21 May 2025
NTS Bulletin May 2025
Food Security and SDGs in Times of Disruption
By Jose Ma Luis Montesclaros
“A world free of hunger by 2030” was set in 2016 as the second Sustainable Development Goal (SDG). Today, with five years remaining until the dead- line, modest progress can be observed in that as much as 2.7 million people globally are still unable to afford a healthy diet, representing approximately 35% of the world population. It is timely to reflect on the issue of economic food access as World Hunger Day is celebrated this month as well.
Within Southeast Asia, in fact, there was an increase in the number of people unable to afford a healthy diet from 2017 to 2022. The countries contributing to this increase include the Philippines, Lao PDR and Myanmar. Each of these countries can be seen as cases for better understanding the nuances of achieving the SDGs amidst disruptions.
The experiences of the Philippines and Lao PDR of rapid food price inflation reveal countries’ vulnerabilities to perturbances in global food supply chains. This was a consistent finding by the IMF in its review of the Philippines’ food inflation history in 2000-2023, where demand-driven factors, owing to monetary policy and domestic preferences, were outweighed consistently by supply-side disruptions including food export bans by source countries. A commonality between two countries these is their lower purchasing power, as lower-middle-income countries, and their high levels of food import reliance. The recent tariff wars, including between the US and China, further complicates pre-existing supply- driven inflation.
Myanmar’s food price inflation experience reveals the difficulties of addressing hunger within conflict settings. Even as the country produces most of its rice as a key staple and is a net rice exporter, the issue lies more in food distribution and access, with over 3.5 million people impacted by displacement amidst armed conflict and violence. One report by the WFP showed that prices of food and other basic staples in the country increased by as much as 30 percent from January 2024 to January 2025, for instance.
These cases point to two potential policy implications in moving closer to achieving SDG2. Firstly, strengthening regional production and trade could help create a layer of buffer to augment the region amidst geopolitical disruptions. In practice, this implies mobilising resources to promote agricultural development regionally, supporting especially the far-flung and capital-scarce regions which possess the natural resources (e.g., favourable land and weather) but only lack the financing to activate these resources.
Secondly, in conflict settings, it is equally important to clear the way for international aid to enter and reach the communities in need. One study of the Turkey earthquake for instance showed that the presence of non-profit and other organisations, in helping to direct food supplies, contributes to reducing the risks of food insecurity in disaster struck areas. This suggests the need to explore intersections between humanitarian diplomacy in conflict disaster settings, and the unique challenges of ensuring sufficient food distribution in such settings. Another study revealed that in some cases, aid-in-cash may be more responsive than aid-in-kind, owing to problems of entry for the former. These present early learning points to build on in improving regional food resilience amidst disasters.
As early as 2023, it was already recognised that SDGs are mostly offtrack and unlikely to be met by 2030. Nonetheless, regional initiatives in promoting regional food security are critical in providing a counterbalance of stability and resilience amidst geopolitical disruptions as well as in the presence of domestic conflict and disaster settings.
Food Security and SDGs in Times of Disruption
By Jose Ma Luis Montesclaros
“A world free of hunger by 2030” was set in 2016 as the second Sustainable Development Goal (SDG). Today, with five years remaining until the dead- line, modest progress can be observed in that as much as 2.7 million people globally are still unable to afford a healthy diet, representing approximately 35% of the world population. It is timely to reflect on the issue of economic food access as World Hunger Day is celebrated this month as well.
Within Southeast Asia, in fact, there was an increase in the number of people unable to afford a healthy diet from 2017 to 2022. The countries contributing to this increase include the Philippines, Lao PDR and Myanmar. Each of these countries can be seen as cases for better understanding the nuances of achieving the SDGs amidst disruptions.
The experiences of the Philippines and Lao PDR of rapid food price inflation reveal countries’ vulnerabilities to perturbances in global food supply chains. This was a consistent finding by the IMF in its review of the Philippines’ food inflation history in 2000-2023, where demand-driven factors, owing to monetary policy and domestic preferences, were outweighed consistently by supply-side disruptions including food export bans by source countries. A commonality between two countries these is their lower purchasing power, as lower-middle-income countries, and their high levels of food import reliance. The recent tariff wars, including between the US and China, further complicates pre-existing supply- driven inflation.
Myanmar’s food price inflation experience reveals the difficulties of addressing hunger within conflict settings. Even as the country produces most of its rice as a key staple and is a net rice exporter, the issue lies more in food distribution and access, with over 3.5 million people impacted by displacement amidst armed conflict and violence. One report by the WFP showed that prices of food and other basic staples in the country increased by as much as 30 percent from January 2024 to January 2025, for instance.
These cases point to two potential policy implications in moving closer to achieving SDG2. Firstly, strengthening regional production and trade could help create a layer of buffer to augment the region amidst geopolitical disruptions. In practice, this implies mobilising resources to promote agricultural development regionally, supporting especially the far-flung and capital-scarce regions which possess the natural resources (e.g., favourable land and weather) but only lack the financing to activate these resources.
Secondly, in conflict settings, it is equally important to clear the way for international aid to enter and reach the communities in need. One study of the Turkey earthquake for instance showed that the presence of non-profit and other organisations, in helping to direct food supplies, contributes to reducing the risks of food insecurity in disaster struck areas. This suggests the need to explore intersections between humanitarian diplomacy in conflict disaster settings, and the unique challenges of ensuring sufficient food distribution in such settings. Another study revealed that in some cases, aid-in-cash may be more responsive than aid-in-kind, owing to problems of entry for the former. These present early learning points to build on in improving regional food resilience amidst disasters.
As early as 2023, it was already recognised that SDGs are mostly offtrack and unlikely to be met by 2030. Nonetheless, regional initiatives in promoting regional food security are critical in providing a counterbalance of stability and resilience amidst geopolitical disruptions as well as in the presence of domestic conflict and disaster settings.
