RESOURCES

The results of the 2nd round of the IPC Chronic Food Security Analysis conducted in Bangaldesh last year in December 2015 have been officially released at the Technical Seminar held on 28th June 2016, in Dhaka, Bangladesh. 

Following the successful completion and release of the 1st round of IPC chronic food insecuirty analysis situation in 18 districts, the IPC TWG in Bangladesh expanded the coverage of the analysis to other 10 vulnerable districts that were recently reported in the Government’s Food Security Monitoring report, namely: Sunamganj, Habiganj, Netrokona, kishoreganj, Sylhet, Maulvibazar (Haor), Rang-amati, Bandarban, Khagrachhari (CHT) and Cox’s Bazar.

According to the results, 12.4 million people out of the total population in the 18 districts are chronically food insecure. Among them, 2.4 million are experiencing severe chronic food insecurity (IPC Level 4), and 3.6 million are moderately chronically food insecure (IPC Level 3).  

The population classified in level 3 and 4 are of major concern and warrant action from the government and the development community.The populations most in need are those who depend on low valued livelihoods such as marginal farmers, agriculture wage laborers and marginal fishermen. 

Of major concern are Sunamganj and Bandarban districts, which fall in severe chronic food insecurity (IPC Level 4). Other districts with higher proportion of chronically food insecure population are Netrakona, Habiganj, Khagrachar,and Rangamati.

The major factors contributing to the severe and moderate chronic food insecurity conditions are: 

• low valued livelihood strategies (providing inadequate and often unpredictable income) combined with high dependency on single livelihood and low literacy rates, which result in high poverty (27 percent);
• poor sanitation and lack of infrastructural facilities such as electricity, roads, and growth centers. 

Other factors that contribute to aggravate the chronic food insecurity include inadequate financial access to food, and climatic hazards such as excessive rainfall and pre-monsoon flash floods that significantly affect households’ production of food.

Implications for Response

The Government and partners are recommended to scale up the on-going efforts and prioritize the most affected populations by focusing on: 

• Enhancing and diversifying income generation opportunities in order to strengthen livelihoods and economic empowerment. These interventions need to include the development of an operational plan to expand the markets as well as value chain analysis.
• Improving “Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), promoting behavior change, education, care practices and nutrition.

The analysis was finalized in December 2015 and will remain valid for next 3 to 5 years, in the absence of any structural changes.