Coping or hoping? Livelihood diversification and food insecurity in the COVID-19 pandemic

IF 6.8 1区经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY

Food Policy Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102819

Ann M. Furbush , Anna Josephson , Talip Kilic , Jeffrey D. Michler

{"title":"Coping or hoping? Livelihood diversification and food insecurity in the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Ann M. Furbush , Anna Josephson , Talip Kilic , Jeffrey D. Michler","doi":"10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We examine the relationship between livelihood diversification and food insecurity amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analysis uses household panel data from Ethiopia, Malawi, and Nigeria in which the first round was collected immediately prior to the pandemic and extends through multiple rounds of monthly data collection during the pandemic. Using this pre- and post-outbreak data, and guided by a pre-analysis plan, we estimate conditional associations between livelihood diversification and food insecurity. Our results do not support the hypothesis that livelihood diversification correlates with household resilience. Though income diversification may serve as an effective coping mechanism for small-scale shocks, we find that for a disaster on the scale of the pandemic this strategy is not effective. Policymakers looking to prepare for the increased occurrence of large-scale disasters will need to grapple with the fact that coping strategies that gave people hope in the past may fail them as they try to cope with the future.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":321,"journal":{"name":"Food Policy","volume":"131 ","pages":"Article 102819"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Policy","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919225000235","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examine the relationship between livelihood diversification and food insecurity amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analysis uses household panel data from Ethiopia, Malawi, and Nigeria in which the first round was collected immediately prior to the pandemic and extends through multiple rounds of monthly data collection during the pandemic. Using this pre- and post-outbreak data, and guided by a pre-analysis plan, we estimate conditional associations between livelihood diversification and food insecurity. Our results do not support the hypothesis that livelihood diversification correlates with household resilience. Though income diversification may serve as an effective coping mechanism for small-scale shocks, we find that for a disaster on the scale of the pandemic this strategy is not effective. Policymakers looking to prepare for the increased occurrence of large-scale disasters will need to grapple with the fact that coping strategies that gave people hope in the past may fail them as they try to cope with the future.

查看原文本刊更多论文

应付还是希望？2019冠状病毒病大流行中的生计多样化和粮食不安全

我们研究了2019冠状病毒病大流行期间生计多样化与粮食不安全之间的关系。我们的分析使用了埃塞俄比亚、马拉维和尼日利亚的家庭面板数据，在这些国家中，第一轮数据是在大流行之前立即收集的，并在大流行期间延伸到每月收集的多轮数据。利用疫情前和疫情后的数据，并在预分析计划的指导下，我们估计了生计多样化与粮食不安全之间的条件关联。我们的研究结果不支持生计多样化与家庭弹性相关的假设。虽然收入多样化可以作为小规模冲击的有效应对机制，但我们发现，对于大流行这种规模的灾难，这一战略并不有效。希望为大规模灾害的增加做好准备的政策制定者将需要面对这样一个事实，即过去给人们带来希望的应对策略在他们试图应对未来时可能会失败。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Food Policy 管理科学-农业经济与政策

CiteScore

11.40

自引率

4.60%

发文量

128

审稿时长

62 days

期刊介绍： Food Policy is a multidisciplinary journal publishing original research and novel evidence on issues in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of policies for the food sector in developing, transition, and advanced economies. Our main focus is on the economic and social aspect of food policy, and we prioritize empirical studies informing international food policy debates. Provided that articles make a clear and explicit contribution to food policy debates of international interest, we consider papers from any of the social sciences. Papers from other disciplines (e.g., law) will be considered only if they provide a key policy contribution, and are written in a style which is accessible to a social science readership.