Global Shocks Vulnerability Analysis (v2)

Over the past decade, worldwide food prices have weathered numerous shocks originating from supply interruptions, shifts in biofuel demand, and trade barriers. This volatility has disproportionately impacted food security, notably in low-income nations heavily reliant on imports. In response to this challenge, policymakers require more precise insights into countries' susceptibilities to diverse shocks. The Global Shocks Vulnerability Analysis tool aims to introduce a vulnerability metric that quantifies nations' proneness to food price escalations, considering factors like dietary patterns, import reliance, and levels of food security.

Vulnerability hinges on multiple factors, including the reverberations of global price fluctuations on local markets, the presence of substitutes, the role a commodity plays in household budgets, and the broader context of a nation's food security and income situation.

However, developing a vulnerability index that encompasses all these aspects necessitates intricate data from household budget surveys, a challenge due to complexity and availability constraints. A vulnerability index limited to specific countries would also yield limited insights. Our emphasis is on an index that aligns with four criteria: accurately capturing negative impacts, offering widespread applicability, relying on quantifiable variables, and being user-friendly for independent computation.

The proposed approach introduces the Food Import Vulnerability Index (FIVI), designed for assessment at the country-commodity level. Concentrating on pivotal staples in national diets, FIVI comprises three components: the portion of daily caloric intake derived from the commodity, the ratio of imported commodity consumption, and an indicator reflecting the level of food insecurity in the given nation.

The rationale behind using a multiplicative index is to ensure that vulnerability registers zero if caloric intake from the given food commodity is null, or in the absence of imports, or where food security issues are negligible. On the contrary, a hypothetical value of 100 would indicate that a) the commodity encompasses the entirety of calories consumed, b) all domestic commodity supply is imported, and c) the entire population experiences moderate to severe food insecurity.


Vulnerability Dashboard (V2)


1.share of calories that the food commodity represents in the national diet

Click here for the full screen

Wheat: The significance of wheat in daily dietary consumption is particularly notable in the Middle East and Central Asia, as evidenced by the fact that all ten nations heavily reliant on wheat are situated within this region. In all these countries, wheat comprises over 40% of the daily caloric intake, ranging from 41% in Iran to a remarkable 62% in Afghanistan. The collective average share of calories among these nations is 47%, underscoring the substantial role wheat plays in shaping their nutritional habits. Notably, wheat constitutes more than half of the national diet in Turkmenistan and Afghanistan , emphasizing the pronounced influence of this staple food source.
Rice: The influence of rice on dietary consumption is particularly evident in a group of countries, primarily situated in Asia and Africa. Among these nations, Bangladesh takes the lead with an astounding 66% of total calories sourced from rice, securing the top rank. Cambodia, Madagascar, Lao P.D.R., Liberia, Guinea-Bissau, Philippines, Viet Nam, Sierra Leone, and Indonesia also prominently feature rice as a cornerstone of their diets, with its contribution ranging from 42% to 57%. The average share of total calories across these countries is 49%, underscoring the significant role of rice in shaping their dietary landscapes.
Maize: Maize emerges as a pivotal dietary staple in various nations, as reflected by its substantial contribution to their daily caloric intake. Among these nations, Malawi secures the foremost position, with maize accounting for 48% of the total calories consumed. Following closely are Lesotho, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, where maize holds a vital role by contributing 47%, 46%, and 34% of total calories, respectively. Notably, maize maintains its significance in both North America and Africa. Countries like Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, located in the North American region, have maize as a primary component of their diets, with its share ranging from 28% to 32%. Similarly, Eswatini, situated in Africa, highlights maize's importance by incorporating it into 27% of its daily caloric intake.
Sorghum: Sorghum stands out as a key dietary component in several nations, primarily situated in the African region. Leading the pack is South Sudan, where sorghum contributes 23% of total caloric intake, securing the top position. Sudan, Chad, Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali, Ethiopia, Togo, Nigeria, and Cameroon also prominently feature sorghum in their diets, with its share ranging from 7% to 21%. On average, across these countries, sorghum accounts for 14% of total calories, underscoring its notable role in shaping their dietary patterns.


2. Share of the population that is food insecure

Click here for the full screen

This index provides an overview of food insecurity at the country-year level, with the index reflecting FAO moderate food insecurity (MFI) values. In cases where MFI data is unavailable, the value is imputed using regression analysis involving GDP, PoU, poverty, and the Gini coefficient. The countries with the highest levels of food insecurity include the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Haiti, and the Central African Republic, with food insecurity scores ranging from 88.70 to 81.30. Additionally, Malawi, Liberia, Comoros, Angola, and Somalia also experience notable food insecurity, with scores ranging from 81.30 to 77.40. The moderate and severe food insecurity has been estimated for the following countries using interpolation: Burundi, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Bhutan, China, Colombia, Cuba, Cyprus, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Micronesia, Gabon, Guyana, India, Iraq, Saint Lucia, Mali, New Caledonia, Niger, Nicaragua, Nauru, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, North Korea, French Polynesia, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Solomon Islands, Seychelles, Syrian Arab Republic, Chad, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Taiwan, Venezuela, and Yemen.


3. Food Import Dependence Index (%)

Click here for the full screen


4. Food Import Vulnerability Index (FIVI)

Click here for the full screen

Overall Import Vulnerability Index: This index reveals that across 170 countries and 98 commodities, the majority of FIV indices are quite modest. Remarkably, over 99% of the country-commodity combinations have an index of less than 1%. This observation is in line with expectations, considering that most of the 98 food commodities within the FAO database play relatively minor roles. Even among the more significant commodities, the index score remains low for countries that are either self-sufficient or possess higher incomes. Among the most vulnerable countries across all four commodities are South Sudan (3.07), Rwanda (0.53), Eswatini (0.51), Zimbabwe (0.44), Papua New Guinea (0.41), Chad (0.34), Sudan (0.21), Djibouti (0.14), Ethiopia (0.12), and Madagascar (0.09).
Wheat: The food import vulnerability index is calculated by combining the proportion of caloric intake from imported wheat with the Moderate Food Insecurity (MFI) value. Yemen tops the list with the highest food import vulnerability score, followed by Djibouti, Afghanistan, Mauritania, Georgia, Congo, Libya, Jordan, Sao Tome and Principe, and Haiti. Although Afghanistan is on the top of wheat dependent countries, comparatively lower wheat import dependency reduces its vulnerability. On the other hand, Yemen's high reliance on wheat imports and elevated MFI propel it to the first position, even though its wheat dependency rank is fourth.
Maize: The Maize Import Vulnerability Index is constructed by combining the share of caloric intake from imported maize with the Moderate Food Insecurity (MFI) value. The ten countries most vulnerable to higher maize prices are led by Malawi, where maize constitutes 48% of total consumed calories. Following closely are Lesotho, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, with maize contributing 47%, 46%, and 34% of total calories, respectively. However, the Maize Vulnerability Index takes into account both import dependency and MFI, resulting in a different order of countries with Zimbabwe at the top, followed by Lesotho, Eswatini, Botswana, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Cape Verde, Namibia, and El Salvador.
Rice: The ten countries most at risk in terms of rice import vulnerability are Liberia, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Comoros, Haiti, Timor-Leste, Sierra Leone, Benin, Bhutan, and Solomon Islands, with vulnerability scores ranging from 23.05 to 10.02. Even though Bangladesh leads with a remarkable 66% of total calories derived from rice, cementing its top position, it is also one of the world's largest rice producers, which significantly contributes to its reduced reliance on imported rice. However, Liberia, with a caloric share of 47% from rice, experiences the highest vulnerability, reflecting a significant dependence on imported rice despite its substantial presence in the local diet.
Sorghum: Among the most vulnerable countries to sorghum import are South Sudan, Rwanda, Eswatini, Zimbabwe, Papua New Guinea, Chad, Sudan, Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Madagascar, with vulnerability scores ranging from 3.07 to 0.09. Notably, South Sudan takes the lead, where sorghum constitutes 23% of the total caloric intake, securing its top position followed by Sudan, Chad, Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali, Ethiopia, Togo, Nigeria, and Cameroon also prominently rely on sorghum in their diets, with its share ranging from 7% to 21 all relying on sorghum imports. Furthermore, three of these countries—South Sudan, Rwanda, and Madagascar—are among the most food-insecure nations.

The previous version

The previous tool effectively served to identify early on exposure to the shocks to global food and fertilizer markets caused by the war in Ukraine that started in February 2022. 
Please explore the previous version of the Global Shocks Vulnerability Analysis tool by clicking the link below