Climate-Induced Shocks, Food Insecurity and Strategies for Tackling Evolving Impacts within the Alliance of Sahel States

Abstract

This study sought to analyse and quantify the impacts of floods (proxy through positive rainfall anomalies) and droughts (negative rainfall anomalies) on household food security in the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), namely Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger. These countries are also designated crisis countries by the FAO. The goal of the study was to determine and recommend to the countries’ governments, the FAO and other development partners, pathways to buffering vulnerable households’ food security against climate –induced shocks. The specific objectives of the study were to: 1) Assess how positive and negative rainfall shocks affect food security in the AES, and 2) Explore and recommend available strategies needed to enhance resilience, support adaptation and reduce food insecurity in these states. Two datasets, household survey and satellite precipitation data, were used for the analysis. The household survey data was obtained from the FAO DIEM household survey database, while the precipitation data was extracted from the ECMWF Climate Reanalysis v5 (ERA5) high, spatiotemporal resolution monthly precipitation data provided by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Copernicus Climate Change Services. The FAO-DIEM data contains information on various food security indicators. The study however, focused on three of these food security indicators, namely the Food Consumption Score (FCS), the Reduced Coping Strategy Index (rCSI) and Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES). The multiple linear regression model was used to estimate the effects of positive and negative rainfall anomalies on household food security. From the analysis, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) Both positive rainfall anomalies and droughts threaten food security within the AES. While the incidence of floods is disruptive in the short term with implications for food production, droughts cause long term food production risks and livelihood stress. Unlike droughts the incidence and effects of which unfold gradually, the incidence of floods is sudden. Thus, adjusting to the sudden shocks of flood effects is more difficult than adjusting to the gradual effects of droughts. The fast-track nature of flood incidence may imply difficulties for households to adequately ex-ante coping measures. This way, ex-post flood damages may be more deleterious that those of droughts.

2) Crop-livestock diversification is associated with reduced vulnerability and improved household resilience and food security. Thus, the adoption of livestock-crop diversification strategies could be used to spread and reduce the risks associated with floods and droughts. Moreover, crop -livestock diversification appears to be useful for sustaining and smoothening household consumption and income patterns to provide a stronger buffer against food insecurity and improve the quality of diets and nutrition among households.

Generally, food insecurity interventions, namely cash, food, and asset support, are expected to serve as swift and targeted responses to crises, while linking social protection to nutrition and overall household welfare. Addressing the bottlenecks to food security and consolidating the gains from the social protection divide could be the beginning of safeguarding food supplies, protecting rural economies and ensuring the sustainability of food systems in crisis communities.

Based on the above conclusions, the following recommendations are provided to guide the actions of governments of the AES countries, FAO and other development interest groups: 1) In the short term, there is the need for integrated support systems such as cash and asset support as well as targeted food reliefs under more severe situations. This is critical as it addresses the very immediate hunger and potential food insecurity problems while protecting livelihoods. It also, supports and builds seasonal and shock responsive programming whilst strengthening local markets, targeting and protecting the very vulnerable in the society as well as building the adaptive capacities of communities to climate shocks.

2) In the medium term, we recommend the promotion of crop-livestock diversification across the AES. The promotion of crop-livestock diversification is a sure bet to stabilising and smoothing households’ income and food supply. This intervention will help bridge seasonal food shortage gaps within households and prevent them from impulse sales of assets. Additionally, the economic viability of households would be enhanced with more market participation due to the benefits and cross-effects of integrating crops and livestock.

3) In the long, there is the need to strengthen flood preparedness and rapid response mechanisms. The importance of this cannot be overstated as this could build the long-term resilience of households and communities to reduce repeated displacements caused by floods and droughts. Also, strengthening flood preparedness and rapid response mechanisms would preserve development gains and thus ensure that resources are channelled to other equally pressing developmental needs. These would save lives in the now and protect livelihoods and developmental gains for the future.