Food Salience and the Nutrition Transition in Kiribati: Urban–Rural and Socioeconomic Patterning of Food Preferences
Kiribati is undergoing a nutrition transition as imported foods increasingly compete with traditional staples, yet the cultural patterning of food preferences remains poorly characterised. We analysed 2019 cross-sectional household survey data from 399 adults primarily responsible for food preparation. Three timed freelists captured favourite foods, traditional foods, and the three foods eaten most often. Smith’s salience, cultural consensus analysis, hierarchical clustering, and multivariable linear regression characterised food preferences and socioeconomic correlates of the proportions of imported, processed and traditional items in favourite-food lists. Fish, breadfruit, and coconut formed a cross-domain core of salient foods, while imported rice ranked first among frequently consumed foods and was salient across all three domains in rural participants. Urban respondents showed stronger cultural consensus than rural respondents (6.57–7.69 vs. 3.60–5.65). Spending >75% of household income on food was associated with greater imported (β = 0.13, p ≤ 0.05) and processed (β = 0.16, p ≤ 0.01) food preferences. Urban residence, refrigerator ownership, and larger household size were associated with a lower proportion of traditional items in favourite-food lists. Freelisting revealed that culturally valued local foods persist despite widespread import dependence, suggesting that observed consumption does not fully represent collective food preference. Food-choice interventions are therefore worth testing as ways to make already-valued local foods more affordable, convenient, and accessible.
Authors
- John Paul Cauchi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8983-8499)
- Zhen Ming Jeremy Ng (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3323-2555)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Foods
- Published
- 2026-09-29
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/foods15193499
- Primary Topic
- Indigenous Studies and Ecology
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00