VNM_2015_FIES_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS
DDI_VNM_2015_FIES_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS_FAO
Office of the Chief Statistician
Nesstar Publisher
VNM_2015_FIES_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS_v01
Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)
FIES
VNM_2015_FIES_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS
FAO Statistics Division
Nesstar Publisher
FAO Statistics Division
Socio-Economic/Monitoring Survey [hh/sems]
Food Insecurity
SDG
SDGs
Food Access
Viet Nam
National
Individuals
Individuals of 15 years or older.
Sample survey data [ssd]
Last 12 months.
Face-to-face par [f2f]
Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.
As part of the statistical disclosure control process, values for number of children and number of adults that were 10 or above, were recoded as "10+" and categories for area were combined into "urban/suburbs" and "towns/rural".
The users shall not take any action with the purpose of identifying any individual entity (i.e. person, household, enterprise, etc.) in the micro dataset(s). If such a disclosure is made inadvertently, no use will be made of the information, and it will be reported immediately to FAO.
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
VNM_2015_FIES_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS.NSDstat
This dataset contains the variables used to calculate the FIES-based indicator, deomographic variables and some derived variables calculated by FAO from the survey.
1000
23
Nesstar 200801
Unique respondent identifier
1000
0
111210197
211095726
160091821.537
28950554.869
Worried you would not have enough food to eat because of a lack of money or other resources
997
3
0
No
730
1
Yes
267
Sysmiss
3
Unable to eat healthy and nutritious food because of a lack of money or other resources
995
5
0
No
799
1
Yes
196
Sysmiss
5
Ate only a few kinds of foods because of a lack of money or other resources
996
4
0
No
764
1
Yes
232
Sysmiss
4
Skipped a meal because there was not enough money or other resources to get food
996
4
0
No
926
1
Yes
70
Sysmiss
4
Ate less than you thought you should because of a lack of money or other resources
996
4
0
No
825
1
Yes
171
Sysmiss
4
Household ran out of food because of a lack of money or other resources
999
1
0
No
920
1
Yes
79
Sysmiss
1
Hungry but did not eat because there was not enough money or other resources for food?
998
2
0
No
957
1
Yes
41
Sysmiss
2
Went without eating for a whole day because of a lack of money or other resources?
1000
0
0
No
988
1
Yes
12
Sysmiss
0
Post-stratification sampling weights
1000
0
0.332
2.927
1
0.589
Year when the GWP was administered in the country
1000
0
1
2015
1000
Sysmiss
0
Number of adults 15 years of age and above in household
1000
0
01
01
55
02
02
369
03
03
250
04
04
206
05
05
79
06
06
25
07
07
7
08
08
4
09
09
1
10
10+
4
Sysmiss
0
Number of children under 15 years of age in household
998
2
00
00
389
01
01
309
02
02
241
03
03
43
04
04
11
05
05
2
07
07
1
08
08
1
10
10+
1
Sysmiss
2
Sum of Affirmative responses to FIES questions
980
20
0
8
1.069
1.9
Estimated person parameters using the Rasch model
980
20
-2.115
2.29
-1.551
1.004
Estimated person parameter errors using the Rasch model
980
20
0.515
0.873
0.781
0.147
Probability of being moderately or severely food insecure
980
20
0
0.999
0.15
0.3
Probability of being severely food insecure
980
20
0
0.682
0.013
0.081
Age of the respondent
1000
0
15
96
44.277
16.533
Education of the respondent
1000
0
1
Elementary_or_less
424
2
Secondary
450
3
College
117
4
Dont_know
4
5
Refused
5
Sysmiss
0
Area
1000
0
1
Urban/Suburbs
201
2
Towns/Rural
799
3
Dont_know
0
4
Refused
0
Sysmiss
0
Gender of the respondent
1000
0
1
Male
435
2
Female
565
Sysmiss
0
Income quintile
1000
0
1
Poorest_20%
196
2
Second_20%
177
3
Middle_20%
196
4
Fourth_20%
188
5
Richest_20%
243
Sysmiss
0