Three billion people cannot afford a healthy diet
A healthy, nutritious diet is much more expensive than a calorie sufficient one. As a result, three billion people cannot afford a healthy diet.
A healthy diet is about much more than calories: we need a wide range of nutrient-dense foods to get all of the vitamins and minerals that are essential for good health. In this post I look at the costs of diets around the world. Healthy diets are expensive; more than four times the cost of a basic, calorie-sufficient one. This is true in every country in the world. As a result, three billion people cannot afford a healthy diet, even if they spend most of their income on food.
Being able to eat a healthy, nutritious diet is one of our most basic human needs. Yet billions of people go without; they suffer from ‘hidden hunger’, micronutrient deficiencies such as too little iron, calcium, vitamin-A or iodine.
There are many reasons why someone might not eat a nutritious diet.1 Often it’s because people cannot afford to.
To understand the affordability of food across the world a team of researchers looked at the lowest-cost options to meet basic nutritional requirements.2 As part of this study for the FAO’s The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report, Anna Herforth and colleagues asked the question: “what is the cheapest way to meet dietary requirements in each country?”.
They answered this question using data on prices for locally-available food items from the International Comparison Program (ICP) matched to other data on food composition and dietary requirements.
You find their full set of results in our Food Prices Data Explorer.
An energy sufficient diet: hundreds of millions cannot afford one
Let’s start with the most basic requirement: getting enough calories. These calories could come in any form, but the cheapest option in most countries is starchy foods and cereals. Living on this ‘energy sufficient’ diet would mean eating only maize flour or rice for every meal, a diet that is severely lacking all other important nutrients. When you look at people’s diets you see that in poor countries, people get most of their calories from starchy foods.
In each country, prices were measured at retail marketplaces specific to the local context – this could be anything from small open stalls to large supermarkets, whatever is most representative for the country.3 The total costs of diets are given in international-$.4
In the following text I always refer to international-$, but only use the $-sign to keep the text readable.
A person can eat an energy sufficient diet on less than $1 a day. The global average price for this diet across all countries in the study was $ 0.83 per day.
What does this mean for the affordability of a calorie sufficient diet? The researchers define ‘affordability’ by whether someone can afford it if they spend 52% of their income on food.5 The concept of ‘affordability’ is a somewhat subjective one, and will depend on an individual’s context. People at higher incomes spend a much smaller share on food. The relationship between our income and what we spend on food follows a fairly consistent pattern, known as Engel’s Law. Engel’s Law describes the empirical regularity that as incomes increase the share that we spend on food decreases (even if the total amount that we spend on food increases). We see this relationship holds true when we compare food expenditures across the world.
This means the poorest households spend a very high share of their income on food. The researchers chose this ‘52% threshold’ because this is the share that people at the lowest incomes do typically spend on food.
By comparing the cost of diets with income distributions across the world, researchers estimated that 381 million people could not afford the most basic energy sufficient diet in 2017.6 These are the very worst-off in terms of nutrition.
An important question is how subsistence farmers fit in. They are included in these numbers: the income measure used to calculate the affordability of diets does take the value of subsistence farming (i.e. home production) into account. When the FAO report states that these smallholder farmers cannot afford a calorie-sufficient diet, they’re really saying that they cannot produce one. This state – where farmers struggled to produce enough staple crops to feed their families – was the default position in the past. Most of the world population was undernourished. As a recent study on the history of global poverty estimates, just two centuries ago around three-quarters of the world “could not afford a tiny space to live, food that would not induce malnutrition, and some minimum heating capacity.”7
Today we might think of this calorie-sufficient threshold as the nutritional equivalent to the $1.90 international poverty line.8 It is the absolute bare minimum. It is a very low threshold that allows us to identify those living in the most dire of circumstances.
A healthy diet: three billion people cannot afford one
What people really need is a diverse and nutritious diet. Getting enough calories is important, but it is not sufficient to live a healthy and productive life. Eating only cereals and starchy foods will leave you deficient in protein, essential fats and the wide range of micronutrients that our bodies need to function optimally.
Most countries develop ‘food-based dietary guidelines’ which provide recommendations on what a ‘healthy diet’ would look like. This includes guidelines on what balance of foods across the many groups – cereals, fruits, vegetables, legumes, meat and dairy – is considered best for long-term health.
The researchers also looked at the lowest-cost options to meet these national food-based dietary guidelines. Of course, there is no universal ‘healthy diet’, particularly when we consider the strong cultural differences in what people eat. So, the researchers selected dietary guidelines which were regionally representative: this means we’re not expecting that people in India or Japan will adopt the national dietary guidelines of the United States, or vice versa.
Unsurprisingly, a diverse, healthy diet is much more expensive than a calorie-sufficient one. The researchers found that the average cost across the world was $3.54 per day. That’s more than four times higher.9
When we put these prices in the context of affordability – again defining this as spending 52% of our income on food – we find that three billion people cannot afford a healthy diet. In many of the world’s poorest countries – particularly across Sub-Saharan Africa – it’s unaffordable (or not producible) for most of the population. This is shown in the map which gives these figures as a percentage of the total population. In many countries, a healthy diet is out-of-reach for more than 90%.
How do incomes around the world compare with the price of a healthy diet?
A useful way to bring context to food prices is to compare the cost of a healthy diet with the median income of countries across the world.
Both of these distributions are shown in the chart. First I’ve plotted the income distribution of the world in blue – the height of each box corresponds to the median income of each country in 2017. The poorest countries you find on the left, the richest on the right. The width of each bar represents the size of the population in that country.
These are measured in international dollars, which correct for cross-country price differences.
On top of this income distribution I’ve added the cost of a healthy diet for each country – shown in pink.
In the poorest countries, the cost of a healthy diet is higher than the median income. Even if the average person in these countries spent all of their money on food, a healthy diet would be unaffordable.
In some countries – India is the largest among them – dietary costs would be roughly equal to the median income. There people would need to spend all of their income on food to afford a healthy diet.
Towards the right we find the world’s richest countries. There, median incomes are much higher than dietary costs. In these countries the median income earner can afford a healthy diet with a relatively small fraction of their income. The average person in France could spend just 6% of their income on food. In Denmark, just 5%.
What this comparison shows is how far most of the world is from being able to afford a healthy diet. We cannot spend all, or even most, of our income on food. We would have very little to spend on other essentials such as energy, housing, clothing, education and healthcare.
On this chart I’ve also drawn lines that show us what level of income you would need if you were to spend one-third; 20% or 10% of your income on food. This is equivalent to the share that people in high-income (10% to 20%) and middle-income (one-third) countries spend. Median incomes would need to be anywhere in the range of $11 to $37 per person per day.
There’s no definitive answer as to which of these income levels is ‘right’. But considering it in this way gives us some indication of what minimum thresholds might seem reasonable to aim for given the cost of healthy, nutritious diets across the world.
The world has come a long way in making a calorie sufficient diet more attainable. Undernourishment is no longer the default state like it was in the past (although it is still a sad reality for many of the world’s poorest). The world managed to achieve this through technological advances in agriculture: we can now grow much more food. This happened alongside a significant rise in incomes across the world.
This ratio between food prices and incomes – called ‘real incomes’ is key. If we’re to make a healthy diet affordable for everyone, we need to see large increases in real incomes. As we explain in our recent article, an increase in real incomes means economic growth.
We still have some way to go to ensure everyone can afford a calorie-sufficient diet. What this latest research shows is that we have much further to go to ensure that a healthy diet is affordable in all countries across the world.
Update
This article was first published on 12th July 2021. It was updated on 11th July 2022 with updated figures from the latest food prices release from the World Bank.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank William Masters, Max Roser, Joe Hasell and Esteban Ortiz-Ospina for feedback and suggestions on this work.
Endnotes
Some reasons – in addition to those discussed in this text – include a lack of knowledge: we might simply not know what a healthy diet looks like. Or there is unequal distribution of foods within households.
Herforth, A., Bai, Y., Venkat, A., Mahrt, K., Ebel, A. & Masters, W.A. 2020. Cost and affordability of healthy diets across and within countries. Background paper for The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020. FAO Agricultural Development Economics Technical Study No. 9. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb2431en.
To assess prices and the availability of food, the authors used the World Bank’s International Comparison Program dataset which provides food prices in local currency units (LCU) for 680 foods and non-alcoholic beverages in 170 countries.
Throughout this article the statisticians who produce these figures are careful to make these numbers as comparable as possible.
First, many poorer people rely on subsistence farming and do not have a monetary income. To take this into account and make a fair comparison of their living standards, the statisticians that produce these figures estimate the monetary value of their home production and add it to their income/expenditure.
Second, price changes over time (inflation) and price differences across countries are both taken into account: all measures are adjusted for differences in purchasing power. To this end incomes and expenditures are expressed in so-called international dollars. This is a hypothetical currency that results from the price adjustments across time and place. An international dollar is defined as having the same purchasing power as one US-$ in the US. This means no matter where in the world a person is living on int.-$30, they can buy the goods and services that cost $30 in the US. None of these adjustments are ever going to be perfect, but in a world where price differences are large it is important to attempt to account for these differences as well as possible, and this is what these adjustments do.
In the previous release of this dataset, researchers set this 'affordability' threshold at 63% of someone's income.
This figure is lower than the 663 million people defined as undernourished by the UN FAO. Where does this difference come from? This study focuses on what people could afford, not what they actually choose to spend their money on. Spending 52% of your income on food leaves very little for other important goods such as housing, energy, education, clothing and health. Not everyone who could spend this money on achieving an energy sufficient diet will do so. They might choose to spend some of their income elsewhere.
Michail Moatsos (2021) – Global extreme poverty: Present and past since 1820. Published in OECD (2021), How Was Life? Volume II: New Perspectives on Well-being and Global Inequality since 1820, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3d96efc5-en.
Since publishing this article, the international poverty line has been updated to $2.15 per day, now measured in 2017 international-$ as opposed to the 2011 international-$ used previously. All int.-$ values given in this article likewise refer to 2011 prices.
You can read more in our article From $1.90 to $2.15 a day: the updated International Poverty Line.
While there are some country-by-country differences in the cost of these diets (some of which is likely to be attributed to the large uncertainty around these estimates), healthy diets are expensive everywhere compared to the incomes of billions of people across the world. No country is an exception.
Cite this work
Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this article, please also cite the underlying data sources. This article can be cited as:
Hannah Ritchie (2021) - "Three billion people cannot afford a healthy diet". Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: 'https://staging-owid.netlify.app/diet-affordability' [Online Resource]BibTeX citation
@article{owid-diet-affordability,
author = {Hannah Ritchie},
title = {Three billion people cannot afford a healthy diet},
journal = {Our World in Data},
year = {2021},
note = {https://staging-owid.netlify.app/diet-affordability}
}
Reuse this work freely
All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license. You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.
The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.
All of our charts can be embedded in any site.