Jamaica vs Lesotho: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population
Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population over time
- Jamaica
- Lesotho
How they compare
Lesotho currently reports 59.9% against 56.4% in Jamaica, a difference of 3.5%.
That makes Lesotho's figure about 1.1 times Jamaica's.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Lesotho has been ahead every year.
Jamaica ranks 22nd and Lesotho ranks 19th of 126 countries.
Lesotho has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Jamaica | Lesotho | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 47.1% | 50.2% | 3.1% | Lesotho |
| 2020s | 54.0% | 56.1% | 2.0% | Lesotho |
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, Jamaica or Lesotho?
- Lesotho, at 59.9% against 56.4% in Jamaica as of 2023.
- What is the difference in prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population between Jamaica and Lesotho?
- 3.5%, with Lesotho ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Jamaica and Lesotho?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2018 to 2023.
- How do Jamaica and Lesotho rank globally for prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population?
- Jamaica ranks 22nd and Lesotho ranks 19th of 126 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.