Natural disasters have become commonplace events with acute or long-term impacts on human life (Reduction UNOfDR, 1901). These disasters affect various aspects of human capital, including nutrition and health (Baez et al., 2010). A decline in food security is inevitable due to the adverse effects of disasters on sources of livelihood (LIVELIHOODS TBRJFAO, 2015). The Asia-Pacific region has been experiencing natural disasters for decades. Since 1970, a person residing in this region has been five times more likely to be affected by natural disasters compared to other regions. This is noteworthy considering that 60% of the world’s population resides in this region, which covers 40% of the Earth’s landmass (Economic, 2017). Iran, a crisis-prone country in this region, has faced numerous crises such as earthquakes and floods, as well as economic instability in recent years due to international sanctions (Hejazi and Emamgholipour, 2022). Until 2016, the prevalence of food insecurity was 49% among Iranian households (Behzadifar et al., 2016). The prevalence of food insecurity among teachers is reported to be approximately 70%, depending on various economic and social factors (Parvin et al., 2020). Rising food prices adversely affect food security in vulnerable groups (Hejazi and Emamgholipour, 2022). Although humanitarian aid and support can be beneficial in critical situations, they may not always significantly reduce vulnerability to future crises (Safarpour, 2018; Hejazi and Emamgholipour, 2022). Apart from the type of disaster, vulnerability to food insecurity during crises depends on various factors, including physical ability, living conditions, age, and race (Clay et al., 2018). Resilience, a multidimensional concept, has been extensively used in various fields such as food security and is consistently proposed as a means to enhance performance (Hoddinott, 2014). According to Constas and Barrette’s perspective on food security, “Resilience represents the likelihood over time of a person, household or other unit being non-poor and food-secure in the face of various stresses and shocks. If and only if that likelihood is and remains high, then the unit is resilient” (Constas and Barrett, 2013). One of the most notable features of resilience is that it demonstrates the combined effect of several shocks and stressors such as climate change, economic instability, and social conditions that have increased vulnerability in a society (FAO, 2016; II R, 2018). The measurement of resilience in the context of food insecurity is crucial. Firstly, it can help distinguish between individuals with high and low resilience for resource allocation. Secondly, understanding how interventions work in critical situations can be beneficial. Measuring resilience to food insecurity is complex due to its different levels such as individuals, households, and communities. Beyond these level differences, various indicators can be associated with it such as health conditions, cultural and political situations, and ecological factors (Béné et al., 2016). Due to the complexity of the concept of resilience, there is no consensus on an appropriate measurement; however, some experiences have been gained in this regard (Lascano Galarza, 2020). The Food and Agriculture Organization has extensive experience in measuring resilience to food security (FAO, 2016). The most precise empirical attempt at measuring resilience was carried out by Alinovi et al. in 2016 who proposed an econometric approach (FAO, 2016). The livelihood strategy is another method used by households to cope with critical situations; this method was used in Kenya (Alinovi et al., 2010a). Resilience has been measured as a final or short-term outcome in studies. In some studies, resilience has been considered an indicator of food security which can sometimes be difficult to distinguish. Furthermore, in some cases, the dynamic feature of resilience and the role of stress have been overlooked (Ansah et al., 2019).

Evidence from 35 countries indicates that access to assets was the first or second pillar in predicting resilience to food insecurity. However, these results were observed in countries with socioeconomic and crisis profiles that are significantly different from Iran (d’Errico et al., 2021).

According to the climate and hunger vulnerability map, Iran exhibits medium vulnerability with low adaptive capacity, very high sensitivity, and medium exposure to shocks. This underscores the importance of addressing food insecurity and resilience in Iran (Krishnamurthy et al., 2014). While several studies have evaluated household food insecurity in Iran, research on the resilience approach and adaptive capacity to enhance food security during crises is limited. Teachers play a pivotal role in improving human resources, which is crucial during crises. They can serve as an accurate representation of society due to their diverse economic and social conditions (Izadkhah et al., 2012; Hosseinighousheh et al., 2021).

To address this gap, this paper explores a method to answer the question: “What are the main dimensions of household resilience to food insecurity among teachers living in Tehran?” The findings of this research can provide valuable insights for policymakers aiming to improve household resilience to food insecurity in countries similar to Iran in Asia.

The study population resided in various zones of Tehran, including the north, south, west, east, and center. Approximately half (51%) of the household heads were over 50 years old. The most common education level among household heads was a bachelor’s degree, accounting for 30%, while only 0.2% of the household heads were illiterate. The number of household members ranged from 2 to 4 in 77% of the households. Men were the head of the household in 94.5% of the households, and 88% of the households had one or two employed members. Furthermore, 42% had two sources of income. The socio-economic status of the study population is presented in Table 7.

In terms of food security, 88.25% of the study population were food security, while 11.75% had experienced some degree of food insecurity. The study results indicated that households in Zone 1 (a region of the municipality located in the north of Tehran) had the highest dietary diversity scores compared to others. In contrast, households in Zone 10 (the most populous area located in the center of Tehran) had the lowest dietary diversity scores.

The average caloric and protein intake was highest in Zone 5 (northwest of Tehran) and lowest in Zone 10. Detailed information on food security and food intake is presented in Table 8.

Rising food prices and living costs, experienced by 99.5% of households, and loss of assets, experienced by 20% of households, were identified as the financial shocks with the highest frequency. Households in Zone 10 had the highest rates of household head mortality and disability, job loss, and non-payment compared to other areas. While 99.5% of households had experienced increases in food prices and living costs, using savings was the most common coping strategy. The data related to crises and coping strategies in the study population are presented in Table 9.

The results in Table 10 showed that 52% of the households were vulnerable, 18.75% were resilient, 15.5% were moderately resilient, and only 11% were highly resilient.

We found that the average consumption of red meat in highly resilient households was significantly higher than in vulnerable households (p = 0.003). Additionally, the mean consumption of dairy products in vulnerable households was significantly lower than in highly resilient households (p = 0.02). Furthermore, highly resilient households had a higher average dietary diversity score than vulnerable households (p < 0.001).

According to the results of the regression analysis to identify the effect of each latent variable on household resilience, it was found that all five dimensions explained 56% of the resilience index. Based on this analysis, assets were the most important dimension (ß = 0.33), followed by adaptive capacity (ß = 0.26), stability (ß = 0.22), access to basic services (ß = 0.14), and income and food access (ß = 0.04).

Table 10 reveals that households situated in Zone 1 exhibited a higher degree of resilience relative to other zones. Conversely, Zone 10 was characterized by a heightened vulnerability, with a substantial 80% of its households falling into the vulnerable category.

In this study, we found no significant correlation between the gender of the household head and resilience to food security; however, none of the female-headed households were classified as highly resilient.

Risk exposure and resilience to existing risks are two factors that significantly influence vulnerability to food insecurity at the household level. Given that many risks are considered unpredictable, measuring resilience to food security becomes crucial in assessing vulnerability. This study utilized a conceptual framework developed for this purpose in similar studies.

The results revealed that assets were the most critical dimension in predicting resilience to food insecurity. According to studies investigating resilience, assets—including natural, physical, human, financial, and social assets—are deemed important capacities for coping with crises (O’Connor et al., 2017). Numerous studies, including those conducted in Ethiopia, have underscored the role of assets in enhancing resilience (Kebede et al., 2016).

In a study conducted in Africa, the asset index was the sole indicator used to assess resilience to food security. The advantage of this method is that data collection can be quick and straightforward, but the validity of the results depends on the quality and reliability of the data (Browne et al., 2014). A study in Kenya found that wealthier families could increase their adaptive capacity through greater access to superior facilities. Assets can help reduce vulnerability in several ways (Unks et al., 2019). According to another study, asset inadequacy was associated with a high risk of food insecurity across all income levels (Chang et al., 2014). In a 2021 study by Nahid et al., stability variables were identified as an important dimension in predicting resilience to food insecurity among rural households in the Fars province of Iran (Nahid et al., 2021). In many countries, assets are either the first or second pillar in predicting resilience capacity (d’Errico et al., 2021). Our study corroborates the findings of previous research that assets are an important dimension in predicting resilience to food insecurity.

There was a significant disparity in the resilience capacity of households across different zones. The percentage of vulnerable households ranged from 27% in Zone 1 to 80% in Zone 10. Notably, the majority of resilient households were located in Zone 1, while Zone 10 had the lowest resilience capacity. Households in Zone 1 were better off in terms of income and food access. Moreover, the number of income sources and employed household members were fewer in Zone 10 compared to other zones, and the household members had a lower level of education.

It is worth mentioning that the value of properties and economic indicators in Zone 1 of Tehran are higher than in other areas. According to a similar study on Social Resilience across different zones of Tehran, Region 1 had the highest correlation between social relations and beliefs, while Region 19 demonstrated a weaker situation in terms of social resilience (Hosseini et al., 2020). However, it is important to note that this study focused solely on social resilience, and the selected zones differed from those in our study.

In a similar study conducted in Sudan, differences in the resilience capacity index were observed across different regions. For instance, regions such as Khartoum and the northern regions exhibited greater resilience due to better access to income, food, and basic facilities (Lokosang et al., 2014). A 2020 study by Atara et al. found that resilience varied based on household livelihood systems (Atara et al., 2020). According to the results, one of the reasons for the differences in the zones of Tehran may be attributed to variations in the type of income source.

There was no significant relationship between resilience in food security and the level of education of the household head. The level of education and literacy is one of the indicators of adaptive capacity. Given that our study population comprised teacher households, this may explain the lack of relationships. However, the number of household heads with Ph.D. and master’s degrees was higher in Zone 1, which is considered a high resilience region. Evaluating the education level of other household members can also be beneficial in predicting resilience in food security. Education was one of the most relevant indicators of adaptive capacity in a 2018 study by d’Errico et al. However, adaptive capacity was the main dimension for determining resilience to food security in Tanzania and Uganda (d’Errico et al., 2018).

There was no significant relationship between resilience to food security and the household head’s gender. However, none of the female-headed households had high resilience to food insecurity. The more significant number of male-headed households in this study can be a reason for the lack of a significant relationship. A similar study conducted in Kenya found no significant association between resilience to food security and the gender of the household head (Alinovi et al., 2010a). In another study in Malawi, households headed by females had higher resilience capacity scores and lower food consumption scores. This finding suggests that for female household heads, the quantity of food is more important than its quality. Indeed, while females earn less, they tend to spend more on food (Lascano Galarza, 2020).

This hypothesis warrants further investigation in our society with a larger population. A similar study conducted in Niger found that resilience to food security was lower in households headed by females due to lower adaptive capacity, greater vulnerability, and loss of assets (Gambo Boukary et al., 2016).

It is essential to study the vulnerability and adaptive capacity of female-headed households during crises in Iran to build resilience. No significant relationship was observed between the number of family members and resilience to food security. In a similar study in Kenya, more family members were associated with less food insecurity resilience due to increased poverty (Alinovi et al., 2010a). Another study in Iran showed a significant relationship between food insecurity and family size (Tabrizi et al., 2018). Family size has a different effect on resilience to food insecurity. It has a positive effect when considered an adaptive capacity, but it can have a negative effect in low-income households. Owen et al. in 2021, found that Family literacy can be considered a form of human capital (Chamdimba et al., 2021). This study observed a significant relationship between resilience to food insecurity and education level. In a similar study in Kenya, the education level was considered one of the critical indicators of adaptation capacity; food security was higher in Meru due to more literate people (Alinovi et al., 2010a). Although budget allocation to education in households may have adverse effects on resilience at first, it can be beneficial in improving resilience in the long term (Chamdimba et al., 2021). A more significant number of family members is considered an opportunity if more literate people accompany it. However, this relationship was not observed in the present study because everyone had the same opportunity to study.

The study found a significant relationship between the number of income sources and resilience to food insecurity. Households with more than three sources of income were more resilient. This aligns with a study by Alinovi in Palestine, where the resilience rate varied from −0.25 in households without a source of income to 0.81 in households with six sources of income. Indeed, increasing the number of income sources is associated with higher food security resilience (Alinovi et al., 2010b).

The study also observed a significant relationship between the food consumption ratio and resilience to food security. Households that could afford more food expenditure were more resilient. This is consistent with a similar study in Sudan, Kordofan, and Darfur, where regions with higher food insecurity also had lower per capita expenditure. According to the results, per capita expenditure is one of the relevant variables for the resilience capacity index (Ibnouf, 2009).

However, it is important to note that per capita food consumption only considers quantity and ignores quality. Additionally, the knowledge of the person who purchases food items is also important but often overlooked (Lascano Galarza, 2020). These factors highlight the complexity of measuring and building resilience to food insecurity.

In this study, household income played a significant role in resilience to food security. The results showed that the estimated income was lower in vulnerable households compared to resilient households. This is consistent with findings from Sudan, where the average household income was lower in Khartoum and Darfur compared to other areas (Lokosang et al., 2014). Higher-income households have better economic power to prepare food, which makes them more resilient to shocks that lead to food insecurity (Kebede et al., 2016).

However, it is important to note that the consequences of income shocks on food security are context-specific. Shocks such as soaring food prices have adverse effects on both the poor and rich in the long term. However, in the short term, those with low income suffer more (Akter and Basher, 2014). This suggests that a high income does not always equate to resilience. These findings underscore the complexity of building resilience to food insecurity and highlight the need for context-specific strategies.

We found that highly resilient households had a higher dietary diversity score than vulnerable households. The average consumption of meat and dairy was lower in vulnerable households, which can be important for policy-making and practical intervention. The available evidence suggests a significant positive relationship between household dietary diversity score and household resilience (Ansah et al., 2019).

Insurance is one of the risk management instruments, and it is observed that more resilient households insure their properties more than others. However, insurance is more important for vulnerable households to protect them against unexpected losses. This aligns with the results of a study in Kenya, where farmers who had insurance were better able to protect their livelihoods (Alinovi et al., 2010a). These findings highlight the importance of insurance as a tool for enhancing resilience, particularly for vulnerable households.

We found a significant relationship between the number of coping strategies and resilience to food insecurity, suggesting that more use of coping strategies is associated with more vulnerability. These coping strategies may involve finding another job, using money saved up, selling belongings, spending less on food, and not making loan payments. Based on the results of a similar study in Malawi, coping strategies are beneficial in the short term but can become a destructive factor in the long term (Lascano Galarza, 2020). A study in Africa found that consuming seeds during famine could increase food security, but due to a shortage of seeds for agriculture in the next season, it reduces food security over a long time (Misselhorn, 2005).

To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to assess resilience to food insecurity in Tehran. The study population was teachers who were selected from different zones of Tehran. Considering that this study was at the household level and teachers had different socio-economic conditions, these results might also have relevance for wider society.

In this study, we used RIMA-I, which has been widely used in several studies to measure household resilience to food insecurity. This makes it easier to compare the results with similar studies.

The Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) was used for the first time in this study to evaluate resilience to food security. The results suggest that assessing the population’s nutritional status before crises can better manage food insecurity during crises.

Despite the various strengths and novelty of our study, and being the first to evaluate resilience to food insecurity in Tehran, there are some limitations that need to be considered. We used RIMA-I, which had some limitations in predicting resilience to food insecurity. RIMA-I could not show the effect of an increase or decrease in the resilience of food security because food expenditure was one of the Income and Food Access pillar variables. Moreover, shocks were included in the procedure, and it is impossible to analyze shocks.

While many studies have used RIMA-I, FAO has presented RIMA-II. Both models have their advantages and disadvantages. The decision on which model to use should depend on the research question, available data, and resources. Although for our data and study population, using RIMA-I was better than RIMA-II, we suggest that future studies use the RIMA-II method. The results of the present study can help compare these two methods in Tehran.

While assets and income play a crucial role in evaluating resilience, obtaining accurate data in this context is not straightforward. Many households were reluctant to disclose their salary or income accurately, and income was estimated through several questions, which was one of the limitations of this study.

Given the low-income sources in vulnerable zones, key objectives should be to increase the education level of family members to enhance their job prospects and increase their assets. The percentage of non-governmental jobs was higher in Zone 10, which had more vulnerable households. One of the indicators is stability in income sources, and government jobs are more stable than non-governmental jobs. Therefore, it is necessary to pay more attention to households with non-governmental income sources.

Indeed, while assets play a crucial role in enhancing resilience, there is no guarantee that assets are well preserved in times of crisis, especially since only some households use insurance services. It is essential to establish rules that obligate governments to insure vulnerable groups to protect their assets, such as houses and cars.

This study underscores the need for fundamental changes to build resilience. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly the first goal of eradicating poverty, are closely related to the results of resilience studies. Other goals, such as the fourth goal discussing the quality of education, and the eighth goal emphasizing the importance of economic growth, are also related to resilience.

More studies are needed to examine resilience to food security in vulnerable groups of society, and appropriate policies should be devised to maintain resilience to food security in resilient groups during crises. These findings highlight the complexity of building resilience and underscore the importance of a comprehensive and nuanced approach.

This study found that assets were a significant dimension in predicting resilience to food insecurity among teacher households in Tehran. However, the use of coping strategies is associated with more vulnerability. The study also highlights the importance of insurance in enhancing resilience, particularly for vulnerable households. Food intake differed in households with various degree of resilience to food insecurity and households with higher dietary diversity scores were more likely to be resilient. The study concludes by emphasizing the need for policies and interventions to improve resilience to food security in vulnerable households.

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

The studies involving humans were approved by the Ethics Committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IR.TUMS.VCR.REC.1397.292). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.

HP and HM designed the study, and supervised the data collection and cleaning. ML collected the data and drafted the manuscript. ML and AE analyzed the data. All authors reviewed, contributed to the article, and approved the submitted version.