Food Security and Food Sovereignty: The Difference Between Surviving and Thriving.

Previous research in American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities has documented high prevalence of food insecurity. Yet many AI/AN scholars and communities have expressed concerns that the dominant societal conceptions of food security are not reflective of the teachings, priorities, and values of AI/AN communities. Food security initiatives often focus on access to food and, at times, nutrition but little consideration is given to cultural foods, the spirituality carried through foods, and whether the food was stewarded in a way that promotes well-being not just for humans but also for plants, animals, land, and water. Despite the concerns of AI/AN communities that their needs are not centered in dominant societal food conceptualizations and food security programming, the food sovereignty efforts of AI/AN communities have captured national attention as a solution to modern food system inequities. Indigenous Food Sovereignty (IFS) is a holistic approach to food that incorporates values of relationality, reciprocity, and relationships. Fundamental differences exist between food security and food sovereignty, yet dominant society often reduces IFS as a solution to food security, rather than an entirely different food system that is predicated on values that contrast with that of dominant society. Despite calls to decolonize the definition and measurement of food security, we explore whether fixing the concept of food security is a worthy endeavor or whether efforts would be better spent supporting the resurgence and revitalization of AI/AN food values, food knowledge, and community food sovereignty initiatives.

Framing an Indigenous Food Sovereignty Research Agenda.

Access to healthy and appealing food is essential for individuals to be able to live a healthy and quality life. For decades, food security has been a priority issue for public health professionals. Food sovereignty expands upon the concept of food insecurity (i.e., having access to nutritious and culturally relevant food) by incorporating people's rights to define their own food system. The expanded focus of food sovereignty on food systems prioritizes public health professionals' role in supporting environmental- and systems-level initiatives and evaluating their implications for health, economics, and the natural environment. Food sovereignty is of particular importance for Indigenous peoples (i.e., American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities). Colonization had demonstrable consequences, with many Indigenous communities being forcibly relocated from traditional lands, alongside the destruction of traditional food sources. Indigenous food sovereignty aligns with the sovereign nation status that American Indian tribes and Alaska Native communities have with the United States. Furthermore, the worldviews that incorporate Indigenous communities' relational responsibilities to care for their food systems, according to their traditional practices and beliefs (Coté, 2016; Morrison, 2011), uniquely positions Indigenous peoples to lead food sovereignty initiatives. In this article, we explore what is currently known regarding food sovereignty and health. We then discuss opportunities to expand the evidence on Indigenous food sovereignty's relationships with (1) health and well being, (2) economics, (3) the natural environment, and (4) programming facilitators and barriers.

Measuring Food Security among American Indian and Alaska Native Adults: Validity Evidence Supports the Use of the US Department of Agriculture Module.

BACKGROUND: Inequities in access, availability, and affordability of nutritious foods produced by settler colonialism contribute to high rates of food insecurity among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) households. Efforts to understand the influences of food security programming among AI/AN individuals in the United States are constrained by the absence of validity evidence for food security assessments for this population. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed whether AI/AN adult responses on the Food Security Survey Module provide an accurate assessment of food security prevalence, especially when compared with other racial and ethnic groups. DESIGN: A correlational design with the cross-sectional 2019 National Health Interview Survey was used to address the research objective. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: The 2019 National Health Interview Survey contains a sample (N = 30,052) representative of the resident civilian noninstitutionalized population. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was food security, as characterized by the 10-item US Department of Agriculture Adult Food Security Survey Module. The module evaluates whether insufficient finances result in perceived food shortages and a reduction in the quantity and/or quality of food intake during the prior 30 days. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Data were analyzed by racial and ethnic subsamples to assess scale dimensionality (confirmatory factor analysis), Item Response Theory item analysis, differential item functioning, and external validity (χ2 tests). RESULTS: Results supported the use of the 10-item module for racial and ethnic groups. However, differential item functioning effect sizes exceeded criteria for the Asian, AI/AN, and Hispanic respondents when compared with White respondents. Food security was not significantly related to all expected correlates in the AI/AN subsample. CONCLUSIONS: Compelling evidence is presented for validity of the FSSM scores in determining food security status of AI/AN adults. Qualitative inquiry that explores how culture influences the way food security is conceptualized and experienced is warranted.

Food Insecurity among American Indian and Alaska Native People: A Scoping Review to Inform Future Research and Policy Needs.

Food insecurity, defined as insufficient access to nutritious foods, is a social determinant of health that may underpin health disparities in the US. American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) individuals experience many health inequities that may be related to food insecurity, but no systematic analyses of the existing evidence have been published. Thus, the objective of this scoping review was to assess the literature on food insecurity among AI/AN individuals and communities, with a focus on the prevalence of food insecurity and its relations to sociodemographic, nutrition, and health characteristics. Systematic search and data extraction processes were used. Searches were conducted on PubMed as well as peer-reviewed journal and government websites. Of 3174 identified references, 34 publications describing 30 studies with predominantly AI/AN sample populations were included in the final narrative synthesis. Twenty-two studies (73%) were cross-sectional and the remaining 8 (27%) described interventions. The weighted average prevalence of food insecurity across the studies was 45.7%, although estimates varied from 16% to 80%. Most studies used some version of the USDA Food Security Survey Modules, although evidence supporting its validity in AI/AN respondents is limited. Based on the review, recommendations for future research were derived, which include fundamental validity testing, better representation of AI/AN individuals in federal or local food security reports, and consideration of cultural contexts when selecting methodological approaches. Advances in AI/AN food insecurity research could yield tangible benefits to ongoing initiatives aimed at increasing access to traditional foods, improving food environments on reservations and homelands, and supporting food sovereignty.