{
  "title": "Coping with Climate Shocks: Food Security in a Spatial Framework",
  "publication": "IMF Working Papers, August 11, 2023",
  "sourceUrl": "https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807",
  "canonical": "https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807",
  "overlayPath": "/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/index.md",
  "summary": "We develop a quantitative spatial general equilibrium model with heterogeneous house-holds and multiple locations to study households’ vulnerability to food insecurity from cli-mate shocks.",
  "sections": [
    {
      "heading": "Model and approach",
      "content": "- Develop a quantitative spatial general equilibrium model with heterogeneous households and multiple locations.\n- Households endogenously respond to negative climate shocks by:\n  - drawing-down assets,\n  - importing food,\n  - temporarily migrating to earn additional income to ensure sufficient calories.\n- Coping strategies are most effective when trade and migration costs are low; remote households are therefore more vulnerable to climate shocks.\n- Food insecure households are more vulnerable because proximity to a subsistence requirement leads them to hold a smaller capital buffer and to dissave more aggressively in response to shocks, at the expense of future consumption.\n- Calibrated to 51 districts in Nepal."
    },
    {
      "heading": "Empirical estimates and impacts",
      "content": "- Annual combined impact of floods, landslides, droughts and storms:\n  - GDP losses of 2.3 percent.\n  - Welfare losses of 3.3 percent for the average household.\n  - Increased the rate of undernourishment by 2.8 percent.\n- Distributional and spatial heterogeneity:\n  - Undernourished households experience roughly 50 percent larger welfare losses (relative to non-undernourished households).\n  - Households in remote locations suffer welfare losses roughly two times larger than in less remote locations: 5.9 vs 2.9 percent."
    },
    {
      "heading": "Counterfactual simulations and resilience mechanisms",
      "content": "- Simulations illustrate the role of better access to migration and trade in building resilience to climate shocks.\n- Reduced trade and migration costs improve the effectiveness of coping strategies (importing food, temporary migration), lowering vulnerability for remote and food insecure households.\n\n---\n\n Content in this bundle\n\n- Working Paper\n  - Working Paper (Markdown version){rel=\"alternate\" type=\"text/markdown\"}\n  - Working Paper (PDF){rel=\"external\" type=\"application/pdf\"}\n\n---\n\nSource: https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807"
    }
  ],
  "bullets": [
    "[Markdown version](/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/index.md)",
    "[Structured JSON version](/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/index.json)",
    "[Bundle manifest](/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/bundle-manifest.json)",
    "Authors: Diogo Baptista, John A Spray, Filiz D Unsal",
    "Published: August 11, 2023",
    "Series: IMF Working Papers",
    "DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400252884.001",
    "Develop a quantitative spatial general equilibrium model with heterogeneous households and multiple locations.",
    "Households endogenously respond to negative climate shocks by:",
    "Coping strategies are most effective when trade and migration costs are low; remote households are therefore more vulnerable to climate shocks.",
    "Food insecure households are more vulnerable because proximity to a subsistence requirement leads them to hold a smaller capital buffer and to dissave more aggressively in response to shocks, at the expense of future consumption.",
    "Calibrated to 51 districts in Nepal.",
    "Annual combined impact of floods, landslides, droughts and storms:",
    "Distributional and spatial heterogeneity:",
    "Simulations illustrate the role of better access to migration and trade in building resilience to climate shocks.",
    "Reduced trade and migration costs improve the effectiveness of coping strategies (importing food, temporary migration), lowering vulnerability for remote and food insecure households.",
    "**Working Paper**"
  ],
  "related": [
    {
      "title": "Working Paper",
      "role": "paper",
      "sourceUrl": "https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/wp/2023/english/wpiea2023166-print-pdf.pdf",
      "summary": {
        "path": "/-/media/files/publications/wp/2023/english/wpiea2023166-print-pdf.pdf.md",
        "mime": "text/markdown"
      },
      "binary": {
        "path": "/-/media/files/publications/wp/2023/english/wpiea2023166-print-pdf.pdf",
        "mime": "application/pdf"
      }
    }
  ],
  "alternates": {
    "markdown": "/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/index.md",
    "json": "/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/index.json",
    "bundleManifest": "/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807/bundle-manifest.json"
  },
  "generatedAtUtc": "2026-09-16T22:53:54.235Z"
}