Abstract
Despite small improvements, gender and social inequalities remain pervasive; they lead to worse outcomes for women and children and Indigenous populations during food, energy, and environmental, including climate, crises, widening gaps in access to food and employment and increasing overall inequity in income between the rich and the poor. At the same time there is considerable evidence that women have large roles to play in crisis mitigation, particularly in the most vulnerable populations, and that their engagement in decision-making processes supports crisis prevention. To avoid that humanitarian and food crises increase gender and social inequities and to ensure that women can exert their agency in reducing crises impacts, governments, donors and practitioners need to actively work with and for women, girls and Indigenous populations, providing opportunities for their active participation in decision-making processes and policy responses at all levels, ensuring access to digital tools, information, finance, and raising awareness on and actively working toward preventing gender-based violence.
Climate, food, water and energy crises are increasing
What do poor bioenergy policies, the COVID-19 pandemic and climate extreme events have in common apart from a lack of human ingenuity? They all contributed to global food and energy price spikes. Three such crises have now occurred in just the last 15 years (Figure 1), leading to immense human suffering, ranging from malnutrition to associated civil strife and violent conflict, gender-based violence (GBV), loss of schooling and increased child marriages. These food price spikes directly led to increases in food insecurity: In 2021, between 702 and 828 million people were chronically hungry and 3.1 billion people lacked access to a healthy diet, even before the war on Ukraine led to yet higher food price inflation (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, WHO 2022). At least 150 million more women than men were experiencing food insecurity (Selva and Janoch 2022).
Figure 1 masks much larger food price spikes experienced in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Examples include the 48% (April 2023) year-on-year food price increase in Pakistan linked to an acute balance-of-payment crisis and political uncertainty, the more than 100% year-on-year food inflation experienced in Venezuela in the first half of 2022 (no later data available), and the 200% average year-on-year food price inflation experienced in Lebanon over the last 12 months.
Food price shocks can be yet more extreme in local areas within countries linked to intrastate conflicts. In such conflicts, food prices do not only increase, but access to food may be entirely cut off in parts of countries. An example was the intrastate civil war in Ethiopia leading to a severe famine with an estimated 13 million people in need of food aid in Tigray and surrounding regional states, as banking and telecommunications, and fuel and food access were cut off.
While water cannot be easily added to Figure 1 because it is not traded globally, water scarcity and variability linked to climate change, environmental degradation, poor policy and lack of investments have clearly been drivers and multipliers of food and energy crises; and the often poor responses to global food and energy crises have worsened water security.
Gender inequities increase with food and humanitarian crises
Given existing gender inequalities in access to productive resources, services, and agency, due to harmful social norms, food and humanitarian crises put women and girls at a higher risk of hunger and malnutrition (Njuki et al. 2022). Experience shows that crises can reduce women’s resources and agency more quickly and deeply than men’s widening gender inequalities (World Economic Forum 2021).
It is therefore not surprising that the recent FAO report on the Status of Women in Agrifood Systems (2023), notes that the gender gap in food insecurity is worsening – the gap in the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity increased from 1.7 percentage points in 2019 to 4.3 percentage points in 2021; while the World Food Program estimates that COVID-19 pushed an additional 47 million girls and women into extreme poverty, reversing decades of progress (WFP 2022). Job losses in agrifood systems were much more pronounced for women than men during the COVID-19 pandemic as they were more likely to work without protection in the informal sector to start with. Food and humanitarian crises are also more likely to result in girls rather than boys being pulled from school, and in increases in GBV, with long-term implications for their reproductive health, income-earning opportunities, and well-being for themselves and their children. Moreover, to cope with shocks, households may dispose of women’s financial assets first, especially when these are more liquid or secondary to the household’s main livelihood activity (Shean and Alnouri 2014). The erosion of women’s incomes, savings, and assets leaves them with fewer options to deal with rising prices of food, energy, and agricultural inputs and can lead to permanent increases in gender inequities.
A study of COVID-19 impacts in five African countries showed increases in GBV and a lack of access to safe spaces and services for youth, especially girls and young women. As schools closed, and school feeding programs were suspended, adult (71%) and youth (52%) respondents reported an increase in the economic and sexual exploitation of girls for food in rural and informal settlements (MIET Africa 2021).
Governments are left in precarious fiscal situations during food and energy price spikes, particularly if they linger for months and years. When the going gets tough – that is extreme fiscal distress – weaker and less vocal, and more remote segments of society often lose protection or are forgotten in relief efforts. Budgetary shifts can disproportionately affect the most vulnerable, including women and female heads of households, exacerbating existing structural barriers and intersecting forms of discrimination (CWGL 2019; Oliveira and Alloatti 2022). When governments reduce expenditures on education and health, the burden of providing these services is often transferred to households and communities, putting additional pressure on women and reinforcing traditional gender roles (Quisumbing et al. 2008).
Women and children are especially vulnerable to rising food prices. Even before the pandemic, women were more likely to experience food insecurity and malnutrition than men, with intra-household inequality often driving nutritional deprivation in women and children, rather than poverty (Brown, Ravallion and van de Walle 2019). To cope with rising food prices, households tend to spend less money on food, often by prioritizing staple foods and reducing consumption of nutrient-rich foods (Brinkman et al. 2010). Women act as “shock absorbers” for their households during food price crises, reducing their own consumption to leave food for others (Quisumbing et al. 2008). Rising food insecurity and malnutrition pose the greatest risks for children and pregnant and lactating women, who may suffer repercussions to health and productivity that can span across future generations (Martorell and Zongrone 2012). Food price increases can also lead farm households to hoard food crops, which contributes to further price increases (Timmer 2010), food loss and waste due to spoilage and pests, and greater exposure to health risks, such as aflatoxin.
Both climate- and conflict-induced food and humanitarian crises can be highly detrimental to agricultural areas. During crises, costs of agricultural inputs, particularly inorganic fertilizers, pesticides, and fuel for agricultural machinery rise, threatening to widen the gender gap in agricultural productivity. Women farmers already have less access to resources, such as fertilizers (Peterman, Behrman, and Quisumbing 2014). Higher input prices can lead to conflicts within households, and women tend to have less influence over decisions about how to allocate increasingly expensive resources (Quisumbing et al. 2008).
Importantly, many of the gender-blind crisis responses that have been implemented in response to recent food and humanitarian crises have likely worsened outcomes for women. For example, fertilizer subsidies or e-vouchers targeted to landholders are less likely to reach women farmers due to their limited control over land. Moreover, these transfers often use digital platforms, which again are less likely to benefit women due to the well-documented gender digital divide (GSMA 2022).
Women have key roles in crisis mitigation and prevention
Women and other marginalized groups have important contributions to make in both crisis prevention and, following crisis onset, in their mitigation. For women and other marginalized groups to exert these roles, they require supporting policies, institutions and investments that are described in the following.
Crisis prevention
Shair-Rosenfield and Wood (2017) find that the proportion of female representatives in a national legislature prolongs peace following a negotiated settlement due to their increased spending on welfare, as compared to military, and by improving public perceptions, particularly in states with nominally democratic political institutions. Similarly, McCarthy and Kilic (2017) find that women’s representation and voice enables communities to negotiate and enforce agreements to provide public goods, which is particularly important in times of crises. Greater public goods provision, in turn, increases agricultural productivity and consumption per capita.
As such, women leaders and women’s organizations need equal and meaningful participation in decision-making spaces at multiple scales to develop more inclusive processes, design gender-responsive interventions, coordinate implementation across sectors, and monitor and evaluate the gendered impacts of the crisis response. If women’s voices are formally represented in crisis planning and response, programs are more likely to be more equitable and effective.
More research and awareness raising is needed to fully mainstream understanding of women’s roles in peace-making and peace-keeping.
Crisis mitigation
Social networks and women’s groups are essential to help governments and NGOs reach those most affected by food and humanitarian crisis. As an example, women’s groups in Sri Lanka intervened quickly following the 2004 Tsunami responding to reports of violence against women in shelters and elsewhere. They mobilized funds and distributed items overlooked by relief agencies such as underwear and sanitary towels and successfully lobbied for adequate lighting and covered bathrooms to increase women’s safety and called for women’s representation in camp management (Fisher 2009). Similarly, the Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) in India with 1.5 million women members working in the informal sector served as intermediary between women and the government during relief efforts under the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of this initiative, SEWA has also supported community-based, decentralized economic activities based on the 100-miles principle that supports local communities to weather and overcome supply chain disruptions during economic and other crises.
Women’s associations in India and elsewhere have also been shown to be effective at promoting economic empowerment, helping women access public entitlements, and increasing women’s political engagement.
Informal networks are equally important during crises. For instance, in the conflict in Yemen, women’s social networks enabled them to share food, shelter, information, and emotional support (Kim et al. 2022). Inputs from women’s groups and networks are essential to ensure that relief programs address women’s needs in their specific context.
Climate- and conflict-driven food and humanitarian crises raise the risk of GBV both inside and outside the home, including early and forced marriage as a coping mechanism. Expanding access to health, trauma, and legal services are essential for victims, but so is prevention. Targeted incentives, such as conditional cash transfers, can help by taking pressure off families and reduce adverse outcomes for women and girls, such as early marriage. Gender transformative approaches that engage women and men together in addressing conflicts and sharing resources as well as involving local religious leaders in crisis mitigation can reduce GBV as well.
To be able to take adequate response options during food and humanitarian crises, women need access to information on coping and resilience strategies. To effectively reach women and other vulnerable groups, resources and approaches must be tailored to address the specific needs of women, girls and other disadvantaged groups and they must use channels that women can access and trust. As an example, women farmers are more likely to access information from informal channels, such as women’s groups and neighbors rather than from agricultural extension services. Closing the gender digital divide, including increasing women’s mobile phone ownership, and removing other biases inherent in digital tools, such as their linkage to a savings account, is essential given the growing provision of information and relief services through these tools (Rowntree et al. 2019). Some organizations are tackling the digital divide head on through innovative product development, such as digital training modules accessible via mobile phone. Besides these approaches, affordable microfinance and mobile money programs can also help support women during food and humanitarian crises. During the 2008 food price crisis in Bangladesh, microfinance programs targeting women improved their livelihood prospects, including helping them rent more land so that their families could grow food (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO 2021).
In addition to resources and information, women also need financial support and access to financial products that are tailored to meet their specific needs during food and other crises. Worldwide, women, the poor, the young, Indigenous people, and those outside the workforce all continue to have lower financial account ownership rates, on average, compared to men and high-income adults, older persons, and the employed, with negative implications for their economic empowerment, resilience, and well-being (Demirgüç-Kunt et al. 2022). Women often trade in informal market settings, which are typically excluded from public sector initiatives, such as subsidy programs and social protection measures. Major barriers for women to access support programs, such as costly registration fees, collateral requirements, and the requirements of documentation that might be difficult or impossible for women to obtain, should be reduced. The private sector must also be leveraged, but with guidance to enable companies to recognize women’s value as a market segment, to better target women, and to provide gender-responsive financial tools to effectively reach women.
Lessons from both the 2008/2009 food crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic have shown that targeted cash and food transfer programs are the most effective and efficient means of helping households smooth consumption despite rising food prices (Grosh et al. 2011; Gentilini et al. 2022). These social protection programs serve as an important safety net in supporting food security and nutrition for women, especially the most vulnerable – pregnant women, single mothers, those with young children at risk of malnutrition, women with disabilities, older women, and refugee women. However, there are numerous studies that have shown program weaknesses regarding targeting, program mechanisms, and their sustainability. As an example, most COVID-19 relief transfers in LMICs were short-lived (Gentilini et al. 2022). Moreover, recognizing that decision-making around where food assistance is prioritized within a household is driven by social norms, gender-transformative approaches are necessary to ensure urgent assistance fully benefits all members of the household. Cash transfer programs can also help women retain access to financial resources, but barriers to their financial inclusion need to be overcome to enable women to access these programs (e.g. when payments are made electronically). Moreover, cash transfer programs must be equipped to support migrant and refugee women to access official identity documents, which they may have left behind when they were forced to flee. Determining individual needs within households is one way to ensure better response to the food security dynamics within families.
Social assistance programs that include additional services, such as support for childcare and incentives for adolescent girls to stay in school, can have a longer-term positive impact on women’s livelihoods. Providing incentives for girls to remain in school during times of crisis can ensure that the next generation of women has greater economic opportunities.
Evidence from previous crises suggests a heightened risk of GBV, affecting particularly women and girls, both inside and outside the home, including child early and forced child marriage and other types of GBV. Efforts should go beyond providing services for women and girls experiencing GBV and sexual exploitation to include prevention and protection measures and livelihood rehabilitation programs, designed together with development partners and local women’s organizations. Addressing the exploitation of women and girls is critical: one step forward is to guarantee continued education opportunities by reducing school fees or providing long-term zero interest credit linked to school attendance. A greater focus on incentives to retain school enrollment of adolescent girls will go a long way to ensuring longer term economic prosperity and food security. One option is to offer cash-based transfers or food vouchers to families as an incentive to ensure school retention. In many countries, additional top-ups or take-home food bundles are offered to secure the continued participation of adolescent girls in school during times of crisis, while also supporting their food security.
Finally, to develop and implement gender-responsive approaches to humanitarian crises, more timely, accessible, and localized, sex-disaggregated data and evidence are required to understand the differential impacts of both the crisis itself and implications of potential responses on women and girls, and men and boys in different contexts. Given that women tend to have lower resilience capacities, gender analyses that assess women’s needs and priorities in different contexts are critical.
Although some evidence exists, data should be collected more systematically and be accessible and more widely used. Information is needed on immediate effects of food and humanitarian crises as well as crises responses. Key areas with missing information include the incidence of GBV, and longer-term impacts on gender equality and women’s empowerment, and well-being outcomes, such as food security, nutrition, and resilient livelihoods. These data can also help stakeholders understand how to support women as economic actors in agri-food value chains, including the important role of women farmers in supporting food security in the current season and future growing seasons.
Conclusions
Intentional efforts and commitments from all actors are essential to ensuring that women are actively engaged in preventing food and humanitarian crises and in mitigating their outcomes. Achieving this will require crises interventions that prioritize gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, instead of blanket interventions.
Women-led and women’s rights organizations must take center stage in crises responses and have their voices heard at national and international platforms. A strong focus on justice, equality, inclusiveness and human rights must be at the heart of every effort to counter the socio-economic impact of food and humanitarian crises; and crises responses need to help build more resilient agri-food systems and rural livelihoods.
Despite the many challenges that women and girls are facing, they are essential to the success of any crisis response. Finally, key actor groups must shift the rhetoric away from describing women as vulnerable victims, towards recognizing the resilience that women display around the world during times of crisis.
References
Brinkman, H.J., S. de Pee, I. Sanogo, L. Subran, and M.W. Bloem. 2010. High Food Prices and the Global Financial Crisis Have Reduced Access to Nutritious Food and Worsened Nutritional Status and Health. The Journal of Nutrition, 140(1): 153S-161S. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.109.110767
Brown, C., M. Ravallion, and D. van de Walle. 2019. Most of Africa’s Nutritionally Deprived Women and Children Are Not Found in Poor Households. The Review of Economics and Statistics 2019; 101 (4): 631-644. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00800
CGD (Center For Global Development). 2022. Extreme Poverty Estimate Following Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine (Mid-March 2022).
CWGL (Center for Women’s Global Leadership). 2019. The Impact of Economic Reforms and Austerity Measures on Women’s Human Rights
Demirgüç-Kunt, A., L. Klapper, D. Singer, and S. Ansar. 2022. Global Findex Database 2021: Financial Inclusion, Digital Payments, and Resilience in the Age of COVID-19. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://10.1596/978-1-4648-1897-4
El Pais. 2023. Ethiopia’s forgotten war is the deadliest of the 21st century, with around 600,000 civilian deaths. Jan 27.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2023. The status of women in agrifood systems. Rome: FAO.
FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, WHO 2022. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022. Repurposing food and agricultural policies to make healthy diets more affordable. Rome: FAO.
FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2021. 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. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4474en
Fisher, S. 2009. Sri Lankan women’s organisations responding to post-tsunami violence. In Women, gender and disaster, eds. E. Enarson and P.G.D. Chakrabarti. Sage Publications.
GBV Working Group. 2022. No Conflict Exists in a Vacuum: Food insecurity and the consequences of the Ukraine crisis on Gender-Based Violence (GBV) in West and Central Africa.
Gentilini, U. et al. 2022. Social Protection and Jobs Responses to COVID-19: A Real-Time Review of Country Measures. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/37186
Grosh, M., Andrews, C., Quintana, R., Rodriguez-Alas., C. 2011. Assessing safety net readiness in response to food price volatility. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26825
GSMA. 2022. The Mobile Gender Gap Report 2022. London, UK: GSMA.
Headey, D.D., & Hirvonen, K. (2022). Food inflation, poverty, and urbanization in the short run. IFPRI Discussion Paper 2133. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.136356
Kim, J., M. Elsamahi, A. Humphrey, A. Kadasi, and D. Maxwell. 2022. Sharing to Survive: Investigating the Role of Social Networks During Yemen’s Humanitarian Crisis. Washington, DC: Resilience Evaluation, Analysis and Learning (REAL) Associate Award.
Martorell, R. and A. Zongrone. 2012. Intergenerational influences on child growth and undernutrition. Pediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 26 (Suppl 1), 302-314. https://doi.org/0.1111/j.1365-3016.2012.01298.x
McCarthy, N. and T. Kilic. 2017. The Nexus between Gender, Collective Action for Public Goods, and Agriculture: Evidence from Malawi. World Bank Policy Research Paper 6806. Washington DC: World Bank.
MIET AFRICA (2021) The Impact of COVID-19 on Adolescents and Young People in the SADC Region. South Africa. MIET AFRICA.
Njuki, J. S. Eissler, H. Malapit, R. Meinzen-Dick, E. Bryan, and A. Quisumbing. 2022. A review of evidence on gender equality, women’s empowerment, and food systems. Global Food Security, 33: 100622.
Oliveira, A.L.M. and M. Alloatti. 2022. Gendering the crisis: austerity and the Covid‑19 pandemic in Brazil. Economia Politica, 39: 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40888-021-00243-7
Peterman, A., J.A. Behrman, A.R. Quisumbing. (2014). A Review of Empirical Evidence on Gender Differences in Nonland Agricultural Inputs, Technology, and Services in Developing Countries. In: Quisumbing, A., Meinzen-Dick, R., Raney, T., Croppenstedt, A., Behrman, J., Peterman, A. (eds) Gender in Agriculture. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8616-4_
Quisumbing et al. 2008. Helping Women Respond to the Global Food Price Crisis. IFPRI.
Rowntree, O., K. Bahia, H. Croxson, A. Delaporte, M. Meyer, M. Shanahan, and C. Sibthorpe. 2019. The Mobile Gender Gap Report 2021. GSMA Connected Women.
Selva, M. and E. Janoch. 2022. Food Security and Gender Equality: A Synergistic Understudied Symphony. CARE Research Report.
Shair-Rosenfield, S. and R.M. Wood. Xx Governing Well after War: How Improving Female Representation Prolongs Post-conflict Peace. Journal of Politics 79(3): 995-1009.
Shean, A., and S. Alnouri. 2014. Rethinking Resilience: Prioritizing Gender Integration to Enhance Household and Community Resilience to Food Insecurity in the Sahel. Portland, OR: Mercy Corps. https://www.mercycorps.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/Rethinking_Resilience_Gender_Integration.pdf
Timmer, C.P. 2010. Reflections on food crises past. Food Policy, 35: 1-11.
World Economic Forum. 2021. Global Gender Gap Report 2021.