Connect with us

Misc

Mapped: The 3 Billion People Who Can’t Afford a Healthy Diet

Published

on

World at 8 Billion Report

VC+ members get access to our World at 8 Billion Report.

Gain access to this exclusive new report and webinar by becoming a VC+ member.

cost of healthy diet

The 3 Billion People Who Canโ€™t Afford a Healthy Diet

While they arenโ€™t often the focus of news media, hunger and undernourishment are problems plaguing millions of people every day.

According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), more than 3 billion people could not afford a healthy diet in 2020, an additional 112 million more people than in 2019. The increase was partly because of rising food prices, with the average cost of a healthy diet rising by 3.3% from 2019 levels.

As of August 2022, the FAO food price index was up 40.6% from average 2020 levels. Unless income levels increased by a similar magnitude, the healthy diet crisis is likely to have worsened, especially in low-income countries experiencing rampant food inflation.

Using data from the FAO, the above infographic maps the share of people unable to afford a healthy diet in 138 different countries as of 2020 (latest available data).

The Cost and Affordability of a Healthy Diet

According to the FAO, a healthy diet is one that meets daily energy needs as well as requirements within the food and dietary guidelines created by the country.

The (un)affordability is measured by comparing the cost of a healthy diet to income levels in the country. If the cost exceeds 52% of an average householdโ€™s income, the diet is deemed unaffordable.

Hereโ€™s a look at the share of populations unable to afford a healthy diet, and the cost of such a diet around the world:

CountryPercent of population unable to afford a healthy dietCost of Healthy Diet (USD per Person per Day)
Burundi ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฎ97.2%$2.9
Madagascar ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฌ97.0%$3.2
Liberia ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ท96.8%$3.9
Malawi ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ผ96.6%$3.1
Nigeria ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฌ95.9%$4.1
Central African Republic ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ซ95.1%$3.6
Guinea ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ณ94.9%$4.1
Angola ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ด94.3%$4.5
Congo ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฌ92.4%$3.4
Sudan ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฉ91.8%$4.3
Mozambique ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฟ91.5%$3.2
Democratic Republic of Congo ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฉ90.0%$2.1
Sierra Leone ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฑ89.2%$2.9
Niger ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ช88.8%$2.9
Zambia ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฒ88.0%$3.3
Tanzania ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฟ87.6%$2.7
Guinea-Bissau ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ผ87.2%$3.5
Ethiopia ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡น86.8%$3.4
Rwanda ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ผ86.3%$2.7
Haiti ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡น85.9%$4.5
Sao Tome and Principe ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡น84.7%$3.6
Nepal ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ต84.0%$4.4
Lesotho ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ธ83.5%$4.3
Pakistan ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฐ83.5%$3.7
Chad ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฉ83.4%$2.8
Benin ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฏ82.9%$3.7
Uganda ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฌ82.2%$2.7
Kenya ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ช81.1%$3.0
Burkina Faso ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ซ80.1%$3.3
Laos ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฆ79.8%$4.1
Mali ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฑ74.3%$3.1
Bangladesh ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฉ73.5%$3.1
Egypt ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฌ72.9%$3.4
Eswatini ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฟ71.8%$3.4
India ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ70.5%$3.0
Indonesia ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฉ69.1%$4.5
Philippines ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ญ68.6%$4.1
Jamaica ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ฒ66.2%$6.7
South Africa ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฆ65.2%$4.3
Myanmar ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ65.1%$4.2
Gambia ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฒ64.0%$3.1
Djibouti ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฏ63.9%$3.1
Botswana ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ผ61.4%$3.7
Ghana ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ญ61.2%$4.0
Cameroon ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฒ60.7%$2.8
Mauritania ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ท60.7%$3.7
Fiji ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฏ60.4%$3.9
Suriname ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ท58.8%$5.7
Namibia ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฆ56.8%$3.5
Bhutan ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡น53.0%$5.0
Mongolia ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ณ51.4%$5.1
Honduras ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ณ51.3%$3.5
Iraq ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ถ49.6%$3.5
Kyrgyzstan ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฌ49.6%$3.2
Sri Lanka ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฐ49.0%$3.9
Senegal ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ณ46.0%$2.3
Guyana ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡พ43.0%$4.9
Armenia ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฒ42.9%$3.2
Tajikistan ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฏ42.1%$3.5
Cabo Verde ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ป38.1%$3.6
Belize ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฟ36.4%$2.1
Gabon ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฆ36.3%$3.6
Nicaragua ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฎ35.7%$3.3
Algeria ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฟ30.2%$3.8
Vietnam ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ณ30.0%$4.1
Colombia ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ด26.5%$3.1
Mexico ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฝ26.3%$3.3
Bolivia ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ด24.7%$3.8
Palestine ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ธ23.1%$3.4
Ecuador ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡จ21.4%$2.9
Saint Lucia ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡จ20.6%$3.6
Peru ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ช20.5%$3.3
Iran ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ท20.3%$3.6
Tunisia ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ณ20.3%$3.6
Albania ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฑ20.1%$4.2
Brazil ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ท19.0%$3.1
Dominican Republic ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ด18.3%$3.9
Panama ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆ18.2%$4.5
North Macedonia ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฐ18.0%$3.4
Paraguay ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡พ17.8%$3.5
Montenegro ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ช17.5%$3.5
Thailand ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ17.0%$4.3
Costa Rica ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ท16.8%$4.1
Morocco ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฆ16.7%$2.8
Serbia ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ธ16.3%$4.2
Jordan ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ด14.9%$3.6
Mauritius ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡บ13.5%$3.6
China ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ12.0%$3.0
Trinidad and Tobago ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น11.6%$4.2
Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ด8.8%$3.2
Bulgaria ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฌ8.5%$4.1
Seychelles ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡จ6.8%$3.8
Moldova ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฉ6.7%$2.8
Chile ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฑ3.8%$3.4
Croatia ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ท3.8%$4.3
Bosnia and Herzegovina ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฆ3.7%$4.0
Uruguay ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡พ3.6%$3.4
Russia ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ3.5%$3.4
Greece ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ท3.2%$3.1
Italy ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น2.9%$3.1
Japan ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต2.5%$5.8
Hungary ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡บ2.0%$3.5
Spain ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ2.0%$2.8
Malaysia ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡พ1.9%$3.5
Latvia ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ป1.8%$3.2
South Korea ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท1.7%$5.2
United States ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ1.5%$3.4
Maldives ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ป1.4%$3.9
Estonia ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช1.3%$3.3
Kazakhstan ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฟ1.2%$2.7
Lithuania ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡น1.2%$3.1
Slovakia ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฐ1.2%$3.2
Israel ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ1.0%$2.5
Poland ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ1.0%$3.2
Austria ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡น0.8%$3.0
Australia ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ0.7%$2.6
Canada ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ0.7%$3.0
Malta ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡น0.7%$3.8
Sweden ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช0.6%$3.3
Portugal ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น0.5%$2.7
United Kingdom ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง0.5%$1.9
Denmark ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ0.4%$2.5
Norway ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด0.4%$3.5
Cyprus ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡พ0.3%$3.0
Belarus ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡พ0.2%$3.3
Belgium ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช0.2%$3.1
Czechia0.2%$3.0
Germany ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช0.2%$3.0
Netherlands ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ0.2%$3.0
Finland ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ0.1%$2.7
France ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท0.1%$3.2
Ireland ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช0.1%$2.2
Luxembourg ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡บ0.1%$2.7
Slovenia ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฎ0.1%$3.1
Azerbaijan ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฟ0.0%$2.5
Iceland ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ธ0.0%$2.4
Switzerland ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ0.0%$2.7
United Arab Emirates ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ช0.0%$3.1
World ๐ŸŒŽ42.0%$3.5

In 52 countries, more than half of the population cannot afford a healthy diet. The majority of these are in Africa, with the rest located across Asia, Oceania, and the Americas.

By contrast, in four countriesโ€”Azerbaijan, Iceland, Switzerland, and the UAEโ€”everyone is able to afford a healthy diet. The picture is similar for most European and developed high-income countries, where more than 95% of the population can afford a healthy diet.

When the percentages are translated into numbers, Asia contains the most number of people unable to afford a healthy diet at 1.89 billion, of which 973 million people are in India alone. Another 1 billion people are in Africa, with around 151 million people in the Americas and Oceania.

While hunger is a worldwide concern, it is particularly acute in African countries, which cover all of the top 20 spots in the above table.

Africaโ€™s Deepening Food Crisis

In many countries across sub-Saharan Africa, more than 90% of the population cannot afford a healthy diet.

Sub-Saharan Africa is particularly susceptible to extreme climate events and the resulting volatility in food prices. Roughly one-third of the worldโ€™s droughts occur in the region, and some sub-Saharan countries are also heavily reliant on imports for food.

Russiaโ€™s invasion of Ukraine has deepened the crisis, with many African countries importing over 50% of their wheat from the two countries in conflict. The rising food prices from this supply chain disruption have resulted in double-digit food inflation in many African nations, which means that more people are likely to be unable to afford healthy diets.

The Horn of Africa region at the Eastern tip of Africa is particularly in turmoil. All the countries in the region are reliant on wheat from Russia and Ukraine, with Eritrea (100%) and Somalia (>90%) high up in the import dependency chart. Additionally, the region is facing its worst drought in 40 years alongside ongoing political conflicts. As a result, 22 million people are at risk of starvation.

Population Growth and Food Insecurity

In November of 2022, the global population is projected to surpass 8 billion people, and many of the fastest growing countries are also food-insecure.

By 2050, the global population is likely to increase by 35%, and to meet the growing demand for food, crop production will need to double. Given that agriculture is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, this increase in crop production will also need to be environmentally sustainable.

As the impacts of climate change intensify and food demand increases, reducing food waste, building climate-resilient agricultural infrastructure, and improving agricultural productivity will all play a key role in reducing the levels of food insecurity sustainably.

world at 8 billion report

Get our new “The World at 8 Billion” report and webinar by becoming a VC+ member

 

Click for Comments

Misc

Mapped: U.S. Mineral Production Value by State in 2022

U.S. mineral production value increased by 4% YoY in 2022 to reach $98.2 billion. Which states contributed the most to domestic mineral production?

Published

on

U.S. States Ranked by the Value of their Mineral Production

The U.S. produced $98.2 billion worth of nonfuel minerals in 2022, but which states made up the majority of the mining?

This map uses data from the USGS to map and rank U.S. states by the value of their nonfuel mineral production in 2022.

The ranking takes into account the mining of nonfuel minerals that are split into two main categories: metallic minerals (like gold, copper, or silver), and industrial minerals (like phosphate rock, various types of clay, and crushed stone).

The Top Mineral-Producing States in the U.S.

Arizona tops the list of mineral-producing states, with $10.1 billion worth of minerals which account for 10.3% of the U.S. total, largely due to the state’s prolific copper production. The state of Arizona accounted for around 70% of domestic copper production in 2022, and as a result also produces large amounts of molybdenum as a byproduct.

The state of Nevada was the next top mineral producer at $8.9 billion worth of minerals, thanks to its longstanding leadership in gold mining (accounting for 72% of U.S. gold production in 2022) and by having the only operating lithium project in America.

States in the Western region of the U.S. dominate the ranking of top mineral-producing states, holding the top two spots and making up half of the top 10 when it comes to total mineral production value.

RankStateMineral Production Value (2022)Share of U.S. total
1Arizona$10.1B10.3%
2Nevada$8.9B9.1%
3Texas$8.0B8.2%
4California$5.6B5.7%
5Minnesota*$4.8B4.9%
6Alaska$4.5B4.6%
7Florida*$2.8B2.9%
8Utah$3.6B3.7%
9Michigan$3.4B3.4%
10Missouri$3.2B3.2%

*The value of these states is a partial total which excludes withheld values by the USGS to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. Rankings remain unaffected which is why some states may rank higher than others despite having a lower value.

Texas rounds out the top three at $8 billion worth of minerals produced in 2022, largely thanks to its dominant production of crushed stone. The state of Texas was the top producer of crushed stone in 2022 at more than $2.8 billion worth, nearly double that of the next largest producer, Florida, which produced $1.5 billion worth.

What Minerals is the U.S. Producing the Most of?

Nonfuel mineral production is categorized into two main categories by the USGS, metals/metallic minerals and industrial minerals.

While not as shiny, the produced value of industrial minerals far outweighs that of metallic minerals. While $34.7 billion worth of metals were produced in 2022, industrial mineral production value was nearly double at $63.5 billion.

Construction aggregates like construction sand and gravel along with crushed stone made up almost half of industrial minerals production at $31.4 billion, with crushed stone being the leading mineral commodity overall at $21 billion of production value.

Following crushed stone, the next top minerals produced but the U.S. were (in decreasing order of value): cement, copper, construction sand and gravel, and gold.

Although the value of metals production decreased by 6% compared to 2021, industrial minerals production increased by 10% year-over-year, resulting in an overall increase in America’s overall nonfuel mineral production of 4%.

Continue Reading

Misc

Visualizing the Opportunity Cost of Unrecycled Metals in the U.S.

Exploring the quantity and dollar value of recycled metals in the U.S. by visualizing metal recycling ratios.

Published

on

The Opportunity Cost of Unrecycled Metals in the U.S.

Metals are an essential resource for modern society, used in everything from construction and transportation to technology and medical equipment. As the demand for these minerals continues to grow, so does the amount of waste generated by their production and consumption.

Recycling this metal waste is not just a win for sustainability; it also has huge economic benefits. In the visual above, we explore the ratio of recycled vs. unrecycled metals in the U.S. using 2020 Recycling Statistics by the U.S. Geological Survey.

Metal Recycling in the U.S.

Opportunity cost is a concept that refers to the benefits that are forgone when choosing one option over another. In the case of unrecycled metals, the opportunity cost is the potential economic and environmental benefits that could have been achieved through increasing metal recycling ratios.

Below are the recycling rates for select metals in the U.S. in 2020.

Metal% of supply recycled
Aluminum54
Chromium25
Copper36
Iron & Steel52
Lead77
Magnesium55
Nickel52
Tin36

The above recycled metals represented a dollar value of $26 billion in 2020. Their unrecycled counterparts, on the other hand, represented $28 billion.

Metals can either be recycled from scrap that results from the manufacturing process (known as โ€œnew scrapโ€) or scrap from post-consumer products (โ€œold scrap.โ€) Regardless of the source, many of them, especially chromium, copper, and tin, have the potential to reap further sustainability and economic benefits by recycling a larger proportion of their scrap supplies.

The Case for Metal Recycling

When compared with the mining, processing and transport of new metals, recycling metals can provide a significantly less energy-intensive alternative, saving enough energy each year to power millions of homes in the U.S.

Recycling metals can also save natural resources, create more green jobs, and reduce a country’s dependency on mineral imports by supplementing its supply of raw materials.

Overall, the potential for metal recycling is vast, and taking steps to increase the amount of recycled metals in the U.S. can lead to even greater sustainability and economic benefits.

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Popular