Yene, A anase; Balla, Sophie Michelle Eke
A icle
Food insecu i y du ing COVID-19 in Came oon: Associa ed
ac o s and adap a ion s a egies
Economies
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
MDPI – Mul idisciplina y Digi al Publishing Ins i u e, Basel
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Yene, A anase; Balla, Sophie Michelle Eke (2025) : Food insecu i y du ing
COVID-19 in Came oon: Associa ed ac o s and adap a ion s a egies, Economies, ISSN 2227-7099,
MDPI, Basel, Vol. 13, Iss. 6, pp. 1-23,
h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/economies13060172
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/329452
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Academic Edi o : Gheo ghe
H. Popescu
Recei ed: 4 Ma ch 2025
Re ised: 14 Ap il 2025
Accep ed: 14 Ap il 2025
Published: 14 June 2025
Ci a ion: Yene, A., & Eke Balla, S. M.
(2025). Food Insecu i y Du ing
COVID-19 in Came oon: Associa ed
Fac o s and Adap a ion S a egies.
Economies,13(6), 172. h ps://doi.o g/
10.3390/economies13060172
Copy igh : © 2025 by he au ho s.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land.
This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and
condi ions o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion (CC BY) license
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/
licenses/by/4.0/).
A icle
Food Insecu i y Du ing COVID-19 in Came oon: Associa ed
Fac o s and Adap a ion S a egies
A anase Yene * and Sophie Michelle Eke Balla
Depa men o Public, Social and Solida i y Economics, Facul y o Economics and Applied Managemen ,
Uni e si y o Douala, Douala P.O. Box 4032, Came oon; [email p o ec ed]
*Co espondence: [email p o ec ed]
Abs ac : This s udy seeks o iden i y he ac o s d i ing household ood insecu i y in
Came oon du ing he COVID-19 pandemic, examine he e ec s o coping s a egies on
household esilience, and explo e complemen a i ies among hese s a egies. We used
da a om he COVID-19 panel su eys conduc ed by he Na ional Ins i u e o S a is ics
o Came oon. Th ee models a e es ima ed: an o de ed logi model o ood insecu i y
ac o s, a logi model o he impac o coping s a egies, and a mul i a ia e p obi model
o complemen a i ies. The indings e eal ha ood insecu i y is exace ba ed by con lic ,
socio economic shocks (e.g., loss o employmen , c op he ), and p ice hikes. Abou
28.59% o households a e esilien , mainly due o pas sa ings, cash ans e s, ee ood,
and in-kind ans e s. The s udy emphasizes he impo ance o social and go e nmen al
suppo o mi iga e ood insecu i y du ing c ises, and unde sco es he need o moni o ing
socio-economic condi ions du ing pandemics and o he c ises.
Keywo ds: adap a ion s a egies; COVID-19; ood insecu i y; household; esilience
1. In oduc ion
In Ma ch 2020, he Wo ld Heal h O ganiza ion decla ed COVID-19 a pandemic,
p omp ing public heal h measu es ha led o social and economic dis up ions (Onyeaka
e al.,2021). Food supply chains we e a ec ed by con ainmen and social dis ancing poli-
cies, hinde ing he mo emen o a me s, ag icul u al inpu s, and ood p oduc s (Banque
Mondiale,2021). Sub-Saha an A ican coun ies, elian on ood impo s, we e especially
ulne able due o ade es ic ions. Global ood insecu i y ale s a ose om ood sho ages,
p ice hikes, and income loss ied o ising unemploymen . The Wo ld Food P og amme
p ojec ed ha 265 million people would ace acu e ood insecu i y, doubling p e-pandemic
le els (WFP e al.,2020).
The COVID-19 pandemic caused inancial and heal h shocks, educing household
wel a e due o business closu es and go e nmen con ainmen measu es like isola ion and
a el es ic ions. These e o s, including qua an ines and acili y closu es, had se ious
socio-economic impac s, especially on u al a me s in low- and middle-income coun ies
(Ekwebelem e al.,2020). Mobili y es ic ions limi ed access o ood om daily ma ke s
and endo s, while job losses in o mal and in o mal sec o s wo sened ood insecu i y
(Kansiime e al.,2021). This exace ba ed unemploymen , po e y, anspo a ion issues,
and ch onic malnu i ion, u he ha ming ulne able households’ heal h.
The Came oonian go e nmen implemen ed se e al COVID-19-p e en i e s eps as
ea ly as 18 Ma ch 2020, 12 days a e disco e ing i s i s COVID-19-posi i e pa ien (OMS-
Came oun,2020). A i s , ood secu i y was a p oblem o households in Came oon
Economies 2025,13, 172 h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/economies13060172
Economies 2025,13, 172 2 o 23
(Tambe e al.,2021). The pe cen age o people expe iencing ood insecu i y inc eased om
12.8% in 2019 o 20.4% in 2020. The egions mos impac ed by ood insecu i y a e he
No h-Wes (40.0%), Sou h-Wes (30.7%), Li o al (25.1%), Fa No d (24.8%), Adamaoua
(22.1%), and Wes (20.5%), all o which a e g appling wi h dis inc humani a ian c ises.
Se e e ood insecu i y a ec s nea ly 5% o people in he No h-Wes (4.4%), Sou h-Wes
(6.9%), and Fa -No h (5.4%) egions (MINADER/PAM/FAO,2020). While he educ ion
in pu chasing powe , loss o li elihoods and ea ning possibili ies, and es ic ed access o
ood and essen ial se ices pe sis ed in 2022, ood insecu i y deepened in 2021. Recen ly,
he con lic be ween Russia and Uk aine has made ma e s wo se by ha ing a de imen al
e ec on he cos o ood, ene gy (gas and oil), and e ilize .
Conside ing how c ucial ood is o human su i al, ood insecu i y is a se ious
p oblem ha canno be igno ed. The impac o he COVID-19 pandemic on ood insecu i y
in Came oon has no been ho oughly s udied empi ically. Tambe e al. (2021) e alua ed he
ood secu i y and di e si y o die s o adul Came oonians du ing he COVID-19 pandemic
using an online su ey. Acco ding o hei indings, o e 50% o he pa icipan s mos ly
a e a s and oils, ce eals, ege ables, oo s, and ube s. The a e age die a y di e si y in he
na ion appea s o be poo , and ood insecu i y is widesp ead. The COVID-19 pandemic’s
ansmission ou es and hei e ec s on ood secu i y in Came oonian u ban amilies we e
discussed and examined by M odo (2021). Acco ding o M odo’s empi ical indings,
he e a e h ee p ima y ways in which he COVID-19 epidemic causes inadequa e access
o ood, namely, es ic ions on ood impo s, a slowdown in he coun y’s economic
ac i i y, and a loss o o eign unding. Using a elephone su ey, Foka-Nkwen i e al. (2020)
in es iga ed he ela ionship be ween COVID-19 and declining ood p ices, which ha e
esul ed in ood insecu i y in Came oon. Thei indings demons a e how se ious ensions
and ood sho ages we e b ough abou in Came oon as he co ona i us ou b eak sp ead
h ough in e up ions o he coun y’s ood supply ne wo ks, as well as he loss o e enue
and emi ances.
Suh e al. (2023) ound ha u al male-headed amilies we e subs an ially mo e
ulne able o ood insecu i y han hei semi-u ban emale-headed coun e pa s when
examining he connec ion be ween ood secu i y and coping me hods in Came oon du ing
he COVID-19 pe iod. Fu he mo e, hei analysis e ealed ha , in compa ison o male-
headed and semi-u ban homes, emale-headed and semi-u ban households epo ed a
posi i e and s a is ically signi ican co ela ion wi h coping echniques, wi h cheape and
less popula ood consump ion being he mos common coping mechanism.
P io esea ch on ood insecu i y in Came oon exhibi s h ee majo limi a ions. Fi s ,
p e ious s udies (Tambe e al.,2021;M odo,2021) ely on c oss-sec ional da a, p e en ing
a dynamic unde s anding o empo al e ec s, pa icula ly du ing COVID-19. Second,
he samples used (Foka-Nkwen i e al.,2020), o en es ic ed o online su eys o u ban
a eas, exclude u al households and egions wi hou in e ne access, he eby skewing
na ional ep esen a i eness. Thi d, analyses o adap a ion s a egies emain agmen ed;
no Came oonian s udy has simul aneously explo ed he de e minan s o ood insecu-
i y, he e icacy o adap a ion s a egies, and hei syne gies (Suh e al.,2023), limi ing
policy ecommenda ions.
Ou s udy in oduces ou inno a ions. Fi s , i p o ides a longi udinal analysis in
Came oon, acking 2680 households ac oss wo c i ical phases o he pandemic, e ealing
delayed shock e ec s. Second, an in eg a ed modeling app oach combines an o de ed
logi (de e minan s o ood insecu i y), a bina y logi ( esilience), and a mul i a ia e p obi
(in e ac ions be ween adap a ion s a egies), o e ing a holis ic pe spec i e. Thi d, i syn-
hesizes cumula i e c ises by in eg a ing he combined impac s o COVID-19 and a med
con lic s, an app oach a ely adop ed in A ican s udies (Tabe-Ojong e al.,2023). Finally,
Economies 2025,13, 172 3 o 23
ep esen a i e da a, including unde s udied a eas such as con lic -a ec ed No hwes
egions and u al zones, ensu e a balanced u ban– u al analysis, add essing pas me hod-
ological biases. These ad ancemen s be e in o m ood secu i y policies in a con ex o
mul idimensional c ises.
Fu he mo e, he analysis o socio-economic cha ac e is ics in luencing he adop ion
o hese adap a ion s a egies p o ides c i ical insigh s o a ge ed and e ec i e assis ance.
In summa y, his s udy expands he ood insecu i y pa adigm by inco po a ing he e ec s
o pandemics and a med con lic s and by examining in de ail he adap a ion s a egies
deployed by households, go e nmen s, and ci il socie y, as well as he socio economic
cha ac e is ics go e ning hei adop ion. In a con ex ma ked by in e wined heal h,
economic, and secu i y c ises, his s udy add esses he ollowing ques ion: wha ac o s
explain he wo sening ood insecu i y among Came oonian households du ing COVID-19,
and how do adap a ion s a egies in luence hei esilience?
This s udy aimed o achie e he ollowing:
✔
Iden i y he ac o s d i ing household ood insecu i y in Came oon du ing he COVID-
19 pandemic;
✔
Analyze he e ec s o adap a ion s a egies on household esilience o ood insecu i y;
✔Examine complemen a i ies be ween adap a ion s a egies.
To achie e hese objec i es, we o mula ed h ee hypo heses:
Hypo hesis 1 (H
1
): Socio-economic shocks (a med con lic s, job losses, p ice su ges) signi ican ly
exace ba ed ood insecu i y among Came oonian households du ing he pandemic.
This hypo hesis is g ounded in he concep ual amewo k o mul idimensional c ises
(HLPE,2017;Ba e ,2020) which posi s ha he in e ac ion o simul aneous shocks c e-
a es c i ical h eshold e ec s o ood sys ems. In Came oon, he con e gence o a med
con lic s in Anglophone egions and he COVID-19 pandemic sugges s an in ensi ica ion
o ulne abili ies.
Hypo hesis 2 (H
2
): Indi idual adap a ion s a egies (p io sa ings) and ins i u ional s a egies
(cash ans e s) enhance household esilience o ood insecu i y.
Inspi ed by empi ical e idence on c isis mi iga ion in agile con ex s (Tabe-Ojong
e al.,2023), his hypo hesis con as s wo esilience mechanisms: indi idual s a egies
(e.g., p ecau iona y sa ings), o which he e icacy depends on ini ial p eca i y le els; and
ins i u ional in e en ions (e.g., a ge ed cash ans e s), o which he impac is modula ed
by geog aphic co e age and deploymen speed (Gen ilini,2022). We posi ha ins i u-
ional ans e s may compensa e o inequali ies in access o sa ings, pa icula ly o u al
households excluded om o mal inancial sys ems.
Hypo hesis 3 (H3): Adap a ion s a egies a e complemen a y (e.g., cash ans e s + ood aid).
This hypo hesis ex ends he wo k o Suh e al. (2023) by empi ically es ing he
complemen a i y pa adigm in a he e ogeneous na ional con ex . Fo ins ance, eme gency
ood aid could neu alize sho - e m shock e ec s, while cash ans e s suppo p oduc i e
in es men s in he medium e m.
The o he sec ions o he s udy a e s uc u ed as ollows: a b ie li e a u e e iew is
p esen ed in Sec ion 2, he me hodology is explained in Sec ion 3, he esul s and discussion
a e p esen ed in Sec ion 4, and he s udy is concluded in Sec ion 5.
Economies 2025,13, 172 4 o 23
2. B ie Re iew o he Li e a u e
The li e a u e iden i ies h ee pa hways h ough which he COVID-19 pandemic
has a ec ed he economy: di ec consump ion dec eases, inancial sys em shocks, and
supply side dis up ions (Ca lsson-Szlezak e al.,2020;Dandonougbo e al.,2021). These
dis up ions impac ed ood demand and supply, leading o inc eased ood insecu i y due
o a ious ac o s such as lack o anspo a ion and social suppo (HLPE,2017;Ba e ,
2020;Ozili,2020). In Nige ia, ood insecu i y su ged, wi h se e e cases ising du ing he
pandemic (O jiako e al.,2023). Indonesian households also expe ienced inc eased ood
insecu i y in 2020–2021 (Am ullah e al.,2023). In Gua emala, income losses and educed
die a y di e si y we e obse ed due o he pandemic (Ceballos e al.,2020). Simila ly, poo
households in Kenya and Uganda we e mo e ulne able o income shocks and educed
ood consump ion (Kansiime e al.,2021).
COVID-19 led o job losses, educed incomes, and hinde ed ood p oduc ion due o
mobili y es ic ions and suspended ag icul u al ac i i ies (Mouloudj e al.,2020). The
pandemic in ensi ied ood insecu i y by dis up ing ood supply chains, li elihoods, and
social p o ec ion p og ams, u he educing consume con idence (HLPE,2017). Va ious
household cha ac e is ics, such as income, educa ion, and household size, inc eased he
isk o ood insecu i y du ing he pandemic (Ansah e al.,2019;Fi oz e al.,2021). Li es ock
owne ship helped cushion some households om alling in o se e e ood insecu i y (Balana
e al.,2023).
Se e al s udies also explo ed coping s a egies du ing he pandemic. In A ica, house-
holds elied on go e nmen suppo , social ne wo ks, and o aging o mi iga e ood in-
secu i y (Tabe-Ojong e al.,2022;Fung Uy e al.,2023). Despi e limi a ions in da a, he
pandemic’s causal link o ood insecu i y is e iden , wi h social p o ec ion p og ams in
E hiopia educing he likelihood o ood insecu i y (Abay e al.,2023). Howe e , esea ch
gaps emain, pa icula ly ega ding household ood insecu i y d i e s, adap a ion s a e-
gies, and coping mechanisms in Came oon du ing he pandemic (M odo,2021;Tambe
e al.,2021;Foka-Nkwen i e al.,2020;Suh e al.,2023). This s udy aims o add ess hese
gaps and enhance he unde s anding o COVID-19- ela ed ood insecu i y.
3. Me hodology
This sec ion p esen s he da a, he heo e ical amewo k, he speci ica ion o he
econome ic model, and he jus i ica ion o he a iables.
3.1. Da a Sou ce
The da a we e de i ed om he EPICOVID-19 (2021a,2021b) panel su eys conduc ed
by Came oon’s Na ional Ins i u e o S a is ics (INS) ac oss wo phases (Feb ua y and June–
July 2021). The ini ial sample o 2680 households was cons uc ed using he Random
Digi Dialling (RDD) me hod, co e ing he ne wo ks o majo mobile ope a o s (MTN,
O ange, Vie el) and all egions o he coun y. Despi e a 30.6% a i ion a e be ween
phases (1861 households emaining in Round 2), s a is ical adjus men s (in e se p obabili y
weigh ing) we e applied o mi iga e po en ial non- esponse biases. The geog aphical
ep esen a i eness and longi udinal s uc u e o he da a enable he analysis o empo al
a ia ions in ood insecu i y, including access o basic se ices, socio-economic shocks (job
loss, income educ ion), and household coping s a egies.
The da ase includes key indica o s o each wa e: ood secu i y (a ailabili y, access,
and die a y di e si y), compliance wi h go e nmen heal h measu es, and exposu e o
economic shocks. Compa isons be ween he wo ounds p o ide a dynamic pe spec i e
c i ical o assessing he e olu ion o ulne abili ies du ing he pandemic. S a i ied analy-
Economies 2025,13, 172 5 o 23
ses by egion and mobile ope a o accoun ed o in as uc u al dispa i ies (e.g., absence o
Cam el esponden s).
We used he da a o wo ounds o a leas ou easons. The pandemic caused luc-
ua ing socio-economic dis up ions (con inemen s, eopenings, a ia ions in ood p ices).
Two ounds o da a collec ion (Feb ua y and June–July 2021) allowed us o cap u e he
ollowing: immedia e e ec s (e.g., sudden job losses du ing he i s con inemen ), medium-
e m adap a ions (e.g., adop ion o coping s a egies such as in-kind ans e s o sa ings).
In addi ion, he second ound iden i ied households ha ha e egained ood secu i y (“ e-
silien ”) o ha e allen back in o insecu i y. This makes i possible o es he e ec i eness o
coping s a egies. In e - ound compa isons p o ide in o ma ion on he u gency o a ge ed
in e en ions (e.g., inc eased suppo o con lic zones whe e insecu i y has wo sened).
3.2. Food Insecu i y Index and Th eshold De ini ion
The wo concep ual s eps necessa y o c ea e a mul idimensional index a e he iden i i-
ca ion o ele an dimensions o be included in he analysis and hei agg ega ion (Sen,1976,
1999). The cons uc ion o ou mul idimensional index d aws inspi a ion om he Food
Insecu i y Expe ience Scale (FIES) de eloped by he FAO, which assesses ood insecu i y
h ough eigh s anda dized ques ions on household expe iences (Balla d e al.,2013). These
ques ions, iden ical o hose in he FIES, cap u e key dimensions ecognized in e na ionally.
Unlike he s anda d FIES (which ypically uses sco ing o Rasch models), we employed
Mul iple Co espondence Analysis (MCA) o agg ega e he bina y (‘yes/no’) esponses o
he eigh ques ions (see Appendix ATable A1). MCA is he mos app op ia e me hod o
mul i a ia e analysis, as households answe ed yes o no o each o he abo e ques ions.
The esul ing indica o is a sub-index (index)
1
wi h a o m ee o any uni o measu emen .
No maliza ion using he min-max me hod allowed o he index o be cen e ed be ween
he ex eme alues o he sample. The sub-index, hus no malized, lies be ween 0 and
1, and he ankings o all en i ies we e made ega ding he ela i e disposi ions o he
indica o wi hin his ange. Algeb aically, he ood insecu i y index (INDEX) ob ained by
he min–max me hod is w i en as ollows:
INDEX =indexij −mini
max −mini
(1)
whe e
i
ep esen s he household (
i=
1, 2,
· · ·
,
N
) and
j
he dimension o ood insecu i y
(e.g., access, a ailabili y, s abili y).
To acili a e in e p e a ion, we ha e de ined ou empi ical h esholds in Table 1below.
Table 1. Empi ical Th esholds o Food Insecu i y Le els Based on No malized Index In e als.
Insecu i y Le el No malized Index In e al
No ood insecu i y 0%
Mild >0–30%
Mode a e >30–60%
Se e e >60%
Sou ce: au ho s.
These h esholds we e selec ed o e lec p og essi e in ensi y le els, aligned wi h he
obse ed dis ibu ion in ou sample. The 30%, 60%, and 100% h esholds a e no pa o
he s anda d FIES amewo k bu p o ide a g ada ion ailo ed o he Came oonian con ex
and he dis ibu ion o ou composi e index. While he FIES supplied he ounda ional
ques ions, ou agg ega ion ia MCA and no malized h esholds cons i u ed an inno a i e
adap a ion o add ess he speci ici ies o he EPICOVID-19 da ase .
Economies 2025,13, 172 6 o 23
3.3. Model Speci ica ions
To achie e ou h ee objec i es, we mobilized h ee econome ic models: an o de ed
logi model o iden i y ood insecu i y ac o s, a logi model o analyze he impac o coping
s a egies on household esilience o ood insecu i y, and a mul i a ia e p obi model o
analyse he complemen a i ies among coping s a egies.
3.3.1. Random-E ec s-O de ed Logi Model
He e, he ocus was on me hodological aspec s, ha is, he app op ia eness o he
o de ed logi model o SRH, by compa ing he esul s ob ained using his me hod wi h
hose om he OLS model. SRH has o en been measu ed as an o dinal a iable. In his
s udy, ood insecu i y was ca ego ized in o a 4-poin scale: 1 = No ood insecu i y, 2 = Mild
ood insecu i y, 3 = Mode a e ood insecu i y, and 4 = Se e e ood insecu i y. The analy ical
app oach o handling his ype o a iable, howe e , is o en logi eg ession (Min,2013).
The use o he bina y logi eg ession model is inapp op ia e when he dependen a iable
has mo e han wo ca ego ies and o de ed ou comes is an app op ia e way. Mo eo e , he
independen a iables include no only con inuous a iables (such as household size), bu
also ca ego ical a iables (socio-economic shocks). This s udy modeled he de e minan s o
ood insecu i y by applying a disc e e choice model app oach, knowing ha he EPICOVID-
19 da abases code he ood secu i y index in o ou ca ego ies (no ood insecu i y = 1, mild
ood insecu i y = 2, mode a e ood insecu i y = 3, se e e ood insecu i y = 4). On he o he
hand, we employed panel da a and, in his case, an o de ed logi model wi h andom e ec s
seemed o be he mos app op ia e app oach. The pa ame e s o he andom-e ec s-o de ed
logi model, as s a ed in Equa ion (2), we e es ima ed using maximum likelihood:
P (yi >Kk⌊k,xi , i)=H(xi β+ i−Kk)(2)
o i= 1,
. . .
,npanels, whe e = 1,
. . .
,n
i
,
νi
a e independen and iden ically dis ibu ed
N0, σ2
, and
κ
is a se o cu poin s
κ1
,
κ2
and k
3
, whe e Kis he numbe o possible
ou comes;
xi
is he ec o o explana o y a iables o household ia pe iod (e.g., in e ne
access, socio-economic shocks); and H(
·
) is he logis ic cumula i e dis ibu ion unc ion.
Fu he mo e, x
i
is a column ec o o explana o y a iables, and
β
is a ow ec o o
pa ame e s o be es ima ed.
We exp ess he model in e ms o a la en linea esponse, whe e he obse ed o dinal
esponses yi a e gene a ed om he la en con inuous esponses, such ha
y∗
i =xi β+ i+εi (3)
yi ={1i y∗
i ≤k12i k1<y∗
i ≤k23i k2<y∗
i ≤k34i k3<y∗
i (4)
The e o s
ϵi
a e dis ibu ed as logis ic wi h mean ze o and a iance
π2
3
, and a e
independen o
i
. Fo an o de ed logi model wi h andom e ec s, he ma ginal e ec s
equa ion can be exp essed as ollows:
∂P(yi ≤Kk|xi , i)
∂xi
=∂H(xi β+ i−Kk)
∂xi
(5)
Using he chain de i a ion ule, we can w i e his as
∂P(yi ≤Kk|xi , i)
∂xi
=H′(xi β+ i−Kk)·∂(xi β+ i−Kk)
∂xi
(6)
whe e H
′
(
·
) is he de i a i e o he logis ic dis ibu ion unc ion conce ning i s a gumen
and Kkis he ca ego iza ion h eshold.2
Economies 2025,13, 172 7 o 23
3.3.2. Bina y Logi Model
To in es iga e he impac o coping s a egies on household esilience o ood insecu i y,
we used a bina y Logi model. Acco ding o he Eu opean Union, esilience is he abili y o
an indi idual o household o esis , adap o, and eco e swi ly om shocks (Se ilippi &
Ramna h,2018). Resilience o ood insecu i y, he e o e, e e s o a household’s capaci y
o ansi ion om ood insecu i y o ood secu i y o o main ain ood secu i y be ween
wo su ey pe iods. Resilience o ood insecu i y (RFI) is he obse ed dependen a iable
and i s la en coun e pa is deno ed by
RFI∗
, which de e mines he p obabili y P
i
ha a
household iis esilien o ood insecu i y. The model is speci ied as ollows:
RFI∗=β0+β1X+β2Z+ε (7)
whe e
RFI∗
(a la en a iable) is he logi index ha de e mines he p obabili y o
RFI
( ood insecu i y) being obse ed.
The obse ed bina y esul RFIiis de ined as ollows:
(1i RFI∗≻0
0i RFI∗≺0EQ (8)
Thus,
RFIi=
1 i he household is esilien o ood insecu i y, i.e., i i emains ood
secu e o mo es om ood insecu i y o ood secu i y be ween wo s udy pe iods.
RFIi=
0
o he wise. The p obabili y Pi ha household iis esilien is gi en by
Pi=P(RFIi=1)=1
1+e−(β0+β1X+β2Z)(9)
wi h Xbeing he ec o o coping s a egies, Z he household cha ac e is ics, and
ε
he
e o e m.
β0
ep esen s he in e cep ,
β1
and
β2
a e he coe icien s o coping s a egies
and household cha ac e is ics, espec i ely, ha cha ac e ize he logi index (
RFI∗
), and,
mo e impo an ly, ha a e o be es ima ed o p edic he p obabili y o ood insecu i y
depic ed in (9). The coe icien s we e es ima ed by he MLE. A e he es ima ion, he
ma ginal e ec s o Xand Z on he p obabili y o esilience (P
i
) can be compu ed using he
gene al app oach speci ied in Equa ion (6).
3.3.3. Mul i a ia e P obi Model
Households epo ed adop ing se e al ypes o s a egies o deal wi h ood insecu i y.
The u ili y ha he household ob ained by adop ing one o ano he adap a ion s a egy is
no obse able. I does, howe e , depend on he household’s socio economic and demo-
g aphic cha ac e is ics and socio-economic shocks
(Xi)
, and can he e o e be ep esen ed
by he la en a iable (RFI∗) as ollows:
U∗
is =β0+β1Xi+β2Zi+εis Wi h i=1, 2, . . . , N(10)
whe e
U∗
is
is he la en u ili y o household
i
o adap s a egy
s
;
Xi
is he ec o o socio
economic cha ac e is ics o household
i
(e.g., household size, sec o o ac i i y);
Zi
is he
ec o o shocks expe ienced by household
i
(e.g., job loss, c op o li es ock he );
β
is he
ec o o pa ame e s o be es ima ed; and εis is he e o e m speci ic o s a egy s.
This s udy looked a ou coping s a egies: using pas sa ings, bo owing, di ec cash
ans e , and ee ood. Households end o adop se e al coping s a egies a he same ime
o deal wi h he ood insecu i y p oblem. Mul i a ia e p obi is an ex ension o he bi a ia e
p obi model ha uses Mon e Ca lo simula ion echniques o simul aneously es ima e he
sys em o mul i a ia e p obi eg ession equa ions (G eene,2000). Simul aneous adop ions
Economies 2025,13, 172 8 o 23
o he ou adap a ion s a egies can be modeled by a sys em o ou dicho omous adop ion
equa ions (Yi)as ollows:
Y1=1i u∗
1>u∗
0,Y1=0o he wise
Y2=1i u∗
2>u∗
0,Y2=0o he wise
Y3=1i u∗
3>u∗
0,Y3=0o he wise
Y4=1i u∗
4>u∗
0,Y4=0o he wise
(11)
The mul i a ia e p obi eg ession model was adop ed o es ima e he p obabili y
o he adop ion o coping s a egies
CSj
(Equa ion (11)) o accoun o any co ela ion
be ween he e o e ms o he di e en bina y adop ion equa ions (G eene,2000). The
empi ical model es ima ed wi h he a iables included in he es ima es is as ollows:
u∗
j=α0+α1Co id19i+α2In e ne Accessi+α3Insu ance o mu uali+
α4Size Than 6membe si+α5In o mel sec o i+α6A med con lic si+
α7Re ugees a eai+α8Dea h o disabili y o a membe i+α9Job lossi+εi
(12)
whe e
u∗
j
is he unobse able u ili y ob ained om a coping s a egy,
CSj
, which also
de e mines he p obabili y o obse ing his s a egy, e.g., Y1.
No ice ha in his se up, he la en dependen a iables a e he
u∗
j
s ( a he han he
CSjs
, i.e., pas sa ings, bo owing, di ec cash ans e and ee ood). These ou a e he
obse ed dependen a iables, wi h
u∗
j
s as i s de e minan s, which a e, in u n, d i en by
he explana o y a iables in Equa ion (12). Equa ion (6) shows how he ma ginal e ec s o
hese explana o y a iables on he p obabili y o obse ing CSja e compu ed.
3.4. Choice and Jus i ica ion o Va iables
In he li e a u e, he deba e on he de e minan s o ood insecu i y in ol es wo ypes
o a iables, namely an explained a iable and explana o y a iables. The explained
a iable he e is ood insecu i y cap u ed by he ood insecu i y indica o , which akes 04
modali ies, namely no ood insecu i y, mild ood insecu i y, mode a e ood insecu i y and
se e e ood insecu i y. To in es iga e he household-le el d i e s o ood insecu i y du ing
he pandemic, we conside ed explana o y a iables ha ha e been epo ed in he li e a u e
as impo an ac o s in luencing ood secu i y, pa icula ly in he con ex o Came oonian
households. We conside ed h ee main ca ego ies o a iables ha apply o households:
(i)
Household cha ac e is ics wi h occupa ion, le el o educa ion, gende , ma i al s a us
o he head o household, household size, insu ance and mu ual insu ance (Dzanku,
2019;Fi oz e al.,2021).
(ii)
Shocks lead o inc eased ood insecu i y a indi idual and household le el (Ansah
e al.,2019). In he li e a u e, he e a e wo ypes o shock. Social shocks a e linked
o he abili y o households o main ain an ac i e wo k o ce (Dzanku,2019). Social
shocks include he dea h and illness o a household membe (Chagomoka e al.,2016;
Ansah e al.,2019), a med con lic (HLPE,2017;M odo,2021), he o li es ock and
c ops. The e a e also economic shocks, gene ally associa ed wi h ma ke ola ili y and
uns able incomes (Ozili,2020;Balana e al.,2023). Economic shocks include highe
inpu p ices and loss o employmen (Ca lsson-Szlezak e al.,2020;Ba e ,2020), and
inc eased ood consump ion. In addi ion, shocks such as na u al disas e s ( loods,
d ough s) ha e no been included, as hey a e less p e alen in he pe iod s udied
(2020–2021) acco ding o he a ailable da a.
(iii)
Coping s a egies, e.g., use o sa ings, s o ed ood, bo owing, go e nmen and NGO
assis ance, emi ances ecei ed, o he bo owing, e c., highligh ed in he li e a u e as
measu es equen ly used o cope wi h ood sho ages du ing c ises (Chagomoka e al.,
Economies 2025,13, 172 15 o 23
Table 4. Food insecu i y s a us ansi ion ma ix 1.
Round 1 Round 2
INDEX 1. Food Secu e 2. Mildly Food
Insecu e
3. Mode a ely
Food Insecu e
4. Se e ely
Food Insecu e To al
1. Food Secu e 42.53 11.92 13.35 32.20 100.00
2. Mildly Food Insecu e 33.95 11.16 15.81 39.08 100.00
3. Mode a ely Food Insecu e 28.57 16.52 15.18 39.73 100.00
4. Se e ely Food Insecu e 18.14 13.02 12.67 56.17 100.00
Sou ce: au ho s om EPICOVID-19 (2021a,2021b).
1
In a ansi ion ma ix, only he ows mus be added up o
1 because hey ep esen he ansi ion p obabili ies om a gi en s a e o all o he s a es. The columns, on he
o he hand, ep esen he ansi ion p obabili ies o a pa icula s a e om all o he s a es and do no ha e his
same cons ain .
In he con ex o ood insecu i y, esilience is equen ly assessed using a composi e
indica o made up o mul iple a iables ha a e no included in ou da abase. We con-
s uc ed a a iable esilience o ood insecu i y by applying he capaci y me hod. This
a iable includes homes wi h he abili y o main ain ood secu i y (adap i e capaci y) and
households wi h he abili y o change hei ood insecu i y condi ion in o ood secu i y
( ans o ma i e capaci y) be ween he wo esea ch pe iods. Acco ding o ou indings, 71%
o households lack esilience. Be ween he wo su ey pe iods, hese households ei he
s ayed ood insecu e o wen om ood secu i y o ood insecu i y. Addi ionally, we ha e
28.59% o esilien indi iduals in ou sample. These indings also demons a e he a ie y
o coping mechanisms households employ o add ess ood insecu i y, highligh ing he
necessi y o esea ching he complemen a i y o coping mechanisms.
The ou comes o he logis ic eg ession analysis a e displayed in Table 5. Nume ous
coping mechanisms ha suppo household esilience a e e ealed by an analysis o coping
mechanisms used by households in Came oon du ing he COVID-19 pandemic in he ace
o ood sho ages. Fi s , p io sa ings s and ou as a c i ical componen , emphasizing he
alue o budge ing and accumula ing money o eme gencies in o de o lessen he impac
o calami ies. The esilience o households wi h sa ings has a 41.3% highe p obabili y o
being ood insecu e esilience ela i e o households wi hou sa ings. Likewise, eadily
accessible and a o dable s a egies a e impo an and p o ide households wi h an a enue
o adap abili y, bu mo e esea ch is needed o de e mine hei long- e m e ec s. Ano he
me hod ha is wo king well is di ec cash ans e , which p o ides quick and adap able
suppo o households in need o ood. Cash ans e s inc ease esilience by 8.9% (Table 5).
This esul co obo a es ha o Tabe-Ojong e al. (2023) in Kenya. F ee ood and in-kind
ans e s (excep ood), a e also becoming impo an s a egies o helping ulne able
households di ec ly and in a supplemen a y way. Las ly, i is impo an o no e ha
ins i u ional social p o ec ion mechanisms play a c i ical ole in managing and a e ing
ood eme gencies, as membe ship in insu ance o mu ual insu ance schemes is linked
o inc eased esilience. These indings demons a e he a ie y o coping mechanisms
households employ o add ess ood insecu i y, highligh ing he necessi y o esea ching he
complemen a i y o coping mechanisms.
Economies 2025,13, 172 16 o 23
Table 5. De e minan s o esilience o ood insecu i y: bina y logi esul s.
VARIABLE
(1) (2)
Resilience Pa ame e Es ima es Dy/dx: Ma ginal E ec s
Pas sa ings 0.413 *** 0.081 ***
(0.142) (0.027)
S o ed ood 0.005 0.0009
(0.107) (0.021)
Ready s a egy ( ood?) 0.419 * 0.082 *
(0.220) (0.043)
Go e nmen /communi y o ganiza ion/social sa e y ne s aids
−0.030 −0.005
(0.283) (0.055)
NGO/in e na ional o ganiza ion aids 0.277 0.057
(0.473) (0.102)
Religious and o he s aids −0.528 −0.092
(0.656) (0.099)
Di ec cash ans e 0.453 ** 0.089 **
(0.191) (0.040)
F ee ood 0.482 ** 0.0954 ***
(0.190) (0.040)
T ans e in kind excep o ood 0.708 *** 0.146 ***
(0.119) (0.025)
Insu ance o mu ual 0.424 *** 0.146 ***
(0.156) (0.025)
Cons an 0.334 ***
(0.089)
Obse a ions 1861 1861
Sou ce: au ho s om EPICOVID-19 (2021a,2021b). S anda d e o s in pa en heses. *** p< 0.01, ** p< 0.05,
*p< 0.1.
4.2.3. Complemen a i ies Among Coping S a egies
I is also easible o ake in o conside a ion he in e dependencies be ween he a ious
coping mechanisms ha households used o deal wi h ood insecu i y h oughou he
COVID-19 pe iod hanks o he mul i a ia e p obi es ima o . Table 6p esen s hese
connec ions. The e a e many ela ionships be ween a ious coping mechanisms ha a e
p obably complemen a y. Addi ionally, we disco e ed a nega i e bu negligible coe icien
o go e nmen assis ance h oughou he pandemic. Households do no employ his
me hod e y o en, which may be explained by he ac ha du ing he COVID-19 pandemic,
he go e nmen and e en ce ain humani a ian o ganiza ions we e no logis ically o
adequa ely equipped o espond a o ably o household ood needs. In addi ion, i migh
be challenging o iden i y ulne able households in a co up en i onmen , and go e nmen
help may be p o ided o non-necessa y households.
Table 6. Adap a ion s a egy co ela ion ma ix.
Round 1 Round 2
S1 S2 S3 S4 S1 S2 S3 S4
S1 1 S1 1
S2 −0.004 ** 1 S2 −0.004 1
(0.038) (0.038)
S3 −0.015 0.041 *** 1 S3 −0.015 0.041 *** 1
(0.025) (0.015) (0.025) (0.015)
S4 0.059 *** 0.003 −0.186 *** 1 S4 0.059 *** 0.003 −0.184 *** 1
(0.021) (0.012) (0.019) (0.021) (0.012) (0.009)
Sou ce: au ho s om EPICOVID-19 (2021a,2021b). S anda d e o s in pa en heses. *** p< 0.01, ** p< 0.05.
Economies 2025,13, 172 17 o 23
The co ela ion coe icien s p esen ed in Table 6illus a e he linea ela ionships
be ween di e en s a egies, S1 (sa ings), S2 (cash ans e ), S3 ( ee ood), and S4 ( ans e
in kind excep o ood), ha a e associa ed wi h household esilience o ood insecu i y.
A co ela ion o
−
0.004 be ween S2 and S1 indica es ha he e is i ually no linea
ela ionship be ween hese wo s a egies, meaning ha households ha ely on hei
p e ious sa ings (S1) a e no mo e likely o use c edi (S2). In con as , a co ela ion o 0.041
be ween S3 and S2 shows ha a 1% inc ease in S3 is associa ed wi h a 4.1% inc ease in S2
and ice e sa, i.e., he e is no causa ion in ol ed. A coe icien o 0.041 is e y close o
ze o, which quan i a i ely indica es a e y weak posi i e linea ela ionship be ween S2
and S3. Howe e , he posi i e co ela ion sugges s ha di ec cash ans e s (S3) a e sligh ly
mo e common among households ha ha e ob ained c edi (S2) and a e willing o spend
i on ood. A co ela ion o 0.059 be ween S4 and S1 shows ha households using hei
p e ious sa ings (S1) a e sligh ly mo e likely o ecei e ee ood (S4). Finally, a co ela ion
o
−
0.186 be ween S4 and S3 e eals ha households op ing o di ec cash paymen s (S3)
a e less likely o ecei e ee ood (S4). Fu he mo e, he low co ela ion alues indica e ha
he s a egies a e no complemen a y. Ra he , hey ope a e independen ly o somewha
subs i u i e in he case o S4 and S3.
4.2.4. Discussion
The compa a i e analysis highligh s con e ging and di e ging ends in he impac
o mul idimensional c ises on ood insecu i y. Wi h ega d o he e ec s o a med con-
lic , Came oon is expe iencing a +55.3% ise in ood insecu i y in he No h-Wes and
Sou h-Wes egions, an impac seen e en mo e ma kedly in he coun ies o he Sahel
egion. Su azu and S e ano i´c-š ambuk (2023) poin ou ha a med con lic s exace ba e
he ood insecu i y si ua ion, exace ba ing socio economic ensions in hese coun ies. This
dispa i y be ween Came oon and o he coun ies in he egion can be explained by a unique
combina ion o p o ac ed con lic , low humani a ian co e age and inc eased eliance on
subsis ence ag icul u e in Came oon.
On he e ec i eness o cash ans e s, Came oon’s esul s (+8.9% esilience) a e mo e
modes han hose obse ed in Kenya and Uganda in he s udy by Kansiime e al. (2021),
e lec ing s uc u al sho comings such as less p ecise a ge ing, limi ed unding and
ex ended deploymen imes. Ne e heless, hese ans e s emain a i al ool o households
excluded om o mal inancial sys ems, pa icula ly in u al a eas, p o iding c ucial
suppo o educe insecu i y.
In e ne access is eme ging as a key ac o in esilience o ood insecu i y. In Nige ia,
a s udy showed ha access o ICTs, including he In e ne , was associa ed wi h a 42%
educ ion in ood insecu i y among a ming households (Oluwa ayo & Ojo,2019). In
compa ison, in Came oon, he e ec o In e ne access ansla es in o a 32.7% educ ion
in ood insecu i y. This gap be ween he wo coun ies can be a ibu ed o he pi o al
ole o digi al pla o ms du ing COVID-19 in Came oon, which enabled g ea e access o
in o ma ion and online comme ce, al hough u al ICT pene a ion s ill emains low.
5. Conclusions
This s udy’s objec i es we e o iden i y he ac o s ha explain household ood in
secu i y in Came oon du ing he COVID-19 pandemic, analyze he e ec s o adap a ion
(coping) s a egies on household esilience o ood insecu i y, and iden i y he complemen-
a i ies among adap a ion s a egies. Da a om he Socio-Economic Impac Assessmen
Panel o COVID-19 (EPICOVID-19) su eys on household li ing condi ions in Came oon
conduc ed in 2020–2021 by he Na ional Ins i u e o S a is ics o Came oon we e used in
he es ima ions o h ee models: an o de ed logi model o iden i y ood insecu i y ac o s,
Economies 2025,13, 172 18 o 23
a logi model o analyze he impac o coping s a egies on household esilience o ood
insecu i y, and a mul i a ia e p obi model o analyze he complemen a i ies among adap-
a ion s a egies. The esul s e eal ha socio-economic shocks (a med con lic , job losses,
p ice ises) exace ba ed ood insecu i y, pa icula ly in he No h-Wes and Sou h-Wes
egions (+55.3%). Some 28.59% o households demons a ed esilience, mainly h ough
p e ious sa ings, cash ans e s and ood aid. Howe e , coping s a egies p o ed subs i-
u able a he han complemen a y, as e idenced by he nega i e co ela ion be ween cash
ans e s and ood aid (ϱ=−0.186).
In iew o hese esul s, i appea s ha his s udy pa ially con i ms he hypo heses
o mula ed. Fi s ly, hypo hesis H
1
on he agg a a ion o ood insecu i y by socio-economic
shocks (con lic s, job losses, in la ion) is alida ed: egions in c isis (No h-Wes , Sou h-
Wes ) saw hei ood insecu i y inc ease unde lining he cumula i e e ec o mul idimen-
sional c ises. Secondly, hypo hesis H
2
is pa ially con i med: while indi idual (p io
sa ings) and ins i u ional (cash ans e s) s a egies imp o e esilience, hei e ec i eness
emains une en due o limi ed access o o mal inancial sys ems in u al a eas. Finally, he
H
3
hypo hesis on s a egy complemen a i y is in alida ed: analyses e eal nega i e co ela-
ions (e.g., cash ans e s s. ood aid), indica ing ha households a o subs i u able a he
han complemen a y s a egies, p obably cons ained by limi ed esou ces. These esul s
en ich he li e a u e by showing ha he e ec i eness o esilience mechanisms is closely
dependen on he socio-economic and geopoli ical con ex , pa icula ly in de eloping
coun ies acing o e lapping c ises.
The esul s o his s udy call o an in eg a ed and coo dina ed app oach o s eng hen-
ing ood secu i y in Came oon. Fi s ly, he expansion o digi al in as uc u es in u al a eas
is essen ial, as In e ne access has educed ood insecu i y by 32.7%, by acili a ing access
o online ma ke s, ag icul u al in o ma ion and digi al inancial se ices. A he same ime,
i is c ucial o op imize ins i u ional social sa e y ne s: a ge ed cash ans e s and ee ood
aid need o be expanded, pa icula ly in con lic -a ec ed egions, elying on pa ne ships
wi h local NGOs o imp o e a ge ing o ulne able households. A he same ime, secu ing
ag icul u al a eas mus become a p io i y h ough in es men s in in as uc u e p o ec ion
(wa ehouses, oads) and inpu subsidies, in o de o limi he impac o local shocks (c op
he , insecu i y). To sus ain hese e o s, he p omo ion o p e en i e sa ings mus be
encou aged h ough inancial educa ion p og ams and p oduc s ailo ed o low-income
households, s eng hening hei abili y o abso b u u e shocks. Finally, mul i-sec o coo di-
na ion is essen ial: close collabo a ion be ween minis ies (Ag icul u e, Heal h, Secu i y),
in e na ional humani a ian ac o s and local communi ies would ha monize esponses o
o e lapping c ises (heal h, economic, secu i y), while a oiding edundancies. This com-
bina ion o measu es, ancho ed in Came oon’s socio-economic eali ies, would p o ide a
sus ainable amewo k o building ood esilience in a con ex o mul idimensional c ises.
Howe e , ce ain limi a ions should be no ed. Telephone da a (EPICOVID-19) exclude
households wi hou access o mobile elephony, which unde - ep esen s isola ed u al
a eas. This could lead o an unde es ima ion o ood insecu i y a es in hese a eas. The
wo cycles co e a pe iod o 5 mon hs, which is insu icien o assess he las ing e ec s o
adap a ion s a egies.
The limi a ions o his s udy sugges a mo e owa d pos -pandemic longi udinal
s udies, which would ollow households o e se e al yea s o analyze he sus ainabili y o
esilience s a egies. Fu u e s udies could also combine su eys and in e iews o explo e
dynamics wi hin households ( o example, he ole o gende in access o ans e s). In
addi ion, u u e s udies could ex end o neighbo ing coun ies (Chad, Nige ia) in o de o
iden i y common pa e ns in con lic zones.
Economies 2025,13, 172 19 o 23
Ul ima ely, his s udy highligh s he ac ha ood secu i y in mul idimensional c ises
depends no only on isola ed esou ces, bu also on coo dina ed go e nance. In Came oon,
combining a ge ed ins i u ional suppo , digi al inclusion and local capaci y building is
essen ial o ans o m ulne abili y in o sus ainable esilience.
Au ho Con ibu ions: Concep ualiza ion, A.Y. and S.M.E.B.; me hodology, A.Y.; so wa e, A.Y.;
alida ion, A.Y. and S.M.E.B.; o mal analysis, A.Y.; in es iga ion, A.Y. and S.M.E.B.; esou ces, A.Y.
and S.M.E.B.; da a cu a ion, A.Y.; w i ing—o iginal d a p epa a ion, A.Y. and S.M.E.B.; w i ing—
e iew and edi ing, A.Y. and S.M.E.B.; isualiza ion, A.Y. and S.M.E.B.; supe ision, A.Y.; p ojec
adminis a ion, A.Y.; unding acquisi ion, A.Y. and S.M.E.B. All au ho s ha e ead and ag eed o he
published e sion o he manusc ip .
Funding: This esea ch was unded by AFRICAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH CONSORTIUM (AERC),
g an numbe RC22513 (www.ae ca ica.o g) And he APC was unded by AFRICAN ECONOMIC
RESEARCH CONSORTIUM.
Da a A ailabili y S a emen : The da a will be a ailable upon eques om he Na ional Ins i u e o
S a is ics (INS) in Came oon.
Con lic s o In e es : No con lic s o in e es we e epo ed by he au ho s.
Abb e ia ions
The ollowing abb e ia ions a e used in his manusc ip :
FIES Food Insecu i y Expe ience Scale
IDP In e nally Displaced People
INS Na ional Ins i u e o S a is ics
MCA Mul iple Co espondence Analysis
NGO Non-go e nmen al o ganiza ion
UNHCR Uni ed Na ions High Commissione o Re ugees
Appendix A
Table A1. Food Insecu i y Expe ience Scale ques ions.
Numbe Ques ion
1Fea o unning ou o ood o lack o money o o he esou ces
2No being able o ea heal hy and nu i ious ood due o a lack o money o o he esou ces
3Ea ing a poo a ie y o ood because o a lack o money o o he esou ces
4Skipping a meal because o a lack o money o o he esou ces o buy ood
5Ha ing ea en less han hey hough hey should because o a lack o money o o he esou ces
6Ha ing un ou o ood because he e was no enough money o o he esou ces
7Being hung y and no ea ing because he e was no enough money o o he esou ces o buy ood
8Going a whole day wi hou ea ing because o a lack o money o o he esou ces
Sou ces: (Balla d e al.,2013).
Table A2. Di e ence-in-means es o g oup o households ha pa icipa ed in bo h uns and g oup
o households ha pa icipa ed in he i s un only.
G oup Obs. Mean S d. E . S d. De . [95% Con . In e al]
Pa icipa ion du ing all pe iods 1861 0.510557 0.009747 0.4204792 0.4914412 0.5296736
No pa icipa ion 819 0.469754 0.014876 0.4257387 0.4405542 0.4989554
Combined 2680 0.498088 0.00816 0.4224324 0.4820877 0.5140888
Di 0.040802 0.017699 0.0060966 0.0755086
di = mean (pa icipa e)
−
mean (no pa icipa e) = 2.3053; Ho: di = 0 deg ees o eedom = 2678; Ha: di < 0 Ha:
di ! = 0 Ha: di > 0; P (T < ) = 0.9894 P (|T| > | |) = 0.0212 P (T > ) = 0.0106.
Economies 2025,13, 172 20 o 23
Table A3. Resul s o andom e ec s o o de ed logi (unbalanced (1), balanced (2)).
VARIABLE
(1) (2)
Food Insecu i y Ca ego y Food Insecu i y Ca ego y
Socio-demog aphic cha ac e is ics o he household
Age: 20 o 34 0.31 0.31
(0.20) (0.23)
35 o 49 0.32 0.36
(0.20) (0.23)
50 and olde 0.16 0.27
(0.21) (0.23)
Household size: 2–4 membe s −0.07 −0.09
(0.09) (0.10)
5–6 membe s −0.06 −0.14
(0.11) (0.12)
G ea e han 6 membe s 0.01 0.01
(0.10) (0.12)
In e ne access −0.33 *** −0.40 ***
(0.08) (0.09)
In o mal sec o −0.13 −0.08
(0.14) (0.15)
Fo mal p i a e sec o −0.61 *** −0.62 ***
(0.16) (0.18)
Public adminis a ion −0.98 *** −0.90 ***
(0.21) (0.22)
A med con lic s 0.55 *** 0.60 ***
(0.13) (0.14)
Re ugee a ea −0.31 *** −0.18
(0.11) (0.12)
In e nally displaced −0.05 0.04
(0.10) (0.11)
Re ugee a ea and in e nally displaced a ea −0.39 *** −0.25
(0.14) (0.16)
Social and economic shocks
Dea h o disabili y o a membe 1.15 *** 0.99 ***
(0.22) (0.25)
Bene ac o dea hs 1.33 *** 1.32 ***
(0.24) (0.27)
Ac i e membe illness 0.91 *** 0.90 ***
(0.15) (0.17)
Loss o impo an con ac 0.36 0.26
(0.23) (0.25)
Job loss 1.02 *** 0.83 ***
(0.15) (0.17)
Family business bank up cy 1.18 *** 1.43 ***
(0.26) (0.29)
The , ha es ing, money, li es ock o p ope y 0.50 ** 0.56 **
(0.25) (0.27)
Inpu p ice inc ease 1.00 *** 1.18 ***
(0.34) (0.42)
P oduc ion sales p ice d op 0.60 * 0.48
(0.32) (0.35)
Inc ease in ood p ices 0.47 ** 0.37 *
(0.19) (0.20)
Poo ha es due o lack o labo 0.34 * 0.45 **
(0.19) (0.22)
Roden o insec in asion 0.96 *** 0.99 ***
(0.11) (0.12)
O he shocks 0.89 *** 0.83 ***
(0.14) (0.15)
Economies 2025,13, 172 21 o 23
Table A3. Con .
VARIABLE
(1) (2)
Food Insecu i y Ca ego y Food Insecu i y Ca ego y
Job loss causes
COVID-19 causes 0.77 *** 0.96 ***
(0.22) (0.23)
O he s causes 0.14 0.11
(0.13) (0.15)
/cu 1 −0.85 *** −0.86 ***
(0.26) (0.29)
/cu 2 −0.16 −0.18
(0.26) (0.29)
/cu 3 0.47 * 0.49 *
(0.26) (0.29)
sigma2_u 1.01 *** 0.99 ***
(0.16) (0.16)
Obse a ions 4541 3722
Sou ce: au ho s om EPICOVID-19 (2021a,2021b). S anda d e o s in pa en heses. *** p< 0.01, ** p< 0.05,
*p< 0.1.
Table A4. Resul s o he Mul i a ia e P obi model.
VARIABLE
Round 1 Round 2
(M1) (M2) (M3) (M4) (M1) (M2) (M3) (M4)
Pas sa ings Ready Di ec Cash
T ans e F ee Food Pas Sa ings Ready Di ec Cash
T ans e F ee Food
COVID-19 0.478 ** 0.922 ** 0.273 0.328 ** 0.226 0.050 0.273 0.015
(0.228) (0.443) (0.171) (0.162) (0.289) (0.339) (0.272) (0.223)
In e ne Access 0.375 *** 0.037 −0.102 0.110 * 0.100 0.281 * 0.097 0.015
(0.103) (0.117) (0.077) (0.058) (0.121) (0.166) (0.088) (0.078)
Insu ance o
mu ual 0.009 0.255 ** 0.219** 0.289 *** 0.027 0.086 −0.098 0.015
(0.115) (0.127) (0.107) (0.084) (0.152) (0.180) (0.120) (0.105)
Size Than 6
membe s 0.040 −0.113 0.046 −0.039 −0.032 0.100 −0.123 −0.243
(0.090) (0.108) (0.074) (0.056) (0.461) (0.538) (0.323) (0.288)
In o mal sec o 0.006 *** 0.017 *** 0.174 ** 0.040 0.0205 *** 0.140 *** 0.035 0.0195 ***
(0.096) (0.126) (0.081) (0.062) (0.104) (0.133) (0.080) (0.070)
A med con lic s 0.050 −0.066 −0.092 −0.159 ** 0.163 0.027 −0.057 −0.335 ***
(0.127) (0.154) (0.109) (0.081) (0.130) (0.160) (0.106) (0.104)
Re ugee a ea 0.084 0.196 −0.081 0.160 ** 0.107 0.050 0.154 0.070
(0.119) (0.135) (0.099) (0.070) (0.131) (0.169) (0.102) (0.086)
Dea h o disabili y
o a membe 0.144 0.562 ** 0.005 0.352 ** 0.137 0.248 0.241 0.704 **
(0.251) (0.227) (0.193) (0.160) (0.367) (0.492) (0.269) (0.352)
Job loss 0.268 * −0.584 ** 0.017 0.316 *** 0.231 −0.137 0.257 0.168
(0.154) (0.287) (0.128) (0.104) (0.313) (0.380) (0.229) (0.204)
Cons an −0.279 *** −0.875 *** −1.211 *** −0.730 *** −0.056 −1.23 *** −1.09 *** −0.623 ***
(0.106) (0.122) (0.099) (0.077) (0.124) (0.168) (0.106) (0.091)
Obse a ions 2680 2680 2680 2680 1861 1861 1861 1861
Sou ce: au ho s om EPICOVID-19 (2021a,2021b). S anda d e o s in pa en heses. *** p< 0.01, ** p< 0.05,
*p< 0.1.
No es
1
The alue o he sub-index was mul iplied by
−
1 be o e p oceeding o he no malisa ion, because when pe o ming an MCA on
S a a 16 wi h bina y coded a iables (0 o 1) S a a sys ema ically places 0 (no) on he posi i e side and 1 (yes) on he nega i e side.
2
In he con ex o ood insecu i y analysis, he ma ginal e ec helps us assess he in luence o explana o y a iables (such as
age o head o household, household size, in e ne access, a ea o esidence, and socioe-conomic shocks, e c.) on household
insecu i y s a us. I allows us o unde s and how hese ac o s con ibu e o a household’s ood insecu i y s a us and can help
policymake s, esea che s, and o ganiza ions unde s and he d i e s o ood insecu i y and ailo in e en ions o add ess speci ic
ulne abili ies and p omo e ood secu i y in di e en segmen s o he popula ion.
Economies 2025,13, 172 22 o 23
Re e ences
Abay, K. A., Be hane, G., Hoddino , J., & Ta e e, K. (2023). COVID-19 and ood secu i y in E hiopia: Do social p o ec ion p og ams
p o ec ? Economic De elopmen and Cul u al Change,71(2). [C ossRe ]
Am ullah, E. R., Tokuda, H., Rusyiana, A., & Ishida, A. (2023). E ec o COVID-19 pandemic on ood insecu i y in Indonesian
households. In e na ional Jou nal o Social Economics.ahead-o -p in . [C ossRe ]
Ansah, I. G. K., Ga deb oek, C., & Ihle, R. (2019). Resilience and household ood secu i y: A e iew o concep s, me hodological
app oaches and empi ical e idence. Food Secu i y,11(6), 1187–1203. [C ossRe ]
Balana, B. B., Ogunniyi, A., Oyeyemi, M., Faso an i, A., Edeh, H., & Andam, K. (2023). COVID-19, ood insecu i y and die a y di e si y
o households: Su ey e idence om Nige ia. Food Secu i y,15(1), 219–241. [C ossRe ]
Balla d, T. J., Kepple, A. W., & Ca ie o, C. (2013). The ood insecu i y expe ience scale: De eloping a global s anda d o moni o ing hunge
wo ldwide. Technical Pape . A ailable online: h p://www. ao.o g/economic/ess/ess- s/ oices/en/ (accessed on 3 Ma ch 2025).
Banque Mondiale. (2021). Came oun- ue d’ensemble. Banque Mondiale.
Ba e , C. B. (2020). Ac ions now can cu b ood sys ems allou om COVID-19. Na u e Food,1(6), 319–320. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
Ca lsson-Szlezak, P., Ree es, M., & Swa z, P. (2020). Wha co ona i us could mean o he global economy. Ha a d Business Re iew,
3(10), 1–10.
Ceballos, F., Kannan, S., & K ame , B. (2020). Impac s o a na ional lockdown on smallholde a me s’ income and ood secu i y:
Empi ical e idence om wo s a es in India. Wo ld De elopmen ,136, 105069. [C ossRe ]
Chagomoka, T., Unge , S., D esche , A., Glase , R., Ma schne , B., & Schlesinge , J. (2016). Food coping s a egies in no he n Ghana. A
socio-spa ial analysis along he u ban– u al con inuum. Ag icul u e & Food Secu i y,5(1), 4. [C ossRe ]
Dandonougbo, Y., Tossou, Y., A ake, E. H., & Ekoue i, D. K. (2021). E e s de la COVID-19 su la a ia ion du e enu e la sécu i é
alimen ai e des ménages au Togo. A ican De elopmen Re iew,33, S194–S206. [C ossRe ]
Dzanku, F. M. (2019). Food secu i y in u al sub-Saha an A ica: Explo ing he nexus be ween gende , geog aphy and o - a m
employmen . Wo ld De elopmen ,113, 26–43. [C ossRe ]
Ekwebelem, O. C., O ielu, E. S., Nno om-Dike, O. V., Iweha, C., Ekwebelem, N. C., Obi, B. C., & Ugbede-Ojo, S. E. (2020). Th ea s o
COVID-19 o achie ing Uni ed Na ions sus ainable de elopmen goals in A ica. Ame ican Jou nal o T opical Medicine and Hygiene,
104(2), 457. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
Fi oz, A., Islam, A., Pak ashi, D., Rahman, T., & Siddique, A. (2021). De e minan s and dynamics o ood insecu i y du ing COVID-19
in u al Bangladesh. Food Policy,101, 102066. [C ossRe ]
Foka-Nkwen i, C., Nguendo, Y. H. B., Noela, A. M., & Nganou-Moua o, M. (2020). COVID-19 and ood insecu i y in Came oon. GSC
Ad anced Resea ch and Re iews,5(2), 111–117. [C ossRe ]
Fung Uy, W., C espo-Bellido, M., G ay, H., W igh , L., Himmelg een, D., & Ma inez Tyson, D. (2023). Coping wi h ood insecu i y
among people seeking ood assis ance du ing he COVID-19 pandemic. Jou nal o Nu i ion Educa ion and Beha io ,55(7), 16.
[C ossRe ]
Gen ilini, U. (2022). Cash ans e s in pandemic imes (No. 37700). The Wo ld Bank G oup.
G eene, W. H. (2000). Econome ic analysis (4 h ed.). P en ice Hall.
Hausman, J. A. (1978). Speci ica ion es s in econome ics. Econome ica: Jou nal o he Econome ic Socie y, 1251–1271. [C ossRe ]
HLPE. (2017). Nu i ion and ood secu i y (A epo by he high-le el panel o expe s on ood secu i y and nu i ion). Commi ee on
Wo ld Food Secu i y.
INS EPICOVID-19. (2021a). Enquê es d’é alua ion de l’impac socioéconomiques de la COVID-19 su les condi ions de ies des ménages au
Came oun, deuxième passage- ole ménages, appo d’analyse des données. EPICOVID-19.
INS EPICOVID-19. (2021b). Enquê es d’é alua ion de l’impac socioéconomiques de la COVID-19 su les condi ions de ies des ménages au
Came oun, p emie passage- ole ménages, appo d’analyse des données. EPICOVID-19.
Islam, A., Mai a, C., Pak ashi, D., & Smy h, R. (2016). Mic oc edi p og amme pa icipa ion and household ood secu i y in u al
Bangladesh. Jou nal o Ag icul u al Economics,67(2), 448–470. [C ossRe ]
Kansiime, M. K., Tambo, J. A., Mugambi, I., Bundi, M., Ka a, A., & Owuo , C. (2021). COVID-19 implica ions on household income and
ood secu i y in Kenya and Uganda: Findings om a apid assessmen . Wo ld De elopmen ,137, 105199. [C ossRe ]
McGo e n, T. M., Gogan, J. L., & Bui, T. X. (2021, Janua y 5–8). Can digi al badging help uni e si ies lexibly suppo s uden s and acul y
du ing c ises? A p oposal and call o esea ch. 54 h Hawaii In e na ional Con e ence on Social Sciences (pp. 6339–6348), Kauai, HI,
USA.
Min, H. (2013). O de ed Logi eg ession modeling o he sel - a ed heal h in Hawai‘i, wi h compa isons o he OLS model. Jou nal o
Mode n Applied S a is ical Me hods,12(2), 23. [C ossRe ]
MINADER/PAM/FAO. (2020). SUIVI DE LA SECURITE ALIMENTAIRE, Bulle in N . 4, République du Came oun (Oc ob e 2020, Données
de Fé ie 2020). A ailable online: h ps://docs.w p.o g/api/documen s/WFP-0000120753/download/ (accessed on 3 Ma ch
2025).
Economies 2025,13, 172 23 o 23
Mouloudj, K., Boua a , A. C., & Fechi , H. (2020). The impac o COVID-19 pandemic on ood secu i y. Les cahie s du CREAD,36(3),
159–184.
M odo, Y. F. (2021). Insécu i é alimen ai e pos -co id des ménages u bains au Came oun. Re ue F ançaise d’Economie e de Ges ion,2(11),
308–332.
Oluwa ayo, I. B., & Ojo, A. O. (2019). E ec o access o ICT on ood insecu i y among a ming households in Nige ia. The Jou nal o
De eloping A eas,53(2), 155–168. [C ossRe ]
OMS-Came oun. (2020). COVID-19 in os: Bulle in d’in o ma ion de l’OMS Came oun (n◦1—jan ie àjuin 2020). OMS-Came oun.
Onyeaka, H., Anumudu, C. K., Al-Sha i y, Z. T., Egele-Godswill, E., & Mbaegbu, P. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic: A e iew o he global
lockdown and i s a - eaching e ec s. Science P og ess,104(2), 00368504211019854. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
O jiako , E. C., Adedi an, A., Ugwu, J. O., & Nwachukwu, W. (2023). Household li ing condi ions and ood insecu i y in Nige ia: A
longi udinal s udy du ing COVID-19 pandemic. BMJ Open,13(1), e066810. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
Ozili, P. K. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and economic c isis: The Nige ian expe ience and s uc u al causes. Jou nal o Economic and
Adminis a i e Sciences,37(4), 401–418. [C ossRe ]
Sen, A. (1976). Po e y and amines: An essay on en i lemen and dep i a ion. Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Sen, A. (1999). De elopmen as eedom. Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Se ilippi, E., & Ramna h, G. (2018). Resilience measu emen and concep ual amewo ks: A e iew o he li e a u e. Annals o Public
and Coope a i e Economics,89(4), 645–664. [C ossRe ]
Suh, N. N., Nyiawung, R. A., & Abay, C. F. (2023). Food secu i y and coping s a egies o COVID-19 dis up ions among a ming
households in Came oon. Food and Humani y,1, 614–625. [C ossRe ]
Su azu, M. M., & S e ano i´c-š ambuk, J. (2023). The cause o diploma ic ailu e in he Sahel egion and he ising coups. In e na ional
Jou nal o Resea ch and Inno a ion in Social Science,7(12), 1005–1012. [C ossRe ]
Tabe-Ojong, M. P., J ., Geb ekidan, B. H., Nshaki a-Rukundo, E., Bö ne , J., & Heckelei, T. (2022). COVID-19 in u al A ica: Food
access dis up ions, ood insecu i y and coping s a egies in Kenya, Namibia, and Tanzania. Ag icul u al Economics,53(5), 719–738.
[C ossRe ]
Tabe-Ojong, M. P., J ., Nshaki a-Rukundo, E., & Haile Geb ekidan, B. (2023). COVID-19 and ood insecu i y in A ica: A e iew o he
eme ging empi ical e idence. Eu opean Re iew o Ag icul u al Economics,50(3), 853–878. [C ossRe ]
Tambe, B. A., Tchuenchieu, A. K., Tchuen e, B. T., Edoun, F. E., Moua o, H. T., Kesa, H., & Medou, G. N. (2021). The s a e o ood
secu i y and die a y di e si y du ing he COVID-19 pandemic in Came oon. Jou nal o Medicine and Heal h Resea ch,6(1), 1–11.
WFP, UNICEF & FAO. (2020). In e im guidance no e: Mi iga ing he e ec s o he COVID-19 pandemic on ood and nu i ion o schoolchild en.
Food and Ag icul u e O ganiza ion o he Uni ed Na ions.
Disclaime /Publishe ’s No e: The s a emen s, opinions and da a con ained in all publica ions a e solely hose o he indi idual
au ho (s) and con ibu o (s) and no o MDPI and/o he edi o (s). MDPI and/o he edi o (s) disclaim esponsibili y o any inju y o
people o p ope y esul ing om any ideas, me hods, ins uc ions o p oduc s e e ed o in he con en .
