Skip header and navigation

2 records – page 1 of 1.

Food and water security issues in Russia I: food security in the general population of the Russian Arctic, Siberia and the Far East, 2000-2011.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature105147
Source
Int J Circumpolar Health. 2013;72:21848
Publication Type
Article
Date
2013
Author
Alexey A Dudarev
Pavel R Alloyarov
Valery S Chupakhin
Eugenia V Dushkina
Yuliya N Sladkova
Vitaliy M Dorofeyev
Tatijana A Kolesnikova
Kirill B Fridman
Lena Maria Nilsson
Birgitta Evengård
Author Affiliation
Northwest Public Health Research Center, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Source
Int J Circumpolar Health. 2013;72:21848
Date
2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Arctic Regions - epidemiology
Costs and Cost Analysis
Diet - economics - standards - statistics & numerical data
Far East - epidemiology
Food Contamination - analysis - statistics & numerical data
Food Microbiology - statistics & numerical data
Food Safety
Food Supply - economics - standards - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Malnutrition - economics - epidemiology - etiology
Nutrition Surveys
Nutritional Requirements - physiology
Russia - epidemiology
Siberia - epidemiology
Abstract
Problems related to food security in Russian Arctic (dietary imbalance, predominance of carbohydrates, shortage of milk products, vegetables and fruits, deficit of vitamins and microelements, chemical, infectious and parasitic food contamination) have been defined in the literature. But no standard protocol of food security assessment has been used in the majority of studies.
Our aim was to obtain food security indicators, identified within an Arctic collaboration, for selected regions of the Russian Arctic, Siberia and the Far East, and to compare food safety in these territories.
In 18 regions of the Russian Arctic, Siberia and the Far East, the following indicators of food security were analyzed: food costs, food consumption, and chemical and biological food contamination for the period 2000-2011.
Food costs in the regions are high, comprising 23-43% of household income. Only 4 out of 10 food groups (fish products, cereals, sugar, plant oil) are consumed in sufficient amounts. The consumption of milk products, eggs, vegetables, potatoes, fruits (and berries) is severely low in a majority of the selected regions. There are high levels of biological contamination of food in many regions. The biological and chemical contamination situation is alarming, especially in Chukotka. Only 7 food pollutants are under regular control; among pesticides, only DDT. Evenki AO and Magadan Oblast have reached peak values in food contaminants compared with other regions. Mercury in local fish has not been analyzed in the majority of the regions. In 3 regions, no monitoring of DDT occurs. Aflatoxins have not been analyzed in 5 regions. Nitrates had the highest percentage in excess of the hygienic threshold in all regions. Excesses of other pollutants in different regions were episodic and as a rule not high.
Improvement of the food supply and food accessibility in the regions of the Russian Arctic, Siberia and the Far East is of utmost importance. Both quantitative and qualitative control of chemical and biological contaminants in food is insufficient and demands radical enhancement aimed at improving food security.
Notes
Cites: Vopr Pitan. 2000;69(1-2):32-410943002
Cites: Vopr Pitan. 2001;70(2):13-711494664
Cites: Gig Sanit. 2004 Jul-Aug;(4):15-815318602
Cites: Med Parazitol (Mosk). 1996 Jan-Mar;(1):52-48700016
Cites: Med Tr Prom Ekol. 1996;(6):16-98925227
Cites: Gig Sanit. 2005 Mar-Apr;(2):37-4115915898
Cites: Gig Sanit. 2008 May-Jun;(3):14-518590141
Cites: Vopr Pitan. 2008;77(3):64-718669334
Cites: Vopr Pitan. 2008;77(5):65-819048893
Cites: Vopr Pitan. 2009;78(1):54-819348284
Cites: Vopr Pitan. 2009;78(5):31-420120967
Cites: Gig Sanit. 2010 Jul-Aug;(4):43-620873385
Cites: Parazitologiia. 2010 Jul-Aug;44(4):336-4221061592
Cites: Parazitologiia. 2010 Sep-Oct;44(5):406-1821309146
Cites: Int J Circumpolar Health. 2012;71:1859222789517
Cites: Int J Circumpolar Health. 2013;72. doi: 10.3402/ijch.v72i0.2153023940840
PubMed ID
24471055 View in PubMed
Less detail

Perception of needs and responses in food security: divergence between households and stakeholders.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature155395
Source
Public Health Nutr. 2008 Dec;11(12):1389-96
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2008
Author
Anne-Marie Hamelin
Céline Mercier
Annie Bédard
Author Affiliation
Department of Food Sciences and Nutrition, Pavillon Paul-Comtois, Université Laval, 2425 rue de l'Agriculture, Québec City, Canada G1V 0A6. anne-marie.hamelin@aln.ulaval.ca
Source
Public Health Nutr. 2008 Dec;11(12):1389-96
Date
Dec-2008
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Educational Status
Family Characteristics
Female
Food - standards
Food Supply - economics - standards - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Interviews as Topic
Male
Middle Aged
Needs Assessment
Perception
Poverty
Public Assistance
Quebec
Questionnaires
Social Class
Young Adult
Abstract
The aim of the study was (i) to describe the needs of food-insecure households and their assessment of community programmes, as expressed by households and perceived by stakeholders; and (ii) to examine the similarities and differences between households' and stakeholders' perceptions in Quebec City area.
A semi-structured interview and sociodemographic questionnaire with fifty-five households and fifty-nine stakeholders (community workers, managers, donor agencies). The transcriptions were subjected to content analysis and inter-coder reliability measurement.
The respondents' perceptions converge towards three main categories of needs: needs specific to food security, conditions necessary for achieving food security and related needs. There was agreement on the necessity of better financial resources, although the impact of financial resources alone may be uncertain in the opinion of some stakeholders. Different perceptions of needs and of their fulfilment by community programmes emerge between both groups. Despite households found positive aspects, they complained that quality of food and access were major needs neglected. Their account suggests overall a partial fit between the programmes and food security needs; even a combination of programmes (e.g. collective kitchens, purchasing groups, community gardens) was insufficient to adequately meet these needs. In contrast, most stakeholders perceived that the household's primary need was a basic amount of food and that the households were satisfied with programmes.
It is urgent to evaluate the overall effect of community programmes on specific aspects of household food insecurity. The results emphasise that community programmes alone cannot bring about social change needed to prevent food insecurity.
PubMed ID
18761760 View in PubMed
Less detail