Evaluation of FSVA Use as an Indicator in Tanjungpinang City Food Security Planning Process
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31629/jgbr.v3i2.8088Keywords:
FSVA, Food Security, Food Vulnerability, Urban PlanningAbstract
This study evaluates the use of the Food Security and Vulnerability Atlas (FSVA) as an indicator-based instrument in the food security planning process of Tanjungpinang City. The issue is important because Tanjungpinang, as an urban and archipelagic area, has limited agricultural land, depends on food supplies from outside the region, and faces uneven socioeconomic and basic service conditions across its wards. The purpose of this study is to assess how FSVA indicators can describe local food security conditions, identify vulnerable areas, and support evidence-based planning for targeted policy interventions. This research employed a quantitative descriptive approach using secondary data from relevant government institutions, including data on food supply facilities, low-welfare population, transportation connectivity, clean water access, and health personnel. The data were analyzed through individual indicator analysis, standardization, weighting, composite scoring, and spatial classification into six priority groups. The findings show that Tanjungpinang City is generally in a relatively food-secure condition, with no ward classified as Priority 1. However, one ward is classified as Priority 2, one ward as Priority 3, one ward as Priority 4, seven wards as Priority 5, and eight wards as Priority 6. Senggarang and Dompak require particular attention because their vulnerability is influenced by low-income households, limited clean water access, and an unequal ratio of health personnel. The study concludes that FSVA is useful not only as a vulnerability mapping tool but also as a planning framework that links data, spatial analysis, causal factors, and policy interventions to strengthen sustainable urban food security.
Downloads
References
Abdelatif, M., & Djiar, K. A. (2025). Urban food security and spatial vulnerability in local planning contexts. Cities and Health.
Battersby, J. (2017). MDGs to SDGs—New goals, same gaps: The continued absence of urban food security in the post-2015 global development agenda. African Geographical Review, 36(1), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2016.1208769
Béné, C., Oosterveer, P., Lamotte, L., Brouwer, I. D., de Haan, S., Prager, S. D., Talsma, E. F., & Khoury, C. K. (2019). When food systems meet sustainability: Current narratives and implications for actions. World Development, 113, 116–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.08.011
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Cattivelli, V., & Rusciano, V. (2020). Social innovation and food provisioning during COVID-19: The case of urban–rural initiatives in the province of Naples. Sustainability, 12(11), 4444. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114444
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dawood, F., & van Vuuren, J. H. (2023). A multi-dimensional spatial index for the quantification of food insecurity. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 14, 100768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100768
Dinku, A. M., Mekonnen, T. C., & Adilu, G. S. (2023). Urban food systems: Factors associated with food insecurity in the urban settings evidence from Dessie and Combolcha cities, north-central Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(3), e14482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14482
Feizizadeh, B., Omarzadeh, D., Lakes, T., & Blaschke, T. (2023). A scenario-based food security analysis and halophyte cultivation suitability assessment using GIScience. Ecological Indicators, 154, 110779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110779
Hecht, A. A., Biehl, E., Barnett, D. J., & Neff, R. A. (2019). Urban food supply chain resilience for crises threatening food security: A qualitative study. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 119(2), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2018.09.001
Horst, M., McClintock, N., & Hoey, L. (2017). The intersection of planning, urban agriculture, and food justice: A review of the literature. Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(3), 277–295. https://doi.org /10.1080/01944363.2017.1322914
Ikudayisi, A. A. (2024). Urban food security and socioeconomic sustainability: A multidimensional perspective. Green Technologies and Sustainability, 2(2), 100080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.grets.2024.100080
Jones, A. D., Ngure, F. M., Pelto, G., & Young, S. L. (2013). What are we assessing when we measure food security? A compendium and review of current metrics. Advances in Nutrition, 4(5), 481–505. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.113.004119
Liu, B., Yu, H., Wang, Y., & Chen, J. (2025). A systematic review of food accessibility in the food supply chain context. Sustainable Futures, 9, 100449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100449
Manikas, I., Ali, B. M., & Sundarakani, B. (2023). A systematic literature review of indicators measuring food security. Agriculture & Food Security, 12, Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-023-00415-7
Martellozzo, F., Landry, J. S., Plouffe, D., Seufert, V., Rowhani, P., & Ramankutty, N. (2014). Urban agriculture: A global analysis of the space constraint to meet urban vegetable demand. Environmental Research Letters, 9(6), 064025. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/6/064025
Morgan, K. (2009). Feeding the city: The challenge of urban food planning. International Planning Studies, 14(4), 341–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563471003642852
Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., & Giovannini, E. (2005). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org 10.178/9789264043466-en
Petrovics, D., & Giezen, M. (2022). Planning for sustainable urban food systems: An analysis of the up-scaling potential of vertical farming. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 65(5), 785–808. https://doi.org10.1080/09640568.2021.1903404
Poulsen, M. N., McNab, P. R., Clayton, M. L., & Neff, R. A. (2015). A systematic review of urban agriculture and food security impacts in low-income countries. Food Policy, 55, 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.07.002
Safayet, M., Arefin, M. A., & Hasan, M. M. (2024). Urban food access, spatial inequality, and vulnerability mapping in food security planning. Urban Governance.
Sonnino, R. (2009). Feeding the city: Towards a new research and planning agenda. International Planning Studies, 14(4), 425–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563471003642795
Warren, E., Hawkesworth, S., & Knai, C. (2015). Investigating the association between urban agriculture and food security, dietary diversity, and nutritional status: A systematic literature review. Food Policy, 53, 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.03.004
Young, S. L., Bethancourt, H. J., Ritter, Z. R., & Frongillo, E. A. (2021). Estimating national, demographic, and socioeconomic disparities in water insecurity experiences in low-income and middle-income countries in 2020–2021. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(12), e880–e891. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00278-5
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yesi Perdeawati, Hamid Haikal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
