food security challenges essay

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Exploration of Food Security Challenges towards More Sustainable Food Production: A Systematic Literature Review of the Major Drivers and Policies

Sabreen wahbeh.

1 Faculty of Business, University of Wollongong in Dubai, Dubai 20183, United Arab Emirates

Foivos Anastasiadis

2 Department of Agribusiness and Supply Chain Management, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece

Balan Sundarakani

Ioannis manikas, associated data.

Not applicable.

Food security is a central priority for international policy as one of the world’s most significantly urgent targets to achieve. It is considered one of the most pressing issues in many countries, the degree of food security representing the level of self-sufficiency and well-being of citizens. In particular, in the current COVID-19 pandemic era, it has more than ever become a mission-critical goal. In this research, we report on the food security drivers and the current state of recommended policies addressing chronic food insecurity aimed at ensuring the sustainability of future food production. Mapping the determinants of food security contributes to a better understanding of the issue and aids in the development of appropriate food security policies and strategies to enhance the sustainability of food production in all facets; namely environmental, social, and economic. Adopting the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) data screening and selection guidelines and standards, we carried out a comprehensive, reliable, systematic, and rigorous review of research from the last ten years in order to identify the most frequently mentioned drivers and policies of food security in the literature available in two databases: Scopus and Web of Science (WOS). The number of extracted articles was 141 papers in total. An analysis revealed 34 drivers of food security and 17 most recommended policies for the mitigation of food insecurity. The existence of food loss and waste (FLW) policies was the primary driver of food security, followed by food security policies (FSP) in their different forms. However, FSP were the most recommended policies, followed by FLW policies. The identified food security drivers and recommended policies should be used by policy-makers to improve food security, thus contributing to sustainable food production. Our research findings, reflected in the latest version of the Global Food Security Index (GFSI), resulted in more tangible policy implications, suggesting the addition of two dimensions regarding food security. We also identified elements not listed under the GFSI that could be considered in its future revision, including environmental policies/indicators, consumer representation, and traceability throughout the entire supply chain. Overall, it can be concluded that food security is a complicated and multi-faceted issue that cannot be restricted to a single variable, necessitating the deeper integration of various multi-disciplinary interventions.

1. Introduction

Food security (FS) is “a situation that exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” [ 1 ] p.3. It is a significant priority for international policy [ 2 ], and has been perceived as being among the key challenges worldwide [ 3 ] as it represents a country’s degree of self-sufficiency and the well-being of its citizens [ 4 ]. Securing a nation’s self-sufficiency has become a top priority in the context of the current COVID-19 global epidemic era, even more so than earlier [ 5 ]. Economic expansion, rising incomes, urbanization, and growing population are driving up the demand for food, as people adopt more diverse and resource-intensive dietary habits [ 2 , 6 ]. The world’s current population is steadily increasing, placing significant pressure on the available natural resources to feed the growing population [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]; however, this dramatic growth in the global population is anticipated mainly in developing countries, which already suffer from devastating hunger and food insecurity [ 7 ]. One of the biggest obstacles to ensuring global food security is the need to roughly double food production within the coming few decades, particularly in the context of the developing world’s rapidly increasing demand [ 10 , 11 ]. The natural resources such as land, water, energy, and other resources used in food production are all subject to increasing competition [ 12 , 13 ]. Climate change poses difficulties for agricultural production [ 14 ], mainly in developing nations, while some existing farming practices harm the environment and contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) [ 15 , 16 ]. There is a real danger that less developed countries may be forced to reverse direction. The FAO’s statistics on world hunger in 2009 showed a dramatic rise to 1.023 billion people, demonstrating precisely such a situation. When commodity prices fell the following year, this number dropped to 925 million, which was still more prominent than in 2007 (i.e., before the price spike) [ 17 ]. According to recent data published by the Global Hunger Index, the number of malnourished people grew from 785 million in 2015 to 822 million in 2018. Moreover, 43 out of 117 countries reported extreme hunger [ 18 ]. Approximately 20% of developing countries lack the resources and physical access necessary to provide their citizens with the most basic food. Children in developing countries face vitamin and nutritional deficiencies and being underweight, which puts them at risk for various sicknesses due to food insecurity [ 12 ]. National and global imbalances brought on by food insecurity are expected to worsen human suffering and make it harder for people to survive [ 12 ]. Despite the efforts of multiple global organizations such as the FAO and the UN, the problem of food insecurity is worsening [ 19 ], which means that more effective and sustainable solutions must be provided to ensure the alleviation of food insecurity and the sustainability of food production. Hence, policy-makers must understand that in a world that is becoming more globalized, food insecurity in one region could have significant political, economic, and environmental impacts elsewhere [ 2 ].

Throughout the twentieth century, policy-makers used the concept of food security as a key notion in formulating food-related policies [ 17 ]. Lang and Barling [ 17 ] have proposed two main schools of thought on food security: the first focused on increased production as the primary solution to under-consumption and hunger, while the second is a newer one that is more socially and environmentally conscious and accepts the need to address a wide range of issues, not just production. The former is primarily concerned with agriculture, while the latter is concerned with food systems. One approach to solve the food security challenge is to intensify agricultural production in ways that impose much less environmental stress and do not jeopardize our long-term ability to continue producing food [ 2 ]. The above sustainable intensification strategy comprises a policy agenda for several governments worldwide, but has also drawn criticism for being overly production-focused or incoherent [ 2 ]. The central mission of the twenty-first century is to establish a sustainable food system, which calls for a more concrete policy framework than that which is currently in place [ 17 ]. This mission has been disrupted by competing solutions for policy focus and policies that have, so far, failed to incorporate the complex array of evidence from social, environmental, and economic components into such an integrated and comprehensive policy response [ 17 ]. Millions of people are being pushed into a cycle of food insecurity and poverty due to climate change; however, we can combat both food insecurity and climate change by implementing climate-friendly agricultural production methods [ 12 ]. Tsolakis and Srai [ 20 ] have stated that any comprehensive food security policy should entail multi-dimensional policies considering aspects such as resilience, trade, self-sufficiency, food waste, and sustainability. As it is traditionally understood, food security concerns individuals, while ecological and environmental concepts operate locally and at supra-national, regional, and international levels [ 1 ]. According to Guiné, Pato [ 21 ], the four pillars of food security—availability, access, utilization, and stability—should be reconsidered to include additional factors such as climate change. Clapp, Moseley [ 22 ] has also stressed that it is time to officially update the existing food security definition to involve two further dimensions—sustainability and agency—containing broader dynamics that have an impact on hunger and malnutrition [ 23 ]. Sustainability relates to the long-term ability of food systems to ensure food and nutrition security in a way that does not jeopardize the economic, social, and environmental foundations that generate food and nutrition security for upcoming generations [ 22 , 23 ]. Agency represents the ability of people or groups to decide what they consume, what they produce, and how they produce, process, and distribute their food within food systems, as well as their capacity to participate in processes that shape the food system’s policies and governance [ 22 , 23 ]. Instead of dismissing food security as being insufficient, Clapp, Moseley [ 22 ] has contended that the inclusion of two extra dimensions—agency and sustainability—into food security policy and assessment frameworks will help to guarantee that every human has access to food, not just now but also in the future. Sustainability can be viewed as a pre-requisite for long-term food security [ 1 ]. Environmental aspects—particularly climate and the availability of natural resources—are pre-requisite for food availability and biodiversity protection [ 24 ]. The availability of food for everybody depends on economic and social sustainability. Food utilization, too, is influenced by social sustainability. The three components of sustainability—social, economic, and environmental—ensure the continuity of the three food security dimensions and the food system stability on which they rely. As confirmation of the vital relationship between food security and sustainability, “The International Food Policy Research Institute” has launched a 2020 Vision of Food Security to achieve food security, stating that “a world where every person has economic and physical access to sufficient food to sustain a healthy and productive life, where malnutrition is absent, and where food originates from efficient, effective, and low-cost food and agricultural systems that are compatible with sustainable use and management of natural resources” [ 12 ] (p357). Many policies, priorities, technologies, and long-term solutions must be developed and implemented worldwide to achieve the 2020 food security vision [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. However, there is a scarcity of systematic studies analyzing the food security drivers and the recommended policies to improve food security.

Following a review of the academic literature, we discovered a scarcity of research that systemically summarizes the major drivers of food security, outlines the recommended policies to improve food security, ensures the sustainability of future food production, and provides policy recommendations to enhance food security based on a country’s context. In response to this gap in the literature, we carried out a comprehensive, reliable, systematic, and rigorous review of previous research from the last ten years in order to identify the most frequently mentioned drivers/policies in the scanned literature. The rationale behind this study is to identify and list food security drivers and the current state of recommended policies that address chronic food insecurity to ensure the sustainability of future food production, utilizing a systematic literature review (SLR) methodology. Moreover, we hope to identify drivers/policies in order to aid policy-makers in selecting the most appropriate policies based on each nation’s context (e.g., agricultural production, natural resource availability, climate, political stability, and so on). Most importantly, policy-makers can use the identified drivers of food security and the recommended policies in the literature to customize appropriate policies that ensure the sustainability of future food production and, hence, ensure food sustainability for future generations. Based on the evidence reported in the literature, the identified food security drivers and recommended policies will aid the policy- and decision-makers of various countries in sustainably improving the food security situation. The need to identify the main drivers of food security arises from the notable increase in households and individuals suffering from food shortages and insecurity globally [ 25 ]. Finally, the findings of this research will be used to inform the GFSI developers in order to include more comprehensive indicators expected to contribute to the sustainability of future food production.

2. Materials and Methods

This research aims to report on food security drivers and the current state of recommended policies that address chronic food insecurity in order to ensure the sustainability of future food production through the use of a systematic literature review (SLR) methodology. We highlight existing food security drivers and outline recommended policies to alleviate food insecurity following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) data screening and selection guidelines [ 26 ]. The extraction process was meticulously documented in order to ensure the transparency and replicability of this systematic literature review [ 27 ]. A panel of researchers was formed, following the systematic review guidelines [ 26 ], to define the research field and questions, select keywords and the intended databases, and develop the sets of inclusion and exclusion criteria.

The research began by formulating the research questions to guide this systematic review based on identified gaps in the literature, guiding us in an attempt to answer the following research questions:

• Q1. What are the main drivers of food security?
• Q2. What are the main recommended policies to alleviate food insecurity?

By answering these questions, this paper provides a reference that policy-makers and practitioners can use to identify the main drivers of food security and the recommended policies in the literature in order to customize and choose appropriate policies that ensure the sustainability of future food production. The identified food security drivers and recommended policies are expected to aid policy- and decision-makers in improving the state of FS. This study also provides a roadmap for future research based on the evidence reported in the literature.

A specific research criterion was used to ensure that the research sources selected were sufficient and comprehensive enough to capture all of the significant and salient points to adequately answer the research questions [ 26 ]. To this end, we provide a critical review of the existing literature that has been published in two databases—Scopus and Web of Science (WOS)—between 2010 and 15 March 2021, to answer the abovementioned research questions. The time limit was set to cover the period following the global financial crisis of 2008/2009 and its effect on rising food prices, increased unemployment rates, and increasing food insecurity worldwide [ 28 , 29 , 30 ]. This period allows for consideration of policies designed to ensure global food security following the food shortage crisis. The use of Scopus and Web of Science (WOS) databases helped us to include most potential published works in a broad scope of journals, thereby limiting the risks of bias and possible exclusions associated with the use of fewer journals.

We employed a set of identified keywords, which are summarized in detail in Table 1 . A critical analysis was conducted regarding the most relevant concepts that are available in the literature and which affect each of the four dimensions of FS: Food availability, food access, food utilization, and food stability. For instance, the research string “Agrifood supply chain” OR “Agri food supply chain” OR “Agri-food supply chain” was added as a secondary search string, because food availability is highly dependent on the food supply chain and how well its activities are managed. The food supply chain is exposed to many factors that can negatively impact the country’s food security level, such as severe weather conditions [ 31 , 32 ]. Therefore, it is critical to consider some characteristics of the food supply chain, such as biophysical and organoleptic features, shelf life, transport conditions, production time, and storage, to efficiently and effectively manage it [ 33 ]. Effective supply chain management is seen as a significant contributor to gaining and enhancing industrial competitive advantage and efficiency at the company level, possibly impacting food security positively [ 34 ]. “MENA Region” OR “Middle East and North Africa” OR “Middle East” OR “North Africa” research string was added due to the severity of food insecurity there and to ensure the inclusion of papers that address the problem in these countries and propose strategies to overcome food insecurity. According to the GFSI data [ 25 ], MENA region countries are experiencing a decline in food security; moreover, the number of households and individuals suffering from food shortages and insecurity is dramatically increasing.

Primary and secondary search strings used in this research.

The research string “Sustainable supply chain” OR “Resilient supply chain” was added due to much research that stressed the impact of designing a proper supply chain structure due to its significant impact on the future improvement of its performance [ 33 ]. The central mission of the twenty-first century is to establish a sustainable food system, which calls for a more concrete policy framework than what is currently in place [ 17 ]. Sustainability can be viewed as a prerequisite for long-term food security [ 1 ]. The environment, particularly climate and the availability of natural resources, is a prerequisite for food availability and biodiversity protection [ 24 ]. The availability of food for everybody depends on economic and social sustainability. Food utilization, too, is influenced by social sustainability. The three components of sustainability—social, economic, and environmental—assure the continuity of the three food security dimensions and the food system stability on which they rely. Moreover, food security is increasingly considered a prerequisite for long-term sustainability [ 1 ]. Adopting a “sustainable production and consumption approach throughout the global food supply chain” is a solution that will help reduce the amount of food waste along the food supply chain [ 35 , 36 ]. Cooper and Ellram [ 37 ] argued that building a resilient supply chain has many advantages such as decreasing inventory time, which will lead to cost and time savings, increasing the availability of goods, reducing the order cycle time, improving customer service and satisfaction, and gaining a competitive advantage. Stone and Rahimifard [ 38 ] stressed the importance of having a resilient agricultural food supply chain to achieve food security due to the incremental increase in volatility across the supply chain.

The research string “Food Safety” OR “Food diversity” OR “Food quality” OR “Food standards” OR “Micronutrient availability” was added due to one of the food security dimensions: utilization, which is concerned with all aspects of food safety, and nutrition quality [ 39 ]. According to FAO (2019), the utilization dimension should assess food diversity, food safety, food standards, and micronutrient availability. It is inadequate to provide enough food to someone unable to benefit from it because they are constantly sick due to a lack of sanitary conditions. It indicates that in the country, individuals are taking advantage of the food they receive or have access to, with extra emphasis on the dietary quality that contains nutritious ingredients such as vitamins (vitamin-A) and minerals (Iron, Zinc, Iodine) [ 40 ]. According to the World Health Organization, people diagnosed with malnutrition usually suffer from micronutrient deficiencies, protein deficiency, obesity, or undernutrition. The lack of micro-ingredients can increase the risk of developing severe chronic and infectious diseases for people in general and children in particular (toddlers 9–24 months). These diseases have an irreversible negative impact on people’s health, which enhances the persistence of poverty and food insecurity. It is critical to invest in the health and nutrition elements on a global scale by ensuring safe drinking water, immunization, enhancing sewage discharge, improving public health services, and reducing poverty levels [ 41 ].

The research string “Agricultural infrastructure” OR “Agricultural production volatility” OR “Vulnerability assessment” was chosen because much research has emphasized the importance of investing in a strong agricultural infrastructure to improve food security levels, especially in light of current challenges such as climate change, increased urbanization, water scarcity, and the shift away from using cropland for non-agricultural activities [ 7 , 8 , 41 ]. Food security is vulnerable to severe weather conditions, whereas harsh weather conditions may adversely impact the food supply chain in weak areas [ 31 , 32 ]. Therefore, it is critical to assess the vulnerability level of each country to protect the food supply chain. The use of the “Food loss” OR “Food waste” OR “Food waste and loss” research string was due to the general agreement among researchers on the importance of reducing food waste to improve food security [ 35 , 42 , 43 ]. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (2013), around one-third of the food produced globally (1.3 billion tons) is wasted or lost. Most wasted food is either fresh and perishable or leftovers from eating and cooking [ 36 , 42 ]. Basher, Raboy [ 43 ] argued that eliminating just one-fourth of the food waste would be enough to feed all the currently undernourished people. One of the Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations, “SDG 12.3 Food Waste Index” stresses that decreasing the amount of food loss and waste will help reduce hunger levels, promote sustainable production and consumption, and enhance food security [ 44 ].

The use of “Policy description” OR “Policy assessment” OR “Policy recommendation” OR “Policymaking” OR “Policy-making” OR “Policy making” research string was due to the impact of adequate and proper policy formulation on food security ( Table 1 ). Establishing effective and efficient food policies that ensure that each individual has an optimal level of food security is critical in every country because it directly enhances the country’s competitive advantage and efficiency [ 34 , 45 ]. Timmer [ 46 ] emphasized that designing the proper set of policies to end hunger based on each country’s context is challenging and requires collaborative participation from multiple stakeholders. Murti Mulyo Aji [ 34 ] stressed the role of the government’s policies in developing a collaborative supply chain that creates value throughout the supply chain by improving information, logistics, and relationship management. Effective and efficient supply chain management significantly impacts managing long-term partnerships and corporations among a wide range of firms that vary in size and sectors (public or private). This collaboration will enhance prediction of changes in customer demands in domestic and international markets. If previous policies were insufficient to ensure that country’s true competitive advantage, it could cause market distortion [ 34 , 47 ]. Countries are encouraged to gradually reduce the adoption of inequitable trade policies to focus on enhancing their true competitive advantage, demonstrating fair competition, and increasing economic efficiency, particularly in the spirit of trade liberalization [ 34 ].

The selection of research sources was accomplished in March 2021, and the search for keywords was enabled for titles, abstracts, and full texts in both electronic search engines (i.e., Scopus and WOS). Several keywords were identified to retrieve the available literature, and search strings consisted of primary and secondary keywords. The primary search string used was as follows: “food security” OR “food insecurity” OR “food availability” OR “food affordability” OR “food access” OR “food utilization” OR “food stability”. The reason behind including these multiple strings was to cover the maximum number of articles that handle the topic of food security or any of its four dimensions.

Specific exclusion and inclusion criteria were applied in order to develop high-quality evidence [ 26 ]. A reasonable number of articles were limited for deep analysis by following the specific exclusion and inclusion criteria to control the quality of the review in the food security field, as detailed in Table 2 above. Only peer-reviewed journal articles were included within the time frame (2010–15 March 2021) and only those written in English. Furthermore, due to this study’s nature and to ensure consistency with the topic area, the most common and effective approach for examining drivers and recommended policies were limited to the business, management, accounting, and agricultural fields [ 48 ]. We have used the “business, management and accounting” research field in the Scopus database to ensure that all the included articles were business-related. Then, we restricted the research field to” Economics, business, and agriculture Economics” in the WoS database to ensure the inclusion of agriculture-related papers and maximize the inclusion of a diverse range of articles. Another round of retrieval was applied using a set of secondary keywords in order to narrow down the search to specific areas of food security. For this purpose, the primary keywords were escorted each time with “AND” and other secondary keywords, as listed in Table 2 .

Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

The initial search using the primary keywords (“food security” OR “food insecurity” OR “food availability” OR “food affordability” OR “food access” OR “food utilization” OR “food stability”) revealed a total of 113,709 documents (Scopus, n = 63,860; WOS, n = 49,849). Strict selection criteria were applied to the first search pool in order to maintain transparency and guarantee the selection of relevant material that answers the research questions. To ensure academic rigor, the search was restricted to including only peer-reviewed publications [ 49 ] (Scopus, n = 47,673; WOS, n = 40,305). The research was then restricted by publication date to between 2010 and 15 March 2021 (Scopus, n = 34,789; WOS, n = 31,278). Only journal articles published in English were selected (Scopus, n = 33,292; WOS, n = 30,313). Then, advanced research was conducted by combining the primary keywords with one of the secondary keywords. The results and the number of articles identified in each search step are detailed in Figure 1 . After removing duplicate articles from each database, a total of 281 journal articles (Scopus, n = 140; WOS, n = 141) were revealed. After combining both databases, 248 journal articles were obtained. These collected 248 journal articles were scanned by reading their abstracts in order to check their applicability to answering the research questions. At this point, 107 articles were excluded as they were considered irrelevant and outside the scope of the research. Finally, the total number of extracted articles was 141, as can be seen in Figure 1 . Data extraction and analysis were performed by a single reviewer (SW), and all extracted data and revealed results were double-checked by three researchers (FA, IM, and BS) to enhance the research and reduce bias in study selection. A complete description of the validity threats (Construct, Internal, External, and Conclusion Validity) following the validation process of Zhou, Jin [ 50 ] is provided in detail in Table 3 .

Research protocol following the PRISMA guidelines.

A reporting of validity threats in this systematic literature review.

Among the selected 141 articles, 28 (19.86%) were published in the Journal of Cleaner Production , 20 (14.18%) were published in Food Policy , and 5 (3.55%) were published in Quality-Access to Success . The rest of the journal names are visualized in Figure 2 .

The most popular journals publishing the 141 included articles. Others denotes journals that were cited once or twice.

After the 141 articles have been extracted, they were analyzed and summarized individually by listing all the discussed food security drivers, as well as the recommended policies for the improvement of food security and sustainable food production. Then, we synthesized the extracted information from all sources in order to identify the gaps, list the similarities between all the resources, and extract significant insights regarding the main drivers of food security and the recommended policies [ 26 ].

3.1. The Major Drivers of Food Security

Analysis of the retrieved literature revealed 34 different drivers of food security, as visualized in Figure 3 . Detailed information, along with a full citation list for all the drivers, is provided in Appendix A .

Summary of the major drivers of food security.

Most papers discussed food loss and waste (FLW) and emphasized its impact on food security [ 6 , 19 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 ]. Around one-third of the food produced globally (1.3 million tons) is wasted or lost [ 96 ]. Basher, Raboy [ 43 ] has argued that, if we could save just one-fourth of the wasted food, it would be enough to feed all the world’s undernourished people, contributing positively to FS. The previous finding supports our research findings that FLW is the primary driver of FS. To reduce FLW, Halloran, Clement [ 6 ] has argued that effective communication, more efficient food packaging, and a better consumer understanding of food packaging could lead to solutions. To decrease food loss, Garcia-Herrero, Hoehn [ 62 ] has suggested improving food labelling, enhancing consumer planning, and developing technological advances in packaging and shelf life for perishable products. Morone, Falcone [ 83 ] has suggested the repetition of large-scale research to help define a set of policies encouraging the transition to a new model for consumption that promotes sustainably procured food and dramatically reduces the amount of waste (more details are provided in Section 3.2 ).

Additionally, several authors have considered food security policy (FSP) as a driver of food security in its different forms [ 56 , 63 , 65 , 69 , 70 , 74 , 79 , 85 , 94 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 ]. The primary goal of establishing food security policies that consider the factors influencing individuals and groups is to reduce poverty and eliminate hunger. One example is safety-net programs or public food assistance programs (FAPs). The main goal of providing safety-net programs is to increase food consumption among poor people and improve food security [ 102 ].

Many papers have discussed the importance of technological advancement as an enabler of food security [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 63 , 69 , 71 , 74 , 77 , 85 , 90 , 94 , 95 , 109 , 116 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 ]. The use of technology to promote behavioral changes has increasingly become a vital instrument to reduce food waste and indirectly improve food security [ 130 ]. Mobile applications offer households helpful guidance on increasing shelf life and experimenting with dishes using leftovers [ 58 ]. Shukla, Singh [ 130 ] has elaborated that, at present, farmers have access to mobile applications that provide them with reasonably and timely priced information.

Some authors have discussed sustainable agricultural development and practices as enablers of food security [ 56 , 57 , 59 , 64 , 71 , 73 , 94 , 97 , 105 , 109 , 111 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 124 , 130 , 132 , 134 , 136 , 137 , 139 , 142 , 143 , 144 , 145 , 146 , 147 ]. Some authors have discussed local production enhancement as a driver of food security to enhance the self-reliance of countries [ 57 , 69 , 85 , 87 , 89 , 94 , 98 , 103 , 105 , 109 , 112 , 117 , 120 , 134 , 137 , 144 , 148 , 149 ]. For example, Ahmed, Begum [ 98 ] has emphasized how, following the GCC ban, Qatar took several successful steps to foster local production, support domestic businesses, and promote the consumption of locally produced food by its citizens. Some authors have argued that building the capacities of small farmers is essential to achieving FS. Education policies are critical for educating farmers, building their capacities, and increasing their human capital; moreover, educational programs should also include food preparation and health education programs in order to ensure the safety of consumed food [ 101 ].

The government’s role in managing a country’s agriculture can also be seen as a driver of food security [ 67 , 75 , 84 , 86 , 100 , 109 , 116 , 117 , 119 , 121 , 137 , 138 , 147 , 150 , 151 , 152 ], as it is responsible for various aspects such as designing, testing, and implementing the right policies to ensure the welfare of its citizens, while providing the necessary assistance to small-scale farmers and ensuring their safety and security in all aspects of life. Governments in developing nations must focus on R&D, agriculture infrastructure (e.g., technologies for irrigation and soil preservation), expansion services, early warning systems, or subsidized farm income in order to alter the production function of the population [ 101 ].

Many authors have discussed the importance of food safety policies as an enabler of food security [ 61 , 64 , 69 , 103 , 105 , 111 , 112 , 129 , 149 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 ]. Food safety policies include food and water safety at several points throughout the supply chain where food-borne diseases might develop [ 69 ]. Environmental policies are also seen as a fundamental enabler of food security [ 59 , 73 , 121 , 124 , 130 , 135 , 139 , 147 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162 , 163 ]. Regardless of the various approaches discussed by the authors, they all agreed that environmental protection would help to ensure food availability for current and future generations. According to some authors, trade policies [ 69 , 94 , 95 , 103 , 111 , 112 , 114 , 123 , 129 , 141 , 146 , 161 , 164 ] and import policies [ 69 , 95 , 100 , 103 , 120 , 124 , 126 , 129 , 146 ] are enablers of food security. Regulating international trade can help to ensure food security. Lowering trade barriers, for example, has been proposed as a way to mitigate the adverse effects of market regulation caused by climate change [ 141 ].

Many authors have recognized policies that promote consumer education on sustainable consumption and increase consumer awareness and knowledge of the environmental impact of their purchases as a driver of food security [ 52 , 60 , 67 , 69 , 86 , 133 , 144 , 151 , 163 , 165 , 166 , 167 ]. Others have stressed proper communication among all stakeholders as a driver of food security [ 6 , 56 , 68 , 69 , 84 , 92 , 129 , 130 , 156 , 157 , 168 ]. Some authors have considered risk management as an enabler of food security [ 94 , 117 , 118 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 145 , 154 , 155 , 157 ]. For example, the aims of building a disaster risk reduction framework in the Pacific include boosting resilience, protecting investments (e.g., in infrastructure, operations, and FS), and decreasing poverty and hunger [ 169 ].

Some authors have proposed the effective gleaning process as a driver of food security [ 70 , 72 , 74 , 80 , 84 , 92 , 142 , 170 ]. Gleaning is the collection of the remaining crops in agricultural fields after their commercial harvest, or just in crop fields where their harvest is not cost-effective. Some old cultures have fostered gleaning as an early form of social assistance [ 80 ]. Some authors have considered the management of government food reserves to be a food security driver [ 64 , 104 , 112 , 117 , 118 , 124 , 136 ]. Despite the high cost of storing food, any country must maintain adequate food reserves to serve the country in case of a crisis scenario [ 171 ]. Some authors have considered integrative policies (i.e., food–water–energy, food–energy, or water–food) as a driver of food security due to their impact on environmental improvement through natural resource handling efficiency [ 56 , 73 , 133 , 139 , 172 , 173 ]. Some authors have considered establishing dietary standard policies as an enabler of food security [ 69 , 151 , 163 , 174 ]. The government should impose policies on healthy food consumption to prevent obesity, such as prohibiting trans-fats. Moreover, they should restrict trans-fat usage in food outlets, establish institutional food standards, implement menu labelling regulations for chain restaurants, and ensure that disadvantaged people have better access to healthy meals [ 151 ].

Authors have highlighted various additional arguments or policies that are considered drivers for FS such as establishing public programs to influence diets in a healthy manner, reducing yield volatility [ 85 , 94 , 105 , 119 , 124 , 126 , 175 ], the country’s natural resources [ 85 , 105 , 119 , 124 , 137 , 145 , 162 , 163 , 176 ], geopolitical and political stability [ 69 , 98 , 104 , 117 , 123 , 124 , 142 ], agricultural infrastructure [ 64 , 114 , 116 , 118 , 142 , 146 , 175 ], food distribution infrastructure [ 71 , 75 , 76 , 112 , 177 , 178 ], economic integration [ 109 , 112 , 123 , 179 , 180 ], collaboration among all supply chain stakeholders [ 75 , 130 , 134 , 157 ], proper measurement of food security dimensions [ 123 , 181 , 182 , 183 ], urban agriculture policies [ 56 , 147 , 148 ], adjustments in dietary structure [ 59 , 86 , 163 ], establishing employment programs for poor household representatives [ 110 , 152 ], customer engagement in designing public policies [ 158 ], and trust in public institutions [ 166 ].

3.2. The Recommended Policies to Alleviate the Food Insecurity

Analysis of the 141 retrieved papers revealed 17 major recommended policies, as visualized in Figure 4 . We also determined sub-policies under each category which were grouped based on common characteristics, relevance, and how they were categorized in the papers. The complete list of sub-policy categories and related references is provided in Appendix B .

The main 17 recommended policies and statistics.

Most authors recommended establishing FSP, in general, as a primary solution for food insecurity in developing and developed countries [ 56 , 57 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 69 , 81 , 85 , 87 , 89 , 91 , 94 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 126 , 127 , 130 , 131 , 133 , 134 , 137 , 142 , 144 , 145 , 148 , 149 , 151 , 152 , 175 , 177 , 180 , 182 , 184 , 185 ]. Many authors have suggested food consumption policies that offer safety-net programs or public food assistance programs (FAPs) such as food price subsidies, cash-based programs, structural pricing adjustments, or micro-credits as enablers of FS. The main goal of providing safety-net programs is to increase food consumption among poor people and improve food security [ 102 ]. Given the solid bidirectional causal link between poverty and malnutrition, FAPs have been recognized as critical components of the overall poverty reduction strategy. Food aid policies and initiatives can fill the gaps left by the for-profit food system and the informal (non-profit) social safety nets, ensuring food security for disadvantaged individuals, families, and communities [ 108 ]. Several authors have recommended establishing policies to enhance the performance and asset bases of small-scale farmers, such as loans, subsidies, access to information, and knowledge-sharing, to address food insecurity. Governments should adopt direct interventions such as structural price adjustments and targeted food subsidies to enhance the food access of farmers by lowering market prices and stabilizing consumption during high food price inflation [ 116 ]. Others have recommended establishing government input subsidy programs (input subsidy policies) that provide farmers with subsidies for investment into high-yielding technology (e.g., automation, fertilizers, high-yield seed). They all claimed this as an effective policy instrument for agricultural development, but each focused on a different mechanism. Shukla, Singh [ 130 ], for example, has discussed public distribution programs; Sinyolo [ 131 ] has emphasized policies aimed at increasing the amount of land planted with enhanced maize varieties among smallholder farmers; Wiebelt, Breisinger [ 124 ] has suggested investments in water-saving technologies, while Tokhayeva, Almukhambetova [ 137 ] have proposed the development of an agricultural innovation system. Others have recommended rural development policies to reduce yield volatility and improve the agricultural infrastructure (e.g., irrigation and water-saving technologies). Governments in developing nations must focus on R&D, agricultural infrastructure (technologies for irrigation and soil preservation), expansion services, and early warning systems [ 101 ]. Technological advancement, in general, is seen as a vital element in reducing yield volatility [ 85 ]. Capacity-building policies (e.g., educational, training, and technical support) have received considerable attention in the literature as a fundamental component of urban farming initiatives, and as attempts to promote self-reliance and networking. Capacity building in many areas connected to urban agriculture is essential for equipping residents with knowledge and expertise [ 148 ]. To enhance FS, some researchers have suggested policies supporting locally produced food, diversified agricultural production policies, policies that impact farm-level commodity pricing, food stock policies, establishing policies to increase the income of farmers, buffer stock policies, and resource allocation policies (for a complete list of references, see Appendix B ).

Many authors have proposed different policy recommendations to reduce food waste and, thus, food insecurity [ 6 , 19 , 51 , 52 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 103 , 130 , 138 , 144 , 150 , 160 , 167 , 168 , 170 , 177 ]. Many have agreed on the importance of policies that promote information and education campaigns that spread awareness at household and public levels by improving meal planning and management in consumers. However, each author suggested a different approach. For example, Schanes, Dobernig [ 58 ] have discussed face-to-face door-stepping campaigns (online and in traditional newspaper leaflets), word-of-mouth, and television shows or movies. However, Septianto, Kemper [ 66 ] have highlighted the importance of social marketing campaign design and framing (having vs. not having) in conveying the intended message to consumers. Tucho and Okoth [ 73 ] have asserted the advantages of producing bio-wastes and bio-fertilizers from food waste and human excreta (in a food–energy–sanitation nexus approach), and also advocated for educating families on how to do so at the household level. Xu, Zhang [ 86 ] has argued that governments should help society to develop a logical perspective on food consumption and aggressively promote the habit of eating simple meals, particularly in social catering. Von Kameke and Fischer [ 52 ] and Zorpas, Lasaridi [ 60 ] have emphasized the importance of teaching customers about efficient meal planning to reduce food waste. Von Kameke and Fischer [ 52 ] have proposed using the Nudging tool rather than campaigning. Xu, Zhang [ 86 ] have suggested initiating suitable policy instruments to nudge individuals to adopt sustainable consumption habits, with important implications for decreasing food waste and increasing food security in China. Smart (innovative) food packaging and labelling policies have received significant attention in the literature, as they are critical in reducing food waste and, thus, improving FS. The nature, size, and labelling of the packaging impact the lifetime of the food. Smart packaging innovations and new technologies are steadily penetrating markets, thus increasing the shelf-life of foods through enhanced protection, communication, convenience, and control [ 58 ].

Food banks, food sharing, and food rescue policies have also received significant attention in the global literature, as they help reduce food waste and improve FS. Food banking is a critical long-term rescue policy for re-distributing surplus food to those in need and reducing poverty and food insecurity [ 80 , 92 ]. Several authors have recommended positive sanctions such as financial rewards, tax credits, federal and state funding, vouchers, or reduced taxes to decrease food waste and improve FS. Positive sanctions consist mainly of financial incentives to encourage restaurants and grocery retailers to donate their leftover food [ 60 ]. Addressing liability concerns might be one incentive, as the research participants have highlighted this as a universal barrier and that this issue, in particular, must be handled [ 51 ]. Negative sanction policies have received considerable attention in the literature as a tool for reducing food waste and improving FS. These include fines and fees imposed on companies and individuals accountable for food waste [ 58 ]. Taxes and fines are a potential way to manage and motivate restaurants and retailers to donate their leftover food to charities and community centers [ 65 ].

The establishment of policies that regulate the sharing of information and knowledge among supply chain stakeholders has received some attention in the literature in terms of reducing food waste and improving food security. Comprehensive food waste legislation has been discussed as a potential enabler of food security. A possible regulatory tool would be to revise and remove unnecessary food safety requirements that result in excessive food waste levels [ 58 ]. According to Halloran, Clement [ 6 ], food waste increased due to European food safety regulations and standardization. Food waste recycling policies have been used as a method to reduce food waste. Food waste can be utilized for value generation at any point of the food supply chain process through efficient techniques, then reincorporated into the cycle [ 77 ]. Food waste has a long history as a source of ecologically friendly animal feed [ 61 ].

A few authors have highlighted the impact of technological advancement (e.g., mobile applications) as a strategy to reduce food waste. Some authors have proposed implementing gleaning operation policies that provide tax incentives and government assistance to gleaners in order to decrease food waste. Some authors have proposed implementing peak storage reduction policies, such as stock-holding incentives. Nudging tools (which nudge people toward forming sustainable consumption behaviors) have been mentioned by a few authors.

Food safety policies received significant attention in the retrieved literature [ 61 , 64 , 69 , 70 , 103 , 105 , 111 , 112 , 120 , 125 , 129 , 130 , 137 , 138 , 149 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 ]; however, they have been discussed in various different forms. Few authors have discussed food quality and food hygiene compliance certifications. Compliance with sanitary standards is required to maintain the best practices for preventing food-borne diseases and food security threats [ 155 ]. Other authors have discussed the importance of food safety standards. Meanwhile, few authors have emphasized the importance of food safety throughout the supply chain, but each proposed a different strategy to achieve it. For example, some authors have suggested using an effective IT system [ 130 ], RFID [ 138 ], or developing food safety training policies [ 155 ].

Many authors have advocated for the implementation of trade policies to address food insecurity in developing and developed countries [ 94 , 95 , 101 , 103 , 111 , 112 , 119 , 123 , 129 , 136 , 141 , 146 , 148 , 149 , 152 , 157 , 161 , 164 , 178 , 180 ], but in different contexts. For example, some have suggested establishing infrastructure development policies that target agricultural logistic infrastructure, or improving the speed and quality of shipping logistics. In contrast, some authors have agreed on the importance of state trading and private trade-supporting policies. Others have suggested the removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers, while a few authors recommended reliable marine connection and transportation logistics policies.

Environmental policies are a fundamental enabler of food security [ 59 , 73 , 94 , 120 , 121 , 124 , 130 , 135 , 139 , 141 , 145 , 147 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 166 ]. However, authors have focused on many different aspects of these policies. Some authors, for example, have emphasized the importance of establishing policies to mitigate the effects of climate change. Others were too specific, suggesting greenhouse gas reduction policies, and proposed penalizing non-compliance. Due to the strong links between climate change, poverty, and food insecurity, some authors have proposed establishing coordinating policies among the three. Other authors have stressed the consideration of policies that encourage the optimization of fertilizer use.

Many authors have considered food import policies as a solution to food insecurity [ 94 , 95 , 100 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 109 , 112 , 116 , 117 , 119 , 120 , 124 , 126 , 134 , 146 ]; however, most authors provided different opinions regarding the most effective policy to implement. For example, some authors have stressed the importance of policies that provide direct government financial assistance to local agriculture, or the importance of policies that sustain local agricultural product prices compared to imported products. Some have recommended providing temporary tax benefits for agricultural investment, while others recommended import ban (substitution) policies. A few authors have recommended direct budget subsidies, subsidized loan interest rates, and strategies for the diversification of imported food origin.

Many authors have discussed the importance of establishing a common agricultural policy (CAP) to address sustainable agriculture [ 56 , 57 , 64 , 89 , 109 , 111 , 118 , 119 , 132 , 142 , 143 , 149 , 161 , 172 , 184 , 186 ]. Others have stressed the importance of food surplus policies in enhancing a country’s food security status [ 51 , 58 , 70 , 72 , 75 , 76 , 79 , 82 , 84 , 90 , 91 ]. Some authors have suggested strategies to regulate a company’s liability regarding the donation of surplus food. A few authors have proposed food policies that subsidize the purchase of surplus food—also known as “ugly food”—by controlling for prices and surplus item characteristics. Some authors have suggested establishing food loss policies. However, few authors have specified the need for policies promoting food loss quantification.

Many authors have discussed the policies that promote traceability across the whole supply chain as an enabler for food security [ 56 , 69 , 103 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 137 , 138 , 168 , 178 ]. However, the different authors discussed different technologies such as investment into information technology such as RFID, effective IT systems, ICT systems, and blockchain technology. Government policies should promote investments into traceability systems that focus on rapid withdrawal in unsafe food scenarios such as product recall regulations, fines imposed on hazardous product distributors, and food-borne food risk monitoring [ 129 ]. Many authors have discussed various risk management strategies to improve a country’s food security [ 94 , 117 , 118 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 145 , 154 , 155 , 157 ]. However, each considered a different approach to overcome the risk. Specifically, they have discussed food scandal policies, the COVID-19 pandemic, programmed risk identification, proactive policy measures to handle flood crises, early warning systems for natural disasters, or risk management throughout the food supply chain. Some authors have highlighted water quality policies such as efficient water-use policies, improving water resources policies, using water-efficient crops, investments into water-saving technologies, and food and water safety throughout the supply chain.

Some authors have discussed the management of government food reserves as an enabler of food security [ 64 , 104 , 112 , 117 , 118 , 124 , 136 ], and others have discussed integrative and coherent policies between food, water, and energy (as a nexus) [ 56 , 73 , 133 , 139 , 172 , 173 ]. Meanwhile, other authors have discussed policies that promote consumer education on sustainable consumption, improving consumer status awareness and knowledge regarding the ecological impact of their purchases [ 60 , 69 , 133 , 144 , 163 , 165 ]. Few authors have addressed the importance of dietary standard policies [ 69 , 151 , 163 , 174 ], urban agriculture policies [ 56 , 147 , 148 ], and food-aid policies [ 118 , 150 ].

Some policies were suggested in one paper only such as devising the right population policy in China [ 85 ], flexible retail modernization policies [ 158 ], policies that facilitate short-term migration [ 187 ], policies to stimulate equitable economic growth through manufacturing and services [ 95 ], and sound research governance policies [ 140 ].

4. Discussion

In this section, we discuss the polices and drivers in the greater areas, then compare them based on specific contexts. This approach serves to provide better understanding, thus informing decision-makers about the importance of choosing the right policies through considering many food security dimensions. By looking deeply at the extracted food security drivers and policies and the way in which they can be applied to each country’s context, we take an example from the MENA region. The MENA region includes a diverse range of nations, including low-income and less-developed (e.g., Sudan, Syria, and Yemen), low–middle-income (e.g., Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Morocco, and Tunisia), upper middle-income (e.g., Jordan, Lebanon, and Libya), and high-income (e.g., the UAE, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Israel, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia) countries [ 126 ]. As food availability is a serious problem in the MENA region low-income countries (Syria and Yemen), due to war and violent conflicts [ 188 ], policies aimed at increasing food availability continue to pique the interest of policy-makers. In these countries, where citizens are incapable of fulfilling their basic food needs [ 189 ], the existence of food security policies in different forms is crucial for achieving food security [ 53 , 97 , 98 , 124 , 184 ], more than FLW policies. Policy-makers should focus on ensuring the availability of either locally produced or imported food, which requires appropriate trade policies to deal with food shortages and improve the availability dimension in these countries. Trade policies should focus on creating infrastructure development policies that target agricultural logistic infrastructure, improve the speed and quality of shipping logistics, and establish reliable marine connections and transportation logistics policies that remove tariff and non-tariff barriers.

Policy-makers should establish import policies that sustain local agricultural product prices compared to imported products, provide direct government financial assistance to local agriculture, and provide temporary tax benefits for agricultural investment.

Additionally, the governments should improve food access in the MENA region low-income countries by reducing or stabilizing consumer and producer food prices. To enhance food access, FSPs (e.g., education policies in general and capacity-building policies) may help to improve individual human capital. Governments also must provide supplemental feeding programs, typically targeting vulnerable groups in need of special diets, such as pregnant women and children [ 101 ].

Moreover, the government should improve credit access through the following means: policies that enhance the performance and asset base of small-scale farmers; the existence of policies that impact farm-level commodity pricing, thus retaining farmers and increasing local production; the existence of government input subsidy programs for individuals, and the existence of policies supporting locally produced food. These are all possible policies to improve the MENA region FS. Governments and global health organizations should promote food utilization in MENA low-income countries through the development of policies that monitor overall food quality, such as access to clean water and micronutrient fortification, or through individual educational programs on safe food preparation [ 155 ]. Finally, enhancing food quality can optimize the individual nutrient absorption [ 101 ].

In contrast, discussions of food security in the MENA region high-income countries have indicated that food availability, access, and utilization are generally higher and not a problem. However, food stability is low, which requires the attention of policy-makers to improve FS. Food stability impacts the other food security pillars (access, availability, and utilization). Moreover, it requires the economic, political, and social sustainability of food systems, which are vulnerable to environmental conditions, land distribution, available resources, conflicts, and political situations [ 190 ]. Food stability necessitates increased efforts and expenditures to achieve food security in the sustainable development goals, especially in light of increased academic and governmental interest in incorporating sustainability values into policies.

As food waste is prevalent in these countries, FLW policies are more critical than FSP, which is in alignment with our findings regarding food security drivers. FLW makes it difficult for the poor in developing countries to access food by significantly depleting natural resources such as land, water, and fossil fuels while raising the greenhouse gas emissions related to food production [ 115 ]. Addressing food loss and waste in these countries can hugely influence the reduction of wasted food and indirectly enhance food security. The number of food-insecure individuals may be reduced in developing regions by up to 63 million by reducing food loss, which will directly reduce the over-consumption of cultivated areas, water, and greenhouse gas emissions related to food production [ 115 ]. According to Abiad and Meho [ 189 ], food waste produced at the household level differs across MENA-region countries. For example, it ranges from 68 to 150 kg/individual/year in Oman, 62–76 kg/individual/year in Iraq, 194–230 kg/individual/year in Palestine, and 177–400 kg/individual/year in the UAE. It is critical to take more aggressive but scientifically sound initiatives to minimize FLW, which will require the participation of everyone involved in the food supply chain such as policy-makers, food producers and suppliers, and the final consumers [ 191 , 192 ]. Food waste reflects an inefficient usage of valuable agricultural input resources and contributes to unnecessary environmental depletion [ 191 , 193 ]. Furthermore, food loss is widely recognized as a major obstacle to environmental sustainability and food security in developing nations [ 194 ]. Preventing FLW can result in a much more environmentally sustainable agricultural production and consumption process by increasing the efficiency and productivity of resources, especially water, cropland, and nutrients [ 115 , 191 , 192 , 195 ]. Preventing FLW is crucial in areas where water scarcity is a prevalent concern, as irrigated agriculture makes up a sizeable portion of total food production, and yield potential may not be fully achieved under nutrient or water shortages [ 191 , 196 , 197 ]. According to the study of Chen, Chaudhary [ 197 ], food waste per capita in high-income countries is enough to feed one individual a healthy balanced diet for 18 days. Chen, Chaudhary [ 197 ] also found that high-income countries have embedded environmental effects that are ten times greater than those of low-income countries, and they tend to waste six times more food by weight than low-income countries. Consequently, implementing proper FLW policies in high-income countries can help to alleviate the food insecurity problem while maintaining the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of future food production.

Implementing effective food storage techniques and capacities is considered a key component of a comprehensive national food security plan to promote both food utilization and food stability; furthermore, proper food storage at the household level maintains food products for a more prolonged period [ 198 ]. Encouragement of economic integration between MENA region countries is very applicable considering the heterogeneity of these countries. For example, countries with limited arable land and high income, such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, can invest in countries with a lower middle income, such as Egypt, and use its land to benefit both countries. On the other hand, Boratynska and Huseynov [ 101 ] have proposed food technology innovation as a sustainable driver of food security and a promising solution to the problem of food insecurity in developing countries. Due to the higher food production demand to support the expanding urban population while having limited water and land availability, higher investments in technology and innovation are needed to ensure that food systems are more resilient [ 190 ]. Boratynska and Huseynov [ 101 ] have argued that, in general, using innovative technologies to produce healthy food products is frequently a concern. However, improving the probability that innovative food technology will enable the production of a diverse range of food products with enhanced texture and flavor while also providing a variety of health advantages to the final consumer is essential. Jalava, Guillaume [ 193 ] have argued that, along with reducing FLW, shifting people’s diets from animal- to plant-based foods can help to slow environmental degradation.

The MENA region example described above can be adapted to different regions based on their food security situation, and relevant policies can be devised to improve food security more sustainably.

5. Conclusions

Food security is a complicated and multi-faceted issue that cannot be restricted to a single variable, necessitating the deeper integration of many disciplinary viewpoints. It is essential to admit the complexity of designing the right policy to improve food security that matches each country’s context [ 46 ] while considering the three pillars of sustainability. Furthermore, it is of utmost importance to implement climate-friendly agricultural production methods to combat food insecurity and climate change [ 12 ]. Mapping the determinants of food security contributes to better understanding of the issue and aids in developing appropriate food security policies to enhance environmental, social, and economic sustainability.

This research contributes to the body of knowledge by summarizing the main recommended policies and drivers of food security detailed in 141 research articles, following a systematic literature review methodology. We identified 34 food security drivers and outlined 17 recommended policies to improve food security and contribute to sustainable food production. Regarding the drivers, one of the foremost priorities to drive food security is reducing FLW globally, followed by food security policies, technological advancement, sustainable agricultural development, and so on (see Appendix A ). Regarding the recommended policies, most studies have detailed the contents and impacts of food security policies, food waste policies, food safety policies, trade policies, environmental policies, import policies, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), food surplus policies, and so on (see Appendix B ).

5.1. Policy Implications

We assessed the obtained results in comparison to the latest version of the GFSI. Using the GFSI (2021) indicators as a proxy resulted in the identification of gaps and specific policy implications of the results. The idea was to identify which of the policies and drivers have been already implemented and which have not (or, at least, have not been very successfully implemented). We used the GFSI as it is a very well-established benchmarking tool used globally by 113 countries to measure the food security level. We examined the indicators mentioned under each of the four dimensions of food security, and listed associations with the identified policies and drivers found in the literature. Accordingly, we suggest the addition of two dimensions to the current index:

• Sustainability

The first dimension relates to measuring the sustainability dimensions that each participating country adopts in its food production process. We noticed that many authors stressed the importance of the existence of clear environmental policies that drive long-term food security. However, the current GFSI lacks indicators measuring this dimension. The reviewed literature suggested environmental indicators considering optimized fertilizer use, carbon taxes, aquaculture environment, bio-energy, green and blue infrastructure, gas emissions reduction policies, policies to reduce the impacts of climate change, and heavy metal soil contamination monitoring.

• Consumer representation

The second dimension is related to consumer voice representation within the GFSI. The reviewed literature suggested implementing policy measures that promote consumer education on sustainable consumption and improve the consumer status, consciousness, and knowledge regarding the ecological impact of their purchases. Any sustainability initiative should be supported and implemented by the final consumer.

Additional gaps in the policies and drivers of food security were identified and allocated under the relevant indicators in the GFSI based on the four dimensions of food security. Under the affordability dimension, we found a lack of policies in the reviewed literature addressing the Inequality-adjusted income index. Regarding the Change in average food costs indicator, we observed that the policies that exist in the literature concern the farmer level only (e.g., policies that impact farm-level commodity pricing and policies supporting locally produced food), and not all of the citizens at the national level. Additionally, policies that promote traceability across the whole supply chain were missing. There were no policies in the reviewed literature under the food quality and safety dimension representing the following: the dietary diversity indicator; micronutrient availability (e.g., dietary availability of vitamin A, iron, and zinc); regulation of the protein quality indicator; the food safety indicator (specifically the two sub-indicators of food safety mechanisms and access to drinking water), and illustration of the national nutrition plan or strategy indicator. Therefore, future research should pay more attention to and emphasize the importance of such policies, particularly in developed countries seeking to improve their food security status and score high on the GFSI.

Moreover, the reviewed literature suggested “developing food safety training policies” to improve food safety and FS; however, no indicators or sub-indicators within the GFSI represent such training policies. The GFSI developers should pay more attention to safety training practices and include them in the index’s future development. Under the availability dimension, the reviewed literature suggested establishing a food loss policy that promotes the quantification of food loss under the food loss indicator. This indicator should be enhanced through well-articulated policies that address the problem of food loss and attempt to mitigate its impact. However, while there were various policies concerning food waste or surplus, there were no indicators within the GFSI that represented food loss. As food loss and waste was identified as the primary driver of food security in this study, we recommend expanding the GFSI to include food loss quantification and reduction policies under the availability dimension. Finally, under the political commitment to adaptation dimension, some policies were identified in the reviewed literature in two sub-indicators: early warning measures/climate-smart agriculture (e.g., proactive policy measures to handle flood crises, programmed risk identification, and early warning systems for natural disasters) and disaster risk management (e.g., food scandals, COVID-19, and risk management throughout the food supply chain). However, under the other two relevant sub-indicators—commitment to managing exposure and national agricultural adaptation policy—there were no identified policies.

5.2. Contributions of the Study

The key contributions of this study to the existing literature are threefold. First, we identified the (34) main food security drivers and the (17) most-recommended policies to improve food security and enhance the future food production sustainability. Several studies have partially covered this area, but none have employed a systematic literature review of 141 papers covering such an scope in this topic. The gravity of food security worldwide is well established; hence the contribution of this work. Second, we provide a reflection of policies/drivers on the latest version of the GFSI, resulting in more tangible policy implications (see Section 5.1 ). Third, through a systematic literature review, we identified elements not listed under the GFSI that could be considered in its future revision. Examples include environmental policies/indicators such as optimized fertilizer use, carbon taxes, aquaculture environment, bio-energy, green and blue infrastructure, gas emission reduction, policies to reduce the impact of climate change, and heavy metal soil contamination monitoring; consumer representation, as the reviewed literature suggested policy measures that promote consumer education on sustainable consumption, as well as improving consumer status, consciousness, and knowledge regarding the ecological impact of their purchases; and traceability throughout the entire supply chain.

5.3. Study Limitations and Future Research

In this study, we identified the major drivers and the recommended policies to improve food security and enhance the future food production sustainability based on the reviewed literature. However, we recommend conducting a Delphi research study in consultation with policy-makers and industry experts. A Delphi study can be used to validate the findings of this systematic literature review based on a specific country’s context. This research was conducted using only 141 articles from two databases; therefore, we suggest replicating this research using different databases, which will allow for the inclusion of more related papers. Moreover, this research included only peer-reviewed articles, which may be considered, based on the guidelines of Keele [ 185 ], as a source of publication bias. Future research may consider including gray literature and conference proceedings. This research did not include the three sustainability pillars within its research string; therefore, we recommend considering the inclusion of the three pillars in future research. Future research should also investigate the use of alternative protein food technology innovation, such as plant-based protein, cultured meat, and insect-based protein, as a sustainable solution to the food security problem. Additionally, understanding the factors influencing acceptance of various technologies by the final consumer is particularly important given some regional characteristics such as harsh arid environments and the scarcity of arable land, freshwater, and natural resources.

Appendix A. Summary Table of Major Drivers of Food Security

Appendix B. Summary Table of Most-Recommended Policies

Funding Statement

This research was funded by the UAE Ministry of Education, Resilient Agrifood Dynamism through evidence-based policies-READY project, grant number 1733833.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.W., F.A., B.S. and I.M.; methodology, S.W., F.A., B.S. and I.M.; validation, S.W., F.A., B.S. and I.M.; formal analysis, S.W.; investigation, S.W., F.A., B.S. and I.M.; resources, I.M. and B.S.; data curation, S.W.; writing—original draft preparation, S.W.; writing—review and editing, F.A.; visualization, S.W.; supervision, F.A., B.S. and I.M.; project administration, B.S. and I.M.; funding acquisition, B.S. and I.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Author Biographies
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Building resilience in food security: sustainable strategies post-covid-19.

1. Introduction

1.1. background, 1.2. impact of covid-19 on fsc, 1.3. post-pandemic impact on food security, 1.4. novelty of the study, 1.5. study objectives.

• Meticulously chart and synthesize the expansive landscape of scholarly publications concerning sustainability and resilience within the intricate domain of FSCs, meticulously scrutinizing their intricate interplay and repercussions amid the backdrop of the COVID-19 crisis.
• Discern and elucidate the intricate nuances, convergences, and disparities inherent in the multifaceted concepts of sustainability and resilience as they manifest and evolve within the dynamic realm of food supply chains, particularly in the context of their safety and security, pre- and post-COVID-19.
• Categorize and systematize the diverse scholarly contributions based on their thematic emphases, encompassing investigations into the underlying causes for the potential dearth of sustainability and resilience within the food and broader supply chain sectors and their profound implications for public health.
• Additionally, this review aims to illuminate the strategic imperatives and concrete actions needed by these critical sectors in response to their multifaceted challenges while creating a systematic conceptualization for analyzing the intricate fabric of these scholarly works.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. data sources, 2.1.1. keywords, 2.1.2. inclusion criteria.

• Papers dedicated to the multifaceted domains of sustainability and resilience within the context of FSC, with a primary objective of ensuring food security.
• Research that analyzed the underlying rationales contributing to the lack of sustainability and resilience within FSC.
• Articles that examined the implications of food security on the overarching dimensions of supply chain sustainability and resilience, which inevitably affect public health.
• Comparative analyses of FSC realms, drawing parallels and distinctions.
• Reports that provided actionable insights and forward-looking perspectives on the development and implementation of sustainable and resilient supply chain strategies to safeguard food security.
• Strict adherence to the English language criterion.
• Inclusion of papers published during and after the emergence of the COVID-19 crisis, encompassing 2019 to 2023.

2.1.3. Exclusion Criteria

• Papers discussing sustainability and resilience without directly relating to food security or failing to define their interrelationships were excluded.
• This review omitted editorial pieces and letters.
• All papers not published in English or predating the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically before December 2019, were systematically excluded.

2.2. Data Collection

2.3. data classification.

• Reasons: Researching the underlying causes behind challenges within food security and the lack of sustainability and resilience post-COVID-19 within food security is critical. It allows for a deeper understanding of the root factors contributing to vulnerabilities, disruptions, or inefficiencies within the food supply chain, as identified in the analyzed publications.
• Impacts: Examining the effects of these factors on different aspects, such as public health, economies, societies, and the overall food systems, allows for a comprehensive assessment of the repercussions resulting from disruptions or inadequacies in food security post-COVID-19.
• Action/Strategy: Various proposed strategies and measures were extracted from the publications to enhance sustainability and resilience within food security post-pandemic. These actionable insights provide a pathway for future practical implementation.
• Similarities and differences: Examining the interdependence and correlation between sustainability and resilience within the context of food security post-COVID-19 is pivotal. In the thematic analysis, commonalities were identified across different publications regarding challenges, responses, or strategies related to food security post-COVID-19. Identifying these similarities allows unified, scalable solutions to be developed across various contexts. Additionally, differences in challenges, responses, and resources were identified within the analyzed publications. As a result of recognizing these diversities, tailored and context-specific interventions can efficiently address specific needs.

3. Literature Review

3.1. reasons and factors underlying food security challenges, 3.2. impact of insufficient food security on public health, 3.3. strategies and approaches for integrating resilience and sustainability in food security, 3.4. exploring the similarities, differences, connections, and disparities between sustainability and resilience, 4. discussion and results, 4.1. integrating sustainability and resilience for food security, 4.2. future research directions.

• Analyze the long-term impact of sustainability and resilience on food systems, particularly their effectiveness in maintaining food security during prolonged crises or disasters.
• Investigate the socio-economic implications of sustainability integrating and resilience approaches in food systems, including their economic feasibility and effects on employment and local economies.
• Utilize emerging technologies, such as advanced data analytics, artificial intelligence, and automation, to further enhance the integration of sustainability and resilience in FSCs.
• Analyze cross-sectoral impacts of integrating sustainability and resilience into food systems on other sectors like healthcare, environmental conservation, and social welfare, as well as synergies in these areas.
• Assess how policies, regulations, and governance structures affect the implementation of sustainability and resilience strategies in the food sectors.
• Identify consumer behavior and preferences in response to resilient food systems and how consumer choices affect the development of sustainable and resilient food systems.
• Examine the implications of integrated sustainability and resilience approaches on global health and food security, considering their effects on vulnerable populations and developing countries.
• Assess the effectiveness of sustainability and resilience integration in diverse food system contexts and identify best practices by conducting comparative studies across different regions or countries.
• Explore the role of multi-stakeholder collaborations, public–private partnerships, and community engagement in promoting sustainable and resilient food systems.
• Develop quantitative metrics and indicators to assess and compare the success and impact of sustainability and resilience integration in food security.
• Research how climate change adaptation strategies can be integrated with sustainability and resilience efforts in food systems to address rising climate-related challenges.
• Conduct case studies of specific regions or organizations that have successfully integrated sustainability and resilience into their food systems and highlight key strategies and lessons learned.
• Focus on interdisciplinary approaches that combine expertise from food science, environment science, public health, economics, and technology to solve complex problems.

5. Conclusions

Author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Alabi, M.O.; Ngwenyama, O. Food security and disruptions of the global food supply chains during COVID-19: Building smarter food supply chains for post COVID-19 era. Br. Food J. 2023 , 125 , 167–185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haji, M.; Kerbache, L.; Al-Ansari, T. Food quality, drug safety, and increasing public health measures in supply chain management. Processes 2022 , 10 , 1715. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kubatko, O.; Merritt, R.; Duane, S.; Piven, V. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global food system resilience. Mech. Econ. Regul. 2023 , 1 , 144–148. [ Google Scholar ]
• Haji, M.; Kerbache, L.; Al-Ansari, T. Development of Risk Management Mitigation Plans for the Infant Formula Milk Supply Chain Using an AHP Model. Appl. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 7686. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Paré, G.; Trudel, M.C.; Jaana, M.; Kitsiou, S. Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Inf. Manag. 2015 , 52 , 183–199. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Z.L. Integrated production and outbound distribution scheduling: Review and extensions. Oper. Res. 2010 , 58 , 130–148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fragapane, G.; De Koster, R.; Sgarbossa, F.; Strandhagen, J.O. Planning and control of autonomous mobile robots for intralogistics: Literature review and research agenda. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2021 , 294 , 405–426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Boyacι-Gündüz, C.P.; Ibrahim, S.A.; Wei, O.C.; Galanakis, C.M. Transformation of the food sector: Security and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Foods 2021 , 10 , 497. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharifi, A.; Khavarian-Garmsir, A.R. The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Sci. Total Environ. 2020 , 749 , 142391. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mondino, E.; Scolobig, A.; Di Baldassarre, G.; Stoffel, M. Living in a pandemic: A review of COVID-19 integrated risk management. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2023 , 98 , 104081. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Paul, A.; Shukla, N.; Trianni, A. Modelling supply chain sustainability challenges in the food processing sector amid the COVID-19 outbreak. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2023 , 87 , 101535. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• El Korchi, A. Survivability, resilience and sustainability of supply chains: The COVID-19 pandemic. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 377 , 134363. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Ekanayake, A.; Rajapaksha, A.U.; Hewawasam, C.; Anand, U.; Bontempi, E.; Kurwadkar, S.; Biswas, K.J.; Vithanage, M. Environmental challenges of COVID-19 pandemic: Resilience and sustainability—A review. Environ. Res. 2023 , 216 , 114496. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zabaniotou, A. A systemic approach to resilience and ecological sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic: Human, societal, and ecological health as a system-wide emergent property in the Anthropocene. Glob. Transit. 2020 , 2 , 116–126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Suleimany, M.; Mokhtarzadeh, S.; Sharifi, A. Community resilience to pandemics: An assessment framework developed based on the review of COVID-19 literature. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2022 , 80 , 103248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Khan, M.R.; Manzoor, A. Application and impact of new technologies in the supply chain management during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Econ. Bus. Adm. 2021 , 9 , 277–292. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ranjbari, M.; Esfandabadi, Z.S.; Zanetti, M.C.; Scagnelli, S.D.; Siebers, P.O.; Aghbashlo, M.; Peng, W.; Quatraro, F.; Tabatabaei, M. Three pillars of sustainability in the wake of COVID-19: A systematic review and future research agenda for sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 297 , 126660. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ivanov, D. Viable supply chain model: Integrating agility, resilience and sustainability perspectives—Lessons from and thinking beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022 , 319 , 1411–1431. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Park, A.; Li, H. The effect of blockchain technology on supply chain sustainability performances. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 1726. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Varriale, V.; Cammarano, A.; Michelino, F.; Caputo, M. Sustainable supply chains with blockchain, IoT and RFID: A simulation on order management. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 6372. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bakalis, S.; Valdramidis, V.P.; Argyropoulos, D.; Ahrne, L.; Chen, J.; Cullen, P.J.; Cummins, E.; Datta, A.K.; Emmanouilidis, C.; Foster, T.; et al. Perspectives from CO+ RE: How COVID-19 changed our food systems and food security paradigms. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 2020 , 3 , 166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mardones, F.O.; Rich, K.M.; Boden, L.A.; Moreno-Switt, A.I.; Caipo, M.L.; Zimin-Veselkoff, N.; Alateeqi, A.M.; Baltenweck, I. The COVID-19 pandemic and global food security. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020 , 7 , 578508. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Negri, M.; Cagno, E.; Colicchia, C.; Sarkis, J. Integrating sustainability and resilience in the supply chain: A systematic literature review and a research agenda. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021 , 30 , 2858–2886. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nordhagen, S.; Igbeka, U.; Rowlands, H.; Shine, R.S.; Heneghan, E.; Tench, J. COVID-19 and small enterprises in the food supply chain: Early impacts and implications for longer-term food system resilience in low-and middle-income countries. World Dev. 2021 , 141 , 105405. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Owida, A.; Galal, N.M.; Elrafie, A. Decision-making framework for a resilient sustainable production system during COVID-19: An evidence-based research. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2022 , 164 , 107905. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Han, S.; Roy, P.K.; Hossain, M.I.; Byun, K.H.; Choi, C.; Ha, S.D. COVID-19 pandemic crisis and food safety: Implications and inactivation strategies. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021 , 109 , 25–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Rai, S.S.; Rai, S.; Singh, N.K. Organizational resilience and social-economic sustainability: COVID-19 perspective. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021 , 23 , 12006–12023. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Roostaie, S.; Nawari, N.; Kibert, C.J. Sustainability and resilience: A review of definitions, relationships, and their integration into a combined building assessment framework. Build. Environ. 2019 , 154 , 132–144. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ur Rahim, H.; Qaswar, M.; Uddin, M.; Giannini, C.; Herrera, M.L.; Rea, G. Nano-enable materials promoting sustainability and resilience in modern agriculture. Nanomaterials 2021 , 11 , 2068. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Galanakis, C.M.; Rizou, M.; Aldawoud, T.M.; Ucak, I.; Rowan, N.J. Innovations and technology disruptions in the food sector within the COVID-19 pandemic and post-lockdown era. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021 , 110 , 193–200. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Garcia, S.N.; Osburn, B.I.; Jay-Russell, M.T. One health for food safety, food security, and sustainable food production. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2020 , 4 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Loopstra, R. Vulnerability to Food Insecurity Since the COVID-19 Lockdown ; The Food Foundation: London, UK, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sukhwani, V.; Deshkar, S.; Shaw, R. COVID-19 lockdown, food systems and urban–rural partnership: Case of Nagpur, India. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 5710. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bounie, D.; Arcot, J.; Cole, M.; Egal, F.; Juliano, P.; Mejia, C.; Egal, F.; Juliano, P.; Carla Mejia, C.; Rosa, D.; et al. The role of food science and technology in humanitarian response. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020 , 103 , 367–375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hall, C.M.; Fieger, P.; Prayag, G.; Dyason, D. Panic buying and consumption displacement during COVID-19: Evidence from New Zealand. Economies 2021 , 9 , 46. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khurshid, A. Applying blockchain technology to address the crisis of trust during the COVID-19 pandemic. JMIR Med. Inform. 2020 , 8 , e20477. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Haji, M.; Kerbache, L.; Sheriff, K.M.; Al-Ansari, T. Critical success factors and traceability technologies for establishing a safe pharmaceutical supply chain. Methods Protoc. 2021 , 4 , 85. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Farooq, M.U.; Hussain, A.; Masood, T.; Habib, M.S. Supply chain operations management in pandemics: A state-of-the-art review inspired by COVID-19. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 2504. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carissimi, M.C.; Creazza, A.; Colicchia, C. Crossing the chasm: Investigating the relationship between sustainability and resilience in supply chain management. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain. 2023 , 7 , 100098. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mohammed, A.; Govindan, K.; Zubairu, N.; Pratabaraj, J.; Abideen, A.Z. Multi-tier supply chain network design: A key towards sustainability and resilience. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2023 , 182 , 109396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Junaid, M.; Zhang, Q.; Cao, M.; Luqman, A. Nexus between technology enabled supply chain dynamic capabilities, integration, resilience, and sustainable performance: An empirical examination of healthcare organizations. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2023 , 196 , 122828. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jomthanachai, S.; Wong, W.P.; Soh, K.L.; Lim, C.P. A global trade supply chain vulnerability in COVID-19 pandemic: An assessment metric of risk and resilience-based efficiency of CoDEA method. Res. Transp. Econ. 2022 , 93 , 101166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, C.C.; Zeng, M.; Luo, K. How does climate change affect food security? Evidence from China. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2024 , 104 , 107324. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Patidar, A.; Sharma, M.; Agrawal, R.; Sangwan, K.S. Traceability and transportation issues in the food supply chain. In Operations and Supply Chain Management in the Food Industry: Farm to Fork ; Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore, 2022; pp. 73–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Haji, M.; Kerbache, L.; Muhammad, M.; Al-Ansari, T. Roles of technology in improving perishable food supply chains. Logistics 2020 , 4 , 33. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Haji, M.; Himpel, F. Building Resilience in Food Security: Sustainable Strategies Post-COVID-19. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 995. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16030995

Haji M, Himpel F. Building Resilience in Food Security: Sustainable Strategies Post-COVID-19. Sustainability . 2024; 16(3):995. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16030995

Haji, Mona, and Frank Himpel. 2024. "Building Resilience in Food Security: Sustainable Strategies Post-COVID-19" Sustainability 16, no. 3: 995. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16030995

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

What is Food Security?

• Our Projects
• Data & Research
• News & Opinions
• What is Food Security

Based on the 1996 World Food Summit , food security is defined when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.

The four main dimensions of food security:

• Physical availability of food: Food availability addresses the “supply side” of food security and is determined by the level of food production, stock levels and net trade.
• Economic and physical access to food: An adequate supply of food at the national or international level does not in itself guarantee household level food security. Concerns about insufficient food access have resulted in a greater policy focus on incomes, expenditure, markets and prices in achieving food security objectives.
• Food utilization : Utilization is commonly understood as the way the body makes the most of various nutrients in the food. Sufficient energy and nutrient intake by individuals are the result of good care and feeding practices, food preparation, diversity of the diet and intra-household distribution of food. Combined with good biological utilization of food consumed, this determines the nutritional status of individuals.
• Stability of the other three dimensions over time: Even if your food intake is adequate today, you are still considered to be food insecure if you have inadequate access to food on a periodic basis, risking a deterioration of your nutritional status. Adverse weather conditions, political instability, or economic factors (unemployment, rising food prices) may have an impact on your food security status.

For food security objectives to be realized, all four dimensions must be fulfilled simultaneously.

The World Bank Group works with partners to build food systems that can feed everyone, everywhere, every day by improving food security, promoting ‘nutrition-sensitive agriculture’ and improving food safety. The Bank is a leading financier of food systems. In fiscal year 2022, there was US$9.6 billion in new IBRD/IDA commitments to agriculture and related sectors

Activities include:

• Strengthening safety nets to ensure that vulnerable families have access to food and water–and money in their pockets to make vital purchases
• Delivering expedited emergency support by fast-tracking financing through existing projects to respond to crisis situations
• Engaging with countries and development partners to address food security challenges. Instruments include rapid country diagnostics and data-based monitoring instruments and partnerships such as the  Famine Action Mechanism  and the  Agriculture Observatory
• Promoting farming systems that use  climate-smart techniques , and produce a more diverse mix of foods, to improve food systems’ resilience, increase farm incomes and enable greater availability and affordability of nutrient-dense foods
• Improving supply chains to reduce post-harvest food losses, improve hygiene in food distribution channels, and better link production and consumption centers
• Applying an integrated “One Health” approach to managing risks associated with animal, human and environmental health
• Supporting investments in research and development that enable increasing the micronutrient content of foods and raw materials
• Advocating for policy and regulatory reforms to improve the efficiency and integration of domestic food markets and reduce barriers to food trade
• Working with the private sector, government, scientists, and others to strengthen capacities to assess and manage  food safety risks in low and middle-income countries
• Supporting long-term global food security programs: The Bank houses the  Global Agriculture and Food Security Program  (GAFSP) , a global financing instrument that pools donor funds and targets additional, complementary financing to agricultural development across the entire value chain.  Since its launch in 2010 by the G20 in response to the 2007-2008 food price crisis, GAFSP has reached over 13 million smallholder farmers and their families with over $1.3 billion in grant funding to 64 projects in 39 countries, $330 million to 66 agribusiness investment projects in 27 countries, and $13.2 million in small-scale grants to support producer organizations. Most recently, in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, GAFSP allocated over $55 million of additional grant funding to on-going public sector and producer organization-led projects to support COVID-19 response and recovery.   
• The Bank also supports the  CGIAR  which advances agriculture science and innovation to boost food and nutrition security globally.

Global Food and Nutrition Security Dashboard

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

Programs submenu

Regions submenu, topics submenu, a new cold war: congressional rhetoric and regional reactions to the u.s.-china rivalry, what are the impacts of gps jamming and spoofing on civilians, press briefing: previewing the quad leaders summit and the high-level week of unga 79.

• Abshire-Inamori Leadership Academy
• Aerospace Security Project
• Africa Program
• Americas Program
• Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy
• Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative
• Asia Program
• Australia Chair
• Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy
• Brzezinski Institute on Geostrategy
• Chair in U.S.-India Policy Studies
• China Power Project
• Chinese Business and Economics
• Defending Democratic Institutions
• Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group
• Defense 360
• Defense Budget Analysis
• Diversity and Leadership in International Affairs Project
• Economics Program
• Emeritus Chair in Strategy
• Energy Security and Climate Change Program
• Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program
• Freeman Chair in China Studies
• Futures Lab
• Geoeconomic Council of Advisers
• Global Food and Water Security Program
• Global Health Policy Center
• Hess Center for New Frontiers
• Human Rights Initiative
• Humanitarian Agenda
• Intelligence, National Security, and Technology Program
• International Security Program
• Japan Chair
• Kissinger Chair
• Korea Chair
• Langone Chair in American Leadership
• Middle East Program
• Missile Defense Project
• Project on Critical Minerals Security
• Project on Fragility and Mobility
• Project on Nuclear Issues
• Project on Prosperity and Development
• Project on Trade and Technology
• Renewing American Innovation
• Scholl Chair in International Business
• Smart Women, Smart Power
• Southeast Asia Program
• Stephenson Ocean Security Project
• Strategic Technologies Program
• Sustainable Development and Resilience Initiative
• Wadhwani Center for AI and Advanced Technologies
• Warfare, Irregular Threats, and Terrorism Program
• All Regions
• Australia, New Zealand & Pacific
• Middle East
• Russia and Eurasia
• American Innovation
• Civic Education
• Climate Change
• Cybersecurity
• Defense Budget and Acquisition
• Defense and Security
• Energy and Sustainability
• Food Security
• Gender and International Security
• Geopolitics
• Global Health
• Human Rights
• Humanitarian Assistance
• Intelligence
• International Development
• Maritime Issues and Oceans
• Missile Defense
• Nuclear Issues
• Transnational Threats
• Water Security

Growing Cities, Growing Food Insecurity: How to Protect the Poor during Rapid Urbanization

Photo: PRAKASH SINGH/AFP/Getty Images

Commentary by Marie Ruel

Published October 14, 2020

The Reset the Table essay series is published weekly, describing today’s challenges to global food security and proposing U.S. government responses.

The 2020 State of Food and Nutrition Security in the World (SOFI) estimates that close to 690 million people, or about 9 percent of the world population, did not have access to enough food or were “undernourished” in 2019. These statistics, however, assume that having enough calories is the only thing that human beings need to live a healthy and active life. This is not the case. To improve the accuracy of the information presented for the first time, the SOFI report also includes new measures of food security, which show that up to 2 billion people did not have access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food in 2019 and 3 billion could not afford a healthy diet. These new measures are much more in line with the 1996 World Food Summit comprehensive and widely endorsed definition of food security, which states that “food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious foods that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.” Clearly, food security measures based only on quantity of food grossly underestimate the magnitude and severity of the problem and reflect only one of the many aspects of what food security really entails.

Food Security in Urban Areas

Urban areas have traditionally been perceived as having less problems of food insecurity than rural areas, and this could be true if indeed only access to enough food mattered. Food in urban areas is generally plentiful and available in a variety of forms from fresh to prepared to packaged, in a number of retail outlets from traditional markets to corner shops to high-end supermarkets, and from local and international formal and informal restaurants and fast food chains. But abundance of food does not mean that everyone has equal access to nutritious foods and to safe, diverse, healthy, and affordable diets.

There is no global data on food security disaggregated by urban and rural areas, although many claim that food insecurity afflicts more rural than urban residents. In fact, the unique characteristics of life in urban areas makes the urban poor particularly vulnerable to food insecurity.

Urban areas are most afflicted by profound inequalities stemming from differences between socioeconomic groups, ethnicity, migratory status, location of residence (slums or formal settlements), city size, and a host of other factors. In India, we find that the nutritional status of poor slum dwellers is similar to those of rural populations, challenging the myth that urban dwellers are generally better off than their rural counterparts. In a forthcoming paper, our team shows that child stunting (low height for age), for example, is approximately 40 percent in both urban slums and rural areas of India, whereas adult overweight is worse in urban slums, affecting 21 percent of adults compared to 15 percent in rural areas. This double burden of malnutrition, which is characterized by the coexistence of problems of undernutrition along with overweight and obesity, is severe in urban areas because of the rapid shifts in dietary patterns that result from exposure to the urban food environment , including abundance and excessive promotion of fast food, fried snacks, sugar-sweetened beverages, and ultra-processed foods.

There is no global data on food security disaggregated by urban and rural areas, although many claim that food insecurity afflicts more rural than urban residents. In fact, the unique characteristics of life in urban areas makes the urban poor particularly vulnerable to food insecurity. Urban dwellers are almost entirely dependent on the cash economy and therefore need stable employment and income for their food needs, whereas many rural households have access to land and grow a significant proportion of the food they consume. An analysis of 20 low- and middle-income countries shows that urban households spend on average more than 50 percent of their budget on food and up to 75 percent in the poorest countries. This dependence on cash for food means that stable income and food affordability are the two most important determinants of food security and access to healthy diets in urban areas.

The Main Drivers of Food Insecurity in Urban Areas

For the urban poor, the challenges of achieving food security and accessing a healthy diet arise from some of the specific features of urban life. First, although income is critically important for food security and healthy diets, many poor urban households rely on low paying and insecure jobs in the informal sector . Women are also more likely to be actively engaged in the labor force and work away from home for long hours, often in jobs that are not amenable to taking a young child along. Because they may not have access to extended family or social networks, especially if they are new migrants to the city, they have to hire substitute childcare, which places an even greater financial burden on their family. This may also affect the quality of childcare and their children’s well-being, diets, and nutrition and health status.

With women spending long hours at work and commuting to and from work, their time for household chores, cooking, and childcare becomes scarce. Moreover, the precarious conditions in which many of the poor live in urban areas means they have limited access to kitchen or cooking equipment, electricity, refrigeration, and safe water, which prevents them from storing food or preparing meals for their family. Time scarcity and physical constraints results in many poor households opting for convenience and relying on ready-to-eat, prepared, and often packaged ultra-processed foods. Such meals are cheaper but of poorer nutritional quality than traditional diets, which take longer time to prepare. Eating out and purchasing meals from informal and non-regulated street vendors and informal restaurants also increases food safety risks and related illness.

In addition to income and food affordability constraints, the urban poor generally have less access to both formal and informal social protection support, such as cash or food transfer programs. Global evidence from 100 countries shows that poor urban households are less likely to be covered by social safety net programs; in middle-income countries, the urban-rural gap was found to be as high as 24 percentage points. Poor urban households also often lack potential financial or food support from extended family networks or informal friends or neighbor groups, especially in unsafe, high-crime environments. This lack of public or social support makes urban dwellers particularly vulnerable to income and food price shocks.

The unique features and drivers of urban food insecurity and unhealthy diets and the vast inequalities within urban areas require tailored programs and policies that specifically tackle the needs of the urban poor.

The consequences of severe food insecurity, and the coping strategies that the urban poor are often forced to adopt in times of crisis, can be extremely damaging for their children’s nutrition, health, and cognitive development in the short term. In the long term, this puts them at a greater risk of poor schooling performance, lower economic productivity, and increased susceptibility to overweight or obesity in adulthood. For older children and adults in households whose coping strategies involve shifting to cheaper sources of calories, including high consumption of ultra-processed foods , the resulting diets, which are low in protein and micronutrients and high in saturated fats, calories, sugar, and salt, increase their risks of overweight and obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases like diabetes, coronary heart diseases, and several types of cancer.

For the urban poor, these health and nutrition challenges are also compounded by a lack of access to health care, safe water and sanitation facilities , and a greater exposure to contaminants and air pollution. Once again, these conditions affect slum dwellers disproportionately and deepen inequalities in health and nutrition outcomes.

Supporting the Urban Poor

With urbanization intensifying in Africa and Asia, the projected population growth is expected to add 2.8 billion urban residents by 2050. Thus, the challenge of addressing urban food security and healthy diets can no longer be ignored. The unique features and drivers of urban food insecurity and unhealthy diets and the vast inequalities within urban areas require tailored programs and policies that specifically tackle the needs of the urban poor. The Covid-19 pandemic and the related economic crisis have disproportionately affected urban populations, especially the previously non-poor who, at least in Africa, are suffering the greatest income losses . Immediate attention needs to be directed to urban populations, with a focus on the following priority areas:

• Leverage food systems to increase availability, access, and affordability of nutritious foods, and consumption by the urban poor. Examples include:
• Strengthen urban-rural linkages and support value chains for perishable, high-value nutritious foods (including fruits and vegetables, dairy, poultry, and fish) to boost consumption of these foods by the urban poor;
• Support women and men in the informal agriculture and food sector through trainings, financial support, and infrastructure to improve hygiene, food safety, and the nutritional value of the foods they sell; and
• Where policies allow, support or expand urban agriculture to increase the urban poor’s consumption of a diversity of nutritious food, such as fruits and vegetables;
• Tailor and target social safety nets to support the livelihoods, income, food security, and healthy diets of urban dwellers and protect them from seasonality, climate, health, and other shocks and vulnerabilities. Examples include:
• Providing targeted cash, food transfers, or vouchers for nutritious foods to poor urban households; and
• Providing free healthy school meals and educating school children in healthy diets and lifestyles, especially those living in urban slums and other poor urban environments.
• Design and target education campaigns combining mass media and targeted messaging through mobile technologies and promotion in markets and other retails frequented by urban poor households to convey key messages about nutritious foods and healthy diets and lifestyle, and to reverse current trends showing rapid rises in consumption of cheap calories from unhealthy ultra-processed foods.
• Address inequalities in the access of poor urban dwellers to services , including health care, water, sanitation, waste removal, and electricity services, and lift the access and utilization barriers faced by urban dwellers where services are available.

In order to design successful programs and policies that address the realities of urban life and the specific needs of the most vulnerable, investments in research are needed to characterize the specific challenges and the opportunities to support the urban poor and to test solutions that can be scaled up. The current state of evidence on urban food security, diets, nutrition, and health and their drivers is shockingly outdated and scattered . The existing evidence cannot provide the type of information needed to guide policy. In this area in particular, action is needed urgently.

Marie Ruel is the director of the International Food Policy Research Institute’s Poverty, Health, and Nutrition Division and a member of CGIAR’s Agriculture for Nutrition and Health’s program management committee.

Commentary   is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).

© 2020 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Programs & Projects

A reflection on global food security challenges amid the war in Ukraine and the early impact of climate change

The COVID-19 pandemic. Supply chain strains. Climatic events. These disruptions were already pushing food prices up when Russia invaded Ukraine in late February. Today, war in one of the world’s six breadbasket  regions 1 Globally, there are six breadbaskets that together supply roughly 60 to 70 percent of global agricultural commodities. and in the Black Sea, a critical supply and transit hub for wheat and fertilizers, is tilting global food security into a state of high risk .

About the authors

This article is a collaborative effort by Daniel Aminetzah , Artem Baroyan, Nicolas Denis , Sarah Dewilde, Nelson Ferreira , Oleksandr Kravchenko , Julien Revellat , and Ivan Verlan , representing views from McKinsey’s Agriculture Practice.

A deal signed on July 22 intended to free approximately 20 million tons of grain stuck in Black Sea ports 2 Matina Stevis-Gridneff, “Russia agrees to let Ukraine ship grain, easing world food shortage,” New York Times , July 22, 2022. has brought some relative relief to the market, enabling the price of some cereals to return to preinvasion levels. 3 Caitlin Ostroff, “Wheat, corn prices fall as Ukraine dispatches grain,” Wall Street Journal , August 1, 2022. In spite of this optimistic turn of events, a confluence of immediate concerns and longer-term complications continue to point to elevated risk levels. Immediate concerns include the fact that though the grain deal may alleviate some logistical problems in ports, the outcome is uncertain, and there are significant inland bottlenecks and other complexities that could continue to make it difficult for grain to reach customers. 4 Dalton Bennett and Isabelle Khurshudyan, “After Russian port strike, Ukraine grain deal hangs in the balance,” Washington Post , July 26, 2022. Also, if the roughly 20 million tons of grain in question has not been stored in optimal conditions for the five to six months it has been sitting in Ukrainian silos, it may have declined in quality and could be unfit for human consumption. 5 “Lebanese buyer refuses cargo from first grain ship since Ukraine-Russia agreement over quality doubts,” VRT News, August 9, 2022. Also daunting is the fact that our projection for the 2022–23 harvest in Ukraine is below normal levels by more than 30 million tons, due to lower acreage planted and lower input availability (and the fact that some grain is likely to remain unharvested).

These immediate concerns converge with longer-term complications that began in early 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic began, convulsing global supply chains. Next, monetary and fiscal policies aimed at alleviating the pandemic’s impact pushed up commodity prices starting in mid-2020. Even before the invasion, price levels for wheat and corn were 40 to 50 percent higher than the average price over the past decade. Fast-forward to 2022: the blockade of Black Sea ports caused by the war in Ukraine severely restricted supply access. This situation has provoked numerous countries to try to protect their food access by curbing grain exports. Add to this picture the recent heat waves in India and the current dry summer in Western Europe that together could limit supply to world markets by more than ten million tons of grain—vivid demonstrations of the higher risk for food commodities posed by climate change . Lastly, while the price of grain has come down, fertilizer prices remain high, causing some farmers to use them sparingly as grain commodity prices show signs of contraction.

The consequences of a looming food crisis may be more pronounced than during the 2007–08 global food crisis 6 Douglas Belkin and Bob Davis, “Food inflation, riots spark worries for world leaders,” Wall Street Journal , April 14, 2008. and the 2010–11 food price hikes that contributed to the Arab Spring. 7 Caroline Henshaw, “The politics of food prices in Egypt,” Wall Street Journal , February 1, 2011. Today’s more negative outlook could ultimately result in a deficit of roughly 15 million to 20 million metric tons of wheat and corn from the world’s supply of exported grain in 2022. The deficit in 2023 could reach roughly 23 million to 40 million metric tons, according to our worst-case scenario, assuming a prolonged crisis in which the recently signed agreements don’t work.

The larger deficit represents a year’s worth of nutritional intake for up to 250 million people, the equivalent of 3 percent of the global population. In addition to the human suffering this implies, based on the experiences of recent food crises, there are a host of other possible destabilizing consequences.

What follows is our perspective on four dimensions of the unfolding and constantly changing crisis 8 The invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 is having deep human, as well as social and economic, impact across countries and sectors. The implications of the invasion are rapidly evolving and are inherently uncertain. The analysis in this article was formulated based on the best-available data as of mid-July. As a result of the dynamic situation, this article should be treated as a best-efforts perspective at a specific point of time, which seeks to help inform discussion and decisions taken by leaders of relevant organizations. The document does not set out economic or geopolitical forecasts and should not be treated as doing so. It also does not provide legal analysis, including but not limited to legal advice on sanctions or export control issues. :

• This year, exports have dropped due to logistical constraints in Ukraine and export limitations from other countries.
• Next year may be even worse. We estimate that crop production in Ukraine will decline by 35 to 45 percent in the next harvesting season, which started in July.
• Some countries will likely suffer more than others, and overall consequences may be more pronounced than in recent, comparable crises.
• Swift mitigations may help to avoid the worst outcomes, and the window of opportunity is narrowing.

The conflict in Ukraine is shaking important pillars of the global food system in an already precarious context. Understanding what has happened, what is likely to come next, who is most affected by it, and what may be done is complex. Managing the circumstances and supporting the best possible outcomes may require decisive action and collaboration.

Exports have dropped due to logistical constraints in Ukraine and export limitations from other countries

Today, the global food supply faces two crucial obstacles: a drop in exports from Ukraine and, to some extent, from Russia, and knock-on effects that could further constrain global supply. The current export deficit has largely been due to the reduced ability to move siloed grain out of the Black Sea region. 9 Andrew Higgins and Erika Solomon, “As food shortages loom, a race to free Ukraine’s stranded grain,” New York Times , June 1, 2022. If the signed agreement fully delivers on its promise, much of the short-term problem could be alleviated, though this optimal outcome is far from certain.

Global export volumes have declined

The world’s grain mostly comes from six growing regions, including Ukraine and Russia, which together produce roughly 28 percent of the wheat and 15 percent of the corn exported globally (Exhibit 1). There has been an immediate reduction of export volumes due to blocked Black Sea ports, mines along the shipping routes, 10 Matthew Luxmoore, Alistair MacDonald, and Nancy A. Youssef, “Mines, port damage threaten revival of sea route for Ukraine grain,” Wall Street Journal , July 2, 2022. and limited alternative routes. Wheat and corn supplies that needed to exit Ukraine via rail or truck transport have faced logistical bottlenecks, including different rail track gauges used in Ukraine versus neighboring countries, 11 Matina Stevis-Gridneff and Michael Schwirtz, “After Ukraine-Russia meeting, U.N. sees ‘a ray of hope’ to free grain,” New York Times , July 13, 2022. a shortage of rail cars, and limited shipping capacity in Polish and Romanian ports. 12 “The bottlenecks on alternative routes to export Ukrainian grain,” BBC News, July 21, 2022. Despite the recent agreement aimed at allowing grain exports from Ukraine’s three major Black Sea ports, 13 “Black Sea grain exports deal ‘a beacon of hope’ amid Ukraine war–Guterres,” UN News, July 22, 2022. the situation will likely remain uncertain and fragile. 14 Karin Strohecker, “Ukraine grain deal won’t fix warzone logistics, top producer says,” Reuters, July 14, 2022.

Sea logistic constraints alone have lowered export volumes from Ukraine by an estimated 16 million to 19 million metric tons (however, if grain soon start flowing in large amounts from Black Sea ports, exports could be higher) and two million to three million metric tons from Russia. Roughly 5 percent of the 400 million metric tons traded globally may seem like a relatively small amount. However, it may be enough to cause significant disruption to the two-year commodity cycle because it creates a call for new contracts and erodes confidence in the liquidity of the market, which can motivate some countries to increase their reserves.

In the next planting season, due to the war’s disruption of Ukrainian planting and harvesting and combined with less-than-optimal inputs into Russian, Brazilian, and other growing countries’ crops, supply will likely tighten. We estimate that these impacts could create a 23 million to 40 million metric ton deficit of globally traded grain in 2023 (Exhibit 2). The smaller deficit is possible if agreements are respected and Black Sea exports from Ukraine become sizable. The more pessimistic scenario reflects what could happen should Ukrainian ports remain largely obstructed, farmers’ liquidity and access to agricultural inputs is limited, and lower acreage is planted.

Supply has been tightened further by countries that have attempted to shield domestic markets with trade restrictions. Roughly 40 new export bans and export licensing requirements have been introduced between the beginning of the war and May 2022. 15 IFPRI Blog , “From bad to worse: How Russia-Ukraine war-related export restrictions exacerbate global food insecurity,” blog entry by Joseph Glauber et al., April 13, 2022. While these measures can bring a perceived gain for the imposing country, history suggests they put additional pressure on available food stocks, push prices up, and further threaten food security for the world’s poor. 16 Vibhuti Agarwal, Jason Douglas, and Jon Emont, “Export curbs spread globally, adding to food-inflation pressures,” Wall Street Journal , May 25, 2022.

Negative impacts have been dampened to some extent, and could be further alleviated by increased exports—some from areas expecting record crops and some from countries that have been loosening grain reserves in a bid to benefit from increased prices. The relief these measures could bring is unclear, as these actions are voluntary and will undoubtedly be driven by market dynamics and politics.

Next year may be worse

Unfortunately, there may be more damage to the global food supply coming by the end of this year and throughout 2023. This year’s logistical problems have resulted in up to 18 million to 22 million fewer metric tons of grain being exported from Ukraine and Russia as of this writing. The ongoing conflict is interfering with farmers’ ability to prepare fields, plant seeds, and protect and fertilize crops, which will likely result in even lower volumes next harvest season. Some of this deficit may be recuperated depending on the success of Black Sea export agreements, logistics improvements, and other interventions. However, factors including the impact of drought throughout the world’s breadbaskets—a trend expected to worsen over time—cloud the outlook.

This year’s logistical problems have resulted in up to 18 million to 22 million fewer metric tons of grain being exported from Ukraine and Russia as of this writing.

The coming Ukrainian harvest and exports will likely be the lowest in the past decade

Based on interviews with growers and on local data, we have modeled the potential harvest for each of Ukraine’s oblasts (administrative divisions). In sum, we estimate that crop production in Ukraine will decline by 35 to 45 percent in the next harvesting season. The main reasons are reduced harvest area due to ongoing military actions and land mines, farmers’ lack of liquidity (due to the inability to ship a large part of last year’s harvest), decreased yields due to reduced access to fertilizers, disrupted timing, less advanced plant protection, and ripple effects from increased diesel and fertilizer costs.

On top of farming challenges, export logistics may continue to be a challenge. Due to these combined factors, exports from Ukraine are likely to decrease by a total of 30 million to 44 million metric tons for the 2022–23 marketing year from a prewar baseline.

What happens in other countries could further reduce global trade volumes

Despite the good harvest that is likely this summer and fall, Russian yields may be lower in upcoming seasons due to global trade restrictions. Hybrid seeds, plant protection products, and, to a lesser extent, machinery and software might be subject to import bans, primarily impacting wheat output.

Fertilizer shortages and higher prices for fertilizers are also expected to reduce yields in countries that depend heavily on fertilizer imports, such as Brazil. This will likely further decrease the volume of grain on the world market.

What other exporting countries do could either add more grain to the global supply or further reduce it. On the one hand, continued or even further trade restrictions could exacerbate global scarcity, while high harvests and loosening reserves could dampen the impact. Climate events may also affect the delicate balance. It is unknown which scenario will prevail.

Overall consequences are likely to be more pronounced than in recent, comparable crises

We face a context in which consumer behavior has been gradually undergoing a paradigm shift, producing more global demand for protein and biofuels at the same time that climate change has introduced more risk to the agricultural sector. The food supply chain is increasingly interconnected, reliance on trade is high, and stocks are low and concentrated in a handful of countries. Oil and fertilizer prices, logistics costs, and the number of trade restrictions in place are close to the highest they have been in the past decade, and the changing climate is having a negative impact on crops.

Some countries are positioned to weather disruptions to a system that requires exquisite balance. Others are less so: highly vulnerable countries account for 18 percent of the global population and 41 percent of the world’s undernourished population. 17 The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2019: Safeguarding against economic slowdowns and downturns , Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Fund for Agricultural Development, World Food Programme, and World Health Organization, July 2019; Total population data, World Bank, accessed July 25, 2022. In 2020, 811 million people worldwide suffered from high levels of malnutrition or undernourishment. 18 The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2021 , Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, October 2021.

Impact by country varies—and is potentially devastating for some

While high global food prices will affect all countries, some are more exposed than others (Exhibit 3). Some, including China, the United States, and countries within the European Union, are relatively well protected. They have high local production, high stock levels, and high purchasing power.

But numerous countries, including Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Yemen, are highly vulnerable. They rely heavily on grain imports, have limited stocks, and have low purchasing power. These countries may be hit hard by price increases. More than 1.4 billion people live in such areas, mostly in Africa and Asia; if the global shortage continues and countries deplete their reserves, this figure could increase to about 1.9 billion people.

The picture is even gloomier when considering some countries’ ability to cope with the fiscal and social consequences of their vulnerability. In many nations, local currencies have devalued sharply in 2022, making US dollar–denominated imported commodities such as wheat and oil even more costly for locals. Largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, these countries are already experiencing higher-than-usual budget deficits and levels of unemployment. As food supplies constrict, these nations will face elevated inflation, which will exacerbate budgetary stress as they attempt to protect their populations from rising food prices. If they cannot do so, malnutrition levels could rise.

Potential consequences

Past food shortages have resulted in consequences such as the following:

• Inflation: Consumer prices increase due to tightened supply, high input and transportation costs, and speculative effects.
• Budgetary and fiscal stress: Increased pressure on financial and fiscal systems to handle inflation, ensure sufficient trade, and provide subsidies to the neediest. These efforts are often hampered by increased external debt and slower GDP growth.
• Malnutrition and hunger: Human suffering increases, especially for the most vulnerable populations, due to higher prices and, to a lesser extent, shortages of actual supplies.

Similar effects—as well as other economic and social difficulties—are possible in the current situation. But this time, the governments of some vulnerable countries may have less ability to cope with constrained supply than they did before other crises, including the Arab Spring and the COVID-19 pandemic (Exhibit 4).

Overall risk to the food system may surpass contemporary crises

The pandemic has depleted countries’ budgets and currency reserves and sent their debts to record levels, making them less resilient in the face of price hikes. Food purchases represent a larger-than-usual share of consumer spending, and unemployment is high in many countries; if governments can’t dampen the shock, households will have no choice but to dedicate more of their budgets to buying food. In this context, even a slight disruption in supply could substantially disturb global food prices and societies’ abilities to cope with them.

When examining the conditions that were present leading up to the 2007–08 global food crisis and the 2010–11 food price hike that contributed to the Arab Spring, we observe even higher risks to the global food system today.

Swift mitigations may help avoid the worst outcomes

Stakeholders around the world may be able to take actions to help avoid the gloomiest scenarios becoming reality. In the short term, three fundamental steps can help reduce risks:

• unblock and de-risk Black Sea logistic routes
• reduce trade restrictions and release buffer stocks; to rebalance global supply, individual countries need to increase the supply of grain traded on the world market
• provide financial aid to the most impacted areas and populations

While thinking about how to mitigate the current crisis, stakeholders should plan for how to avoid the next one. Both governments and players in the food agriculture value chain need to improve how they manage supply–demand shocks. Resilience in the face of the multiple risks highlighted here is essential, particularly in an era when climate change is provoking more extreme events, such as droughts. Though such disruptions may occur in a specific part of the world, prices can skyrocket globally as a result—as the Black Sea situation has so aptly demonstrated.

Fundamental changes to global behavior, coming from both the public and private sectors, could boost transparency and resilience to the global food system. Potential steps to take include the following:

• sustainably transform agriculture to boost yields, especially in importing countries with fast-growing populations
• find ways to reduce global food waste and optimize use of land for food and biomass production
• accelerate the development  and adoption of alternative meat  and encourage the consumption of the most efficient proteins

Historically, supply shocks within the food system have led to inflation, lower fiscal strength, and malnutrition—and in some cases, to periods of political instability and violence. Depending on the duration and severity of the war, the caloric requirements of 250 million people could be lacking from the global supply. These sobering statistics underscore the magnitude and urgency of the situation.

Daniel Aminetzah is a senior partner in McKinsey’s New Jersey office; Artem Baroyan is a consultant in the Kyiv office, where Oleksandr Kravchenko is a partner; Nicolas Denis is a partner in the Brussels office, where Sarah Dewilde is a consultant; Nelson Ferreira is a senior partner in the São Paolo office; Julien Revellat is a partner in the Paris office; and Ivan Verlan is a partner in the Philadelphia office.

This article was edited by Katy McLaughlin, a senior editor in the Southern California office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

The Next Normal – The future of food: Meatless?

How AI can unlock a $127B opportunity by reducing food waste

Will the world’s breadbaskets become less reliable?

• Supply Chain Management
• Food Supply

Global Food Security Strategies, Issues and Challenges

• August 2023
• The Eurasia Proceedings of Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics 22:33-47
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Universiti Teknologi MARA

• Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Septinus Saa
• Nur Ezatul Amirah Binti Nor Le

• Regina Garai Abdullah
• Neilson Ilan Mersat
• Swee-Kiong Wong

• Tapsir Serin
• Engku Elini Engku Ariff

• Ivar Vågsholm

• Muhammad Guntur
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

FOOD SECURITY:

Strengthening Africa’s food systems

Hailemariam Dessalegn

Ahunna Eziakonwa

Food security in Africa: Current efforts and challenges

Former Prime Minister of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Board Chair, Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa

Africa’s food systems are at a crossroad. Several challenges and exogenous shocks— including extreme weather events and climate change, recurrent outbreaks of pests and diseases, limited availability and adoption of yield-increasing technologies—have exposed fragilities of Africa’s food systems, undermining the ability to meet the food demand of a burgeoning population.

“Africa’s food systems must become more resilient and guarantee access to healthy and affordable diets for all. Tested systemic models have demonstrated that agriculture transformation is possible in input and output market systems, and that it can be scaled across the continent.”

More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine have disrupted the supply chain for agricultural inputs, fuel, and food. The state of food security in the continent is worsening, with over 20 percent of the continent’s population (roughly 257 million people) undernourished. 1 Africa bears the heaviest burden of malnutrition, 2 while the African Union’s Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Biennial Review report (2019-2021) further reveals that Africa is not on track to meet its goal of ending hunger by 2025. 3 In 2022, over 20 million people and at least 10 million children faced severe food shortage in Africa due to crop failure and four consecutive dry seasons. 4 East Africa alone lost close to 2 million livestock in a year due to recurrent drought and low response capacity. 5 Moreover, projections by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa point to Africa’s annual food imports increasing significantly; by a factor of seven from $15 billion in 2018 to $110 billion by 2025, and by a factor of three from the current $43 billion. 6

Current efforts by AGRA and other African-led institutions

Given these worrying food security trends, Africa’s food systems must become more resilient and guarantee access to healthy and affordable diets for all. Tested systemic models have demonstrated that agriculture transformation is possible in input and output market systems, and that it can be scaled across the continent. Besides engaging in immediate recovery efforts, such as our $11 million investments to tackle the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) has supported African countries to build capacities for the design of agricultural sector strategies and evidence-based policy reforms. At a country level, AGRA has made significant strides in helping resource national agriculture programs, working closely with ministries of agriculture to design 11 flagship programs. Some of the early dividends of this work include:

• Enhanced capacity of African governments to design and implement policies, and hence respond to emergent agricultural and food systems challenges. AGRA recognizes that “business as usual” is no longer sustainable and has therefore developed a program called “sustainable farming” to ensure that farmers concomitantly achieve three major livelihood objectives, namely: Food security, protecting ecosystem services, and resilience to climate and other shocks. It employs context-specific farming system solutions with emphasis on improving water and nutrient efficiency of crops, replenishing over extracted nutrients through application of judicious amounts of fertilizer, and diversifying the farming systems with climate resilient crops and management practices.
• To improve climate resilience, AGRA invested in the development of African scientists and African research institutions. AGRA has thus far trained more than 500 national research system breeders at PhD and MSc level, to create local capacity of genetic development.
• Responding to the climate risks, Africa has capacity to breed and release varieties of crop that are climate adaptive; early maturing, and drought tolerant like cassava, maize, rice, groundnuts, cowpeas, high iron beans, and b-carotene rich sweet potato that can be scaled.
• Recognizing the malfunctional extension system in Africa, the introduction of private-sector led village-based agricultural advisors’ engagement has helped to reduce post-harvest losses by about 30 percent in countries such as Mali, Mozambique, and Nigeria.
• Together with the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), AGRA is building the Regional Food Balance Sheet (RFBS) to address the dearth of reliable, timely, and accurate data and guide food and nutrition related decision making in Africa.
• Together with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Commission and other partners, AGRA has established the ECOWAS Rice Observatory (ERO) with respective national chapters, where rice-related matters of trade policy, market development, and farmer support will be discussed, and solutions identified.
• Within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, AGRA has established Chinyanja Triangle Soybean Trade initiative and linked a total of 22,179 smallholder farmers to regional trade markets, supplying over 7,070 million metric tons (MT) of soybeans valued at more than $4 million unlocking trade financing valued at $2.5 million which will support aggregators to source soybeans from smallholder farmers at competitive prices.

Critical next steps

Beyond this progress, strategic and urgent measures are still needed to enhance the resilience of Africa’s food systems and bolster the ability to deliver on food security and nutrition objectives. Some of these actions include:

• Accelerating the adoption and implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) in order to avert food supply disruptions, as experienced during the pandemic.
• Providing an enabling policy environment for the financial sector to supply more business and financial tools to Agri-SMEs.
• Supporting the establishment of Strategic Grain Reserves (SGRs) as a buffer against unexpected exogenous shocks. Social Protection Programs are also priorities and should be implemented with clear graduation targets for the beneficiaries.
• Moving towards sustainable farming: Although Africa owns about 60 percent of the world’s potential land for agricultural expansion, 7 by 2050, about 45 percent of the additional food should come from sustainable intensification (i.e., producing more food and fiber per unit of land and water).
• African food systems should be diversified, moving from the major global commodities: Rice, wheat, and maize; and more investment must be made towards African indigenous and resilient crops including sorghum, millets, teff, and cassava.
• Increasing investments in market infrastructure and other incentive mechanisms to support African farmers to adopt climate smart policies, technologies, and practices, including afforestation and rehabilitation of degraded lands, wetlands, and protected areas to enhance carbon sequestration and reduce carbon losses.
• Investment in irrigation infrastructure is critical. Rainfed food production sits at the center of 70 percent of Africa’s livelihoods. This heavy reliance on rainfed systems exposes farmers to recurrent drought and other extreme events, hence water-centered adaptation must be a priority for Africa.
• Increased availability of clean and renewable energy for rural Africa, the absence of which is currently contributing hugely to deforestation and climate change exposure.
• Institutional capacity: Africa’s level of exposure and vulnerability is connected to its low institutional capacity and governance systems. We need to ensure that national systems have the capacity to convert climate policies and commitments into action.
• Early warning systems and associated climate advisories that are demand-driven and context specific, combined with climate change literacy and awareness, can help make the difference between coping and informed adaptation responses.

Securing Africa’s food sovereignty

United Nations Assistant Secretary General, UNDP Director, Regional Bureau for Africa

The war in Ukraine laid bare a vexing and persistent structural vulnerability in most African countries. 8 The continent, with 60 percent of the world’s unused arable land, cannot feed itself because of low yields, poor farm management practices, and distortions in agricultural markets. 9 Consequently, the continent is overly dependent on food and fertilizer imports to feed its people. Africa’s farmers find it increasingly difficult to enhance productivity, create jobs, and boost wealth in the agricultural sector. 10 The Ukraine crisis should be a wake-up call. African countries must embrace a food systems approach to scale-up food production, overhaul farm management practices, and improve food marketing to move beyond food security and attain food sovereignty. 11 This will not only ensure the availability of affordable food, but it will also help countries attain a number of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including: SDG #2 zero hunger, SDG #3 good health and wellbeing, SDG #5 gender equality, SDG #8 decent work and economic growth, and SDG #10 reduced inequalities.

The 27th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP27) highlighted the challenges Africa continues to face with regards to tackling the effects of climate change. While we are buoyed by the groundbreaking decision to establish a loss and damage fund, the failure to reach global consensus on tangible action that will reduce emissions reminds us of the difficult road ahead. 12 Without this thorny issue being resolved, our efforts to attain food sovereignty will remain stymied.

Food sovereignty speaks to the ability of a country to feed itself. In Africa, this must involve increasing production and ensuring that farming systems are more resilient to price and environmental shocks. The 2006 Abuja Declaration of African agriculture ministers called for an increase in Africa’s average fertilizer application rates from 20 kg/ha to 50 kg/ha to boost production. Africa’s average application rates are still at 2006 levels, while the global average is slightly over 130 kg/ha. [UNDP. 2022. “Towards Food Security and Sovereignty in Africa.” Regional Bureau for Africa Working Paper. United Nations Development Programme.] While it is evident that fertilizers are not the proverbial silver bullet, it is clear that better farming practices could be a crucial first step in Africa’s journey towards food sovereignty. Recent UNDP research suggests that meeting the 2006 Abuja target could more than double Africa’s food production in a couple of years.

In order to accomplish this, Africa does not need to be overly dependent on fertilizer imports from Ukraine and Russia. The continent produces sufficient potash and ammonia to sustain a thriving fertilizer industry. In addition, existing fertilizer blending facilities (in 19 African countries) and manufacturing plants (in 10 African countries) operate well below capacity. Concerted investments in infrastructure, technology, and skills, including through public-private partnerships, could boost fertilizer production. Leveraging the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) could also widen and deepen Africa’s market and facilitate the availability of affordable fertilizer across Africa. In Nigeria, for example, if fertilizer-producing plants were working at full capacity (Dangote’s full capacity is 3 million tons and Indorama’s 1.4 million tons), the country could meet its own 1.5 million tons of fertilizer consumption, while also meeting the rest of the region’s needs.

“Food sovereignty speaks to the ability of a country to feed itself. In Africa, this must involve increasing production and ensuring that farming systems are more resilient to price and environmental shocks.”

A case for food sovereignty

Food sovereignty in Africa is not just about production and trade. It is also about resilience and ensuring that the continent’s food production is not held hostage by natural and market shocks. The use of technology, fertilizer, and improved farm management practices could revolutionize Africa’s food sector. In addition, African countries must take steps to reverse their dependence on food aid and food imports. Free or cheap food imports have made local food production in Africa less competitive and, in turn, shifted consumer preferences away from local brands to foreign ones. As a result, Africa is now the most food-import-dependent region in the world, dedicating more than 13 percent of its import expenditure to buying food and agricultural commodities. This contributes to overall fiscal stress.

Revolutionizing food production in Africa will improve the continent’s development prospects and build resilience. Using fertilizers produced in Africa and fully integrating research from Africa’s agricultural research institutes could help the continent attain food sovereignty by minimizing imports. This would make Africa’s food markets more resilient during global shocks and prevent the pass-through of global price shocks into domestic inflation. It would also have the added benefit of relieving stress on scarce foreign exchange earnings.

Assuming Africa had adhered to the 2006 Abuja Declaration and gradually increased fertilizer application rates from 20 kg to 50 kg per hectare between 2010 and 2020, food production could have grown cumulatively by 209 percent instead of just 24 percent. Such an increase would have had a salutary impact on reducing hunger and addressing malnourishment.

The increased agricultural productivity would also significantly impact women and girls, helping Africa make more progress on SDG 5 regarding gender equality. Research by the Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that women comprise 43 percent of the agricultural labor-force in developing countries and are mainly concentrated in harvesting and weeding.7 Boosting food production could therefore also contribute to decent work and economic growth (SDG 8), especially for women and girls.

Policy options

Some African countries are already improving food production and attaining food sovereignty. Malawi’s 2006-2010 agricultural development program, which has been described as “pro-poor,” increased yields, raised incomes, and made the crops more resilient to drought. 13 Ethiopia’s 2005 productive safety net policy program (PSNP) targeted households and communities that are chronically food insecure and offered insurance, as well as investment in public goods such as soil and water conservation.

“Free or cheap food imports have made local food production in Africa less competitive and, in turn, shifted consumer preferences away from local brands to foreign ones. As a result, Africa is now the most food-import-dependent region in the world, dedicating more than 13 percent of its import expenditure to buying food and agricultural commodities.”

Despite progress in a few countries, Africa needs coordinated policy changes and sustained action to increase food production, improve distribution, ensure affordability, and reduce dependency. 14 African leaders should prioritize incentives to increase domestic and regional food supply. This will include using appropriate inputs to boost and scale up production to cater to national and regional markets. An important goal in this context is the full operationalization of the AfCFTA to facilitate the free movement of labor, inputs, and food across the one-Africa market. From a policy perspective, Africa must shift the narrative from food supply to developing resilient food systems . 15 Africa’s default must no longer be only trying to address food availability. Policies must focus on ensuring that the entire continental food value chain is robust, profitable, and leaves no one (and no community) behind.

Africa’s development partners also have a critical role to play. 15 While temporary aid is needed, the primary need is to fully support programs that de-risk and boost critical investments in Africa’s food sector. This will facilitate financial and technical resources to modernize food production, storage, and marketing in Africa. Africa’s development partners can also promote efforts to maximize regional food trade, by reducing disincentives and inefficiencies in global markets—such as dumping, subsidies, and tariff structures that would disadvantage or discourage domestic production in African countries.

Africa has a long history of food dependency, a legacy of food-aid policies and low domestic productive capacity. 15 As a result, much of its food is imported, implying that any major global shock can lead to severe trade disruptions, increased hunger, and pass-through inflation, eroding both household and public budgets. Africa’s food sovereignty pathway involves enhancing agricultural productivity by improving farm management techniques.

UNDP analysis shows that Africa could easily produce the fertilizer inputs it needs, and that meeting the 2006 Abuja Declaration targets would boost food supply, while positively impacting the SDGs. 15

Ensuring Africa’s food sovereignty—implying increased availability and affordability—is key to the continent’s own economic sovereignty, sustainable development, and achieving the SDGs. 15

• 1. Armstrong, Martin. 2022. “A fifth of people in Africa are suffering from chronic hunger. This map shows where the situation is most severe.” World Economic Forum. August 2022.
• 2. FAO. 2022. “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022.” The Food and Agriculture Organization.
• 3. AU. 2021. “3rd CAADP Biennial Review Report.” The African Union.
• 4. UNICEF. 2022. “At least 10 million children face severe drought in the Horn of Africa.” United Nations Children’s Fund.
• 5. Bloomberg. 2022. “’On Brink of Catastrophe’: Horn of Africa Drought Kills Over 1.5 million Livestock.” Bloomberg. February 2022.
• 6. UNECA. 2021. “Regional Dialogue: African Food Systems: Seventh Session of the Africa Regional Forum on Sustainable Development.” Background paper. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. March 2021.
• 7. Wim Plaizier. 2016. “2 truths about Africa’s agriculture”. World Economic Forum.
• 8. UNDP. 2022. “The impact of the war in Ukraine on sustainable development in Africa.” United Nations Development Programme.
• 9. UNECA. 2013. “Eighth African Development Forum (ADF-VIII) Governing and Harnessing Natural Resources for Africa’s Development.” United Nations Economic Commission for Africa.
• 10. UNDP. 2022. “The impact of the war in Ukraine on sustainable development in Africa.” United Na¬tions Development Programme.
• 11. UNDP. 2022. “Towards Food Security and Sovereignty in Africa.” Regional Bureau for Africa Working Paper. United Nations Development Programme
• 12. World Economic Forum. 2022. “What did COP27 accomplish and what actions can we expect as a result?” World Economic Forum.
• 13. Arndt, Channing, Karl Pauw, and James Thurlow. 2015. “The Economy-wide Impacts and Risks of Malawi’s Farm Input Subsidy Program.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Volume 98, Issue 3 p. 962-980.
• 14. UNDP. 2022. “Towards Food Security and Sovereignty in Africa.” Regional Bureau for Africa Working Paper. United Nations Development Programme.

By Jeanine Milly Cooper

Liberian Minister of Agriculture Jeanine Mill Cooper explains how the country is increasing the availability of rice.

By Danielle Resnick

Danielle Resnick provides recommendations to help mitigate the recurring food price crises in Africa and enhance food security.

By Satu Santala

Satu Santala makes the case for greater investment and innovation in Africa’s food systems.

Next Chapter

03 | Education and Skills Equipping a labor force for the future

Foresight Africa: Top Priorities for the Continent in 2023

On January 30, AGI hosted a Foresight Africa launch featuring a high-level panel of leading Africa experts to offer insights on regional trends along with recommendations for national governments, regional organizations, multilateral institutions, the private sector, and civil society actors as they forge ahead in 2022.

Africa in Focus

What should be the top priority for Africa in 2023?

BY ALOYSIUS UCHE ORDU

Aloysius Uche Ordu introduces Foresight Africa 2023, which outlines top priorities for the year ahead and offers recommendations for supporting Africa at a time of heightened global turbulence.

Foresight Africa Podcast

The Foresight Africa podcast celebrates Africa’s dynamism and explores strategies for broadening the benefits of growth to all people of Africa.

• Media Relations
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

• Magazine of the International Sociological Association
• Available in multiple languages

Global Dialogue is available in multiple languages! Select the language to download the issue.

Food Security Discourse: Challenges for the 21st Century

by Mustafa Koç

December 04, 2018

Food security emerged as a discourse during the global financial crisis in the mid-1970s as an international priority to address availability and accessibility of food for all. One of the most familiar definitions of food security was provided by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) at the World Food Summit in 1996. According to this definition, food security “exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.”

Despite its wide recognition by international organizations such as FAO, food security has been a confusing concept with multiple definitions and differing priorities that has continued to change over the years. The conceptual perplexity of food security discourse reflects competing imaginations of how access to food should be managed in market economies as well as changes in the specific ways the food system is organized, i.e., the policies and practices that define conditions of food provisioning in the latter half of the twentieth century.

Since the 1980s, the conceptualization of food security has gone through a revision in an environment of market liberalism, intensification of global economic relations, and restructuring of the economy and the state. Neoliberal policies that were adopted as a solution to the financial crisis of the 1970s led to cuts in spending on social programs and changes in the conditions of work, a shrinking of the role of the state in the economy, deregulation, privatization, and liberalization of trade. These changes led to a decline in unionized jobs in the manufacturing sector, and precarious and part-time employment mostly in the informal and service sectors. The decline in social programs made the situation worse, resulting in higher rates of poverty and food insecurity.

The neoliberal food security discourse included a shift from the rights-based language of the earlier era to a market-oriented one that identified food as a commodity, and food insecurity as a personal failure rather than a failure of the agri-food system. A 1993 World Bank document clearly reflected this shift: “In practice, however, food is a commodity.” As the social functions of the welfare state shrank and national social programs were downloaded to provincial and local governments, social assistance and care functions were increasingly left to civil society organizations (CSOs) and families. Philanthropic organizations, such as food banks, started filling the gap left from government-run social programs. First emerging in the United States in 1967, food banks lacked transparency and accountability, unlike social welfare agencies, yet began spreading across the world as important mechanisms of social security to provide “surplus food” to “surplus populations.”

In a market economy, products that have been produced for human consumption but cannot be sold in the market before their best before dates become surplus. Redistribution of the surplus food has been promoted as a solution to deal with food waste and food poverty. This seemingly noble concern, however, tends to ignore the role of government cuts in social assistance and the marketing imperatives of the agri-food companies in the rise of food insecurity. While it is true that up to 40% of food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted between field and plate and reducing this waste could allow us to feed all the food insecure in the world, the causes of food insecurity are not due to shortages of food, but due to inequalities in access. At present, most of the world’s grains and oilseeds are used as animal feed, biofuels, and industrial products such as high-fructose corn syrup, instead of food. The reduction of wasted food thus requires a critical re-examination of how the profit imperatives of the agri-food system and subsidies in certain sectors are simultaneously creating enormous surpluses of both food and hunger.

Progress was not universal

At the World Food Summit in 1996, a commitment was made to reduce the number of undernourished people by half by 2015. At that time, the estimated number of food insecure was 799 million. In 2009, the estimated number of food insecure reached 1,023 billion. The FAO responded to this by changing their methodology in 2012. Even with this new methodology, the number of undernourished people could be reduced only to 815 million in 2015. Moreover, in Africa and the Middle East, the numbers of undernourished people show an increase due to wars and armed conflict. In recent decades, armed conflicts in different parts of the world have turned millions of people into food-insecure surplus populations. According to FAO 2017 estimates, about 60% of the 815 million chronically food-insecure and malnourished people in the world live in countries affected by conflict. About 75% of children suffering stunted growth as a result of malnutrition live in war-torn countries. The destruction of domestic economies, infrastructure, and major state institutions due to war has also caused millions of people to become refugees, while attempts to contain population movements within their respective regions have turned neighboring countries into refugee camps. The 6 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan and Iran, and the 5.6 million Syrians in Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Egypt are only two of the recent examples of mass regional population movements. While refugees suffer long-term and chronic food insecurity and malnutrition, they also become a source of food insecurity and political instability in the host countries.

Future threats to food security

By 2050, the world population is expected to reach 9 billion. As the developing economies adopt the wasteful consumption patterns of wealthier countries and armed conflicts across the world create new waves of refugees, the level of food insecurity can get worse. So far, we have relied on finding ways of increasing our productive capacity and improving the access to food for vulnerable segments of the population. Attempts to increase productive capacity through industrial farming methods led to increasing concentration of ownership in the hands of more efficient farmers and pushed millions of peasants and small farmers to the cities. Increasing use of agrochemicals also created major environmental problems, such as soil degradation, air and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity. Agriculture contributes to an estimated 13% of the greenhouse gas emissions. Increasing impacts of climate change create another threat to production capacity around the world. While seeking new policies to improve the availability and accessibility of food and reduction of loss and waste, we may also need to question our diets, consumption patterns, and the organization of the agri-food system that has prevailed throughout the last century.

The emerging food sovereignty movement has been connecting farmers, workers, and eaters in an effort to work towards an alternative food system. While food sovereignty shares some insights with earlier discourses of food security, with its emphasis on the role of the states in defining conditions of food provisioning within national/local boundaries, it also includes a new sense of resistance to globalization. Different from the neoliberal interpretations of food security, the food sovereignty discourse recognizes food as a human right; underlines the importance of ownership and control of land, water, and genetic resources by local/indigenous peoples; emphasizes sustainability and resilience instead of efficiency in the production process; and rejects the use of food as a weapon. Like food security, food sovereignty discourse is also dynamic and fluid, shaped by changing political and economic histories. It will be interesting to watch what role food sovereignty plays in reconstructing public perception of food system priorities and redefining food security.

by Mustafa Koç , Ryerson University, Canada and member of ISA Research Committees on Sociology of Migration (RC31) and Agriculture and Food (RC40) < [email protected] >

Read more about Facing Poverty

“Charity Economy”: In the Shadow of the Welfare State

by Fabian Kessl

Why Are There More Poor Women in Latin America?

by Juliana Martínez Franzoni

Post-Bailout Welfare: New Landscapes of Poverty in Greece

by Vassilis Arapoglou

Key Features of Post-Apartheid Poverty

by Joshua Budlender

This issue is not available yet in this language. Request to be notified when the issue is available in your language.

If you prefer, you can access previous issues available in your language:

Food security and nutrition and sustainable agriculture

Related sdgs, end hunger, achieve food security and improve ....

Description

Publications.

As the world population continues to grow, much more effort and innovation will be urgently needed in order to sustainably increase agricultural production, improve the global supply chain, decrease food losses and waste, and ensure that all who are suffering from hunger and malnutrition have access to nutritious food. Many in the international community believe that it is possible to eradicate hunger within the next generation, and are working together to achieve this goal.

World leaders at the 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) reaffirmed the right of everyone to have access to safe and nutritious food, consistent with the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger. The UN Secretary-General’s Zero Hunger Challenge launched at Rio+20 called on governments, civil society, faith communities, the private sector, and research institutions to unite to end hunger and eliminate the worst forms of malnutrition.

The Zero Hunger Challenge has since garnered widespread support from many member States and other entities. It calls for:

• Zero stunted children under the age of two
• 100% access to adequate food all year round
• All food systems are sustainable
• 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income
• Zero loss or waste of food

The Sustainable Development Goal to “End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture” (SDG2) recognizes the inter linkages among supporting sustainable agriculture, empowering small farmers, promoting gender equality, ending rural poverty, ensuring healthy lifestyles, tackling climate change, and other issues addressed within the set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals in the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

Beyond adequate calories intake, proper nutrition has other dimensions that deserve attention, including micronutrient availability and healthy diets. Inadequate micronutrient intake of mothers and infants can have long-term developmental impacts. Unhealthy diets and lifestyles are closely linked to the growing incidence of non-communicable diseases in both developed and developing countries.

Adequate nutrition during the critical 1,000 days from beginning of pregnancy through a child’s second birthday merits a particular focus. The Scaling-Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement has made great progress since its creation five years ago in incorporating strategies that link nutrition to agriculture, clean water, sanitation, education, employment, social protection, health care and support for resilience.

Extreme poverty and hunger are predominantly rural, with smallholder farmers and their families making up a very significant proportion of the poor and hungry. Thus, eradicating poverty and hunger are integrally linked to boosting food production, agricultural productivity and rural incomes.

Agriculture systems worldwide must become more productive and less wasteful. Sustainable agricultural practices and food systems, including both production and consumption, must be pursued from a holistic and integrated perspective.

Land, healthy soils, water and plant genetic resources are key inputs into food production, and their growing scarcity in many parts of the world makes it imperative to use and manage them sustainably. Boosting yields on existing agricultural lands, including restoration of degraded lands, through sustainable agricultural practices would also relieve pressure to clear forests for agricultural production. Wise management of scarce water through improved irrigation and storage technologies, combined with development of new drought-resistant crop varieties, can contribute to sustaining drylands productivity.

Halting and reversing land degradation will also be critical to meeting future food needs. The Rio+20 outcome document calls for achieving a land-degradation-neutral world in the context of sustainable development. Given the current extent of land degradation globally, the potential benefits from land restoration for food security and for mitigating climate change are enormous. However, there is also recognition that scientific understanding of the drivers of desertification, land degradation and drought is still evolving.

There are many elements of traditional farmer knowledge that, enriched by the latest scientific knowledge, can support productive food systems through sound and sustainable soil, land, water, nutrient and pest management, and the more extensive use of organic fertilizers.

An increase in integrated decision-making processes at national and regional levels are needed to achieve synergies and adequately address trade-offs among agriculture, water, energy, land and climate change.

Given expected changes in temperatures, precipitation and pests associated with climate change, the global community is called upon to increase investment in research, development and demonstration of technologies to improve the sustainability of food systems everywhere. Building resilience of local food systems will be critical to averting large-scale future shortages and to ensuring food security and good nutrition for all.

State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020

Updates for many countries have made it possible to estimate hunger in the world with greater accuracy this year. In particular, newly accessible data enabled the revision of the entire series of undernourishment estimates for China back to 2000, resulting in a substantial downward shift of the seri...

Food and Agriculture

Our planet faces multiple and complex challenges in the 21st century. The new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development commits the international community to act together to surmount them and transform our world for today’s and future generations....

Global Blue Growth Initiative and Small Island Developing States (SIDS)

Three-quarters of the Earth’s surface is covered by oceans and seas which are an engine for global economic growth and a key source of food security. The global ocean economic activity is estimated to be USD 3–5 trillion. Ninety percent of global trade moves by marine transport. Over 30 percent of g...

Food Security and Nutrition in Small Island Developing States (SIDS)

The outcome document of Rio+20, “The Future We Want” (United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012) acknowledged that SIDS remains a special case for sustainable development. Building on the Barbados Programme of Action and the Mauritius Strategy, the document calls for the conv...

FAO and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals

The Sustainable Development Goals offer a vision of a fairer, more prosperous, peaceful and sustainable world in which no one is left behind. In food - the way it is grown, produced, consumed, traded, transported, stored and marketed - lies the fundamental connection between people and the planet, ...

FAO Strategy for Partnerships with the Private Sector

The fight against hunger can only be won in partnership with governments and other non-state actors, among which the private sector plays a fundamental role. FAO is actively pursuing these partnerships to meet the Zero Hunger Challenge together with UN partners and other committed stakeholders. We ...

FAO Strategy for Partnerships with Civil Society Organizations

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) is convinced that hunger and malnutrition can be eradicated in our lifetime. To meet the Zero Hunger Challenge, political commitment and major alliances with key stakeholders are crucial. Only through effective collaboration with go...

Emerging Issues for Small Island Developing States

The 2012 UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Global Environmental Issues primarily identified emerging environmental issues and possible solutions on a global scale and perspective. In 2013, UNEP carried out a similar exercise to identify priority emerging environmental issues that are of concern to ...

Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom, We recognize that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for su...

Good practices in building innovative rural institutions to increase food security

Continued population growth, urbanization and rising incomes are likely to continue to put pressure on food demand. International prices for most agricultural commodities are set to remain at 2010 levels or higher, at least for the next decade (OECD-FAO, 2010). Small-scale producers in many developi...

Farmer’s organizations in Bangladesh: a mapping and capacity assessment

Farmers’ organizations (FOs) in Bangladesh have the potential to be true partners in, rather than “beneficiaries” of, the development process. FOs bring to the table a deep knowledge of the local context, a nuanced understanding of the needs of their communities and strong social capital. Increasing...

Post 2015 and the SDGs. Nourishing People, Nurturing the Planet.

FAO and the Post-2015 development agenda issue papers. Persistently high levels of hunger and malnutrition – 795 million chronically hungry people in the world in 2014–2016 – and unsustainable human ativity on the earth’s carrying capacity present a major challenge for agriculture. To meet the g...

2024 SDG Global Business Forum

&nbsp;The 2024 SDG Global Business Forum will take place virtually as a special event alongside the 2024 High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), the United Nations central platform for the follow-up and review of the SDGs. The Forum will place special emphasis on the SDGs under

Expert Group Meeting on SDG2 and its interlinkages with other SDGs

The theme of the&nbsp;2024 High-Level Political Forum&nbsp;(HLPF) is “Reinforcing the 2030 Agenda and eradicating poverty in times of multiple crises: the effective delivery of sustainable, resilient and innovative solutions”. The 2024 HLPF will have an in-depth review of Sustainable Development Goa

Expert Group Meetings for 2024 HLPF Thematic Review

The theme of the 2024 High Level Political Forum (HLPF) is “Reinforcing the 2030 Agenda and eradicating poverty in times of multiple crisis: the effective delivery of sustainable, resilient and innovative solutions”. The 2024 HLPF will have an in-depth review of SDG 1 on No Poverty, SDG 2 on Zero Hu

International Workshop on “Applications of Juncao Technology and its contribution to alleviating poverty, promoting employment and protecting the environment”

According to the United Nations Food Systems Summit that was held in 2021, many of the world’s food systems are fragile and not fulfilling the right to adequate food for all. Hunger and malnutrition are on the rise again. According to FAO’s “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2023

Second Regional Workshop on “Applications of Juncao Technology and its Contribution to the Achievement of Sustainable Agriculture and the Sustainable Development Goals in Africa” 18 - 19 December 2023

Ⅰ. Purpose of the Workshop At the halfway point of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the application of science and technology in developing sustainable agricultural practices has the potential to accelerate transformative change in support of the Sustainable Development Goals. In that r

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (SOFI) 2023 Launch

On&nbsp;12 July 2023 from 10 AM to 12 PM (EDT), FAO and its co-publishing partners will be launching, for the fifth time, the&nbsp;State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World&nbsp;(SOFI) report at a Special Event in the margins of the ECOSOC High-Level Political Forum (HLPF). The 2023 edition

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022 (SOFI) Launch

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World is an annual flagship report to inform on progress towards ending hunger, achieving food security and improving nutrition and to provide in-depth analysis on key challenges for achieving this goal in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021 (SOFI)

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021 (SOFI 2021) report presents the first evidence-based global assessment of chronic food insecurity in the year the COVID-19 pandemic emerged and spread across the globe. The SOFI 2021 report will also focus on complementary food system solu

Committee on World Food Security (CFS 46)

Ministerial meeting on food security and climate adaptation in small island developing states.

The proposed meeting will offer SIDS Ministers and Ambassadors the opportunity to explore the implications of the SAMOA Pathway as it relates to food security and nutrition and climate change adaptation. The ultimate objective is to enhance food security, health and wellbeing in SIDS. Ministers an

• January 2015 SDG 2 SDG2 focuses on ending hunger, achieving food security and improved nutrition and promoting sustainable agriculture. In particular, its targets aims to: end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round by 2030 (2.1); end all forms of malnutrition by 2030, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older persons (2.2.); double,by 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment (2.3); ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality (2.4); by 2020, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and their related wild species, including through soundly managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the national, regional and international levels, and promote access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed (2.5); The alphabetical goals aim to: increase investment in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension services, technology development and plant and livestock gene banks , correct and prevent trade restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets as well as adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets and their derivatives and facilitate timely access to market information, including on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food price volatility.
• January 2014 Rome Decl. on Nutrition and Framework for Action The Second International Conference on Nutrition (ICN2) took place at FAO Headquarters, in Rome in November 2014. The Conference resulted in the Rome Declaration on Nutrition and the Framework for Action, a political commitment document and a flexible policy framework, respectively, aimed at addressing the current major nutrition challenges and identifying priorities for enhanced international cooperation on nutrition.
• January 2012 Future We Want (Para 108-118) In Future We Want, Member States reaffirm their commitments regarding "the right of everyone to have access to safe, sufficient and nutritious food, consistent with the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger". Member States also acknowledge that food security and nutrition has become a pressing global challenge. At Rio +20, the UN Secretary-General’s Zero Hunger Challenge was launched in order to call on governments, civil society, faith communities, the private sector, and research institutions to unite to end hunger and eliminate the worst forms of malnutrition.
• January 2009 UN SG HLTF on Food and Nutrition Security The UN SG HLTF on Food and Nutrition Security was established by the UN SG, Mr Ban Ki-moon in 2008 and since then has aimed at promoting a comprehensive and unified response of the international community to the challenge of achieving global food and nutrition security. It has also been responsible for building joint positions among its members around the five elements of the Zero Hunger Challenge.
• January 2002 Report World Food Summit +5 The World Food Summit +5 adopted a declaration, calling on the international community to fulfill the pledge, made at the original World Food Summit in 1996, to reduce the number of hungry people to about 400 million by 2015.
• January 2000 MDG 1 MDG 1 aims at eradicating extreme poverty and hunger. Its three targets respectively read: halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than $1.25 a day (1.A), achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people (1.B), halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger (1.C).
• January 1996 Rome Decl. on World Food Security The Summit aimed to reaffirm global commitment, at the highest political level, to eliminate hunger and malnutrition, and to achieve sustainable food security for all. Thank to its high visibility, the Summit contributed to raise further awareness on agriculture capacity, food insecurity and malnutrition among decision-makers in the public and private sectors, in the media and with the public at large. It also set the political, conceptual and technical blueprint for an ongoing effort to eradicate hunger at global level with the target of reducing by half the number of undernourished people by no later than the year 2015. The Rome Declaration defined seven commitments as main pillars for the achievement of sustainable food security for all whereas its Plan of Action identified the objectives and actions relevant for practical implementation of these seven commitments.
• January 1992 1st ICN The first International Conference on Nutrition (ICN) convened at the FAO's Headquarters in Rome to identify common strategies and methods to eradicate hunger and malnutrition. The conference was organized by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) and was attended by delegations from 159 countries as well as the European Economic Community, 16 United Nations organizations, 11 intergovernmental organizations, and 144 non-governmental organizations.
• January 1986 Creation of AGROSTAT (now FAOSTAT) Since 1986, AGROSTAT, now known as FAOSTAT, has provided cross sectional data relating to food and agriculture as well as time-series for some 200 countries.
• January 1979 1st World Food Day World Food Day is celebrated each year on 16 October to commemorate the day on which FAO was founded in 1945. Established on the occasion of FAO Twentieth General Conference held in November 1979, the first World Food Day was celebrated in 1981 and was devoted to the theme "Food Comes First".

Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

The meaning of food security, food insecurity in the american perspective, major problems associated with the traditional food systems, american communities affected by food insecurity, my role in the food system.

Even as commercial and peasant farmers continue to increase pressure on farmland for the production of non-food crops, food security continues to dominate major global forums. Global farmlands are gradually losing their historical fertility, food-processing companies are increasingly becoming unstable, and food galleries are becoming emptier.

The issue of food security is a universal dilemma that has struck several nations across the world, even as climate continues to be unpredictable, and the events of hunger and drought continue to occur repeatedly. The intent of this essay is to give an in-depth meaning of food security, the perspective of food insecurity to the case of the United States, the major lapses of the conventional food systems, and the American communities that frequently remain affected by food insecurity.

Food security may refer to the sufficient accessibility of nutritious, safe, and religiously and culturally appropriate food to all the people across the world. Food security may also depict a situation whereby all communities of the world, regardless of their ethnic backgrounds, religious beliefs, political affiliations, and socioeconomic statuses, rightfully enjoy unlimited access to reliable and affordable food that is nutritious and safe for human consumption.

Food security is also a state whereby all the people across the continents are capable of accessing food that is sufficient in quantity and quality, depending on their daily nutritional demands. The concept of quantity applies because food has to be adequate to feed the populations sufficiently. The concept of quality applies because food has to be safe and nutritious.

Despite the United States seeking equitable access to economic food resources and physical food resources, food insecurity in the American perspective comes in a disparity manner. American food insecurity occurs when the vulnerable groups of people in different communities are suffering an acute shortage of ability to have an economic and physical access to safe, nutritious, and religiously and culturally appropriate food.

Food insecurity in America is eminent when children are facing a devastating shortage of adequate food that is nutritious and safe for human consumption. Food insecurity in the United States also becomes eminent when the elderly, the ethnic minority, and the rural people, lack access to food of the right quality and quantity, due to their mobility conditions and other socioeconomic situations.

The foremost problem associated with the American conventional food systems is lack of food maintenance. The traditional American food systems lacked proper food maintenance because they lacked proper food harvesting techniques, they lacked proper food preservation methods, and they lacked ample storage infrastructures.

Although the traditional food systems are more nutritious and safer compared to the foods produced through the contemporary technologies and stored through the modern industrial systems, they lack their sustained value because of poor preservation. Since the modern industrial food systems replaced the traditional methods of producing and preserving food, food security has improved tremendously across the continents. The traditionally gathered foods have never proven significant in dealing with the modern food insecurity. The replacement of traditional galleries with industries is worthwhile.

Although hunger is a universal problem that affects all the global communities, food insecurity in United States affects the minority ethnicities unfairly. The most affected minority communities are those that make up the biggest minority groups. The ethnic communities of America that often face food insecurity are large minority communities.

These communities involve the African American ethnic communities and the Latino minority population, which report constant events of food shortages. In the American demographic statistics and history, the two minority communities have remained disproportionately affected by poverty, food insecurity, and unemployment misfortunes. These two ethnic communities of the United States live in the rural, the suburban, and the underdeveloped cities of America. These are areas, where racial poverty, lack of education and unemployment, are major social concerns.

My major role in the modern food system is to ensure appropriate use of the available food in the markets, at home, and within the institution. People must use the right amount of food required by the body tissues to enable the body systems work properly. I must practice suitable cooking. Suitable cooking means cooking the right amount of food, without wasting any food amount that may deem important somewhere else in the world.

My other significant role in the food system is ensuring an appropriate budgeting of food to avoid unnecessary food decay, which literally leads to loss of food. Lastly, my other role in the food security is sensitizing the local communities about the appropriate use of farmland.

Food insecurity is becoming a growing concern in many nations. Food security primarily means an unlimited economic and physical access to food that is nutritious, safe, and culturally and religiously acceptable. Although hunger is a universal problem that affects many people across the world, the situation may sometimes be disproportionate in some parts of the world, depending on several socioeconomic dynamics.

In America, poverty, unemployment, and old age are some of the variables that determine access to food, as well as define the situation of food insecurity in the nation. In America, there is food insecurity when the elderly, the ethnic minority, the children, and the rural and suburban populations report considerable incidences of hunger. Such situations make the issue of food insecurity a complex phenomenon.

• Sugar Substitutes: Benefits and Threats
• Malaysia National Agri-Food Policy: Local Food Promotion
• Problems in Ungoverned Spaces in Modern World
• Misrepresentation Under Contract Law
• The False Memories Concept
• Nutrition: Maximal Fat Oxidation Testing
• Food Borne Diseases of Intoxicants on MSG
• Restaurant Health Code Violations
• Survey of Food Allergies in the UAE
• Food Security in Detroit - Michigan
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, May 15). Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems. https://ivypanda.com/essays/food-security-in-the-united-states/

"Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems." IvyPanda , 15 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/food-security-in-the-united-states/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems'. 15 May.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems." May 15, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/food-security-in-the-united-states/.

1. IvyPanda . "Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems." May 15, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/food-security-in-the-united-states/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Food Security in the United States: The Major Lapses of the Conventional Food Systems." May 15, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/food-security-in-the-united-states/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Advertisement

The unmet demand of food security in East Africa: review of the triple challenges of climate change, economic crises, and conflicts

• Open access
• Published: 05 September 2024
• Volume 5 , article number  244 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Abdulkadir Mohamed Abdullahi 1 ,
• Roice Bwambale Kalengyo 2 &
• Abdimalik Ali Warsame 1  

153 Accesses

Explore all metrics

East Africa struggles with a profound challenge in ensuring food security amidst the convergence of climate change, economic crises, and conflicts. This paper presents a comprehensive review of the interconnected and compounding effects of these three factors on the region’s food security landscape. It investigates the complex ways in which shifting climatic patterns disrupt agricultural systems, exacerbating food scarcity and amplifying vulnerabilities among marginalized communities. The study also examines the intertwined impact of economic downturns, which diminish access to resources, disrupt supply chains, and deepen food insecurity. Furthermore, the paper scrutinizes the ramifications of persistent conflicts, which not only displace populations but also destabilize agricultural production, aggravating food shortages. To achieve the objective of this, review the authors have collected the relevant documents through search engines of Web of Science, Google, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Science Direct databases. This review found that climate change, economic instability, and conflict are the primary challenges to food security in East Africa. Climate change exacerbates extreme weather events, rising temperatures, and pest infestations, reducing agricultural productivity and economic growth. Economic instability stems from a lack of industrialization, dependence on foreign aid, and significant investment gaps, resulting in persistent poverty and underdevelopment. Additionally, conflict and instability disrupt agricultural activities, displace populations, and restrict access to essential resources, further aggravating food insecurity. The study emphasizes the necessity for coordinated efforts among governments, international organizations, and local communities to navigate these intersecting crises and establish sustainable pathways toward enhanced food security in the region.

Similar content being viewed by others

Conflict in Ukraine and the unsettling ripples: implications on food systems and development in North Africa

From global to local, food insecurity is associated with contemporary armed conflicts.

Climate variability, food security, and adaptation strategies in Somaliland a review

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

The United Nations' 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, established in 2015, outlines 17 Sustainable Development Goals with 169 corresponding targets to guide international efforts towards sustainable development by 2030 [ 1 ]. Specifically, SDG 2 aims to address all forms of hunger and food and nutritional insecurity [ 1 ]. Despite significant progress in reducing hunger, combating malnutrition, and enhancing food security, considerable challenges persist. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report reveals that the population experiencing hunger has increased to levels recorded a decade ago [ 2 ]. Approximately 1 billion individuals are food- and nutrient-insecure, placing them at heightened risk of diet-related non-communicable diseases [ 3 ]. The emerging "triple burden" of malnutrition, encompassing obesity, undernutrition, and micronutrient deficiencies, has now become the leading cause of poor health globally [ 4 ].

According to Wagler et al., [ 5 ], food security is the state in which individuals have reliable access to adequate quantities of safe and nutritious food to support their normal growth, development, and an active, healthy lifestyle. This multi-dimensional concept encompasses the availability, accessibility, utilization, and stability of food supplies [ 6 ]. Climate-related risks and food insecurity disproportionately impact the most vulnerable regions globally, including West Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa, and South Asia [ 7 ]. This critical issue is projected to persist in the coming decades due to factors such as localized population growth, limited socioeconomic resources, ongoing regional political conflicts and climate crisis, with 40–50% of the world's undernourished population residing in Sub-Saharan Africa [ 8 ].

In 2021, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) stated that around 193 million individuals, equivalent to 21.3% of the world’s population, would face heightened food insecurity, a significant increase from 108 million people, or 11.3%, in 2016 [ 9 ]. In 2019, 821.6 million people worldwide suffered from hunger, and 2 billion individuals, representing 26.4% of the global population, did not have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food [ 10 ]. In Africa, between 2000 and 2020, food insecurity was increased from 25 to 37%, with a brief decline in the middle of the years [ 11 ].

Africa experiences a markedly elevated level of food insecurity in comparison to other regions globally [ 12 ]. Over 50% of the African population is at risk of experiencing extreme food insecurity [ 13 ] East Africa had the highest food insecurity rate in 2018, with 63% of the population affected, followed by Southern Africa at 54%, West Africa at 48%, and North Africa at 48%. Climate change, conflict, and economic issues are the primary reasons leading to increased food insecurity in East Africa [ 14 , 15 ].

The East African region, frequently designated as Eastern Africa, generally encompasses the countries situated in the eastern segment of the African continent. The precise composition of East Africa can fluctuate depending on the context, but it typically comprises the following nations: Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Ethiopia, Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea, South Sudan, and Madagascar [ 16 ]. East Africa, home to 370 million people, faces significant food security challenges, with approximately 40 percent of the population having poor access to food [ 17 ].

Over 265 million people across East Africa live on less than $1.90 per day, rendering them particularly susceptible to food insecurity [ 18 ]. Recent studies have highlighted the concerning trends in compound extremes of rainfall and temperature across the region. The high occurrence of these events has had many negative impacts on human security, as the population is largely dependent on rain-fed agriculture [ 19 ]. Studies between 2015 and 2017 found that around 72.9 million people in the region were undernourished. Additionally, 2.7 million children under 5 had wasting, 14.7 million under 5 s were stunted, and 1.5 million under 5 s were overweight [ 20 ].

Recognizing the gravity of this challenge, recent research highlights the complex and interconnected drivers of food insecurity, including the impacts of climate change, increased frequency of extreme weather events, economic shocks, and conflict [ 21 , 22 ]. Consequently, a comprehensive understanding of these factors is necessary to develop effective policies and interventions to achieve the SDG 2 targets [ 23 ]. Climate change is a natural process occurring on Earth. It has become a significant concern due to its widespread impacts on agriculture, water resources, markets, and global natural resources [ 7 ]. In developing and developed countries, risks from extreme climate impacts reveal higher levels of vulnerability with higher confidence on projected increases in droughts, heat waves and floods [ 7 ].

Beyond the direct impacts of climate change, the East African region has experienced economic shocks and conflict, which have compounded the challenges facing food systems [ 24 ]. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted supply chains, reduced incomes, and increased food prices, making it more difficult for vulnerable populations to access adequate nutrition [ 25 ]. Similarly, ongoing conflicts in countries like Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan and South Sudan have displaced millions of people, destroyed agricultural infrastructure, and disrupted food production and distribution [ 26 ].

The East African region has a long history of political instability and conflict, which have had significant impacts on food security and agricultural production [ 17 ]. Political conflict and civil war, which are common in the region, have compounded the challenges facing food systems. This is evidenced by the displacement of over 30% of pastoralists in East Africa due to climate change [ 27 ]. The civil war in Sudan and South Sudan, the conflict in the Tigray region of Ethiopia, and the ongoing insecurity in Somalia are all examples of the political instability in the region. These conflicts have displaced millions of people, destroyed farms and livestock, and disrupted trade and food distribution networks, leading to severe food shortages and famine-like conditions in affected areas [ 15 ].

The current food security situation in East Africa remains extremely alarming due to the combined effects of climate change [ 17 ], economic crises [ 25 ], and conflicts [ 26 ]. This complex issue requires multifaceted solutions, as no single approach can adequately address the interconnected problems affecting food security in the region [ 28 ]. The issue of food security in this region is devastating, exacerbated by political instability, economic hardship, and climate crises throughout the region's history. Consequently, these factors have worsened food insecurity and significantly reduced the resilience of the local population. However, as far as the authors is aware, no comprehensive review or research has been conducted on this topic specifically in the context of East Africa or individual countries within the region. This indicates a lack of consolidated evidence on the devastating impacts of these threats on food security, hindering the implementation of effective short-term and long-term measures. While prior investigations have focused on individual factors [ 13 , 15 , 29 ], this research offers a comprehensive analysis of how these three interrelated issues—climate change, economic crises, and conflicts—collectively contribute to food insecurity in East Africa. Additionally, it provides practical, evidence-based interventions for achieving zero hunger in the region. Therefore, this review is crucial for informing decisions by governments and international organizations on how best to mitigate the severe impacts of these threats on food security in East Africa.

2 Material and methods

2.1 review methodology.

The study employed a scoping review methodology, which follows the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley [ 30 ], to address the complex and broad nature of the topic and related studies. In addition, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist was utilized to guide the reporting process [ 31 ].

Scoping reviews provides an appropriate methodology when the goal is to map the existing body of literature on a topic, identify key concepts, and explore the range of available [ 31 ]. This approach enables the inclusion of diverse research methodologies to more comprehensively and deeply understand the current knowledge on a particular subject [ 32 ]. It has been argued that the scoping review approach enhances rigor by reducing biased searches, while also providing focus and boundaries for the review [ 33 ].

To achieve the objective of this review, we collected relevant information from various academic databases, including Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Science Direct, focusing on peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2024. Additionally, we identified relevant grey literature by reviewing reports from the UN, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, an eight-country trade bloc in East Africa. Our search strategy adhered to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for scoping reviews [ 34 ].

2.1.1 Identification, screening, and inclusion

We selected articles and grey literature according to the following inclusion criteria: focus on food security as the main topic, publication between 2010 and 2024, food security as the setting, and key study terms such as food security, East Africa, climate change, economic crisis, and conflicts. The review process focused on food security in broad terms, without addressing the specific Sustainable Development Goal 2. It also did not identify the particular country within the East African region mentioned in the introduction. Additionally, publications in languages other than English were excluded from the analysis.

Duplicate and outdated articles were manually removed. Then, we screened the articles in a step-wise process: by title, abstract, and full text. We also screened the grey literature sources based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Through this process, we identified 34 out of 340 peer-reviewed articles and 24 out of 76 grey literature sources for the scoping review. The reasons for excluding articles and grey literature are provided in Fig.  1 . The included publications vary in the depth of their findings.

Prisma flowchart for study selection

2.2 Recent studies on the multidimensional food ecosystem in Africa

Food security is attained when individuals have consistent access to a sufficient quantity of nourishing food that aligns with their dietary requirements and choices to support a healthy lifestyle [ 35 ]. The world population is expected to reach 8.6 billion by 2030 and 9.8 billion by 2050, with the majority of this increase occurring in Africa [ 14 ]. Climate change presents a significant and swiftly growing danger to the food and nutrition security of impoverished small-scale farmers worldwide [ 36 ].

Climate change in Africa has led to decreased agricultural output, resulting in around 286 million individuals experiencing hunger and malnutrition due to food insecurity [ 37 ]. Sub-Saharan Africa has a higher prevalence of food insecurity and inadequate micronutrient intake [ 38 ]. Over-reliance on rainfed agriculture, eating food with low nutritional value and antinutritional solid components, violence, natural disasters linked to climate change, economic downturns, widespread poverty and inequality, and the regular occurrence of crop diseases and pests are the main causes of the problem [ 39 ].

Climate change in East Africa has caused a decrease in genetic diversity, resulting in increased food insecurity affecting more than 18 million people [ 14 ]. The genetic resources in this region are threatened by factors like population growth, invading species, agricultural changes, and intensified land usage [ 40 ].

The agriculture and water sectors are vital for fostering economic change, sustainable livelihoods, and development, particularly in developing nations [ 41 ]. The 2014 Malabo Declaration by the African Union highlights the significance of enhancing agricultural productivity to boost economic growth, create jobs, and eliminate hunger and malnutrition in Africa [ 42 ]. Agricultural development is essential for economic growth and the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as well as for the water sector.

The Food and Agriculture Organisation has recorded extensive damage to pastures and crops in East Africa, particularly in Agro-pastoral areas of Eastern Ethiopia, Central Somalia, and Northern Kenya, due to the Desert Locust infestation [ 43 ]. The 2020 IPC study indicates significant food insecurity in the region, impacting around 8.5 million individuals in Ethiopia, 3.1 million in Kenya, and 1.1 million in Somalia. Riaz identified COVID-19, environmental shocks, conflict, DL, and economic crises as the primary causes of food insecurity [ 44 ].

According to Pinstrup-Anderson and Cohen [ 45 ], currently, 828 million people do not have adequate access to food. 25% of the population lives in sub-Saharan Africa (210 million), 31% in East and Southeast Asia and South Asia (258 and 254 million), 7.6% in Latin America and the Caribbean, and 5% in North Africa and the Near East. The future of Africa appears grim. With the increasing population and its escalating demands on the environment, a rise in food insecurity is anticipated. Approximately 39% of individuals in sub-Saharan Africa experience malnutrition. The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) predicted in 1996 that food insecurity in the region would increase until 2010, contrasting with a global drop, with an estimated 680 million people facing food insecurity by 2010.

As can be observed from Table  1 , the prevalence of undernourishment varies greatly across East Africa, with some countries having rates as high as 33%. The Food Security Risk Index, which measures the severity of food insecurity, also varies from country to country. The countries with the highest Food Security Risk Index scores are Burundi, Eritrea, Somalia, and South Sudan.

Multiple causes such as poverty, conflict, climate change, and inadequate infrastructure contribute to food insecurity in East Africa. Poverty significantly contributes to food insecurity by restricting individuals' ability to obtain food. Conflict can also interrupt food production and distribution, resulting in food insecurity. Climate change is hindering agricultural growth in certain regions of East Africa, while inadequate infrastructure complicates the transportation of food from abundant areas to those in need. The global community is addressing the issue of food insecurity in East Africa. The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) is a prominent organisation addressing this matter. FAO offers diverse programmes and initiatives to enhance food security in East African countries.

Gibson, [ 46 ] in his book “The Feeding of Nations: Redefining Food Security for the 21st Century”, classifies many forms of vulnerability. FIVIMS classifies groups based on occupation (fishermen and pastoralists), geographical location (marginal urban or forest residents), culture (bushmen and nomads), demography (children under 5), social status (refugees and the displaced), and physical condition (the disabled and severely ill). The complexity of many possible divisions presents a challenge. Elderly relatives of Kalahari bus drivers and sedentary indigenous children under five in Mauritania experience distinct food security challenges.

The following provides a succinct review of four of the most vulnerable categories, starting from the macro to the micro, to simplify the fundamentals. Firstly, Vulnerable locations: These locations have delicate, well-balanced ecosystems or significantly depend on the supply and production of food and food-related components. These could become subject to resource mismanagement, degradation, and catastrophic weather events like floods or droughts. Although primarily rural, such susceptible places can also be urban, which has an impact when many people, families, or entire communities depend on a specific location or region.

Thus, these people will suffer from any significant changes to the land's sustainability, productivity, or supply. Second, Vulnerable Groups: These are typically homogeneous groups, including women, children under five, the impoverished, seasonal agricultural workers, recent immigrants, and nomadic or transhumant populations (whose seasonal migration usually takes place between high pastures in the summer and lower valleys in the winter). These communities rarely have significant control over food security in terms of continuity, either material or financial. The third category is called "vulnerable households," which refers to family units that are frequently grouped together by vulnerable typologies. Examples of these include households headed by women or those that are large or have a high prevalence of diseases like tuberculosis or AIDS. Finally, vulnerable individuals are typically those members of the community who are particularly at risk of food insecurity and who require additional care or attention. Infants and kids under five, expectant or nursing moms, the sick, the elderly, people with disabilities, etc. are among them.

This review of the literature discovers that climate change, conflict, and economic crises are the main challenges to achieving food security in East Africa. However, what is lacking in the current literature is a proper categorization of how and in which capacities the triple challenges hinder food security in East Africa. This paper, therefore, puts forward a set of categories by which climate change, conflict, and economic crises obstruct the path of achieving food security in the region.

2.3 The current hunger crisis in East Africa

In developing economies, agricultural production is the primary source of food security for millions of people. The vulnerability is notably serious in Africa, where agricultural output provides 66 per cent of the active population with their principal source of income [ 47 ]. Food security is a significant problem for many East African households. There is evidence that households with the lowest food security, particularly those led by women, are less inclined to adopt innovative agricultural technology and practices that may enhance their farm's productivity and make them more resilient to climate change [ 48 ] Food security Conditions in Uganda have rather worsened by the previous Covid 19, They used to at least go to town, bring some food, and also give them at least a substantial uptick of about 1USD for home use to maybe buy them milk for their children's nutritional demands. However, because of the coronavirus disease outbreak, they are no longer receiving money [ 49 ].

Rural households face various constraints such as limited investment capital, inadequate access to natural resources, lack of inputs like labour, and insufficient knowledge, which hinder their ability to try out new agricultural technologies related to crops, livestock, water, soil, and agroforestry knowledge [ 50 ]. The Malabo Declaration of 2014 highlights the essential role of food security and nutrition in the growth of the continent [ 13 ] Africa has the greatest prevalence of undernourishment, despite the Malabo agenda [ 51 ] Progress in reducing hunger has been sluggish over the past twenty years, with the number of hungry individuals in East Africa rising by 20% in 1990. Between 2000 and 2002, the percentage of malnourished individuals in Kenya was 33%, in Uganda it was 19%, and in Tanzania it was 44% [ 52 ].

The frequency of undernourishment in Sub-Saharan Africa rose from 20.8% to 22.7% during 2015 and 2016. In 2016, the number of undernourished individuals increased from 200 to 224 million, accounting for 25% of the 815 million undernourished people globally [ 48 ]. The proportion of the population experiencing acute food insecurity due to limited access to food has risen in the area [ 53 ] Other than Djibouti, the selected East African states have a greater prevalence of undernourishment compared to sub-Saharan African countries, where it stands at 20.8 percent. The World Bank claimed that in 2015, the prevalence of undernourishment in Ethiopia was 28.8%, in Kenya 19.1%, in Rwanda 41.1%, in Uganda 39%, and in Tanzania 32.3% [ 54 ]. Factors contributing to the widespread undernourishment in the regions are poverty, conflict, climate change, environmental degradation, and political instability [ 51 ].

In line with the above background and by using secondary literature, the following section of this paper answers the question of how and in which capacities the triple challenges (climate change, conflict, and economic crises) hinder food security in East Africa. By focusing on climate change, conflict, and economic crises as the core obstacle to food security in the region, we will also explain three strategic solutions (A. Addressing Climate Change; B. Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding; C. Sustainable Agricultural Development) that we can use to address the challenges.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 challenges of achieving food security in east africa, 3.1.1 climate change.

The challenge of achieving the SDGs is further compounded by the complexities brought about by climate change SDGs [ 55 ]. Africa has been recognized as one of the continents most affected by climate change due to two primary factors: its geographical location within the warming tropics and its limited human, social, and economic resilience to cope with the impacts of climate change [ 56 ].

The East African region is now experiencing recurrent obstacles to food production, which could exacerbate owing to climate change without proper adaptation measures [ 57 ]. Dell et al.’s research shows that a one-degree Celsius increase in temperature in developing nations is linked to a 3% reduction in agricultural production, resulting in a 1.3% fall in economic growth [ 58 ]. In East Africa, increasing populations will raise the demand for water and food. Prolonged extreme climate events, such as higher temperatures, rising sea levels, droughts, floods, storms, and acidification, will negatively affect agricultural yields, putting additional pressure on already scarce water resources and reducing crop yields [ 59 ].

The East African region is experiencing an influx of insects and weed seeds due to the increasing temperatures and water levels [ 15 , 60 ]. The infestation of locusts in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia during 2019–2020 resulted in the damage of 1.25 million hectares of land, leading to a financial requirement increase by nearly $70 million for response efforts [ 61 ]. The current drought in East Africa has already led to the loss of over 1.5 million animals and a significant reduction in maize production [ 62 ].

An estimated 20.3 million individuals are experiencing food insecurity in Sudan, with similar situations affecting approximately 20.1 million people in Ethiopia, 7.4 million people in South Sudan, 6.5 million people in Somalia, and 5.4 million people in Kenya due to conflict and instability, economic difficulties, and climate-related challenges [ 63 ]. However, the nutritional status remains concerning across Eastern Africa where over 4.3 million children as well as an additional 743,000 pregnant and breastfeeding mothers are forecasted to be affected by severe malnutrition in Kenya, Somalia, and Ethiopia [ 63 ].. The Horn of Africa region has experienced three consecutive below-average rainy seasons [ 64 ].

Addressing the impacts of climate change on food security is crucial as global temperatures increase. This involves decreasing greenhouse gas emissions, supporting climate-adaptive farming methods, and enhancing social support systems for individuals facing challenges in obtaining food [ 65 ].

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [ 66 ], reported that climate change is impacting food security in various ways, such as:

Reduced crop yields: climate variability is causing increasingly severe weather phenomena, such as prolonged dry spells, excessive rainfall, and high temperatures. These conditions have the potential to harm crops and diminish their productivity.

Increased pests and diseases: climate fluctuations are leading to more extreme weather events, including extended periods of drought, heavy rainfall, and elevated temperatures. These circumstances could negatively impact agricultural yields and reduce overall crop output.

Disruptions to food supply chains: climate change has the potential to interrupt food supply chains by causing harm to infrastructure, including roads and bridges, as well as complicating the transportation of food.

Rising food prices: rising food costs can result from a combination of factors such as lower crop yields, heightened pest and disease presence, and disturbances in food distribution networks. This may pose challenges for individuals in purchasing affordable food.

The effects of climate change on food security are most keenly experienced by the most impoverished and susceptible individuals worldwide. These individuals frequently reside in regions that are already susceptible to extreme climates and have scarce resources to manage the extra difficulties brought about by climate change [ 67 ].

3.1.2 Economic challenges

East Africa consists of thirteen nations with diverse characteristics. The region is generally characterized by a weak economy and low levels of human development, with most nations being low-income except for Kenya and Djibouti, which fall into the lower-middle-income category [ 15 ]. In 2018, the anticipated real GDP growth rate for East Africa was 5.7%, slightly lower than the previous year's rate but still the highest among all African regions. It is expected to maintain a robust growth rate, expanding by 5.9% in 2019 and reaching 6.1% in 2020. However, there is significant diversity across countries within the region; for example, South Sudan experienced a contraction of -3.8%, while Rwanda and Ethiopia saw impressive growth rates of 7.2% and 7.7% respectively in that same period. Ethiopia, Rwanda, Kenya, and Djibouti have strong agricultural, services, and industrial sectors driving their rapid economic expansion. However, South Sudan (– 3.8%), Burundi (1.4%), and Somalia (2.9%). experienced negative or low growth due to instability affecting economic activity [ 68 ].

Moreover, the economic framework and growth patterns in East Africa are characterized by a lack of industrialization, resulting in insufficient job opportunities, economic variety, and product distinction [ 15 , 69 ] Despite this overall underwhelming performance, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda have recently made progress in the field of industrialization. All East African countries import manufactured goods while primarily exporting raw materials. The regulatory structure sets out the terms for exchanging manufactured products for essential commodities. Until 2003–2013 when global commodity prices began to rise again after almost a century-long decline [ 70 ].

East Africa faces a variety of challenging risks that could hinder economic growth and development prospects. Some nations have specific economic and social traits, such as being landlocked or small island states, relying on a few export products, and experiencing volatile export revenues. They are also vulnerable to natural disasters due to heavy reliance on agriculture and its unstable output. Persistent deficits in the current account and increasing foreign debt are other significant concerns. State fragility poses potential threats to Burundi, Somalia, South Sudan, and Ethiopia to some extent. The decline in global commodity prices has negatively affected the terms of trade for almost all nations heavily reliant on basic commodities for exports.

Additionally, the significant growth of the region has been driven by considerable investment that exceeds domestic savings. The persistent current account deficit is closely connected with the gap between domestic investment and savings (or external gap). Moreover, economic challenges in Ethiopia, Burundi, and South Sudan including high inflation, currency devaluation, shortages of gasoline and dollars continue to hinder economic progress. Despite noticeable economic expansion in most nations recently, a large part of the population still grapples with food insecurity, poverty levels are high and there's insufficient human development. Except for Kenya, all East African countries have low human development classification. Eritrea, Burundi, Djibouti, and South Sudan have subsequent lowest human development. Widespread poverty also prevails especially in rural areas; regions where South Sudan, Burundi, Eritrea, and Somalia are situated as per Africa [ 70 ].

3.1.3 Conflict and instability

Conflict and instability are closely related to food insecurity, and this relationship has been extensively studied and documented in academic literature. Here is an overview of how conflict and instability contribute to food insecurity, along with some key references to include:

According to Dube Vargas, [ 71 ], conflict and instability have disrupted agricultural activities and food production in several ways. Armed conflicts often lead to the displacement of populations, which can result in abandoned fields, destroyed infrastructure, and a lack of access to agricultural resources. This disruption can significantly reduce food production and availability, as shown in the study by Collier Hoeffler [ 72 ] on Greed and Grievance in the Civil War. Oxford Economic Papers, 56(4), 563–595, the findings revealed that conflict and instability often lead to losing livelihoods, making it difficult for people to afford or access food. This can result in destroying businesses, markets, and job opportunities, leaving individuals and communities economically vulnerable.

Conflict-induced displacement can result in the loss of land and assets, making it challenging for affected populations to produce their food. Internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees often rely on aid, and their limited resources make them susceptible to food insecurity [ 73 ]. Conflict and instability can disrupt food distribution systems, making transporting and delivering food to affected areas difficult. This can lead to food shortages and price spikes, further exacerbating food insecurity [ 74 ]. Conflict zones are often dangerous for humanitarian organizations to operate in. Limited access can hinder aid and relief efforts, leaving vulnerable populations without the necessary assistance to meet their food needs [ 75 ].

3.2 The way forward: strategies and solutions

3.2.1 addressing climate change (adaptation and mitigation strategies).

Climate change has significant impacts on food security. It is crucial to explore options beyond agriculture to address climate change impacts and enhance food security for disadvantaged populations [ 76 ]. Dealing with climate change adaptation, mitigation, and food supply requires multi-level decision-makers to navigate a network of interconnected concerns.

There is a wealth of literature on how climate change affects food security in underprivileged nations. Employing adaptation strategies like using heat-resistant crop varieties, adopting improved crops, adjusting cropping patterns, and diversifying agricultural produce can significantly mitigate the effects of climate change and reduce the risk of hunger to as low as 28% [ 77 ]. In hot and arid areas, anticipated agricultural income may decline by 43%. Farmers and experts recommend various adaptation measures, including crop diversification, improved germplasm utilization, enhancements in soil and water management, and better access to fertilizers and equipment [ 78 ].

Multiple empirical studies have examined how farmers have adapted to the negative consequences of shifting climate conditions and their influence on food security [ 79 , 80 , 81 ]. Notably, Di Falco et al., [ 82 ] found that Ethiopian farmers' adaption tactics to climate change were most influenced by knowledge, extension services, and access to loans. Webber et al. [ 83 ] Discovered that farmers’ capacity to adjust to climate change was impeded by characteristics such their socioeconomic level, perception of climate change, labour availability, and access to financing. In 2016, Douxchamps and colleagues found that applying adaptation methods such crop diversification, soil and water conservation, improved crop varieties, and fertilisers increased food security for certain households in different African countries ([ 80 ] Below et al. (2015) identify the main challenges impeding adaptation efforts in Tanzania as a lack of financial resources, including land, manpower, money, and equipment, as well as insufficient cooperation and conflicts between traditional agricultural systems, such as cassava farming and grazing [ 79 ].

On the other hand, while in our gathered literature from multi-perspective sources, we found the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), specifically the Working Group III (WG III) conclusions helpful in explaining how to address food insecurity through many categories in the literature we collected from multiple sources [ 84 ]. The IPCC AR5 WG III emphasises the need of decreasing emissions from agriculture, forestry, and land use (AFOLU) to mitigate climate change in the twenty-first century, as these sectors are the primary sources of most non-CO 2 greenhouse gas emissions and carbon storage on land. Dittmer et al. [ 85 ] stressed the importance of clearly incorporating agricultural emissions into national mitigation targets and strategies to achieve the Paris Agreement's two-degree Celsius goal [ 85 ].

This research review elaborates on how implementing mitigation strategies across the entire food system, from production to consumption, can aid in reaching global mitigation goals and improving food security and nutrition. To understand the spectrum of mitigation potential of food systems, it is crucial to consider scenarios where efficiency gains and dietary changes due to increasing income per capita are included in business-as-usual projections [ 86 ].

The AR5 classified mitigation measures ranging from fundamental ways like as improving agricultural and animal management to more sophisticated techniques like afforestation, soil carbon storage, and BECCS projects. P. Smith et al. [ 84 ] highlighted two main groups of mitigation pathways from the food system.

Supply-side: Agricultural emissions can be decreased by improving production efficiencies and increasing carbon sequestration in soils and biomass. Energy-related emissions in the food system can be lowered by enhancing energy efficiency and substituting fossil fuels with carbon-free sources like biomass.

Demand side: Greenhouse gas emissions could be reduced by altering diets, decreasing food waste, and using wood for cooking.

Changes in food habits that reduce production-related GHG emissions and adjustments to land use that absorb carbon are examples of demand-side mitigation techniques. On both the supply and demand sides, reducing food loss and waste can help reduce GHG emissions.

3.2.2 Sustainable agricultural development

In this section, we identified some key strategies and approaches that East African countries can adopt to achieve their full potential for food security:

Government decisions to Invest in research and innovation are crucial to achieving Sustainable Agricultural Development [ 87 ]. This could include promoting research and development in agriculture to improve crop varieties, pest resistance, and productivity, as well as promoting innovation in farming techniques, such as drought-resistant crops, organic farming, and precision agriculture. Over the past two decades, agricultural production, food, and nutrition security have been under significant stress [ 88 ]. On the other hand, the need for access to land, water, and seeds for smallholder farmers, particularly women, as well as developing and enforcing land tenure systems that protect the rights of small-scale farmers could be a great way to ensure sustainable agriculture [ 89 ].

Enhancing agricultural extension services is also important regarding knowledge and information sharing [ 89 ]. This involves strengthening extension services to provide farmers with the knowledge and skills needed to adopt modern and sustainable farming practices and use technology, such as mobile apps and SMS, to disseminate information to remote areas. In many regions of the globe, it is advised to apply smart practices and technology for climate-resilient agriculture. There is a dire need to bring forth climate-smart agricultural alternatives, such as drought-resistant crops and conservation farming, as well as developing and implementing early warning systems to help farmers prepare for extreme weather events [ 90 ]. Smallholder farmers who do not have access to credit and financial services in the East Africa region require support to invest in their farms and develop farmer cooperatives and associations to enable collective marketing and bargaining power [ 62 ].

In sub-Saharan Africa, postharvest losses (PHL) have been recognized as a major obstacle to attaining food and nutrition security [ 91 ]. They are investing in infrastructure and technology to improve agricultural products’ storage, transportation, and processing and promoting good agricultural practices crucial to minimize losses [ 92 ]. Developing rural infrastructure is essential to connect remote areas to markets and expand access to electricity and reliable energy sources for processing and value addition, which means achieving sustainable food security. Strengthening the value chain can also increase the value addition of agricultural products by developing and supporting agribusinesses [ 93 ]. In addition, promoting local and regional trade significantly reduces dependence on imports [ 94 ].

In order to create and implement policies that support sustainable agriculture, protect natural resources, and enhance food security, sustainable agricultural development must have both governance and policy. This involves ensuring transparent and equitable land and resource management as well as fighting corruption [ 95 ]. Likewise, it is impossible to overlook the need to offer access to market data and information. This means a lot to provide farmers with insights into pricing and market trends by supporting e-commerce and online marketing platforms, information-sharing networks, and market data systems.

On the other hand, risk mitigation approaches can play a crucial role in enhancing the resilience of farmers. This includes establishing insurance and social safety nets to assist farmers in coping with setbacks and losses and fostering agricultural diversification [ 96 ]. It is believed that vocational training in agriculture and agribusiness, as well as funding educational and training initiatives that increase the capabilities of the agricultural workforce, particularly young people, can help the resilience of the farmers [ 97 ]. On the other hand, public–private partnerships are essential for promoting cooperation between NGOs, the business sector, and governments to pool resources and expertise to advance sustainable agriculture [ 98 ].

Promote regional integration; this involves promoting regional cooperation and trade agreements to enhance food security by reducing access to resources and markets [ 94 ]. To ensure all intended goals are achieved, an effective monitoring and evaluation system must assess the impact of agricultural development programs [ 96 ]. In addition, long-term planning and investment should be implemented by encouraging government institutions to commit to long-term planning and investment in agriculture to ensure sustainability and food security [ 98 ]. Sustainable agricultural development requires a multi-faceted approach, and the specific strategies adopted should be tailored to each country's unique circumstances and challenges. It is essential for East African governments, in partnership with international organizations and stakeholders, to work together to prioritize and implement these strategies to curb food insecurity and promote sustainable agricultural development on the continent.

3.2.3 Conflict resolution and peacebuilding

Conflict, violence, and fragility are acknowledged as obstacles to attaining universal food security in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Given the propensity of conflict to impede sustainable development, one of the objectives is to substantially diminish the prevalence of violence by collaborating with member states and communities to identify enduring resolutions to issues of insecurity and conflict. The 2030 Agenda considers the elimination of hunger and poverty (Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs] 1 and 2) as prerequisites for the establishment of peaceful and inclusive societies (SDG 16); the prevention of violence and conflict is considered indispensable to the attainment of each of the remaining SDGs.

Despite the frequent association between armed conflict and severe hunger, historical patterns indicate that hunger may be prevented and does not always ensue from war. To develop effective responses and treatments, a comprehensive understanding of the supposed correlation between conflict and food poverty is necessary. Despite the apparent correlation between conflict, severe food insecurity, and chronic hunger, the available data is limited and inconsistent, and the precise processes at play remain poorly understood. In contrast, hunger, encompassing various forms such as chronic malnutrition, famine, and general deprivation, is frequently regarded as a potential catalyst for conflict. However, the precise mechanisms underlying its differential applicability as a contributing factor or catalyst in different contexts remain obscure. The objective of the current investigation is to provide more insight into these pathways of causality.

4 A positive assets-based model of agricultural systems solution

The arrows in Fig.  2 illustrate the various ways in which human capital and social capital interact with each other. For example, people with high levels of human capital are more likely to have strong social networks, and people with strong social networks are more likely to have access to opportunities for economic and social advancement.

According to J. Pretty [ 99 ], the above figure is illustrating the role of a positive Assets-based model and social capital in the sustainable livelihood framework: modified from J. Pretty’s asset-based model of agricultural systems—flows and outcomes in sustainable systems

According to Fig.  2 , the following are some specific examples of the interactions between human capital and social capital:

Economic: People with high levels of human capital (such as education and skills) are more likely to get high-paying jobs. They are also more likely to start their businesses. Social networks can help people find jobs, learn about new business opportunities, and get access to capital.

Political: People with high levels of human capital are more likely to be politically engaged. They are more likely to vote, run for office, and participate in civic activities. Social networks can help people mobilize for political action and build coalitions.

Social: People with high levels of human capital are more likely to have strong social ties. They are also more likely to be involved in social organizations. Social networks can provide people with support, companionship, and a sense of belonging.

Cultural: People with high levels of human capital are more likely to be involved in cultural activities, such as attending museums, concerts, and plays. They are also more likely to volunteer their time to cultural organizations. Social networks can help people connect with others who share their cultural interests.

Overall, human capital and social capital are complementary resources that could improve people's involvement in sustainable agriculture and resolve conflicts. Investing in human capital can help people develop the skills and knowledge they need to succeed. Investing in social capital can help people build networks and relationships that can support their economic, political, social, and cultural well-being.

5 Conclusion and policy recommendation

This article has explored the complex relationship between food insecurity and the ripples challenges of climate change, economic crisis and conflict in East Africa, with a specific focus on the Horn of Africa. It has highlighted the devastating impact of climate-related stressors, such as erratic rainfall and extreme weather events, on agricultural production and food availability. This, coupled with pre-existing vulnerabilities, has exacerbated food insecurity in the region, leaving millions vulnerable to hunger and malnutrition. However, the article has also emphasized the resilience and potential of East African communities. By embracing innovative agricultural practices, strengthening social safety nets, and promoting regional cooperation contribute to achieving food security and ending hunger in the Horn of Africa.

Achieving zero hunger is not just a humanitarian imperative but also an economic and social necessity. Food insecurity stifles economic growth, hinders development, and weakens national security. Conversely, a food-secure region fosters economic prosperity, promotes social stability, and empowers communities to thrive. In the specific context of the Horn of Africa, achieving zero hunger holds particular significance. The region is home to some of the world's most vulnerable populations, and the consequences of inaction are severe. Ensuring food security for all is not only crucial for saving lives but also for building a stronger, more resilient future for the region.

Tackling food insecurity and climate change in the East Africa requires a multi-pronged approach that involves collective action from various stakeholders. Here are some key action points:

Investing in climate-smart agriculture: It is essential to promote the use of climate-resilient agricultural methods, such as drought-resistant crops and water conservation techniques, to maintain food security in response to changing climate conditions.

Strengthening social safety nets: Implementing safety nets like food assistance programmes and social protection systems can aid vulnerable communities in managing food insecurity and weather shocks.

Fostering regional cooperation: Collaboration between countries in the East Africa is crucial for sharing resources, knowledge, and best practices in tackling food insecurity and climate change.

Engaging international community: International donors and organizations have a vital role to play in providing financial and technical assistance to support regional efforts towards food security and climate resilience.

Empowering local communities: Actively engaging local communities in decision-making processes and ensuring their access to resources and knowledge are essential for building long-term solutions to food insecurity and climate change.

The time for action is now. By working together and implementing concrete solutions, we can create a future where food insecurity is a relic of the past, and East Africa stands tall as a region where all its people have access to safe, nutritious, and sustainable food. Let us rise to the challenge and make zero hunger a reality in the Horn of Africa.

Data availability

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

U Nations. Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, vol. 1. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs; 2015. p. 41.

Google Scholar  

U IFAD. The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2017. 2017.

Searchinger T, Waite R, Hanson C, Ranganathan J, Dumas P, Matthews E. Creating a sustainable food future. 2018.

Swinburn BA, et al. The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: the Lancet Commission report. Lancet. 2019;393(10173):791–846.

Article   Google Scholar  

Wagler A, Schober GS, Chavez-Baray SM, Ayala J, Dessauer PR, Moya EM. Food and housing security at a US hispanic-serving institution: an examination before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front Public Health. 2022;10: 918955.

Derso A, Bizuneh H, Keleb A, Ademas A, Adane M. Food insecurity status and determinants among urban productive safety net program beneficiary households in addis ababa, Ethiopia. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(9): e0256634.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Berhane A. Climate change and variability impacts on agricultural productivity and food security. J Climatol Weather Forecast. 2018. https://doi.org/10.4172/2332-2594.1000240 .

Tubiello. Climate change adaptation and mitigation challenges and opportunities in the food sector. 2012. www.fao.org/foodclimate . 07/28/24

Rome. Committee on World Food security high level panel of experts on food security and nutrition. 2020. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1000en .

Ge J, et al. Food and nutrition security under global trade: a relation-driven agent-based global trade model. R Soc Open Sci. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201587 .

Moseley WG, Battersby J. The vulnerability and resilience of african food systems, food security, and nutrition in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Afr Stud Rev. 2020;63:449–61. https://doi.org/10.1017/asr.2020.72 .

Kabubo-Mariara J, Mulwa R. Adaptation to climate change and climate variability and its implications for household food security in Kenya. Food Sec. 2019;11:1289–304.

Gebre GG. Prevalence of household food insecurity in East Africa: Linking food access with climate vulnerability. Clim Risk Manag. 2021;33: 100333.

Otieno G, Ogola RJO, Recha T, Mohammed JN, Fadda C. Climate change and seed system interventions impact on food security and incomes in East Africa. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116519 .

Kassegn A, Endris E. Review on socio-economic impacts of ‘triple threats’ of COVID-19, desert locusts, and floods in East Africa: evidence from Ethiopia. Cogent Soc Sci. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2021.1885122 .

FAO. World economic situation and prospects 2019. Rome: FAO; 2019.

Choi YW, Eltahir EAB. Near-term climate change impacts on food crops productivity in East Africa. Theor Appl Climatol. 2023;152(1–2):843–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-023-04408-1 .

Davies A, Elaine J. Urban food system transformations and governance in Sub-Saharan Africa item type electronic dissertation; text. 2023. http://hdl.handle.net/10150/667942 accessed 07/28/24

Omay PO, Muthama NJ, Oludhe C, Kinama JM, Artan G, Atheru Z. Changes and variability in rainfall onset, cessation, and length of rainy season in the IGAD region of Eastern Africa. Theor Appl Climatol. 2023;152(1–2):871–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-023-04433-0 .

Obiero K, et al. The contribution of fish to food and nutrition security in Eastern Africa: emerging trends and future outlooks. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2019. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061636 .

Ali I, Sarkar B, Ali SM, Fügenschuh A. Editorial: environmental waste and renewable energy optimization for the sustainable development goals achievement. Front Environ Sci. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1167835 .

Ghazouani T. Dynamic impact of globalization on renewable energy consumption: non-parametric modelling evidence. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2022;185: 122115.

Arora NK, Mishra I. Current scenario and future directions for sustainable development goal 2: a roadmap to zero hunger. Environ Sustain. 2022;5(2):129–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-022-00235-8 .

Kenduiywo B et al. Climate security: resilience, fragility and displacement in the borderlands of the Horn of Africa. 2023.

Tabe-Ojong MP, Nshakira-Rukundo E, Haile Gebrekidan B. COVID-19 and food insecurity in Africa: a review of the emerging empirical evidence. Eur Rev Agric Econ. 2023;50(3):853–78.

Muriuki J, Hudson D, Fuad S, March RJ, Lacombe DJ. Spillover effect of violent conflicts on food insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Policy. 2023;115: 102417.

Mpandeli S, et al. Migration under climate change in Southern Africa: a nexus planning perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114722 .

Sachs JD. The age of sustainable development. New York: Columbia University Press; 2015.

Book   Google Scholar  

Webersik C. State fragility and food security. Kristiansand: University of Agder; 2017.

Campbell F, et al. Mapping reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence and gap maps (EGMs): the same but different—the ‘big picture’ review family. Syst Rev. 2023;12(1):45.

Sorhaindo A, Loi UR. Interventions to reduce stigma related to contraception and abortion: a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2022;12(11): e063870.

Haddaway N. Evidence synthesis 2.0: when systematic, scoping, rapid, living, and overviews of reviews come together. 2020.

Mak S, Thomas A. Steps for conducting a scoping review. J Grad Med Educ. 2022;14(5):565–7.

Zibako P, Hlongwa M, Tsikai N, Manyame S, Ginindza TG. Mapping evidence on management of cervical cancer in sub-Saharan Africa: scoping review protocol. Syst Rev. 2021;10:1–8.

O’Kane G. COVID-19 puts the spotlight on food insecurity in rural and remote Australia. Aust J Rural Health. 2020;28(3):319–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajr.12648 .

Change IC. Land: an IPCC special report on climate change. In Desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. vol. 41. 2019.

Haddad L, Hawkes C, Waage J, Webb P, Godfray C, Toulmin C. Global panel on agriculture and food systems for nutrition. Food systems and diets: facing the challenges of the 21st century. Food Sec. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-017-0678-y .

UNICEF. The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2019. Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable healthy diets for all. In: brief. 2019.

Fraval S, et al. Food access deficiencies in sub-Saharan Africa: prevalence and implications for agricultural interventions. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2019;3:104.

Engels J, Diulgheroff S, Alvarez JS. Management of crop diversity: key practices for DRR implementers. In: Alvarez JS, Orien E, editors. Series: a field guide for disaster risk reduction in Southern Africa: key practices for DRR implementers. Rome: FAO; 2014.

Niang I et al. Africa. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part B: regional aspects. Contribution of working Group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Climate Change. 2014.

Union A. Malabo declaration on accelerated agricultural growth and transformation for shared prosperity and improved livelihoods doc. Assembly/Au/2 (Xxiii). 2014.

Wijerathna-Yapa A, Pathirana R. Sustainable agro-food systems for addressing climate change and food security. Agriculture (Switzerland). 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12101554 .

Riaz U, Hakeem KR, Aziz H, Farooq S. Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic and locust outbreaks on the world’s economy. In: Riaz U, Hakeem KR, editors. Locust outbreaks. New York: Apple Academic Press; 2024. p. 217–35.

Pinstrup-Andersen P. Food policy research for developing countries: emerging issues and unfinished business. Food Policy. 2000;25(2):125-41.

Gibson M. The feeding of nations: redefining food security for the 21st century. Baco Raton: CRC Press; 2012.

Kinda SR, Badolo F. Does rainfall variability matter for food security in developing countries ? Cogent Econ Financ. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2019.1640098 .

Silvestri S, et al. Households and food security: lessons from food secure households in East Africa. Agric Food Secur. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-015-0042-4 .

Giebel C, Ivan B, Burger P, Ddumba I. Impact of COVID-19 public health restrictions on older people in Uganda: hunger is really one of those problems brought by this COVID. Int Psychogeriatr. 2022;34(9):805–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220004081 .

Bryan E, Ringler C, Okoba B, Roncoli C, Silvestri S, Herrero M. Adapting agriculture to climate change in Kenya: household strategies and determinants. J Environ Manage. 2013;114:26–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.10.036 .

Abegaz KH. Prevalence of undernourishment: trend and contribution of East African countries to sub-Saharan Africa from 1991 to 2015. Agric Food Secur. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-018-0198-9 .

UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity-building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development. Organic agriculture and food security in Africa. New York: United Nations; 2008.

Mohajan HK. Food insecurity and malnutrition of africa: a combined attempt can reduce them. J Econ Dev Environ People. 2022;11(1):24–34.

Lwiza SS. The association between household wealth and nutritional status of preschool children in Tanzania: evidence from the 2012/13 National panel survey. J Educ Humanit Sci. 2019;8(2):34.

Moomaw WR, Bhandary RR, Kuhl L, Verkooijen P. Sustainable development diplomacy: diagnostics for the negotiation and implementation of sustainable development. Glob Policy. 2017;8(1):73–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12350 .

Okello M, Lamo J, Ochwo-Ssemakula M, Onyilo F. Challenges and innovations in achieving zero hunger and environmental sustainability through the lens of sub-Saharan Africa. Outlook Agric. 2021;50(2):141–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727020975778 .

Kotir JH. Climate change and variability in Sub-Saharan Africa: a review of current and future trends and impacts on agriculture and food security. Environ Dev Sustain. 2011;13(3):587–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9278-0 .

Dell M, Jones BF, Olken BA. Temperature shocks and economic growth: evidence from the last half century. J Macroecon. 2012;4(3):66–95. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.43.66 .

Islam SM, Karim Z. World’s demand for food and water: the consequences of climate change. In: Hossein M, Farahani DA, Vatanpour V, Taheri A, editors. Desalination-challenges and opportunities. London: Intechopen; 2019. p. 1–27.

McGuire S, Sperling L. Making seed systems more resilient to stress. Glob Environ Chang. 2013;23(3):644–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.02.001 .

Baptista DM, et al. Climate change and chronic food insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa. Washington: International Monetary Fund; 2022.

Korutaro B. Why should Africa be fed by foreigners? Financing is key to reverse this trend! Dev Financ Agenda (DEFA). 2023;8(4):14–5.

WFP. Food security and nutrition update Eastern Africa region: executive summary. 2023.

FSNWG. Extremely high levels of food insecurity observed across Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia and further deteriorations likely with between 23–26 million people becoming highly food insecure due to drought by February 2023. 2022.

I FAo and Unicef, WFP and WHO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021. Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable healthy diets for all. Rome: FAO; 2022.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate change 2022—impacts, adaptation and vulnerability: working group ii contribution to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2023. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844 .

Springmann M, et al. Global and regional health effects of future food production under climate change: a modelling study. Lancet. 2016;387(10031):1937–46.

WFP. WFP East Africa. 2020.

Shafaeddin MS. Trade liberalization and economic reform in developing countries: structural change or de-industrialization? In: Shafaeddin MS, editor. The IMF, World Bank and policy reform. Milton park: Routledge; 2012. p. 155–82.

U. Africa. Primary commodity booms and busts emerging lessons from Sub-Saharan Africa. 2016.

Dube O, Vargas JF. Commodity price shocks and civil conflict: Evidence from Colombia. Rev Econ Stud. 2013;80(4):1384–421.

Collier P, Hoeffler A. Greed and grievance in civil war. Oxf Econ Pap. 2004;56(4):563–95.

UNHCR. Global trends forced displacement in 2017. 2017.

WFP. WFP-0000019183. 2016.

UN OCHA. GHO2021_EN. 2021.

Ziervogel G, Ericksen PJ. Adapting to climate change to sustain food security. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change. 2010;1(4):525–40.

Issahaku G, Abdul-Rahaman A, Amikuzuno J. Climate change adaptation strategies, farm performance and poverty reduction among smallholder farming households in Ghana. Clim Dev. 2021;13(8):736–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2020.1860884 .

Ahmed M, et al. Impact of climate change on dryland agricultural systems: a review of current status, potentials, and further work need. Int J Plant Prod. 2022;16(3):341–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42106-022-00197-1 .

Below TB, Schmid JC, Sieber S. Farmers’ knowledge and perception of climatic risks and options for climate change adaptation: a case study from two Tanzanian villages. Reg Environ Change. 2015;15:1169–80.

Douxchamps S, et al. Linking agricultural adaptation strategies, food security and vulnerability: evidence from West Africa. Reg Environ Change. 2016;16:1305–17.

Soglo YY, Nonvide GMA. Climate change perceptions and responsive strategies in Benin: the case of maize farmers. Clim Change. 2019;155(2):245–56.

Di Falco S, Veronesi M, Yesuf M. Does adaptation to climate change provide food security? A micro-perspective from Ethiopia. Am J Agric Econ. 2011;93(3):829–46.

Webber H, Gaiser T, Ewert F. What role can crop models play in supporting climate change adaptation decisions to enhance food security in Sub-Saharan Africa? Agric Syst. 2014;127:161–77.

Smith P et al. Agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU). In: Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2014. pp. 811–922.

Dittmer KM, Wollenberg E, Cohen M, Egler C. How good is the data for tracking countries’ agricultural greenhouse gas emissions? Making use of multiple national greenhouse gas inventories. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2023;7:1156822.

Benis K, Ferrão P. Potential mitigation of the environmental impacts of food systems through urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA)–a life cycle assessment approach. J Clean Prod. 2017;140:784–95.

Wang R, Meybeck A, Sonnino A. Research and innovation. In: Campanhola C, Pandey S, editors. Sustainable food and agriculture. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2019. p. 491–507.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Madin MB, Nyantakyi-Frimpong H, Inkoom DKB. Seed security among smallholder farmers in semi-arid Ghana. Environ Chall. 2022;6: 100438.

Jacobi J, et al. Operationalizing food system resilience: an indicator-based assessment in agroindustrial, smallholder farming, and agroecological contexts in Bolivia and Kenya. Land Use Policy. 2018;79:433–46.

Singh R, Machanuru R, Singh B, Shrivastava M. Climate-resilient agriculture: enhance resilience toward climate change. Glob Clim Change. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-822928-6.00016-2 .

Sugri I, Abubakari M, Owusu RK, Bidzakin JK. Postharvest losses and mitigating technologies: evidence from Upper East Region of Ghana. Sustain Fut. 2021;3: 100048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2021.100048 .

Jama B, Pizarro G. Agriculture in Africa: Strategies to improve and sustain smallholder production systems. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2008;1136(1):218–32.

Keshelashvili G. Value chain management in agribusiness. Int J Bus Manag. 2018. https://doi.org/10.20472/BM.2018.6.2.004 .

Thow AM, Snowdon W. The effect of trade and trade policy on diet and health in the Pacific Islands. Trade Food Diet Health Perspect Policy Options. 2010;147:168.

Yu W. Agricultural and agri-environment policy and sustainable agricultural development in China. Copenhagen: Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen; 2017.

Meuwissen MPM, et al. A framework to assess the resilience of farming systems. Agric Syst. 2019;176: 102656.

Geza W, Ngidi M, Ojo T, Adetoro AA, Slotow R, Mabhaudhi T. Youth participation in agriculture: a scoping review. Sustainability. 2021;13(16):9120.

Ferroni M, Castle P. Public-private partnerships and sustainable agricultural development. Sustainability. 2011;3(7):1064–73.

Pretty J. Can sustainable agriculture feed Africa? New evidence on progress, processes and impacts. 2000.

Download references

This study is supported by SIMAD University.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Economics, SIMAD University, Mogadishu, Somalia

Abdulkadir Mohamed Abdullahi & Abdimalik Ali Warsame

Faculty of Engineering and Survey, Ndejje University, Kampala, Uganda

Roice Bwambale Kalengyo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Abdulkadir Mohamed Abdullahi: Introduction, Material and Methods Roice Kalengyo Bwambale: Results and Discussion Abdimalik Ali Warsame: Revising it critically for intellectual content and the final approval of the version to be submitted

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdulkadir Mohamed Abdullahi .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This article reports analysis of secondary sources.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Abdullahi, A.M., Kalengyo, R.B. & Warsame, A.A. The unmet demand of food security in East Africa: review of the triple challenges of climate change, economic crises, and conflicts. Discov Sustain 5 , 244 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00381-5

Download citation

Received : 07 May 2024

Accepted : 23 July 2024

Published : 05 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00381-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• East Africa
• Food security
• Climate change
• Economic crises
• Agriculture
• Vulnerability
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

APEC Ministers Responsible for Food Security Chair’s Statement

• The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Ministers responsible for food security, met virtually on 26 August 2022 under the chairmanship of H.E. Dr. Chalermchai Sri-on, Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand to exchange views on policy issues related to the current food security crisis and compounding the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The APEC region must focus on resilient economic rebuilding and recovery.
• APEC economies welcomed the participation of representatives from the APEC Business Advisory Council (ABAC), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC), and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Secretariat.
• Varying views were expressed on the prevailing situation. The meeting expressed its concern on the ongoing COVID-19, current economic challenges, major challenges threatening global and regional food security, including the impacts of economic slowdowns and downturns, climate change, urbanization, global population growth, poverty, the affordability of healthy and nutritious diets, the COVID-19 pandemic, emerging diseases, trade barriers, export restrictions, increasing input costs, including energy and fertilizer, social inequality, as well as other shocks and stresses to food systems. APEC economies also acknowledged that it is time for APEC to sustainably transform our agri-food systems in order to achieve the Roadmap 2030 and align with boarder efforts towards the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, Goal 2 ending (zero) hunger.
• APEC economies encourage to empower smallholders, micro-small and medium size enterprises (MSMEs), women, youth, and other groups with untapped economic potential as indicated in the Food Security Roadmap Towards 2030 to ensure that agriculture is a viable livelihood that sustainably meets the demand for food and agricultural products .
• Reiterating our goal of sufficient, safe, nutritious, accessible and affordable food for all, which will in turn support enhancing the economic recovery and ensuring sustainable and inclusive growth, the meeting strongly supported the need for meaningful actions and achieved consensus on the following:
• Under the theme of APEC Thailand 2022: Open. Connect. Balance., and recognizing the three priorities—open to all opportunities, connected in all dimensions and balanced in all aspects—we recall the Food Security Roadmap Towards 2030 (Roadmap 2030) endorsed at the APEC Ministerial Meeting on Food Security in 2021, and note that it aligns with the theme of APEC Thailand 2022.
• We endorse the implementation plan of the Food Security Roadmap Towards 2030 (Implementation Plan), developed in 2022, which is in line with the Putrajaya Vision 2040 and the Aotearoa Plan of Action, for the lasting food security, food safety and improved nutrition for all, as well as for the reduction of food loss and waste in the region by promoting agricultural and food trade, and working towards sustainable resource management in the agriculture sector. The Implementation Plan identifies specific actions or initiatives that APEC economies may choose to implement to deliver on the Roadmap 2030 in the areas of digitalization and innovation, productivity, inclusivity, sustainability, public-private partnerships and smart goals.
• We acknowledge the work on food security related issues of APEC fora and sub-fora, including the Policy Partnership on Food Security (PPFS), the High Level Policy Dialogue on Agricultural Biotechnology (HLPDAB), the Agricultural Technical Cooperation Working Group (ATCWG), the Oceans and Fisheries Working Group (OFWG) and the Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance (SCSC). We note the contribution of ABAC to food security and its related issues.
• Recalling the Global Report on Food Crises 2022, the number of people reportedly facing acute food insecurity increased from 135 million in 2019 to 193 million in 2021 in the 53 economies most in need of assistance.  We note that food insecurity has continued to increase in 2022. We also acknowledge that it is time for APEC to enhance concentration on the sustainable transformation of our agri-food systems in order to achieve the Roadmap 2030 goals and align with broader efforts towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
• We acknowledge that the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted global food supply chains, livelihoods, income and food prices. It has caused labor shortages, delayed harvesting, suspended operation of processing plants, shifted consumer demand, created disruptions to food distribution systems and slowed trade and business activities. In addition, many urban populations have also been affected with reduced access to food.
• Amid these challenges facing global and regional food security, we reaffirm that APEC economies will jointly pursue cooperation and partnerships to ensure active engagement in supporting food security, in the following areas of: supporting food safety and trade facilitation; improving livelihoods and well-being, especially  for the most vulnerable, by achieving  inclusive agroeconomic growth; promoting productivity growth and sustainable use  of natural resources and the environment; enhancing adoption of science, technology and innovation in the agri-food sector; and balancing the economic, social and environmental interests in realizing food security priorities.

Supporting food safety and trade facilitation

• We recognize the importance of ensuring that food safety measures align with international standards as a component of food security. We also realize the significance of producing nutritious food and achieving more sustainable food systems. We support efforts to reduce food loss and waste. We encourage to promote market access for smallholder farmers as well as consumers’ access to safe food, and enabling effective regulation of food safety in all sectors to strengthen and support food trade, food security and consumer confidence
• We recognize the role of trade to ensure global food security. We support efforts to ensure the unimpeded global trade of food as well as the stability of the food supply chain. We also highlight the importance of a free, open, fair, transparent, predictable, rules-based, and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system, underpinned by WTO rules. In this regard, and agreed to at the Ministerial Declaration on the Emergency Response to Food Security from the twelfth WTO Ministerial Conference, we reaffirm the importance of not imposing export prohibitions or restrictions in a manner inconsistent with relevant WTO provisions.

Improving livelihoods and well-being

• We recognize the importance of self-reliance in agriculture for smallholders—including artisanal fisheries and small-scale aquaculture—to produce food for household consumption as well as the promotion of rural development and prosperity for all our people. We promote transforming food systems to be more resilient to major food insecurity drivers.  Efforts towards empowerment, viable livelihoods and resiliency need to consider gender and climate adaptation and mitigation.

Promoting sustainability of natural resources and environment

• We support approaches to sustainable and climate resilient agriculture based on local conditions, including through the use of innovative technologies and traditional practices that help reduce land degradation and soil erosion, prevent desertification, optimize water use, promote the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and recovery of both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems as well as enhance carbon sequestration and lower greenhouse gas emissions.
• We recognize the essential role of fisheries and aquaculture in ensuring global food security and the importance of the development of local coastal communities to improve the sustainable use of the sector. We acknowledge APEC’s Roadmap on Combatting Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing to ensure the sustainability of fisheries resources and the continued viability of trade in fish and fishery products in the APEC region, as well as the importance of sharing fisheries information, best practices and fisheries technologies to promote good governance in respective economies.

Enhancing innovation and technology in the agri-food sector

• We recognize the importance of agricultural biotechnology as a tool in accordance with each economy’s policy and legislation to enable sustainable agricultural productivity growth essential for food security. We, therefore, encourage APEC economies to utilize risk-proportionate and science-based regulatory frameworks taking into account the economies’ circumstances and priorities to evaluate and approve products of biotechnology, facilitate voluntary technology transfers on mutually agreed terms with appropriate protecting data privacy and intellectual property rights, and raise public awareness in biotechnology innovation.
• We strongly support the introduction of science, technology and innovation, such as precision farm management, climate smart agriculture, and modern smart farming practices through the voluntary sharing, exchanging and transferring of knowledge and best practices, promoting innovation and application of digital technologies to enhance digital supply chain for agriculture production and marketing on mutually agreed terms with appropriate  data privacy protection and intellectual property rights, to help increase productivity, reduce production costs, enhance traceability, improve supply chain data storage, reduce postharvest losses, and build information sharing capabilities. We encourage the promotion of public-private investment to facilitate the use of innovative technologies for the whole food value chain as well as in the introduction of these newly-developed technologies in particular to start-ups and MSMEs.  
• We recognize that both traditional and modern production tools, and emerging digital technologies, are needed to help farmers produce enough to feed a growing global population while reducing their environmental footprint and building climate resilience.  Employing these techniques can accelerate the transition to more sustainable food systems through productivity growth that optimizes agricultural sustainability across social, economic, and environmental dimensions.

Balancing economy, social and environment

• We encourage APEC economies to explore the approach of Bio-Circular-Green Economic Model (BCG), and other innovative approaches in supporting the post COVID-19 pandemic economic recovery. We acknowledge that there is a no “one-size-fits-all” approach to sustainability, and the BCG Model is one of many comprehensive approaches towards inclusive, balanced and sustainable economic development that emphasizes the efficient use of natural resources. We also note the ongoing APEC efforts, including the development of a standalone statement for Leaders’ consideration, to support the BCG Model as an approach for achieving inclusive, balanced and sustainable recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, long-term resilient economic growth, and environmental and climate objectives.

The way forward

• We foster the active engagement of public private partnerships in pursuing synergy and cooperation in contributing towards concrete actions to enhance food security in the APEC region. We instruct the PPFS to facilitate the individual and collective actions conducted by APEC members under the Implementation Plan of the Roadmap 2030, and to report its progress and complete a review of it in 2025.
• We thank Thailand for hosting the virtual APEC Ministerial Meeting on Food Security and related meetings in 2022. We also look forward to the United States hosting APEC in 2023.

Safeguarding Alaska's Lifeline: Rebuilding the Port of Alaska to safeguard food security and economic resilience

• Environment
• Maritime and Coastal Engineering

At a glance

The Port of Alaska's Terminal 1 berth, a lifeline for the state's food security and economic stability, is undergoing a critical rebuild to create a seismically resilient, modern structure capable of withstanding the region's harsh conditions. GHD, in a joint venture with WSP, is providing comprehensive design, bid and construction support services to drive  the project's success while navigating unique challenges such as maintaining port operations, adapting to Arctic weather and protecting local beluga whale populations.

The mission

The Port of Alaska in Anchorage, located at the north end of the Knik Arm, is a critical infrastructure facility that handles more than 85 percent of the state's containerized imports and 90 percent of the state's liquid fuel. As part of the Port's Multiphase Modernization Program, the existing Terminal 1 berth, a key component of the port, is being replaced with a seismically resilient structure designed to withstand harsh cold region demands and challenging environmental site constraints. If this terminal is not operational, it could lead to a humanitarian crisis for the state. The port also supports the Department of Defense joint base through additional vessel berth locations and is the main fuel source for the Alaska Anchorage Airport. However, the current terminal is both functionally and structurally obsolete, meaning it's not big enough and has surpassed its useable design life, and therefore needs to be replaced. Additionally, the current facilities are extremely vulnerable to seismic events, which could have devastating consequences given Alaska's history of large-magnitude earthquakes.

Our challenge

One of the biggest challenges faced by the port is the need to remain fully operational throughout the construction process. The shipping and offloading of goods and materials from Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 cannot stop at any time, necessitating a phased construction approach. The harsh Arctic weather conditions, including sea ice, also pose a significant challenge, limiting the annual construction window and constraining construction means and methods. The presence of beluga whales, a protected native mammal species, adds another layer of complexity, as environmental permits are very sensitive to any vibration in the water caused by construction activities. If the whales are present, all work must shut down to avoid disturbing them, and pile installation operations must be configured to limit the number of mammal disturbances in a calendar year as required by permitting.

Our response

GHD, in a joint venture with WSP, provided design, bid and construction support services for the project. GHD served as the project manager and provided expertise in civil engineering, electrical engineering, corrosion control, fire protection, coastal engineering and navigation, while WSP focused on the waterside structural and geotechnical aspects. The team carefully considered various factors such as the number of piles that could be installed with an efficient construction team, the required lengths for each vessel type, and the use of top-down or water side construction methods to develop a comprehensive plan for the project's construction approach. The design team had a compressed 10-month schedule to meet the issue for construction date, which was driven by permitting efforts. To increase construction efficiency, the design incorporated precast components to reduce cast-in-place work in the environmentally sensitive field conditions, including 200-foot-long, 72-inch diameter, open-ended, steel pipe piles supporting long-span, capacity protected, precast pile-to-cap connections, precast beams and precast deck panels. The project also involved the use of stronger, well-coated materials like galvanized steel and a robust corrosion protection system to withstand the harsh environment. The fendering system, designed to accommodate the wharf's unique berthing and mooring requirements necessitated by large tidal fluctuations and brisk currents, consists of two vertically stacked element fenders connected with a large steel panel and connecting to both wharf and piles.

The rebuilding of Terminal 1 at the Port of Alaska is pivotal in ensuring food security for the state, a point emphasized by the mayor's campaign. The project's successful completion is essential for the uninterrupted flow of goods into Anchorage and the continued functioning of Alaska as a whole. Given the state's remote location and unforgiving climate, Alaska is heavily dependent on its maritime infrastructure and the vital goods transported via its waterways. The new Terminal 1 will not only safeguard the port's operations but also accommodate modern shipping needs, enhance safety and resiliency against natural disasters, and improve cargo handling efficiency. Designed to handle a wide range of cargo, including containers, heavy-lift, cruise ships, military vessels, and potentially future petroleum operations, the replacement Terminal 1 berth will secure the Port of Alaska's future and have a lasting positive impact on the entire state. With construction anticipated to be completed in 2028, this project is a critical investment in Alaska's long-term economic stability and well-being.

We value your privacy

Use of cookies.

This website makes use of cookies to enhance your browsing experience and provide additional functionality, by either storing data on, or collecting data from, your computer.

We use necessary cookies to make our site work. Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility.

We also use information collected from cookies for various purposes, for example for analysis of website usage patterns. Information about the type, use and purpose of the cookies we use is detailed in our Cookies Policy .

GHD is committed to protecting your privacy. Please see our Privacy Policy   for more information.

Cookies, other than necessary cookies, will only be used with your consent. By clicking ‘Accept’ you give us consent to use all cookies. By clicking ‘Reject All’ only necessary cookies will be used. You may disable necessary cookies by changing your browser settings, but this may affect website functions.

Home — Essay Samples — Science — Food Safety — Global Food Insecurity: Causes And Solutions

Global Food Insecurity: Causes and Solutions

• Categories: Food Safety World Food Crisis

About this sample

Words: 2149 |

11 min read

Published: May 17, 2022

Words: 2149 | Pages: 5 | 11 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, section i. background, section ii. technologies that can reduce hunger and improve food security, section iii. specific factors in chosen developing country.

• Chad de Guzman. 2018. CNN Philippines. Philippines food security ranking goes up. Retrieved from https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2018/10/18/Global-Food-Security-Index-2018-Philippines.html
• HealthyPeople.gov. 2020. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Food Insecurity. Retrieved from https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/social-determinants-health/interventions-resources/food-insecurity
• World Resources Institute. 2018. How to Sustainably Feed 10 Billion People by 2050, in 21 Charts? Retrieved from https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/12/how-sustainably-feed-10-billion-people-2050-21-charts
• Bread for the World. 2020. About Hunger. Who Experiences Hunger. Retrieved from https://www.bread.org/who-experiences-hunger
• World Food Programme. Philippines: World Food Programme Clarification on Yolanda Response Funds. Retrieved from https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-statement-yolanda-reponse-funds
• Bill Gates. 2017. The tech solutions to end global hunger. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/23/health/tech-apps-solving-global-hunger-famine/index.html
• iCow. 2020. We aim to secure food production. Retrieved from https://www.icow.co.ke/
• WordPress. 2020. Kilimo Salama. Since we cannot control the weather. Retrieved from https://kilimosalama.wordpress.com/about/
• Grameen Foundation. 2020. The end of poverty is finally within reach. Retrieved from https://grameenfoundation.org/?url=https://grameenfoundation.org/&gclid=Cj0KCQiAkKnyBRDwARIsALtxe7iX8k7sJWnhLUIi7-zh8cEXVS_OvdMq4hAD4Hq9n-rW4O3wM2oniP0aAgo3EALw_wcB
• Kiko Pangilinan. 2016. P-Noy Becoming a Farmer Upon Retirement a Big Boost to PH Farmers, Agriculture. Retrieved from https://kikopangilinan.com/2016/03/18/pangilinan-p-noy-becoming-a-farmer-upon-retirement-a-big-boost-to-ph-farmers-agriculture/
• OXFAM. 2020. The power of people against poverty. Retrieved from https://philippines.oxfam.org/
• Investopedia. 2019. How Corruption Affects Emerging Economies. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/012215/how-corruption-affects-emerging-economies.asp

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Science Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1017 words

1 pages / 372 words

2 pages / 779 words

2 pages / 780 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Food Safety

The "Food, Inc.", documentary film, directed by Robert Kenner provides a comprehensive overview of the food industry in the United States. The film delves into various aspects of the food production process, including the [...]

Food insecurity, a pressing global issue, carries profound implications for individuals and societies alike. In this essay on food insecurity, we will explore the multifaceted nature of this problem, examining its varying [...]

Cinnamon, a spice cherished for its aromatic qualities and versatile uses in both culinary and medicinal contexts, has a less celebrated, more insidious side: the potential to trigger allergic reactions in susceptible [...]

Waking up in morning to the best coffee makes the day a bright and productive one for sure. A creamy and rich froth on top gives heavenly taste to plain cup of coffee. Choosing the best milk frother for almond milk and coffee is [...]

“Want to go have some sushi?” “How about some pho?” “I feel like some Italian.”“Let’s go have Russian.” Everyone turns their head and looks at THAT guy. Who asks for Russian food? Russian cuisine has a deep, rich history that [...]

In recent years, the local food movement has gained a lot of attention for its effort at promoting sustainability from direct-to-consumer sales. Through processing, distribution and consumption, any regional food networks goal [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

FAO Hosts Workshop on Evaluating the Global Health Security Agenda in Africa

Experts from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)  Emergency Center for Animal Transboundary Diseases (ECTAD) in Ghana, Kenya, Sierra Leone, and Tanzania gathered on 28 and 29 August 2024 in Nairobi for a Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) evaluation workshop, where the crucial role of FAO ECTAD in advancing animal health and combating antimicrobial resistance (AMR) across Africa was underscored.

Country Innovations and Challenges

For FAO ECTAD, the GHSA evaluation represents a critical opportunity to showcase the impact of its initiatives and the progress made in collaboration with member countries.

For Kenya, for instance, the workshop highlighted the success of the Animal Surveillance System (KABS), a key project supported by FAO ECTAD. This system exemplifies how FAO ECTAD’s focus on sustainable, country-led solutions has fostered significant improvements in animal health surveillance.

Ghana’s advancement in meat regulations and traceability tools , facilitated by FAO ECTAD’s support, was also a focal point. The integration of the Epi value chain tool reflects FAO ECTAD’s commitment to strengthening regulatory frameworks and enhancing disease monitoring.

In Sierra Leone, the discussion around equipment calibration and the adaptation of the ISAVET curriculum to lower-level animal health professionals highlighted FAO ECTAD’s role in capacity building and education. These efforts are pivotal in ensuring that veterinary services are robust and adaptable to local needs.

Tanzania’s use of the EMA-i mobile app , showcased during the workshop, demonstrates FAO ECTAD’s support for innovative solutions in real-time data collection and reporting. The app’s implementation underscores the importance of FAO ECTAD’s work in fostering technological advancements in disease surveillance.

The workshop also emphasized FAO ECTAD’s pivotal role in AMR management and multisectoral coordination. Through these highlights, the workshop illustrated how FAO ECTAD’s support is making a tangible difference across Africa. The successful implementation of various projects and the collaborative spirit displayed at the workshop reflect FAO ECTAD’s dedication to enhancing regional health security. As the region continues to tackle complex challenges, FAO ECTAD’s contributions remain central to advancing animal health and combating AMR, reinforcing its critical role in the GHSA framework.

For further information, please contact:

Joseph Othieno

National Communications Specialist

Email:  [email protected]