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.