Key Takeaways
- Economist Impact’s inaugural Resilient Food Systems Index (RFSI) ranks 60 countries on a 100-point scale across four pillars: affordability, availability, quality and safety, and climate risk responsiveness.
- Portugal leads the index as the most resilient nation, while the Democratic Republic of Congo ranks last, representing a 42-point gap.
- Climate risk responsiveness is the lowest-scoring pillar globally, with an average score of 56.4.
- While food affordability scored highest overall (71.8), nearly two-thirds of the poorest households' income is absorbed by the cheapest healthy diet in 62% of countries.
- The 15 largest exporters maintain an average resilience score of 71, highlighting their outsized role in stabilizing global markets.
Assessing Global Food Security via the Economist Impact's RFSI
Economist Impact has released the Resilient Food Systems Index (RFSI), a benchmarking model consisting of 71 qualitative and quantitative indicators. The index provides a roadmap for feeding a projected global population of ten billion people by 2050 by identifying current system vulnerabilities.
Findings indicate that while no country is fully resilient, nearly half of the nations surveyed fall into a “middle zone,” with scores ranging from 56 to 71. This suggests significant potential to strengthen global systems against future shocks.
Analyzing the Four Pillars of Resilience
The Economist Impact research highlights critical gaps that persist despite high scores in certain areas.
Affordability and Nutrition Gaps
Food affordability is the strongest-performing pillar, yet deep inequalities remain. A 46-point gap exists between high-income and low-income countries regarding food costs. Furthermore, food prices have risen most rapidly in low- and lower-middle-income countries, increasing by 23.1% over the past five years.
Infrastructure and Availability
Infrastructure is an essential foundation that continues to lag. Transportation and logistics systems scored an average of 56.8, contributing to food loss—13.2% occurs before reaching retail, and 19% is wasted at the household level. While many countries support agritech, a lack of reliable electricity and internet prevents these innovations from scaling.
Climate Risk Responsiveness
The weakest pillar in the Economist Impact index is climate risk responsiveness. Although research into sustainable practices scored high, the actual implementation of agriculture-specific mitigation and adaptation strategies averaged a score of only 34.
Economist Impact Expert Insights on System Interconnectivity
Leadership emphasizes that targeted, coordinated action is required to prevent the deterioration of global food security.
“The data show food systems are deeply interconnected: when countries implement targeted, coordinated action across key resilience levers, the benefits ripple across entire systems,” said Jonathan Birdwell, global head of policy and insights at Economist Impact. “But if these interventions fall short or happen in isolation, overall system resilience will deteriorate.”
Brian Sikes, Board Chair and CEO of Cargill, which supported the index, noted, “This research offers valuable insights that can help strengthen the world's food systems. Cargill is proud to do our part to advance this important work, innovating with farmers, customers, and partners across our global supply chains.”
Strategies for Future-Proofing Food Systems
To move countries beyond the “middle zone,” the Economist Impact report outlines three priority areas:
- Advance Affordability with Access: Diversify agricultural partnerships and expand supply chains for nutrient-rich foods to lower costs.
- Scale Infrastructure: Invest in cold chain capacity and equitable internet access to reduce food loss and expand market access for farmers.
- Strengthen Climate Resilience: Translate agricultural research into actionable, scalable solutions by mobilizing financing and advancing supportive policies.
Explore the entire report.
