Figure 4. Relationships between the percentage of forest cover per
municipality and the values of food security index (A and B) and its
main components (C to F) for the years of 2006 (left column) and 2017
(right column).
Discussion
The relationship between our multidimensional index of food security and
forest cover is complex but highlights that current models of
development based on deforestation do not guarantee food security.
Adopting a multidimensional index of food security brings both challenge
and elucidation of hidden relationships between natural vegetation that
adds to established measures of food security based on food
availability. Although economic poverty and inequality remain constant
between years as the main drivers of our proposed index, other
dimensions shifted in importance suggesting high dynamism in both
environmental and socioeconomic components of the index. All kinds of
combinations between forest cover and food security were observed for
the 1113 municipalities and both positive (win-win) and negative
(lose-lose) synergies, as well as tradeoffs are almost equally likely to
take place, however, clumped in space and therefore with strong
influence of local context. Ultimately, we found two main types of food
insecurity: the first is a sort of “green food insecurity” formed by a
group of economically disadvantaged municipalities with high forest
cover and low social evensess. The second one is a “grey food
insecurity” formed by poor municipalities with low forest cover and
more social inequality. In between these extremes, there is a zone of
relatively high food security and intermediate forest cover with less
poor people and intermediate levels of social inequality.