This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Floods, wildfires, conflicts, earthquakes, economic shocks, hurricanes or epidemics: These unexpected and often dramatic events affect people's lives and jobs, destroy crops, wipe out livestock and stored food, contaminate water, block roads, cut off communities and severely affect access to markets and food. This is a distressing picture—one expected to get much worse in the near future because of climate change and an increasingly polarized world.
Yet science says no: These natural and human-made shocks do not have to lead to more hunger by default. A new study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, challenges the natural human tendency to think that everything will necessarily get worse after a shock. Instead, the study presents compelling empirical evidence that it is possible to break the link between shocks and food insecurity.
The key element is resilience. In simple terms, resilience means the ability of people, communities, ecosystems (and food systems in this particular case study) to withstand disturbance and continue functioning despite disasters and shocks. Using a large data set from several dozen countries worldwide, recorded over more than 10 years, the international researchers who conducted the study show that what matters in the face of disasters is not simply how developed a country is or how often it is affected by shocks or disasters (or how severe they are), but, perhaps more importantly, how prepared a country is and how much resilience capacity it has built.
They found, for instance, several examples of countries—particularly in Asia—that show improving food-security trends despite being more severely affected by disasters than the rest of the world. "In the context of increasing shocks and disasters (climate change, conflicts, pandemic), these findings are important—they demonstrate that food crises are not ineluctable and that suffering can be avoided if countries, and in particular their food systems, are sufficiently prepared," said Chris Béné, lead author. To understand what shapes countries' ability to maintain food security amid crises and disasters, the researchers studied countries with different income levels and analyzed factors such as the severity of shocks, the capacities of countries' governments, levels of infrastructure, economic and social cohesion, and, importantly, the characteristics of their food systems.
The findings offer important insights for governments seeking to strengthen national preparedness and food security in the face of increasing shocks. Although every country is unique, some general principles emerge. In particular, the study found that having multiple ways to obtain food clearly helps reduce the risk of crises.
Likewise, government effectiveness (that is, how well public and civil services function), as well as greater capabilities and better access to new technologies and financial markets, are critical. Finally, social capital (community networks, social connections and relationships) also appears important in the long term. "To strengthen resilient food systems, the government, development agencies and financial institutions should prioritize reinforcing government capacities to better anticipate and respond to shocks and disasters, promoting diversity and redundancy in food systems—and not just efficiency or just-in-time food chains—and investing in human capabilities at the household and community levels to protect nutrition and household assets," said Jose-Luis Vivero-Pol, co-author.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
