Central and South America Regional Report

A report from The Economist Intelligence Unit
Food securityinfocus:
Central&
SouthAmerica 2014
Sponsoredby

© The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20141
Food security in focus: Central & South America 2014
is an Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) report
commissioned by DuPont. The report discusses the
major findings in the 2014 Global Food Security
Index (GFSI) for the 18 countries of Central &
South America included in the index.
About the GFSI
The GFSI considers the core issues of affordability,
availability, and quality & safety across a set of 109
countries. The index is a dynamic quantitative and
qualitative benchmarking model, constructed from
28 unique indicators, that measures the drivers of
food security across both developed and
developing countries. Food security is defined as
the state in which people at all times have physical,
social and economic access to sufficient and
nutritious food that meets their dietary needs for a
healthy and active life, based on the definition
established at the 1996 World Food Summit. The
overall goal of the study is to assess the
vulnerability of food systems to security and
insecurity by looking at drivers of the Affordability,
Availability, and Quality & Safety of food. The 2014
GFSI is the third annual index in this series.
Acknowledgements
Lucy Hurst, associate director of custom research
for the Americas, was the project director. Joshua
Grundleger, analyst, was the project manager.
Katherine Stewart, research associate, was the
editor of the Food security in focus series. Martin
Vieiro, analyst, provided research and analytical
support. Leo Abruzzese, global forecasting director
and global director of public policy, served as
senior adviser. William Shallcross designed and
constructed the benchmarking model, and Mike
Kenny was responsible for layout and design.
Robert Wood, senior editor/economist for Latin
America, provided regional expertise.
PrefaceContents
A regional
analysis of food
security 2
Regional
results and
comparisons 3
Food security in
Central & South
America 6
The countries
of Central &
South America 9
Appendix 12

The Food security in focus regional reports identify
both similarities and differences between countries
in each region and highlight regional areas of
strength and weakness, providing regional analysis
and context to the results in the 2014 GFSI.
Food security is a complex and nuanced issue,
which can be analysed through many viewpoints
and from many geographical perspectives—
national, regional and global. To facilitate greater
insight into the primary elements of global food
security, and to develop a common standard
against which all countries and regions can be
measured, The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)
created the Global Food Security Index (GFSI). The
index is a tool to be used by a wide range of
organisations and individuals working to address
food security and the smooth functioning of food
systems at a variety of levels. Some of the major
elements of food security and, in particular, the
deficiencies that may lead to greater food
insecurity, differ across the globe. The regional
reports seek to facilitate a deeper analysis of food
security through a unique lens. Specifically, these
reports seek to:
l Examine regional challenges, strengths and
issues surrounding food security to gain greater
insight into the study’s measures.
l Provide a point of comparison between the
regions to understand the dynamics of food
security and the mechanisms that may be
employed to address the unique issues that are
experienced within a region.
l Explore the role of regional commonalities—
countries within a region tend to have similar
environments, problems, solutions and, in some
cases, may share common institutions.
l Create more accurate country comparisons and a
more nuanced understanding of food security by
narrowing the frame of analysis.
l Offer insight into the economic, political and
social context of the results of the 2014 GFSI.
A regional analysis of food security

Overview
On a regional level, structural elements, which are
generally more similar within regions than across
the globe, tend to play an extremely important role
in determining food security. Also, in regions that
include countries with different economic systems,
policy environments, agricultural infrastructures
and nutritional standards, the gap in food security
between best and worst performers is wider. These
structural elements tend to change little year on
year; however, when changes do occur, they have a
greater impact on food security than other factors
explored in the index.
l Economic development has the largest impact
on food security, as shown by the strong
correlation between food affordability and food
security. The top performers in the index are rich
countries with developed economies; these tend
Regional results and comparisons
Ranking/score table of all regions
Overall Rank Region 2014 GFSI Score
1 North America 80.0
2 Europe 75.4
3 Middle East and North Africa 57.4
4 Central and South America 56.0
5 Asia and Pacific 55.0
6 Sub-Saharan Africa 36.1
to have relatively high levels of GDP per capita
and low shares of household expenditure on
food. Although emerging economies are
experiencing rapid GDP growth, resulting in
increased Affordability scores and greater urban
absorption capacity, the gap between developed
and developing countries is still great.
l The most food-secure countries also tend to
have developed infrastructures, including
advanced agricultural infrastructures and
facilities and systems that support agricultural
investment and research and development
(R&D). Transport infrastructure, including road
and port systems, and adequate crop storage
facilities drive food availability and are
underdeveloped and undersupplied across
food-insecure countries owing to
underinvestment.

l A stable, efficient and functional policy
environment is crucial for food security. More
food-insecure regions, as well as countries,
frequently have higher political stability risk and
corruption levels, alongside weaker institutions
that fail to provide appropriate government
regulation and oversight. By contrast, the more
food-secure regions have robust policy
environments that facilitate food accessibility
through stable supply chains, and affordability
through food safety-net programmes.
l Nutrition plays an important role in determining
food security. Highly food-secure countries have
diversified diets and a high quality of protein.
Their diets contain a high level of
micronutrients, including iron and vitamin A.
More food-insecure countries are often deprived
of nutritious diets and lack organisations that
regulate nutritional standards.
Regional results
North America and Europe, which collectively
encompass 29 of the 109 countries in the index,
recorded the strongest performances in the GFSI,
driven by the developed countries’ dominance of
those regions.
l As two regions comprised primarily of rich
countries, Europe and North America have high
levels of GDP per capita at an average of
US$32,462 measured in terms of purchasing
power parity (PPP), compared with an average of
US$9,900 at PPP in the other four regions, while
an average of 17.7% of household expenditure
goes on food—just over half the global average
of 34.5%.
l Wealth corresponds with high sufficiency of food
supply, developed agricultural infrastructure,
strong diet diversification, relatively low
political stability risk and low corruption levels
(Ukraine and Russia are exceptions). These
factors contribute to North America’s and
Europe’s first and second place rankings
respectively in the overall index and in each of
the categories.
Availability
Rank Region Score
2 Europe 69.8
Affordability
Rank Region Score
2 Europe 80.3

The next three highest-ranked regions—the Middle
East & North Africa (MENA), Central & South
America and Asia & Pacific—together account for
52 countries in the index. They all fall within a
range of 2.4 points and share several common
factors:
l They are comprised of a mixture of developed
and developing countries that vary in terms of
economic and political structures.
l MENA’s strong Affordability score (third
overall), which is 2.3 points ahead of Central &
South America, and its third-place tie in Quality
& Safety with Central & South America account
for its overall third-place regional rank in the
index.
l Asia & Pacific’s comparatively high percentage
of the population under the global poverty line
and low diet diversification explain its lower
scores in the Affordability and Quality & Safety
categories.
Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the lowest regional
score in the 2014 GFSI, with an overall score that is
just two-thirds that of the Asia & Pacific region.
l It also scores the lowest in each of the
Affordability, Availability and Quality & Safety
categories, owing to the large percentage of
low-income countries in the region; of the 28
countries included in the region, 18 are low-
income, according to World Bank income
classifications.
l Low agricultural import tariffs and commitment
to agricultural research and development, while
still weak, are areas of relative strength in
comparison with select regions, but
underdeveloped agricultural infrastructure, low
income levels and poor diet diversification drive
the region’s poor results.
Quality & Safety
Rank Region Score
2 Europe 78.9
=3 Central and South America 59.5
=3 Middle East and North Africa 59.5

According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO), 47m people in Central & South America and
Mexico (CSA) suffered from hunger in 2011-13, a
6.6% decline from 2008-10. In recent years there
has been a palpable reduction in poverty and
extreme poverty in CSA, but the regional slowdown
experienced in 2013 (as a whole Latin America and
the Caribbean grew by only 2.6%) partly explains
why the gains appear to have lost momentum.
According to the UN Economic Commission for Latin
America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), the number of
people in CSA (and Mexico) living in poverty
amounted to 164m in 2013, and the number of
those in extreme poverty rose by 2m in 2012 to
68m—equivalent to 11.5% of the population.
The region as a whole produces enough food to
feed itself and is also a major food exporter, owing
to the agricultural powerhouses of Brazil and
Argentina. As a net exporter of food, fluctuations
in regional production can be felt in in terms of
affordability and access in target markets in Asia
and Africa. In 2013 the region’s output of cereals
increased to 186.7m tonnes, from 170m tonnes in
2012, driven largely by a rise in corn production.
Governments of countries where agricultural
production is not so bountiful have sought to buoy
output, particularly of smaller-scale farms. In
December 2013, at the second summit of the
Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America
(ALBA) and PetroCaribe (an oil alliance of many
Caribbean states with Venezuela), member
countries announced measures to boost food
availability. Despite a regional focus on increasing
production, the vagaries of the weather and crop
Food security in Central & South America
Average agricultural import tariffs, by region
%
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit
Central and South
America
North America Europe Asia and Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa Middle East and
North Africa
0
5
10
15
20
25

diseases still have the potential to cause localised
problems, particularly for smaller-scale operations,
which require targeted policy interventions as well
as longer-term planning.
Regional highlights
Although economic growth slowed in 2013, rising
incomes helped to offset the effects of regional
food price inflation, which, according to the FAO
Regional Office for Latin America and the
Caribbean, experienced an average weighted
increase of 10.2% in 2013 (food price inflation in
2012 was 8.9%), and households in the majority of
countries in the region spent a lower percentage of
household income on food. CSA’s agricultural
import tariffs are low by global standards. This
reflects the socio-political imperative of ensuring
that as much of the population as possible has a
sufficient calorific intake, and high food prices
have driven the governments of some countries,
such as Bolivia, to reduce import tariffs in order to
bolster access. Despite a strong tariff environment
throughout the region, in Colombia the
government introduced safeguard measures in late
2013 for a two-year period to reduce imports of
potatoes, onions, beans, tomatoes and other items
through higher tariffs. Nevertheless, these factors
have resulted in a marked regional improvement in
food affordability.
In terms of the region’s scores in the GFSI, gains
in the Affordability category more than offset score
slippages in the Quality & Safety measure. High
urbanisation rates, coupled with stunted GDP
growth over the past year and the prevalence of
corruption in the region, which continues to impair
food availability through distortions and
inefficiencies in resource allocation and
distribution systems, negatively affected the
availability of food. A decrease in accessibility of
potable water resulted in score declines in the
Quality & Safety category for the majority of
countries in the region (Ecuador, Brazil and
Argentina experienced some improvement).
Regional strengths: Commitment
and constancy
The more comprehensive regional presence of food
safety nets, together with a decrease in the
percentage of household expenditure on food and
improved agricultural infrastructure owing to port
development in Chile and the Dominican Republic,
has driven an overall score increase of 0.4 for the
region in the 2014 GFSI. Several countries’
application of the lessons learned from successful
food safety net programmes, notably Brazil’s Bolsa
Familia conditional cash transfer (CCT) initiative,
has in recent years bolstered food accessibility and
affordability across the region. For example, in
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Jan
2000
Jan
2001
Jan
2002
Jan
2003
Jan
2004
Jan
2005
Jan
2006
Jan
2007
Jan
2008
Jan
2009
Jan
2010
Jan
2011
Jan
2012
Jan
2013
Brazil Food price inflation
Jan 2005=100
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit; FAO.

October 2013 the government of the Dominican
Republic announced its own Zero Hunger National
Programme for Food Security and Nutrition for the
period 2013-16. Chile, Nicaragua and Uruguay,
following in Brazil’s footsteps, have also
implemented food safety net programmes that
have resulted in score improvements.
Despite localised problems of harvest failure
that are affecting some crops used for both
domestic consumption and cash crop exports, on
the whole CSA scores very well on volatility of
agricultural production. This reflects the region’s
large arable land mass and fairly good level of
agricultural development. Climate change,
however, is increasing the frequency of natural
disasters, and the capacity of vulnerable
populations to recover from their devastating
impact is a growing challenge. Since 2012 an
outbreak of coffee rust disease has swept through
coffee-growing communities in many parts of
Central America, reducing food access for many
families that depend on this cash crop for a living.
Poor rains in Bolivia’s drought-prone El Chaco
region in early 2013 led to large losses of maize for
subsistence farmers. Local areas of southern
Ecuador also experienced drought in mid-2013,
which hit crops and livestock.
CSA receives high overall scores for nutritional
standards and food safety, despite the regional
decline in access to potable water. These factors
are areas of strength for a majority of countries in
the GFSI, reflecting the importance of food security
policies in national agendas that have helped to
build enabling frameworks for food safety and a
general commitment to increasing nutritional
standards.
Regional weaknesses: Growing
urbanisation, minimal innovation
Urbanisation rates in the majority of the region’s
upper-middle-income countries, ranging from
1.05% to 2.54% in 2010-12, are high by
developed-country standards, and the rural-urban
shift in poorer countries is still ongoing owing to
their large rural populations. High urbanisation
rates and the slowdown in GDP growth that the
region experienced in 2013 account for CSA’s low
urban absorption capacity, which weighed on the
region’s food availability. This, combined with high
corruption levels across the region, which hamper
food accessibility by distorting allocation even if
there are sufficient quantities of food available,
result in CSA’s lagging performance in the
Availability category.
Given the large arable land mass in Latin America,
the region’s low agricultural research and
development (R&D) spending ratio is disappointing.
Brazil scores the best among the countries in the
region, with agricultural R&D spending estimated at
between 1.5% and 2% of agricultural GDP, reflecting
the pioneering work of the Embrapa agricultural
extension agency, which has been operating for
more than 40 years and has helped the sector to
innovate and boost production. Argentina, Chile and
Uruguay commit public spending of between 1% and
1.5% of agricultural GDP, while the rest of the
countries invest less. Guatemala, the lowest-scoring
country in the region, spends just 0.06% of
agricultural GDP on R&D.
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Volatility of agricultural production,
Central & South America
Standard deviation
El Salvador
Paraguay
Argentina
Uruguay
Nicaragua
Guatemala
Honduras
Peru
Dominican Republic
Bolivia
Colombia
Chile
Haiti
Panama
Costa Rica
Brazil
Venezuela
Ecuador

The countries of Central & South America
Central & South America can be divided into three
broad economic regions in terms of their
development and placing in the GFSI. As income
levels are closely linked to food security outcomes,
it is not surprising that the more developed
southern countries in South America—Chile,
Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay—do well. Venezuela
also does relatively well, reflecting well-
established safety nets for the poor, but underlying
macroeconomic distortions and foreign-exchange
shortages have increased in recent months,
impairing food supply and posing a risk to its
position going forward. Less developed
economies—such as Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru and to
some extent Colombia—lie behind the leaders.
Most of the Central American and Caribbean
countries are placed further behind, largely
reflecting lower income levels. That said, Costa Rica
and Panama are notable exceptions in this sub-
region, lying in third and seventh place
respectively out of the 18 countries in the region.
Geographically, CSA can be split into four
sub-regions. To the east of the Andes lie the
agricultural centres of Brazil and Argentina. Not
Correlation between GFSI overall score and GFSI affordability score
Overall score v Food affordability, Central & South America
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Foodaffordability
Overall score
Overall score: Rating 0-100
Affordability: Rating 0-100
Correlation (x,y) 0.97
Haiti
Nicaragua
Guatemala
El Salvador
Paraguay
Paraguay
Peru
Colombia
Venezuela
Uruguay
Costa Rica
Argentina
Brazil Chile
Panama
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Honduras

only do these countries produce for export, thanks
to their abundant arable land, but they also
provide considerable and diversified food for their
populations. To the west of the Andes, Chile has
developed an advanced agro-export industry in the
fertile strip of land benefiting from water runoff
from the mountains. Subsistence farming plays a
larger role in Bolivia, Peru and to some extent
Colombia, explaining the weaker food security
scores for these countries. This is also the case for
Central American countries, an area where
agricultural production is more prone to damage
from the ravages of the weather. Caribbean islands
tend to be more dependent on food imports.
Country highlights
There is a broad correlation in the index between
country incomes and food security. Chile, one of
the two upper-income countries in the region, has
the highest overall food security, while Haiti, the
only low-income country, has the lowest. Because
their GDP per head is higher and their households
spend a smaller share of their income on food, the
upper-middle-income countries have higher overall
scores than the lower-middle-income countries,
which correlates strongly with their overall index
performance. However, the link between country
income and food security is not uniform: for
example, Uruguay, the other high-income country
in Central & South America, scores fifth overall
behind three upper-middle-income countries
(Brazil, Costa Rica and Argentina). This discrepancy
stems from Uruguay’s low GDP per head relative to
Chile’s and Argentina’s and higher food spending
as a percentage of household expenditure than in
Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. There are a
number of other factors not in Uruguay’s favour,
namely minimal access to financing for farmers,
high volatility of agricultural production, high food
loss and comparatively low diet diversification.
Nonetheless, country income levels are the major
predictor of food security in Central & South
America.
Food security successes
Chile is Latin America’s food security leader and the
only country in the region ranked in the GFSI’s Best
Environment grouping (the top quartile). Within
the region, Chile leads in terms of Affordability and
Availability and is second to Argentina in Quality &
Safety. Chile’s 1.6 point improvement in the overall
score this year reflects a broadening of its food
safety nets as well as gains in agricultural
infrastructure and port facilities, both of which
buoy food availability. Chile scores somewhat
poorly for public expenditure on agricultural R&D
and GDP per capita. While Chile transitioned this
year from an upper-middle-income country to a
high-income one, reflecting brisk GDP growth rates,
income levels will nevertheless have to rise to
converge with those of more developed countries.
Furthermore, income inequality remains rampant.
Brazil’s social welfare programme Bolsa Familia
promotes improved education and healthcare. A
key to its success has been its integration with
social policies for food and nutrition security. The
government has also increased investments in
potable water and sanitation. Between 1990 and
2013 the prevalence of undernourishment declined
from 15% to 7%, and between 1989 and 2007 the
prevalence of child stunting fell from about 19% to
7%, according to the International Food Policy
Research Institute (IFPRI). With the largest food
supply in the region and low chronic food aid
dependency, Brazil is an agricultural powerhouse
and a large global exporter. That said, agricultural
infrastructure, particularly poor road and port
infrastructure, remains a constraint. In the past
year the government has begun to offer
concessions to upgrade logistics infrastructure,
which should result in improvements once the
projects come to fruition over the medium term.
Brazil’s GDP per capita levels are lower than in
more developed countries and its economy has
weakened since the 2004-10 boom, with an
outlook for modest growth going forward. The
public policies that have helped to lift millions out

of poverty and reduce income inequality in the past
decade—namely minimum wage rises and robust
CCT programmes—are firmly embedded and
unlikely to be reversed, which will help cement
gains in food security indicators.
Improvements in food affordability and
availability have more than compensated for
Bolivia’s decline in the Quality & Safety category,
which has been blighted (as is the case for many
countries in the index) by downward revisions to
the latest estimates available for the percentage of
the population with access to potable water.
Bolivia’s recent high-growth cycle has reduced the
share of food consumption in total household
expenditure, which was high in the past (Bolivia
moved from ranking 15th in the region in the 2013
index to 6th place in 2014 index). Poverty has
fallen, but income levels in Bolivia still lag well
behind those in developed countries, indicating
considerable room for catch-up. Additionally,
although social unrest has long been a feature of
Bolivian politics, with demonstrations often
cutting off road transport of food produce, the
incidence of protests has eased. More rapid GDP
growth has lifted the country’s urban absorption
capacity, an important phenomenon in Bolivia
given that the rural-urban shift is still blossoming,
while in most Latin American countries
urbanisation rates are already fairly high.
Food security challenges
Guatemala, plagued by insufficient food supply,
poor-quality protein and low GDP per head,
continues to be among the weaker performers in
the region. In 2012 the government began
implementing a multi-sectoral strategy called the
Zero Hunger Plan with the aim of reducing
malnutrition in children by 10% by the end of
2015. The plan prioritises 166 municipalities with
the highest prevalence of chronic malnutrition.
Separately, in a bid to combat higher food prices
in 2013, Guatemala introduced the new Pa’quete
Alcance initiative, which includes a line of action
to support farmers. Although Guatemala’s overall
score fell by 0.3 points in the index this year, the
implementation of the government’s ambitious
plan may well see improvements materialise in the
future.
Haiti, the only low-income country in the region
and also the worst-performing one, saw large
improvements between the 2013 and 2014 indices.
Haiti’s improvement in the rankings reflects a low
starting point and is attributable to the ongoing
recovery from the impact of the 2010 earthquake
that devastated the country. The installation of
adequate crop storage facilities, which were
previously lacking, resulted in better agricultural
infrastructure and increased food availability, and
a reduction in import tariffs (to 6%) helped the
flow of food imports, on which Haiti crucially
depends. More than half the population lives in
rural areas, but the country imports half its food
and 80% of its rice. The government aims for Haiti
to produce 60% of its own food in the medium
term, which will require boosting production of
locally grown crops rather than relying on rice
imports. Foreign aid agencies have begun to adopt
more market-oriented policies and, instead of
distributing imported food from the US, have
begun to offer food vouchers to indigent families
to be spent on locally grown food. Economic
growth has buoyed urban absorption capacity and
contributed to political stability, and rising
incomes have helped to reduce food consumption
as a share of household expenditure, which has
augmented the country’s food security. But despite
this Haiti still has a very long way to go to catch up
with developed, more food-secure economies.

Appendix
Asia & Pacific Central & South
America
Europe Middle East &
North Africa
North America Sub-Saharan Africa
Australia Argentina Austria Algeria Canada Angola
Azerbaijan Bolivia Belarus Egypt Mexico Benin
Bangladesh Brazil Belgium Israel United States Botswana
Cambodia Chile Bulgaria Jordan Burkina Faso
China Colombia Czech Republic Kuwait Burundi
India Costa Rica Denmark Morocco Cameroon
Indonesia Dominican Republic Finland Saudi Arabia Chad
Japan Ecuador France Syria Congo (Dem. Rep.)
Kazakhstan El Salvador Germany Tunisia Côte d’Ivoire
Malaysia Guatemala Greece Turkey Ethiopia
Myanmar Haiti Hungary United Arab Emirates Ghana
Nepal Honduras Ireland Yemen Guinea
New Zealand Nicaragua Italy Kenya
Pakistan Panama Netherlands Madagascar
Philippines Paraguay Norway Malawi
Singapore Peru Poland Mali
South Korea Uruguay Portugal Mozambique
Sri Lanka Venezuela Romania Niger
Tajikistan Russia Nigeria
Thailand Serbia Rwanda
Uzbekistan Slovakia Senegal
Vietnam Spain Sierra Leone
Sweden South Africa
Switzerland Sudan
Ukraine Tanzania
United Kingdom Togo
Uganda
Zambia
Country selection table

Appendix These tables list the rankings and scores for Central & South America in the overall index and across the three
categories (Affordability, Availability and Quality & Safety).
Overall Ranking Affordability
Overall Rank Country Score Rank Country Score
1 Chile 72.5 1 Chile 74.5
2 Brazil 68.1 2 Brazil 70.7
3 Costa Rica 65.8 3 Venezuela 68.3
4 Argentina 65.4 4 Argentina 66.6
5 Uruguay 65.0 5 Uruguay 66.5
6 Venezuela 62.5 6 Costa Rica 61.6
7 Panama 61.2 7 Peru 60.5
8 Colombia 58.0 8 Colombia 59.1
9 Peru 56.3 9 Panama 56.5
10 Dominican Republic 54.5 10 Paraguay 56.0
11 Ecuador 54.2 11 Ecuador 55.4
12 Paraguay 53.1 12 Dominican Republic 54.9
13 Bolivia 50.6 13 Bolivia 52.9
14 Honduras 50.1 14 El Salvador 51.1
15 El Salvador 48.8 15 Honduras 49.6
16 Guatemala 46.9 16 Guatemala 49.0
17 Nicaragua 45.6 17 Nicaragua 45.0
18 Haiti 30.2 18 Haiti 24.8
Availability Quality & Safety
Rank Country Score Rank Country Score
1 Chile 71.2 1 Argentina 78.0
2 Costa Rica 69.2 2 Chile 71.3
=3 Brazil 64.9 3 Brazil 70.4
=3 Panama 64.9 4 Costa Rica 67.2
5 Uruguay 63.4 5 Venezuela 66.2
6 Argentina 59.6 6 Uruguay 65.9
7 Colombia 56.2 7 Panama 62.6
8 Venezuela 55.8 8 Dominican Republic 60.5
9 Peru 52.2 9 Colombia 60.0
10 Dominican Republic 52.0 10 Ecuador 58.8
11 Ecuador 51.4 11 Paraguay 58.2
12 Paraguay 48.6 12 El Salvador 57.7
13 Honduras 48.5 13 Peru 57.0
14 Bolivia 48.4 14 Honduras 55.5
15 Nicaragua 44.9 15 Guatemala 52.9
16 El Salvador 43.6 16 Bolivia 50.5
17 Guatemala 42.8 17 Nicaragua 48.8
18 Haiti 35.6 18 Haiti 28.8

Appendix These tables list the year-on-year score changes, 2014 v 2013, for Central & South America in the overall index and
across the three categories (Affordability, Availability and Quality & Safety).
Overall Ranking Affordability
Country Y-o-Y change Country Y-o-Y change
Bolivia 1.9 Venezuela 4.7
Haiti 1.8 Bolivia 4.1
Chile 1.6 Nicaragua 4.0
Nicaragua 1.5 Chile 3.7
Colombia 1.3 Colombia 3.3
Costa Rica 1.2 Uruguay 3.3
Dominican Republic 0.6 Guatemala 2.6
Ecuador 0.6 Haiti 1.5
Uruguay 0.4 Paraguay 0.9
Peru 0.1 Panama 0.5
Venezuela 0.0 Ecuador 0.5
Panama -0.1 Peru 0.3
Argentina -0.2 Costa Rica 0.2
Guatemala -0.3 Dominican Republic 0.2
Brazil -0.5 Argentina 0.2
Honduras -0.6 Brazil 0.0
Paraguay -0.7 Honduras -1.1
El Salvador -1.4 El Salvador -3.2
Availability Quality & Safety
Country Y-o-Y change Country Y-o-Y change
Haiti 3.2 Ecuador 1.1
Costa Rica 3.1 Brazil 0.1
Dominican Republic 1.7 Argentina 0.1
Chile 0.8 Panama -0.1
Bolivia 0.8 Guatemala -0.2
Colombia 0.6 Honduras -0.6
Peru 0.4 Bolivia -0.8
Ecuador 0.4 Peru -0.9
El Salvador 0.2 Chile -0.9
Nicaragua 0.1 Costa Rica -1.0
Honduras -0.1 El Salvador -1.2
Panama -0.8 Nicaragua -1.2
Argentina -0.8 Uruguay -1.3
Brazil -1.1 Dominican Republic -1.5
Paraguay -1.5 Haiti -1.5
Uruguay -1.5 Venezuela -1.6
Guatemala -3.0 Colombia -1.9
Venezuela -3.7 Paraguay -2.5

Whilst every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy of this
information, neither The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd. nor the
sponsor of this report can accept any responsibility or liability
for reliance by any person on this white paper or any of the
information, opinions or conclusions set out in the white paper.
Cover:Getty

London
20 Cabot Square
London
E14 4QW
United Kingdom
Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000
Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476
E-mail: london@eiu.com
NewYork
750 Third Avenue
5th Floor
New York, NY 10017
United States
Tel: (1.212) 554 0600
Fax: (1.212) 586 0248
E-mail: newyork@eiu.com
HongKong
6001, Central Plaza
18 Harbour Road
Wanchai
Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2585 3888
Fax: (852) 2802 7638
E-mail: hongkong@eiu.com
Geneva
Boulevard des
Tranchées 16
1206 Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: (41) 22 566 2470
Fax: (41) 22 346 93 47
E-mail: geneva@eiu.com

Central and South America Regional Report

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (16)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (14)

Ähnlich wie Central and South America Regional Report

Ähnlich wie Central and South America Regional Report (20)

Mehr von Adam Greenfader

Mehr von Adam Greenfader (11)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Central and South America Regional Report