# ANALYSIS OF FOOD SECURITY AMONG SMALLHOLDER FARMING HOUSEHOLDS IN ARID AREAS OF BORNO STATE, NIGERIA

D Mohammed,, U Bukar, J Umar, B Abdulsalam, B Dahiru

► To cite this version:

D Mohammed,, U Bukar, J Umar, B Abdulsalam, B Dahiru. ANALYSIS OF FOOD SECURITY AMONG SMALLHOLDER FARMING HOUSEHOLDS IN ARID AREAS OF BORNO STATE, NIGERIA. Continental Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2016, 8 (1), pp.1-8.
10.5707/cjae.2014.8.1.1.8. hal-01326657

HAL Id: hal-01326657

https://hal.science/hal-01326657

Submitted on 12 Jan 2017

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# ANALYSIS OF FOOD SECURITY AMONG SMALLHOLDER FARMING HOUSEHOLDS IN ARID AREAS OF BORNO STATE, NIGERIA

Mohammed, D¹.,Bukar, U²., Umar, J³.,Adulsalam, B⁴.Dahiru, B⁵.

¹Centre for Arid Zone Studies, University of Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria, ²Department of Agricultural Technology, Ramat polytechnic Maiduguri, Borno State, ³Lake Chad Research Institute (LCRI), Maiduguri, Borno State, ⁴Department of Geography, University of Maiduguri, Borno State, ⁵Department of Agricultural Technology, Federal Polytechnic Mubi, Adamawa State

## ABSTRACT

The study assessed food security situation among smallholder farming households in arid areas of Borno State, Nigeria. Multi-stage sampling procedure was used in selecting 200 household respondents. Data were collected with the use of interview scheduled and structured questionnaires. Result revealed that 91% of the respondents were male, 59% were full time farmers and 33% of the households had farming experience of 11 -15 years. The study further revealed that only 23% of the household respondents were food secure. Logit result indicates that the coefficient of education level(p≤0.01), farming experience(p≤0.01), annual non-farm income(p≤0.05), and farm size(p≤0.05) were significant and positively related to food security in the study area. However, the coefficient of household size (p≤0.05) was significant and negatively related to food security in the study area. Reduction of quantity of meals, sales of assets, purchase of less preferred food and buying food on credit were the coping strategies to food insecurity used by household respondents in the study area. It is recommended that farming household members should be encouraged to go into formal education and respondents should be empowered economically for them to diversify their economy thereby putting them in a better footing to have access to food items.

**KEYWORDS:** Analysis, Food Security, Farming Households, Borno, Nigeria

Received for Publication: 21/01/14

Accepted for Publication: 27/03/14

Corresponding Author: dmsong81@yahoo.com

## INTRODUCTION

Nigeria is blessed with huge potential to be one of the leading economies in the world. It's endowed with varied vegetation zone capable of producing the essential food commodities; vast mineral and human resources capable of propelling economic growth and development. Agriculture, however, is one of the most important sectors of the Nigerian economy; it contributes more than 30% of the total annual GDP, employs about 70% of the labour force, accounts for over 70% of the non-oil exports and, perhaps most important, provided over 80% of the food needs of the country (Adegboye, (2004). Despite the huge potentials of Nigerian agricultural economy, most of the Nigerian population can't meet their daily food requirements (FAO (1996), Orewa and Iyambe (2009).

Over the years, the role of growth in agricultural production have stagnated and failed to keep pace with the need of the rapidly growing population resulting in progressive increase in food insecurity incidence in the country. The increase in population at a rate considerably higher than the rate of increase in food production has continued to widen the gap between domestic food supply and domestic demand. This disparity has led to rising food prices and declining foreign exchange earnings from agricultural exports. The interaction of these factors has led to food insecurity and the idea of self-

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
sufficiency is becoming more and more difficult to achieve due to declining agricultural production and
widespread poverty.

Food security exists when all people at all times have physical, social and economic access to
sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active
and healthy life (FAO (2002). In this connection, food security has three dimensions; availability,
accessibility and utilization. Food insecurity has been described as "a condition in which people lack
basic food intake to provide them with the energy and nutrients for fully productive lives" (Cox et al.,
2001). A critical examination of these definitions, especially in the context of smallholder farming
households, suggests that there are many factors embedded in what food security or insecurity entails.
Smallholding farms are characterised by low income generation, small size land utilisation, lack of
proper inputs and lack of resources, all of which limit productivity and further increase level of
poverty. Low level of managerial and technical skills and inadequate training were identified as the
major determinants of low level of productivity and household food insecurity. People living in poverty
often cannot produce or buy enough food to satisfy their needs and so are more susceptible to disease.
Sick people are less able to work or produce food (Oni et al., 2010). The United Nations (UN) Standing
Committee on Nutrition concluded that nutrition is an essential foundation for poverty alleviation and
also for meeting Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) related to improved education, gender
equality, child mortality, maternal health and diseases (POST (2006). ).

Although, a lot of researches were conducted on food security in Nigeria (Idrisa et al., (2008), Omotosho et al., (2006), Sanusi et al., (2006), Ibrahim et al., (2009), Obioha, (2009), however, few studies were carried out in the arid areas particularly in the study area, where environmental factors are becoming threatening to food security situation. It is against this backdrop that the study was designed to provide information that could be used to enhance food security situation in the study area. The study is aimed at answering the following research questions:

i. what are the socio-economic characteristics of respondents in the study area?

ii. what is the food security status of respondents in the study area?

iii. What are the determinants of food security among respondents in the study area? and

iv. what are the coping strategies to food insecurity among respondents in the study area?

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

The study was carried out in Monguno local government area of Borno State. It is located in northern part of the State. The area lies between longitude 13⁰ 00' N and longitude 13⁰ 30' E and latitude 12⁰ 00' N and 12⁰ 40' N (Kalu et al., 2007). The study area has 2013 projected population of 136,947 (Based on 15 and 3.2% population growth rate). The mean annual rainfall in the area is 500mm (Alex, (1997) and last for only 120 days in "good years" (John et al., 2011). The mainstay of the economy is Agriculture (Kwaghe, (2006), cultivating Millet, Cowpea and Sorghum as major crops grown in the area that are mostly used for household consumption. The soil type of the study area is sandy, which is typical of most semi-arid and arid regions. The area is frequently characterized by drought occurrence (John et al., 2011).

Household's respondents of the study were selected through multi-stage sampling technique. In the first stage, four wards that comprise Monguno, Mintar, Kumalia and Magumeri were randomly selected from the ten wards of the local government area. In the second stage, from each of the selected ward, two communities were randomly selected, giving a total of eight communities used for the study. In the third stage, twenty five smallholder farming households were randomly selected from each of the selected community, giving a total of 200 household respondents. Interview schedule and structure questionnaire were used to illicit information from respondents. Information sought from the head of the selected households relate to socio-economic characteristics of household, household's food security status and coping strategies against food shortages. Both descriptive (frequency, percentages as well as Food Security Scale (FSS)) and inferential (logit regression)statistics were used to analyse

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>
the data of the study.The FSS was developed by Freedom from Hunger (FH), an international development organization and have been used in a similar study by (Melgar-Quinonez, (2004), Ibrahim et al., 2009). FFH's scale incorporates 17 items that account for a maximum scale score of 9 points (Melgar-Quinonez, (2004). The scale that was used for this study was similar to the FFH's scale, but includes only 12 items. The scale was designed to capture the food security status of the households (Appendix 1). The classification into 2 food security groups was done according to the following criteria:

- Total score of 0 or 5 meant a food secure household

- Total score greater than 5 meant a non-food secure household

FFH was used to achieve objective ii.

The explicit logit regression model is expressed as follows:

$$Lo = b_0 + b_1X_1 + b_2X_2 + b_3X_3 + b_4X_4 + b_5X_5 + b_6X_6 + e$$

Where,

L₀ was binary (1 or 0). 1 was denoted for households that were food secured and 0 for otherwise.

X₁ to X₆ were the socio-economic characteristics of respondents that affect households' food security.

X₁ = Education Level (yrs)

X₂ = Household Size (number of persons that belong to a household)

X₃ = Annual non-farm Income (N)

X₄ = Gender (Binary)

X₅ = Age (yrs)

X₆ = Marital Status

X₇ = Farming Experience (yrs)

X₈ = Farm Size (ha)

e = error term

Logit model was used to achieve objective iii.

This model was equally used by (Omotosho et al., 2006), Amaza et al., 2007) to determine factors affecting food security in rural household in Kwara State, and Borno State Nigeria respectively.

A total of 180 questionnaires were adequately filled and retrieved

# RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

## Socio-economic Characteristics of Respondents

Table 1 revealed that majority (91%) of the respondents were male, 53% aged 45 and above. Only 28% of the respondents had no formal education at all. Fifty nine percent (59%) of the respondents interviewed were full time farmers. Of the respondents, 33% had 11 to 15 years farming experience, 22% had 16 to 20 years and 21% had 6 to 10 years farming experience. Thirty one percent (31%) of the respondents had 6 to 9 household size, 28% had 2 to 5 years, 22% had 14 and above and 19% had 10 to 13 household members. It is deduced from the foregoing that majority of the respondents were aged, full time farmers and had one or the other form of formal education. These attributes could have positive effects on food security among respondents.

## Households Food Security Status

It was revealed that only 23% of the respondents were food secured and 77% of the household respondents were food insecure. This finding concurred with that of (Omotosho et al., 2006), who observed that about two-third of the rural farming households sampled in Kwara State were food insecure. (Orewa and Iyambe 2009) also observed that only 31% of the households in Nigeria met the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) recommended minimum daily calorie intake. They further, concluded that the level of undernourishment (low daily calorie intake) and malnutrition (low protein intake) was very high in Nigeria. Food production in the study area is affected by the unsuitability of

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>
climatic conditions; the area is deserted with high frequency of dry spell occurrences; rainfall last within short period of time. Furthermore, Boko Haram conflict in the northeast has intensified in rural areas of Borno State. The conflict has displaced significant portions of the population, disrupted normal market and trade behaviors, and restricted agricultural activities. It is projected that households affected by the conflict in Borno state have less resilience to cope and will face food insecurity during January to March 2014 (Adegbenga, 2009).

<table><caption>Table 1 Socio-economic Characteristics of Respondents (180)</caption><thead><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Frequency</th><th>Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Sex</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Male</td><td>164</td><td>91</td></tr><tr><td>Female</td><td>16</td><td>09</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Age</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>15-24</td><td>13</td><td>07</td></tr><tr><td>25-34</td><td>24</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>35-44</td><td>49</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>45 and above</td><td>95</td><td>53</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Education Level</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>None</td><td>50</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Qur'anic</td><td>47</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Primary</td><td>13</td><td>7.0</td></tr><tr><td>WASC/NECO</td><td>30</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Post-Secondary</td><td>40</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Primary Occupation</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Civil Servant</td><td>38</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Trading</td><td>20</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>H/wife</td><td>16</td><td>09</td></tr><tr><td>Farming</td><td>106</td><td>59</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Farming Experience (yrs)</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1-5</td><td>18</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>6-10</td><td>37</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>11-15</td><td>60</td><td>33</td></tr><tr><td>16-20</td><td>40</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>25 and above</td><td>25</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Household Size</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2-5</td><td>51</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>6-9</td><td>56</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>10-13</td><td>34</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>14 and above</td><td>39</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Annual Income (N)</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt;31,000</td><td>21</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>31,000-60,000</td><td>30</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>61,000-90,000</td><td>15</td><td>08</td></tr><tr><td>91,000-120,000</td><td>16</td><td>09</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;120,000</td><td>98</td><td>54</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Field Survey, 2013

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>Table 2 Household Food Security Status (n= 180)</caption><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>Frequency</td><td>Percentage (%)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Food Secure</td><td>42</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Food Insecure</td><td>138</td><td>77</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Field Survey, 2013

## Factors Affecting Household Food Security

Table 3 shows that the coefficient of education level and farming experience were found to be positive and significant (P<0.01) influencing food security among households in the study area. In the same vein, the coefficient of annual income and farm size were also positive and significant (p<0.05) relating to household food security in the study area. The coefficient of household size however, was negative and significant (p<0.05) relating to food security among respondents in the study area.

These results imply that the higher the years spent in formal education by head of household, the greater the chance of the household being food secured. It's obvious that education improves awareness of farmers to modern practices that could translate to high yield/income thereby, ensuring food security. Also the higher the years of farming experience by the head of the household the higher the likelihood of household being food secured. Result on annual income implies that the household respondents with large income had the greater probability of being food secured. This could be as a result of the fact that with money income, respondents could be able to buy the necessary foodstuffs the family require. The larger the household size, the lower the probability of the household being food secure as revealed by the result of the study. That is household size is a negative factor determining the food security status of a household in the project area. This is obvious because having many dependents population in the household render the household food insecure particularly if the household members are mostly underage or unproductive. This result concurred with that of (Amaza *et al.*, 2007).

<table><caption>Table 3 Logit Likelihood of Factors Affecting Household's Food Security</caption><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>Coefficient</td><td>Z</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Education Level</td><td>0.105</td><td>2.79***</td></tr><tr><td>Farming Experience</td><td>1.026</td><td>2.63***</td></tr><tr><td>Household Size</td><td>-0.075</td><td>1.92**</td></tr><tr><td>Annual Non-Farm Income</td><td>0.446</td><td>2.22**</td></tr><tr><td>Gender</td><td>0.115</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td>Age</td><td>0.640</td><td>0.50</td></tr><tr><td>Marital Status</td><td>0.153</td><td>0.09</td></tr><tr><td>Farm Size</td><td>0.128</td><td>1.88**</td></tr><tr><td>Constant</td><td>3.278</td><td>2.56</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Field Survey, 2013

*** 1% significant level

** 5% significant level

## Coping Strategies to Food Insecurity by Respondents

Result on coping strategies against food insecurity practiced by respondents revealed that reduction of quantity of meals (41%), sale of assets (22%), purchase of less preferred food (28%) and buying food on credit (35%) were the major strategies used to cope against food insecurity by household respondents in the study area. This study was in line with a study by (Adegbenga, 2009) who observed that most frequently used coping strategy by the respondents was reduction in food consumption (89.9%).

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>Table 4 Coping Strategies to Food Insecurity by Respondents (138)</caption><thead><tr><td>Coping Strategy</td><td>*Frequency</td><td>Percentage (%)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Skipping Meals</td><td>26</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Reduction of quantity of Meals</td><td>57</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Sales of Assets</td><td>40</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase of Less Preferred Food</td><td>51</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Borrowing from Friends and Relations</td><td>27</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Buying Food on Credit</td><td>48</td><td>35</td></tr><tr><td>Others</td><td>15</td><td>11</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Field Survey, 2013

*Multiple responses existed therefore, total percentage greater than 100

## CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

The study analysed food security situation among smallholder farming households in arid area of Borno, Nigeria. The study concludes that only 23% of the respondents were food secure. Respondents with high level of education, farming experience, annual non-farm income and farm size had influenced food security situation among respondents in the study area. The coefficient of household size was however negative indicating inverse relationship between household size and food security among respondents in the study area. Reduction of quantity of meal, buying food on credit, purchase of less preferred food and sale of assets were the most frequently used coping strategies to food insecurity among respondents in the study area. It is recommended that education should be revamped in the study area particularly among farmers. Smallholder farmers should be empowered economically for them to diversify their economy.

## REFERENCES

* Adegbenga E. A. (2009). Food Insecurity and Coping Strategies among Rural Households in Oyo State, Nigeria. *Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment Vol.7 (3&4): 187-191*.

* Adegboye, R. O. (2004). Land, Agriculture and Economic Growth in Nigeria. 3rd Faculty Lecture, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ilorin. 25th Feb.

* Alex, C. O. (1997). The Economics of Field Pest on Borno State Agriculture. Unpublished M. Sc. Dissertation, Department of Economics, University of Maiduguri P. 15

* Amaza, P.S., J. K. Olayemi, A.O. Adejobi, Y. Bila, and I. Iheanacho. (2007). Baseline socioeconomic survey report: agriculture in Borno State, Nigeria. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria. 84 pages.

* Cox, P. G., Mak, S., Jahn, G. C. and Mot, S. (2001). Impact of Technology on Food Security and Poverty Alleviation in Combodyia: Designing Research Process. Pp. 677-684 in S. Peng and B. Hardy (eds). Rice Research for Food Security and Poverty Alleviation. Proceedings of the International Rice Research Conference, 31st March-3rd April, 2000. Los Banos, Philippines. Pp. 692

* FAO (1996). Socio-political and Economic Environment for Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations. World Food Summit Vol. 1 Sec. 14

* FAO (2002). The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2001. Rome: FAO.

* Ibrahim, H., Uba-Eze, N. R., Oyewole, S. O. and Onuk, E. G. (2009). Food Security among Urban Households: A case study of Gwagwalada Area Council of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, Nigeria. *Pakistan Journal of Nutrition* 8(6):810-813

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>
Idrisa, Y. L., Gwary, M. M. and Shehu, H. (2008). Analysis of Food Security Status among Farming Households in Jere Local Government Area of Borno State, Nigeria. *Agro-science Journal of Tropical Agriculture and Extension*. 7 (3):199-205

John, N., Iheanacho, A. C. and Irefin, D. (2011). Effects of Socio-economic Characteristics of Food Crop Farmers on Selection of Coping Strategies against Drought in Borno State, Nigeria. Lincoln University Journal of Science. Vol. 2 No. 1

Kalu, K. M., Umeham, S. N and Okereke, F. (2007). Length-Weight Relationship and condition factor of *Clarias gariepinus* and *Tilapia zillii* in Lake Alau and Monguno Hatchery, Borno State, Nigeria. Animal Research International 4 (1) Pp. 635-638

Kwaghe, P. V. (2006). Poverty Profile and its Determinants among Farming Households in Borno State, Nigeria. Ph. D. Thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, University of Maiduguri.

Melgar-Quinonez, H.(2004). Testing Food-Security Scales for Low-Cost Poverty Assessment. Research Report. Ohio State University for Freedom from Hunger, USA.

NPC (2006). Nigerian Population by States and Local Government Areas. Published by National Population Commission, Abuja.

Obioha, E. E. (2009). Climate Variability, Environmental and Food Security Nexus in Nigeria. *Journal of Human Ecology*. 26 (2) Pp. 107-121

Omotosho, O. A., Adewumi, M. O., Mohammed Lawan A. and Ayinde, O. E. (2006). Determinants of Food Security among the Rural Farming Households in Kwara State, Nigeria. *African Journal of General Agriculture* 2 (1):7-15

Oni, S. A., Maliwichi, L. L. and Obadire, O. S. (2010). Socio-economic Factors Affecting Smallholder Farming and Household Food Security: A case of Thulamela Local Municipality in Vhembe District of Limpopo Province, South Africa. *African Journal of Agricultural Research* 5 (17) 2289-2296

Orewa, S. I. and Iyambe, C. O. (2009). Household Food Insecurity in Nigeria: an Assessment of the present status of Protein-Energy malnutrition among Rural and Low Income Urban Household. *Journal of Applied Sc. Research* 5(10): 1615-1621

POST (2006). Food Security in Developing Countries. The Parliamentary of Science and Technology (POST), London. Pp. 1-4

Sanusi, R. A., Badejo, C. A. and Yusuf, B. O. (2006). Measuring Household Food Insecurity in Selected Local Government Areas of Lagos State, Nigeria. *Pakistan Journal of Nigeria*. 5(1):62-67

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>
Appendix 1: Food Security Scale (FSS)

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Item Criteria</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ITEM 1 Binary item<br>I (we) couldn't afford to eat balanced meals</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 2<br>In the last 12 months did you or other household member ever cut the size of your meals or skip meals because there was not enough food or money to buy food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 3<br>In the past 12 months were you and your household member worried that your food will run out before you have food or money to buy more?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 4<br>In the last 12 month were you ever hungry but did not eat because you couldn't afford enough food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 5<br>In the past 12 month did you have to eat same food daily because you did not have varieties of food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 6<br>In the past 12 month did you ever eat less than you felt you should because there was no food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 7<br>Did you or any adult household stop eating for a whole day because there was no food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 8<br>Did you rely on few kinds of low cost food because you do not have money?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 9<br>Did you ever comment that the food you bought did not last and you did not have money to get more?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 10<br>Did you or any adult household member lose weight during the past 12 months because you did not eat enough food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 11<br>I couldn't feed my children with balanced and enough meal because there was no enough food?</td><td>1= Yes No = 0<br>0= No Yes = 1</td></tr><tr><td>ITEM 12<br>Which of the following describes your household food consumption during the past 12 months?<br>(a) Always enough of what is required ( ) (b) Enough but not always what is required ( ) 1 = 0<br>(c) Sometimes enough food ( ) (d) Often not enough food ( ) 2-4 = 1</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>