1. Background
The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has been the centre stage of various crises, ranging from political instability, violence and insecurity to the biggest outbreak of Ebola in the world’s history. As a result, the country’s development status remains low, characterised by pronounced malnutrition, high poverty rates and fragile livelihoods (INS, 2019; Marivoet, De Herdt, & Ulimwengu, 2019).
At the same time, the DRC is endowed with countless natural resources. The country has the potential to become one of the richest economies on the continent and a driver of African growth. Given that around 65% of total population live in rural areas, the agriculture sector has by far the biggest potential to be an engine of inclusive development.
Despite its significant agricultural and mineral resources, the DRC has the largest number of food insecure people in the world, resulting from a combination of factors including conflict, increased food prices and transportation costs, as well as the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and other epidemics. The country’s protracted food crisis is compounded by one of the world’s longest-running armed conflicts with armed forces associated with foreign forces that continue to fight intensely in the eastern territories. According to the 2023 Global Report on Food Crises (GRFS) (FSIN, 2023), the Democratic Republic of the Congo has the highest numbers of people in IPC Phase 3 or above, at about 26.43 million, accounting for over 55 percent of the region’s total number of people in these phases, mostly due to compounding shocks the country experiences.
The armed conflict in Eastern DRC has led to the displacement of people, often forcing them to abandon their farms and livestock. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reports that as of 2021, there were over 5 million internally displaced people in DRC (OCHA, 2021). The displacement severely undermines food production, leading to food shortages in the region. The ongoing conflict has led to the destruction of infrastructure crucial for agriculture, such as irrigation systems, storage facilities, and roads needed for the transportation of food and farming inputs. This has also reduced the ability of farmers to engage in productive agriculture, leading to food insecurity (FAO, 2020). Even when food is available, conflict can make it difficult for people to access markets due to safety concerns. Roads are often blocked by armed groups, preventing the transportation of food to markets (WFP, 2021).
Timely response to these shocks becomes critical as households and communities that have lost their livelihoods because of a shock can rapidly deplete assets and engage in coping strategies with long-term effects on well-being. Given resources constraints, proposed responses must be based on evidence. However, in addition to the lack of adequate data, empirical misspecifications may lead to erroneous evidence; therefore, increasing the challenge to design, implement, and monitor required interventions in the face of multiple shocks. In this paper, using the case of Eastern DRC, I highlight the need for researchers and policymakers to consider the complexities and nuances of different shocks and their interactions in order to design more effective food security interventions.
2. Data and methods
I use a typology of shocks treatment (identical and independent shocks; non-identical and independent shocks; non-identical but dependent shocks) to assess how each specification determines the impact of shocks on households’ food security. Identical shocks refer to the assumption that all shocks are the same and therefore can be addressed with a one-size-fits-all approach while independence stipulates that one shock does not affect the occurrence or magnitude of another. Data are from a households survey conducted in 2022 by the World Food Program (WFP) in one of the most affected provinces in the DRC, the province of Nord Kivu in Eastern DRC. The survey covered about 3,000 households.
Probit models were used to estimate the impact of shocks occurrence on food security in the region.
3. Results and discussions
The survey included twenty shocks; however, respondents were asked to list up to three shocks only. Figure 1 shows that 32.3 percent, 7.6 percent and 3.4 percent of surveyed households have been affected by one, two and three shocks respectively. It is likely that the number of households with multiple shocks would have been much higher had the respondents been allowed to report all the shocks they faced.
Among reported shocks, sickness/disease ranks first (Figure 2); indeed, for the last ten years, Eastern DRC has experienced Ebola, Cholera and COVID-19. Armed conflict combined with forced displacement affected around 40 percent of households. For more than thirty years, Eastern DRC has also been the epicenter of violence and civil unrest in country. As far as weather-related shocks are concerned, less than ten percent of households mentioned flood/drought.
These multiple and compounding shocks might explain why more than 50 percent of the surveyed households were under “non-acceptable” food security state (Figure 3). Indeed, 32.2 percent of surveyed households were under “Borderline” and 19.5 percent under “Poor” states.
Estimated results (Figure 4 & 5) suggest that shocks are likely to increase the probability of being in “Poor” state of food security while reducing the probability of being in “Acceptable” state. In other words, they increase the likelihood of bad state while reducing that of good state. The results also indicate significant difference in marginal effects across shocks; weather-related shocks (flood/drought) have the highest marginal impact followed by armed conflict and forced displacement. The difference is more significant when shocks are treated as identical; this happens when the question on shocks is formulated as “has your household been affected by any shock” without explicitly specifying which one. This results in one binary variable (1 if affected, 0 otherwise). Treating shocks as identical increases the risk of mis-targeting and may lead to blind policy and interventions.
Multivariate probit (MVP) models account for the fact that these shocks are neither identical nor independent (Cappellari and Jenkins, 2003). As shown in Figure 6 & 7, the marginal effects of compounding shocks on food security escalate substantially compared to the individual shocks. Compounding shocks occur when multiple shocks happen simultaneously or in quick succession, leading to a cumulative impact. For example, a drought may reduce crop yields, while a pandemic may disrupt supply chains and limit access to food, creating a compounding effect that worsens food insecurity.
The marginal effects of compounding shocks on food security can be severe. They can lead to higher food prices, reduced food availability, and decreased access to nutritious food, which can increase malnutrition and hunger. In addition, they can affect food systems in different ways, such as by disrupting production, distribution, and marketing of food, creating further challenges. Furthermore, compounding shocks can have long-term effects on food security. For instance, they can reduce the resilience of households, communities, and countries, making them more vulnerable to future shocks. Therefore, addressing the root causes of food insecurity and building resilience to compounding shocks is essential to ensure sustainable food security for all.
4. Concluding remarks
The challenge of responding to multiple and compounding food shocks is a complex and multifaceted issue that requires a coordinated and sustained effort from various actors at the local, national, and global levels. In the case of the DRC, food shocks are resulting from various factors such as extreme weather events, diseases outbreaks, conflicts, and economic shocks. When multiple shocks occur simultaneously or in quick succession, the impact on food systems can be compounded, leading to increased food insecurity and malnutrition.
To address this challenge, it is important to adopt a holistic approach that considers the various interconnected factors that contribute to food shocks. This includes measures to improve the resilience of food systems, such as diversifying crops, building climate-resilient infrastructure, and investing in early warning systems. Additionally, efforts to promote sustainable and inclusive economic growth, reduce poverty and inequality, and build social safety nets can help mitigate the impact of food shocks on vulnerable populations.
At the same time, it is essential to strengthen coordination and collaboration among stakeholders involved in food security and nutrition, including governments, civil society organizations, private sector actors, and international organizations. This includes sharing information, resources, and best practices, as well as working together to develop and implement effective policies and programs.
Overall, responding to multiple and compounding food shocks requires a long-term, sustained effort that recognizes the complex nature of shocks and involves a broad range of stakeholders working together towards a common goal.
References
Cappellari, L. and S.P. Jenkins. 2003. Multivariate probit regression using simulated maximum likelihood. The Stata Journal 3(3): 278-294.
FSIN and Global Network Against Food Crises. 2023. GRFC 2023. Rome.
Marivoet, Wim; De Herdt, Tom; and Ulimwengu, John M. 2019. Reviewing DRC’s poverty estimates, 2005-2012: Unprecedented GDP growth without trickle down. London: Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium.
Ulimwengu, John, Cleo Roberts, and Josée Randriamamonjy. 2012. Resource-rich yet Malnourished: Analysis of the Demand for Food Nutrients in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Discussion Paper 01154. Washington, D.C. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
UN OCHA (2021). DR Congo: Humanitarian Snapshot (as of 31 Dec 2021).
WFP (2021). WFP Democratic Republic of Congo Country Brief.