Botswana vs Zambia: Prevalence of severe food insecurity in the population (%)
Prevalence of severe food insecurity in the population (%) over time
- Botswana
- Zambia
How they compare
Botswana currently reports 20.4% against 17.2% in Zambia, a difference of 3.2%.
That makes Botswana's figure about 1.2 times Zambia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Zambia ahead.
Botswana ranks 19th and Zambia ranks 21st of 128 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Botswana averaged higher in 1 and Zambia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Zambia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 21.9% | 23.6% | 1.7% | Zambia |
| 2020s | 24.5% | 19.1% | 5.4% | Botswana |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher prevalence of severe food insecurity in the population, Botswana or Zambia?
- Botswana, at 20.4% against 17.2% in Zambia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in prevalence of severe food insecurity in the population between Botswana and Zambia?
- 3.2%, with Botswana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Zambia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Botswana and Zambia rank globally for prevalence of severe food insecurity in the population?
- Botswana ranks 19th and Zambia ranks 21st of 128 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), published as Prevalence of 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 severely food insecure. A household is classified as severely food insecure when at least one adult in the household has reported to have been exposed, at times during the year, to several of the most severe experiences described in the FIES questions, such as to have been forced to reduce the quantity of the food, to have skipped meals, having gone hungry, or having to go for a whole day without eating because of a lack of money or other resources.