## Coping with Climate Shocks: Food Security in a Spatial Framework

_IMF Working Papers, August 11, 2023_

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Coping with Climate Shocks: Food Security in a Spatial Framework](https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807)

## Other formats

- [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)

## Bibliographic details
- 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

---

### Model and approach
- Develop a quantitative spatial general equilibrium model with heterogeneous households and multiple locations.
- Households endogenously respond to negative climate shocks by:
  - drawing-down assets,
  - importing food,
  - temporarily migrating to earn additional income to ensure sufficient calories.
- 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.

### Empirical estimates and impacts
- Annual combined impact of floods, landslides, droughts and storms:
  - GDP losses of 2.3 percent.
  - Welfare losses of 3.3 percent for the average household.
  - Increased the rate of undernourishment by 2.8 percent.
- Distributional and spatial heterogeneity:
  - Undernourished households experience roughly 50 percent larger welfare losses (relative to non-undernourished households).
  - Households in remote locations suffer welfare losses roughly two times larger than in less remote locations: 5.9 vs 2.9 percent.

### Counterfactual simulations and resilience mechanisms
- 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.

---

## Content in this bundle

- **Working Paper**
  - [Working Paper (Markdown version)](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2023/english/wpiea2023166-print-pdf.pdf.md){rel="alternate" type="text/markdown"}
  - [Working Paper (PDF)](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2023/english/wpiea2023166-print-pdf.pdf){rel="external" type="application/pdf"}

---

_Source: https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2023/08/11/coping-with-climate-shocks-food-security-in-a-spatial-framework-537807_