4/ Key Findings:
1️⃣ Climate shocks (e.g., floods, droughts) did NOT significantly affect food consumption scores (FCS).
2️⃣ Violent conflict caused a substantial drop in FCS.
Conflict = major driver of food insecurity.
1️⃣ Climate shocks (e.g., floods, droughts) did NOT significantly affect food consumption scores (FCS).
2️⃣ Violent conflict caused a substantial drop in FCS.
Conflict = major driver of food insecurity.
Comments
🔑 Owning productive & non-productive assets improves FCS for all households.
🌟 Female-headed households see even greater benefits.
📉 Longer distances to agricultural markets = lower FCS.
🔍 This effect is sharper for male-headed households.
👩🌾 Women’s group memberships boost FCS for female-headed households.
🚫 However, women do NOT benefit as much from broader social networks during shocks.
👨🌾 Male-headed households benefit from ALL types of networks.
🌾 Especially during conflict, diverse income sources significantly improve FCS for female-headed households.
💡 Informal cash transfers are highly effective, especially for female-headed households.
❌ Formal cash transfers, however, show a negative correlation with FCS—except for male-headed households during violent conflict.
✅ Design gender-sensitive social protection programs.
✅ Prioritize interventions that:
Enhance asset ownership.
Improve market access.
Strengthen women’s social networks.
Encourage income diversification.