Chile vs Romania: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population (%)
Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population (%) over time
- Chile
- Romania
How they compare
Chile currently reports 16.0% against 15.2% in Romania, a difference of 0.8%.
That makes Chile's figure about 1.1 times Romania's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Romania ahead.
Chile ranks 74th and Romania ranks 77th of 130 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Chile averaged higher in 1 and Romania in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Chile | Romania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 13.9% | 15.8% | 1.9% | Romania |
| 2020s | 17.5% | 16.5% | 1.0% | Chile |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population, Chile or Romania?
- Chile, at 16.0% against 15.2% in Romania as of 2024.
- What is the difference in prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population between Chile and Romania?
- 0.8%, with Chile ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and Romania?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Chile and Romania rank globally for prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population?
- Chile ranks 74th and Romania ranks 77th of 130 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), published as Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The percentage of people in the population who live in households classified as moderately or severely food insecure. A household is classified as moderately or severely food insecure when at least one adult in the household has reported to have been exposed, at times during the year, to low quality diets and might have been forced to also reduce the quantity of food they would normally eat because of a lack of money or other resources.