Associations of the exact-overlap Farm-to-Diet Coupling Index and production diversity with market dependence among smallholder farming households in Los Ríos, Ecuador: a cross-sectional study
Journal
Frontiers in Nutrition
ISSN
2296861X
Date Issued
2026-09-08
Author(s)
Zambrano-Villacres, Raynier
Contreras-Moscol, Daniel Jossepp
Andrade Mejia, Nelly
Gortaire-Díaz, David
Type
Article
Abstract
Background
Smallholder farming households may produce food while remaining dependent on markets for household consumption. We examined whether household production diversity and exact production–self-consumption overlap were associated with market dependence, food insecurity, market-dependent vulnerability, and food-system buffer resilience among smallholder farming households in Los Ríos, Ecuador.
Methods
We conducted a cross-sectional study of 133 households. Ten primary dietary food groups were classified as produced, self-consumed from own production, or purchased. The exact-overlap Farm-to-Diet Coupling Index (FDCI) represented the proportion of food groups produced that were also self-consumed. Modified Poisson models with HC3 robust standard errors were used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs).
Results
Median household production diversity was 3 food groups (IQR: 1–4), the Self-consumed Food Group Diversity Proxy was 2 groups (IQR: 1–2), the FDCI was 0.50 (IQR 0.40–1.00), and the Market Food Dependency Index was 0.67 (IQR: 0.50–0.86). Production diversity was positively correlated with self-consumed food-group diversity (Spearman’s ρ = 0.636;
p
< 0.001). Vegetables, fish, and red meat showed the largest purchase–production differences. Each additional food group produced was associated with a lower prevalence of high market dependence (aPR 0.708; 95% CI 0.603–0.832), as was each 0.10-unit increase in the FDCI (aPR 0.933; 95% CI 0.874–0.996). The FDCI estimate was less precise in several sensitivity analyses and was not independently associated with food insecurity, market-dependent vulnerability, or buffer resilience.
Conclusion
Production diversity and exact farm-to-diet overlap captured distinct dimensions of household food acquisition. Both were associated with lower market dependence, but exact overlap was not a consistent indicator of broader food insecurity, vulnerability, or resilience. These findings support assessing production, self-consumption, and purchase as distinct pathways rather than assuming that production diversification alone improves household food security. This distinction may help nutrition-sensitive agricultural programs monitor production, household retention, and market acquisition as separate but interconnected pathways.
Smallholder farming households may produce food while remaining dependent on markets for household consumption. We examined whether household production diversity and exact production–self-consumption overlap were associated with market dependence, food insecurity, market-dependent vulnerability, and food-system buffer resilience among smallholder farming households in Los Ríos, Ecuador.
Methods
We conducted a cross-sectional study of 133 households. Ten primary dietary food groups were classified as produced, self-consumed from own production, or purchased. The exact-overlap Farm-to-Diet Coupling Index (FDCI) represented the proportion of food groups produced that were also self-consumed. Modified Poisson models with HC3 robust standard errors were used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs).
Results
Median household production diversity was 3 food groups (IQR: 1–4), the Self-consumed Food Group Diversity Proxy was 2 groups (IQR: 1–2), the FDCI was 0.50 (IQR 0.40–1.00), and the Market Food Dependency Index was 0.67 (IQR: 0.50–0.86). Production diversity was positively correlated with self-consumed food-group diversity (Spearman’s ρ = 0.636;
p
< 0.001). Vegetables, fish, and red meat showed the largest purchase–production differences. Each additional food group produced was associated with a lower prevalence of high market dependence (aPR 0.708; 95% CI 0.603–0.832), as was each 0.10-unit increase in the FDCI (aPR 0.933; 95% CI 0.874–0.996). The FDCI estimate was less precise in several sensitivity analyses and was not independently associated with food insecurity, market-dependent vulnerability, or buffer resilience.
Conclusion
Production diversity and exact farm-to-diet overlap captured distinct dimensions of household food acquisition. Both were associated with lower market dependence, but exact overlap was not a consistent indicator of broader food insecurity, vulnerability, or resilience. These findings support assessing production, self-consumption, and purchase as distinct pathways rather than assuming that production diversification alone improves household food security. This distinction may help nutrition-sensitive agricultural programs monitor production, household retention, and market acquisition as separate but interconnected pathways.