Malawi vs South Sudan: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population
Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population over time
- Malawi
- South Sudan
How they compare
South Sudan currently reports 88.1% against 81.7% in Malawi, a difference of 6.4%.
That makes South Sudan's figure about 1.1 times Malawi's.
Across all 7 years both countries report, South Sudan has been ahead every year.
Malawi ranks 4th and South Sudan ranks 2nd of 126 countries.
South Sudan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malawi | South Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 79.7% | 85.2% | 5.6% | South Sudan |
| 2020s | 81.8% | 87.3% | 5.5% | South Sudan |
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, Malawi or South Sudan?
- South Sudan, at 88.1% against 81.7% in Malawi as of 2023.
- What is the difference in prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population between Malawi and South Sudan?
- 6.4%, with South Sudan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and South Sudan?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2017 to 2023.
- How do Malawi and South Sudan rank globally for prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population?
- Malawi ranks 4th and South Sudan ranks 2nd 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.