Food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Burkina Faso

Nikiema, Pouirkèta Rita; Dedewanou, Finagnon Antoine Article Food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Burkina Faso Economies Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Nikiema, Pouirkèta Rita; Dedewanou, Finagnon Antoine (2025) : Food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Burkina Faso, Economies, ISSN 2227-7099, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 13, Iss. 6, pp. 1-22, https://doi.org/10.3390/economies13060155 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/329435 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Academic Editor: Sanzidur Rahman Received: 3 March 2025 Revised: 1 May 2025 Accepted: 9 May 2025 Published: 2 June 2025 Citation: Nikiema, P. R., & Dedewanou, F. A. (2025). Food Insecurity During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Burkina Faso. Economies, 13(6), 155. https://doi.org/10.3390/ economies13060155 Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/). Article Food Insecurity During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Burkina Faso Pouirkèta Rita Nikiema 1,* and Finagnon Antoine Dedewanou 2 1University Norbert Zongo, BP 376 Koudougou, Koudougou 40000, Burkina Faso 2Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada; [email protected] *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This paper investigates the implication of the COVID-19 pandemic on household food insecurity in Burkina Faso. We used data from the High-Frequency Phone Survey collected from the period June 2020 to June 2021 by the World Bank in collaboration with the National Institute of Statistics. To assess the persistence of food inadequacy, we estimated a dynamic linear probability model. Our results revealed that female and elderly household members were more likely to skip meals during the pandemic than their respective counterparts. For households that skipped a meal due to the pandemic, the likelihood of facing food insecurity in the subsequent month increased by 37 percent. Similarly, individuals who ran out of food in consecutive months were 0.28 times more likely to experience the same situation in the following month. While other shocks can cause food insecurity, the global health-related, economic, social, and information dimensions of COVID-19 created a distinctive and multifaceted form of food shortage that sets it apart from many other types of shock. These findings suggest the implementation of effective programs to respond to shocks and the mitigation effects experienced by most disadvantaged groups. Keywords: COVID-19; food insecurity persistence; Burkina Faso JEL Classification: D10; I12; O55; Q18 1. Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has led to substantial concerns about threats to food security (Amare et al.,2021;Hirvonen et al.,2021;Laborde et al.,2020). In April 2020, the World Food Programme (WFP) projected that the number of acutely food-insecure people in the world could double by the end of 2020 without concerted action (WFP,2020). The World Bank’s recent estimates show that, globally, the pandemic pushed 23 million people into extreme poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa in 2020. In addition, research on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on food security, food systems, and poverty revealed that the hunger and malnutrition associated with the pandemic might actually kill or debilitate more people than the disease itself, especially in regions of the world with weaker social safety nets (Fanzo,2020;HLPE,2020;United Nations,2020). This paper investigates the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on household food security in Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso is an interesting case study, as the pandemic contributed to the worsening of food insecurity for three main reasons. First, agricultural production and food security in Burkina Faso are highly dependent on weather shocks. According to the Food Crisis Prevention Network (2020), rainfall variability reduced agricultural production by between 6% and 15% in 2019. This could tip 10.1% of the population into food insecurity. In addition, in recent years, the country has been affected Economies 2025,13, 155 https://doi.org/10.3390/economies13060155 Economies 2025,13, 155 2 of 22 by violent terrorist attacks and regional unrest. Second, the Fund for Peace (2020) concluded that Burkina Faso was the fourth most affected country by terrorism in 2019. Terrorism led to the closure of more than 2000 schools, 600,000 internally displaced people, and the shutdown of health centers. On 31 December 2022, 6253 schools closed, and 1.7 million people were displaced internally due to insecurity and violence. These recurrent and violent attacks have deteriorated households’ livelihoods in several regions. Finally, the availability of a large nationally representative panel of households observed during the pandemic makes Burkina Faso an ideal setting for the early empirical examination of the impacts of COVID-19. The effects of the pandemic are expected to differ both by geography and by type of household, with pre-existing vulnerabilities to food security likely to be magnified (Devereux et al.,2020;Ravallion,2020). The impacts are expected to be most severe for poorer households in both rural and urban areas (Ravallion,2020). According to the FAO (2021), COVID-19 was a contributing factor to the increase in moderate and severe food insecurity between 2019 and 2020. Indeed, moderate and severe food insecurity increased from 43 percent to 59 percent in Burkina Faso. As the spread of the pandemic began in urban areas, government responses, including mobility restrictions and lockdowns, would likely be most intense in urban areas and might affect urban residents more directly than rural households in the short term. However, the impact of COVID-19 was also expected to vary across livelihood options, with those activities that require face-to-face interactions likely to experience a significant loss in demand (Abay et al.,2020). Value chain disruptions might extend deeply into rural areas, affecting both input supply and output demand for farmers and affecting the income of those employed in both upstream and downstream agricultural value chains (Amjath-Babu et al.,2020). FAO and WFP (2020) identified the following five ways in which food insecurity can be affected by COVID-19: (i) food access through the reduced purchasing power of households; (ii) the availability of food by reducing agricultural production and disrupting food supply chains; (iii) the limit of government capacities to protect vulnerable populations; (iv) political stability; and (v) conflict dynamics. More precisely, our study answers the following questions: •What is the persistence of food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic periods? •Do the potential effects vary across households? •What are the effects of the spread of the pandemic on food insecurity outcomes? To answer the above questions, we used the 2020–2021 High-Frequency Phone Survey. We also investigated other factors affecting food insecurity indicators via dynamic ordinary least square regression. Previous studies on the effects of COVID-19 on food security in Burkina Faso focused on the broader macroeconomic national level (Zidouemba et al.,2020) and the urban environment (Ouoba & Sawadogo,2022;Sawadogo & Ouoba,2023). Our study fills this gap by analyzing the effects at the microeconomic level and in both rural and urban environments. The contribution of this work is threefold. First, the study adds to the growing literature attempting to analyze the impact of COVID-19 at the household and individual levels. Second, in terms of methodology, the study employed a dynamic model with longitudinal data. Third, the study includes a heterogeneity analysis to help formulate policies targeting vulnerable households and individuals. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we present an empirical literature review and theoretical framework. We discuss the COVID-19 situation in Burkina Faso in Section 3. Section 4describes the data found and documents the food insecurity profile. We present empirical results in Section 5and a discussion surrounding our results in Section 6. The paper is then concluded in Section 7. Economies 2025,13, 155 3 of 22 2. Literature Review 2.1. Empirical Review Several empirical studies have documented the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on food insecurity (Akim et al.,2024;Ouoba & Sawadogo,2022;Syafiq et al.,2022;Laborde et al.,2021;Amare et al.,2021;Adjognon et al.,2021;Devereux et al.,2020). Three main channels have been identified to highlight these impacts: •Income losses and shocks in demand; •Food supply chain disruptions; • Policy responses: hoarding at the country level (food export bans) and fiscal stimulus. Income losses and shocks in demand have contributed significantly to the reduction in food security during the COVID-19 pandemic. With respect to food access disruptions, preventive responses created employment shocks through employment losses. Evidence from lowand middle-income countries shows overall income losses due to stay-at-home policies (Bottan et al.,2020;Ceballos et al.,2020;Hamadani et al.,2020;Kansiime et al.,2021; Koos et al.,2020;Laborde et al.,2021;Mahmud & Riley,2021). Laborde et al. (2021) assessed the impact of COVID-19 on poverty and food insecurity in Asia and Africa, South of the Sahara, using IFPRI’s global general equilibrium model. They found that the increases in poverty are concentrated in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, with harder impacts in urban areas than in rural areas. The COVID-19-related lockdown measures explain most of the decrease in output, whereas declines in savings soften the adverse impacts on food consumption. Using phone-based surveys in Mali, Adjognon et al. (2021) reported high levels of food insecurity and shortfalls in labor market participation in urban areas. In Nigeria, food insecurity and shortfalls in labor market participation were also exacerbated by COVID-19 cases and some containment measures such as lockdowns (Amare et al., 2021). The link between more stringent restrictions, food insecurity, and off-farm income reduction was also established using a robust statistical analysis to compare the areas of Nigeria that experienced differential restrictions (Amare et al.,2021). Moreover, several recent empirical studies have documented the impact of the externality of infection (i.e., the unintended impact of an individual’s infection on the health and economic outcomes of others) on income (see Alinsato,2021;Bethune & Korinek,2020;Eichenbaum et al.,2021; Welfens,2020 for a review). Indeed, the spread of COVID-19 could have led to a decrease in economic productivity, which, in turn, could have resulted in low incomes for individuals. During the COVID-19 outbreak, some people took time off to care for themselves or their family members or to avoid becoming infected. This could have led to reduced productivity in the workplace and, in turn, a decline in income for individuals and businesses. Food supply chain disruptions: Stock-outs affect online markets due to reduced farm deliveries (Mahajan & Tomar,2021), and the prices of grains became unstable, although minimum support prices shielded producers from very low prices (Varshney et al.,2020). Despite government support mechanisms, such as minimum prices, some products (e.g., vegetables) still suffered price drops (Ali & Khan,2020). COVID-19 has disrupted not only food markets but also the overall national and international supply chains (Aday & Aday, 2020;Ayanlade & Radeny,2020;Cao et al.,2021;Elleby et al.,2020), including access to agricultural inputs, such as fertilizers, and others (Ayanlade & Radeny,2020;Nchanji et al., 2021;Pan et al.,2020;Pu & Zhong,2020). We expect that households have become more food insecure due to COVID-19 and related lockdown measures. Policy responses—hoarding at the country level (food export bans) and fiscal stimulus: COVID-19 triggered a range of policy responses at both the national and international levels. Two important policy responses were hoarding at the country level, particularly food export bans, and the fiscal stimulus. Hoarding at the country level refers to the act of governments Economies 2025,13, 155 4 of 22 restricting or banning exports of essential commodities such as food, medical supplies, and other goods in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some countries have implemented export bans on food and other essential goods to ensure their domestic food security and meet the needs of their population. However, these policies can lead to shortages in other countries, particularly in low-income countries, which can exacerbate food insecurity and contribute to global price volatility. Fiscal stimulus refers to policies aimed at boosting economic growth and mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on businesses and individuals. Fiscal stimulus measures can take the form of direct payments to individuals, tax breaks, loans and grants to businesses, and increased government spending on public infrastructure projects. These measures are aimed at maintaining aggregate demand and supporting households and businesses that are struggling financially owing to the pandemic. Fiscal stimulus policies have been widely implemented by governments around the world in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The scale and scope of these policies have varied, with some countries implementing large-scale stimulus packages and others adopting more targeted measures. The effectiveness of these policies in mitigating the economic impact of the pandemic has been mixed, with some countries experiencing a rebound in economic activity while others continue to struggle. In summary, hoarding at the country level and fiscal stimulus are two important policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. While hoarding can contribute to global price volatility and exacerbate food insecurity, fiscal stimulus policies are aimed at mitigating the economic impact of the pandemic on households and businesses. The effectiveness of these policies in mitigating the impact of the pandemic will continue to be evaluated over time. Although the literature on the effects of COVID-19 on food security in lowand middle-income countries continues to grow, minimal research exists on the magnitude of the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the above mechanisms, partly because detailed household survey data are not yet available. This study aims to examine the implications of the spread of the pandemic and associated lockdown measures on the ultimate food security outcomes of households. Burkina Faso was highly susceptible to income shocks and food insecurity associated with the spread of the pandemic. Thus, national and regional lockdowns and mobility restrictions disrupted major economic activities, including local businesses. These restrictions affected food transportation within the country, with clear implications for the food supply. There are indications that Burkina Faso’s domestic and international food supply chains have been disrupted, food prices have increased, and informal sector unemployment rates are likely to be increasing. All these effects are likely to generate significant repercussions for food insecurity, particularly in poorer and vulnerable households (Amare et al.,2021;Ericksen et al.,2012;Gilligan,2020;Tendall et al.,2015). Using multivariate analysis, Syafiq et al. (2022) reported that the reduced income and work stoppage status of households were related to household food security during the pandemic in Indonesia. They also found that households with lower incomes had a four times higher risk of experiencing food insecurity. Additionally, households with younger people had a two times higher risk of experiencing food insecurity than their older counterparts. Ouoba and Sawadogo (2022) analyzed the effects of income loss due to COVID-19 on food security and poverty among the urban households of small traders in Burkina Faso. They found that the pandemic has reduced incomes by increasing the likelihood of households entering poverty. In addition, COVID-19 has increased the likelihood of households being food insecure due to their lower food consumption. Ouoba and Sawadogo concluded that households with adaptive capacity were able to adjust to the shock. Using a computable general equilibrium model with two alternative scenarios (i.e., optimistic and pessimistic), Zidouemba et al. (2020) suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic Economies 2025,13, 155 5 of 22 has contributed to a worsening of food security as food insecurity is increasing among poor households in rural and urban areas in Burkina Faso. The authors show that while urban non-poor households are resilient to the pandemic’s effects, rural non-poor households are likely vulnerable. 2.2. Theoretical Framework COVID-19 has had significant impacts on food security worldwide. Conceptually, the impacts of COVID-19 on food security can be understood through a range of theoretical frameworks, including the food systems framework, the household livelihoods framework, and the global political economy framework. The food system framework emphasizes the interconnectedness of the different components of the food system, including production, processing, distribution, and consumption. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted all of these components, with impacts on farmers, food processors, transport workers, and retailers (Kumar & Kumar Singh,2022). The resulting disruptions led to food shortages, increased prices, and reduced access to nutritious foods, particularly for vulnerable populations (Laborde et al.,2020). The food system framework can be used to understand the complex and interrelated impacts of COVID-19 on food security and inform policy responses that address the different components of the food system. The household livelihoods framework emphasizes the role of individual households in securing access to food. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread job losses and economic insecurity, which has had significant impacts on households’ ability to access and afford food (Karpman et al.,2020). In addition, lockdowns and other public health measures have limited households’ ability to access food markets and other sources of food. The household livelihood framework can help to understand the differential impacts of COVID-19 on households, depending on their socio-economic status and other factors, and to inform policy responses that target vulnerable households and address the underlying economic drivers of food insecurity. The global political economy framework emphasizes the role of international trade and power relations in shaping food security. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to disruptions in global trade and supply chains, including food exports and imports. In addition, the economic impacts of the pandemic have disproportionately affected low-income countries and small-scale farmers, who are often reliant on international trade for their livelihoods (Clapp & Moseley,2020). International trade is one of the key sources of food security as trade moves food from surplus countries to deficit countries, increases food availability, and reduces prices (Ouoba & Sawadogo,2022). However, trade can be a threat to food security because of the closure of markets or trade barriers that disrupt the food supply chain. Worldwide, data indicate that COVID-19 has a significant negative impact on the food supply chain, which contributes to worsening malnutrition (FAO et al.,2021). The global political economy framework can help us understand the underlying structural drivers of food insecurity and inform policy responses that address power imbalances and inequities in the global food system. Overall, these theoretical frameworks can be used to understand the complex and interrelated impacts of COVID-19 on food security and inform policy responses that address the underlying drivers of food insecurity. Indeed, policymakers must be aware that before COVID-19, pre-existing factors such as climate change, conflicts, and socioeconomic factors contributed to food insecurity, and these effects have persisted with the pandemic. Thus, targeted multisectoral interventions are needed to ensure that population resilience accounts for the interrelation between food insecurity factors. Economies 2025,13, 155 6 of 22 3. COVID-19 Measures in Burkina Faso The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in China in December 2019, quickly spread to all countries in the world. Burkina Faso officially recorded its first infection case on 9 March 2020. On 12 April 2022, there were 20,865 confirmed cases of COVID-19, with 383 deaths. Like many countries worldwide, Burkina Faso followed physical distancing, handwashing, and face-covering measures in order to limit the spread of the virus. In view of the increase in the incidence of COVID-19 cases, in addition to barrier measures, new social and economic measures were taken three weeks after the start of the epidemic and were gradually introduced within the country. To contain the spread of the disease, the government of Burkina Faso took additional preventive measures, the first of which came into force on 16 March 2020. These measures included the following: the closure of schools and universities, the closure of certain markets, the closure of restaurants and bars, the closure of all places of worship, and the introduction of a curfew (from 7 p.m. to 5 a.m. in March and later from 9 p.m. to 4 a.m. in April) throughout the territory. Also, the government implemented restrictions on travel within the country; the quarantine of cities recording at least one case; the closure of air, land, and rail borders; the cessation of all nonessential activities, including sports and cultural activities; and the prohibition of gatherings of more than 50 people. While these restrictive measures were intended primarily to reduce the spread of the disease, they impacted the living conditions of populations to varying degrees. For example, the closure of markets impacted access to food in cities and among the poor due to the increase in prices. Indeed, during the period when anti-COVID-19 measures were implemented, 25 percent of households nationwide were unable to access staple foods (INSD,2020). Thus, COVID-19 has affected people’s ability to meet their food needs, which has ultimately exacerbated food and nutrition insecurity in Burkina Faso. However, the closure of markets in the main cities was the most contested measure as a vast majority of young self-employed people work in the informal sector in markets and make a living from day-to-day selling their products (Tapsoba,2022). In Ouagadougou, the political capital of Burkina Faso, 36 markets were closed from 26 March to 20 April 2020, and the large market was closed in Bobo Dioulasso, the economic capital, from 30 March to 12 April 2020. To mitigate the impact of this measure on livelihoods, the government opted for the distribution of food and necessities to those impacted by the decision, specifically to informal traders. However, as donations, riots, and demonstrations erupted, the government was urged to suspend the decision to close the market (Tapsoba, 2022). Indeed, weeks later, a decision was made to reopen markets, but with conditional measures, such as the disinfection of all markets, a reduction in the number of clients, the installation of hand-washing equipment in every shop, social distancing, and mask-wearing for customers and merchants. Keeping markets open helped to maintain traders’ incomes and prevent them from sliding into poverty, and the food security of many urban residents who relied on them was also preserved. According to the FAO (2021), during the pandemic, a solidarity fund was established by the government in the country to benefit actors in the informal sector, particularly women, to revive trade activities in vegetables and fruits. 4. Methodology 4.1. Data Description We use data from Burkina Faso’s High-Frequency Phone Survey (HFPS) phase one, which were collected by the World Bank in collaboration with the Burkina Faso National Institute of Statistics and Demography (INSD). HFPS phase 1 was used to assess the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and included 11 rounds collected from 9 June 2020 to 28 June 2021 and was conducted on a monthly basis. Table 1presents the dates of data collection. The HFPS is a subsample of the Burkina Faso 2018/19 Living Standards and Economies 2025,13, 155 7 of 22 Measurement Survey (LSMS). We merged the data from all 11 rounds and kept the cases with complete information. These data provide information on food, nutrition security indicators, employment, income, etc. Adjusting for potential attrition in the HFPS and constructing nationally representative statistics necessitate constructing and applying appropriate sampling weights. The HFPS team constructed sampling weights using the weights for the LSMS as the basis, with further adjustments made for attrition in the phone survey. The weights for the final sample of households from the HFPS were calculated in several stages and are shown to ensure a comparable distribution of observable characteristics from the LSMS and the HFPS. Furthermore, to obtain representative strata at the national, urban, and rural levels, the HFPS team targeted a sample size of 1800 households from the 7010 representative households in the LSMS. By assuming a 50% nonresponse rate, they obtained the minimum required sample of 1479 households. Therefore, to account for nonresponse and attrition, 2500 households were called in the baseline round. A total of 1968 households were fully interviewed during the first round of interviews, and those 1968 households constituted the final successful sample to be contacted in the subsequent rounds of the survey. Overall, more than 95% of the 1968 households were successfully interviewed in each round. Since HFPS data contain some important information on households’ participation in economic activities and food insecurity experience, we can assess the persistence of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on food insecurity. Table 1. Dates of data collection. Rounds Start End 1 9 June 2020 1 July 2020 2 20 July 2020 14 August 2020 3 12 September 2020 21 October 2020 4 6 November 2020 2 December 2020 5 9 December 2020 30 December 2020 6 15 January 2021 1 February 2021 7 12 February 2021 2 March 2021 8 13 March 2021 1 April 2021 9 20 April 2021 4 May 2021 10 25 May 2021 15 June 2021 11 28 June 2021 20 July 2021 Source: World Bank. We measured food insecurity using three indicators, capturing households’ experience of food insecurity and using the food insecurity experience scale (FIES) developed by Cafiero et al. (2018). In the HFPS, households’ food insecurity experiences were elicited using the self-reported experiences of hunger and food shortages in the last 30 days (Hoddinott,1999;Carletto et al.,2013;Bellemare & Novak,2017). The first indicator asked if a household head or any other adult in the household had skipped a meal because there was not enough money or other resources to obtain food. The second indicator elicited whether the household had run out of food due to a lack of money or other resources to obtain food. The third indicator took a value of 1 if the household or any other adult in the household went without eating for a whole day because of a lack of money or other resources. These three indicators are the reduced FIES and represent a subset of the full FIES commonly employed in the COVID-19 literature (Akim et al.,2024;Amare et al.,2021). Amare et al. (2021) and Akim et al. (2024) used the same three indicators to measure food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria. In general, and in the COVID-19 literature, the full FIES consists of eight indicators (Rudin-Rush et al., 2022;Adjognon et al.,2021). However, the reduced FIES is consistent with the traditional food insecurity classification in the literature (Akim et al.,2024;Adjognon et al.,2021). Economies 2025,13, 155 8 of 22 Also, these three indicators may not capture all domains of the food security situation, but they do show potential dynamics in the food security situation (Amare et al.,2021) and reasonably capture household food insecurity concerns (Akim et al.,2024). In addition to the separate indicators, Akim et al. (2024) used the FIES indicators to compute a food insecurity index and food insecurity score. Indeed, based on the reduced FIES indicators, Amare et al. (2021) used principal component analysis (PCA) to construct a composite index of food insecurity, whereas Akim et al. (2024) included the sum of the indicators to measure the food insecurity score. Moreover, Rudin-Rush et al. (2022) and Adjognon et al. (2021) used food insecurity severity classifications. Table 2reports the weighted and pooled summary statistics of the key variables in our sample. We selected common variables on the basis of the COVID-19 literature. About 15 percent of the respondents in our sample were female; 14.9 percent of the households skipped a meal because of a lack of monetary resources; 8 percent ran out of food; and 5 percent went without eating for a whole day. Table 2. Summary statistics of key variables. Variables Definition and Measure Mean St.Dev Min. Max. Dependent variable Skipped a meal 1 if the household skipped a meal; 0 otherwise 14.92 - 0 1 Ran out of food 1 if the household ran out of food; 0 otherwise 8.46 - 0 1 Went without eating 1 if a member of the household went without eating; 0 otherwise 5.03 - 0 1 Control variables Gender 1 if individual is a female; 0 otherwise 15.60 - 0 1 Age Age in years 47.83 13.909 18 102 Age groups 18–24 group 1 if the individual is aged 18–24 years 0.97 - 0 1 25–44 group 1 if the individual is aged 25–44 years 40.56 - 0 1 45–64 group 1 if the individual is aged 45–64 years 36.59 - 0 1 65+ group 1 if the individual is aged 65 or more 21.18 - 0 1 Household size Number of household members 7.89 0.354 4 8 Household size classes 4–6 members 1 if household has between 4 and 6 members in total 1.29 - 0 1 7 members 1 if household has 7 members in total 7.26 - 0 1 8 members 1 if household has 8 members in total 91.43 - 0 1 Urban 1 if the household lives in urban area; 0 if the household lives in rural area 65.80 - 0 1 Farm activities 1 if household is involved in farm (agriculture) activities; 0 if involved in non-farm activities 64.26 - 0 1 Sample size 8144 - Source: The authors’ calculations used data from the HFPS 2020–2021. 4.2. Food Insecurity Dynamics and Profiles in Burkina Faso Figure 1plots the proportion of respondents who experienced food insecurity between 2020 and 2021. Although between 10 percent and 28 percent of the respondents experienced food insecurity during the beginning of the pandemic, the trend over this time shows that less than 10 percent of the respondents experienced food insecurity in the second quarter of 2021. This trend reflects improved resilience and adaptive measures within the population despite the challenges experienced in the broader Burkina Faso context. Economies 2025,13, 155 15 of 22 Amare et al. (2021) showed that state-level lockdown measures in Nigeria are associated with larger reductions in non-farm business activities. However, wage-related activities may be less affected by lockdown measures since they may still be operated remotely, and individuals can continue working remotely (Dingel & Neiman,2020). In addition, individuals engaged in wage-related activities are likely to have formal contracts and, hence, are less likely to lose their jobs on short notice (Abay et al.,2020;Amare et al.,2021; Dingel & Neiman,2020). We are aware of some potential endogeneity and an omitted variables bias in our dynamic model due to the potential correlation between the individual-fixed effects (Equation (1)) and other determinants of food insecurity. The variations in food insecurity are likely driven by both government responses to the pandemic and household-level responses associated with precautionary measures (Abay et al.,2020). Additionally, our study did not consider variables related to education or literacy (Akim et al.,2024;Ouoba & Sawadogo, 2022), income (Ouoba & Sawadogo,2022), asset ownership (Akim et al.,2024), or labor market participation (Amare et al.,2021). In addition, the findings are only representative of households that have access to telephone services, as the rate of phone ownership in the country is low, especially in rural areas (Akalu & Wang,2023). However, this study revealed a long-term effect of the pandemic on food insecurity as we considered the eleven rounds of the phone survey data (see Table 1). Furthermore, we took into account the heterogeneity of the effects across various aspects of households, such as gender, age, and size. 6. Discussion The persistent food insecurity in Burkina Faso, exacerbated by the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, demands a critical examination to understand the depth of challenges facing policymakers in addressing food scarcity. Burkina Faso, with its predominantly agrarian economy, has long contended with issues such as climate variability and general resource scarcity. The emergence of a global health crisis, however, unveiled the intricate layers of vulnerability woven into the fabric of the country’s socio-economic landscape. One of the central concerns in stabilizing food supplies lies in the gendered dimensions of food insecurity. The pandemic disrupted traditional gender roles, disproportionately burdening women with increased responsibilities and limiting their access to healthcare and income-generating activities. This not only deepened existing gender inequalities but also contributed to a more pronounced vulnerability of women to food insecurity. The reliance on agriculture, a cornerstone of Burkina Faso’s economy, caused unprecedented challenges during the pandemic. Lockdowns and restrictions disrupted supply chains and markets, leaving farmers unable to produce, transport, or sell their goods. This compounded the pre-existing vulnerabilities stemming from the country’s susceptibility to climate change, resulting in a double blow to food production and availability. Furthermore, the economic fallout from the pandemic, characterized by widespread job losses and income disparities, has intensified food insecurity. Vulnerable populations, already on the brink, have found themselves pushed further to the margins, struggling to meet basic nutritional needs. In Burkina Faso, Ouoba and Sawadogo (2022) indicate that in urban areas, nearly 90% of households in urban areas buy food and are more vulnerable to price fluctuations, particularly for households whose main activity is trade. In the same vein, Kansiime et al. (2021) show that households whose food source is linked to the market are more heavily exposed to the deterioration of their food security. Also, Yankey et al. (2025) found a significant impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on food vulnerability among women in Burkina Faso. Economies 2025,13, 155 16 of 22 Importantly, the dependence on external aid for food assistance underscores the nation’s vulnerability to global shocks. While humanitarian assistance plays a crucial role in immediate relief, questions arise about the sustainability of such interventions and the need for comprehensive, long-term strategies to build resilience within the country. In summary, the persistence of food insecurity in Burkina Faso amid the enduring impacts of the COVID19 pandemic demands a holistic and critical approach. Addressing the root causes of vulnerability, reimagining gender roles, and fostering sustainable agricultural practices are essential components of a comprehensive strategy to not only alleviate immediate suffering but also build a more resilient and food-secure future for the nation. In this way, Amare et al. (2021) suggest findings to inform immediate and medium-term social protection policies and help governments and international donor agencies improve their targeting strategies to identify the most impacted and help mitigate the adverse effects of the pandemic on food security. Akim et al. (2024) found that remittances have a mitigating effect in Nigeria. The authors indicated that international remittances have a more substantial mitigating effect than domestic remittances and that these mitigating effects operate through the capital mechanism. Overall, we expect our findings to contribute to the debate on the impacts of lockdown restrictions on developing countries and the efficient role of social programs in alleviating shock impacts on populations’ wellbeing. Indeed, evidence shows that pandemic effects differ by geography and the type of household (Ravallion,2020;Amare et al.,2021;Ouoba & Sawadogo,2022;Akalu & Wang,2023;Akim et al.,2024). Furthermore, the channels through which the pandemic affects individual and household food security are a concern in the context of conflict-affected countries such as Burkina Faso. In fact, populations in conflict zones were more vulnerable as the pandemic worsened their food insecurity situation. Some evidence shows that countries with protracted ethnic and political conflicts were the hardest hit in terms of food insecurity (ACSS,2021;FAO et al.,2021). In particular, Burkina Faso is the country that has experienced the heaviest burden of food insecurity and is actively involved in some forms of conflict (ACSS,2021). 7. Conclusions and Suggestions for Public Research Food insecurity is a common social issue affecting several African households. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased food insecurity, with long-term consequences that may be hard to measure with pandemic data alone. This paper contributes to the literature concerning the impacts of COVID-19 on food insecurity. This study provided a heterogeneity analysis of the impact of the pandemic at the household and individual levels using a dynamic model. We used panel data from the eleven rounds of the High-Frequency Phone Survey, in which we were able to track changes in food insecurity over almost two years after the onset of the pandemic. We found that there was a strong persistence in food insecurity in Burkina Faso. The estimates from our dynamic ordinary least squares model indicate that skipping meals, running out of food, and going out without eating in a given month increase the likelihood of experiencing food insecurity in the following months. Women and individuals aged between 44 and 64 are affected the most. These findings have three policy implications. First, it is important to enable access to food for the most disadvantaged groups. Policymakers need to implement assistance programs to help reduce food insecurity while considering gender, areas of residence, and the type of activities undertaken by individuals. Second, given that women and the elderly experience the persistence of food insecurity more, it is necessary that policies mitigate the impact of COVID-19 and related shocks are gender-sensitive. Third, in the context of terrorism, it is critical to design policies to reduce inequalities and household vulnerability, protect food supply chains, promote social protection, and build resilience Economies 2025,13, 155 17 of 22 during pandemics and generally in periods of crisis. This will ultimately allow individuals and households to adapt to exogenous shocks and reduce their dependence on social assistance. As this study does not quantify the implications of variations in region-level responses to the pandemic, further empirical analysis across a wider variety of national policy and economic contexts in Burkina Faso may further clarify such relationships and the policy lessons they imply. In addition, a future analysis of the impact of social protection and coping strategies in mitigating the impact of the pandemic on food insecurity at the regional level is needed. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, P.R.N. and F.A.D.; methodology, P.R.N.; software, P.R.N. and F.A.D.; validation, P.R.N.; formal analysis, P.R.N. and F.A.D.; investigation, P.R.N.; resources, P.R.N.; data curation, F.A.D.; writing—original draft, P.R.N. and F.A.D.; writing—review and editing, P.R.N. and F.A.D.; project administration, P.R.N.; funding acquisition, P.R.N. and F.A.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by the African Economic Research Consortium (AERC), grant number RC22514 and the APC was funded by the African Economic Research Consortium (AERC). Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: The original data are openly available in the World Bank microdata library, reference number BFA_2020-2024_HFPS_v23_M. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Appendix A Figure A1. Dynamics of food security by gender. Source: The authors used data from the HFPS 2020–2021. Economies 2025,13, 155 18 of 22 Figure A2. Dynamics of food security by age group. Source: The authors used data from the HFPS 2020–2021. Figure A3. Dynamics of food security by household size. Source: The authors used data from the HFPS 2020–2021. Economies 2025,13, 155 19 of 22 Figure A4. Dynamics of food security by place of residence. Source: The authors used data from the HFPS 2020–2021. Figure A5. Dynamics of food security by the type of activities undertaken. Source: The authors used data from the HFPS 2020–2021. Economies 2025,13, 155 20 of 22 Note 1 Please note that respondents in this paper are not household heads, but rather households’ individuals. When surveyed, we asked questions to the respondents’ household members. References Abay, K. A., Tafere, K., & Woldemichael, A. (2020). Winners and losers from COVID-19: Global evidence from Google Search. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. World Bank Group. [CrossRef] ACSS. (2021). Food insecurity crisis mounting in Africa. African Center for Strategic Studies. Available online: https://africacenter.org/ spotlight/food-insecurity-crisis-mounting-africa/ (accessed on 30 April 2025). Aday, S., & Aday, M. S. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on the food supply chain. Food Quality and Safety,4(4), 167–180. [CrossRef] Adjognon, G. S., Bloem, J. R., & Sanoh, A. (2021). The coronavirus pandemic and food security: Evidence from Mali. Food Policy, 101, 102050. [CrossRef] Akalu, L. S., & Wang, H. (2023). Does the female-headed household suffer more than the male-headed from Covid-19 impact on food security? Evidence from Ethiopia. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research,12, 100563. [CrossRef] Akim, Al-mouksit, Ayivodji, F., & Kouton, J. (2024). Food security and the COVID-19 employment shock in Nigeria: Any ex-ante mitigating effects of past remittances. Food Policy,122, 102574. [CrossRef] Ali, J., & Khan, W. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural wholesale prices in India: A comparative analysis across the phases of the lockdown. Journal of Public Affairs,20(4), e2402. [CrossRef] Alinsato, A. S. (2021). COVID-19 en Afrique subsaharienne: Analyse des facteurs explicatifs des réponses d’atténuation des effets socioéconomiques. In B. Boudarbat, H. H. Guermazi, & M. B. O. Ndiaye (Eds.), COVID-19: Impacts économiques et sociaux, politiques de riposte et stratégies de résilience (pp. 96–113). Observatoire de la Francophonie Economique (OFE). Amare, M., Abay, K. A., Tiberti, L., & Chamberlin, J. (2021). COVID-19 and food security: Panel data evidence from Nigeria. Food Policy,101, 102099. [CrossRef] Amjath-Babu, T. S., Krupnik, T. J., Thilsted, S. H., & McDonald, A. J. (2020). Key indicators for monitoring food system disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from Bangladesh towards effective response. Food Security,12(4), 761–768. [CrossRef] Ayanlade, A., & Radeny, M. (2020). COVID-19 and food security in Sub-Saharan Africa: Implications of lockdown during agricultural planting seasons. Npj Science of Food,4(1), 13. [CrossRef] Bellemare, M. F., & Novak, L. (2017). Contract farming and food security. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,99(2), 357–378. [CrossRef] Bethune, Z. A., & Korinek, A. (2020). COVID-19 infection externalities: Trading off lives vs. Livelihoods. NBER Working Paper No. 27009. Available online: http://www.nber.org/papers/w27009 (accessed on 24 February 2023). Bottan, N., Hoffmann, B., & Vera-Cossio, D. (2020). The unequal impact of the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from seventeen developing countries. PLoS ONE,15(10), e0239797. [CrossRef] Cafiero, C., Viviani, S., & Nord, M. (2018). Food security measurement in a global context: The food insecurity experience scale. Measurement,116, 146–152. [CrossRef] Cao, L., Li, T., Wang, R., & Zhu, J. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on China’s agricultural trade. China Agricultural Economic Review, 13(1), 1–21. [CrossRef] Carletto, C., Zezza, A., & Banerjee, R. (2013). Towards better measurement of household food security: Harmonizing indicators and the role of household surveys. Global Food Security,2(1), 30–40. [CrossRef] Ceballos, F., Kannan, S., & Kramer, B. (2020). Impacts of a national lockdown on smallholder farmers’ income and food security: Empirical evidence from two states in India. World Development,136, 105069. [CrossRef] Clapp, J., & Moseley, W. G. (2020). This food crisis is different: COVID-19 and the fragility of the neoliberal food security order. The Journal of Peasant Studies,47(7), 1393–1417. [CrossRef] Devereux, S., Béné, C., & Hoddinott, J. (2020). Conceptualising COVID-19’s impacts on household food security. Food Security, 12(4), 769–772. [CrossRef] Dingel, J. I., & Neiman, B. (2020). How many jobs can be done at home? Journal of Public Economics,189, 104235. [CrossRef] Eichenbaum, M. S., Rebelo, S., & Trabandt, M. (2021). The macroeconomics of epidemics. The Review of Financial Studies,34(11), 5149– 5187. [CrossRef] Elleby, C., Domínguez, I. P., Adenauer, M., & Genovese, G. (2020). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global agricultural markets. Environmental and Resource Economics,76(4), 1067–1079. [CrossRef] Ericksen, P., Bohle, H.-G., & Stewart, B. (2012). Vulnerability and resilience of food systems. In Food security and global environmental change (pp. 87–97). Routledge. Fanzo, J. (2020). COVID-19 threatens to starve Africa. BloombergQuint. Available online: https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/ covid-19-threatens-to-starve-africa (accessed on 27 April 2022). Economies 2025,13, 155 21 of 22 FAO. (2021). Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on agriculture, food security and nutrition in Africa. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). [CrossRef] FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP & WHO. (2021). The state of food security and nutrition in the world: Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable healthy diets for all. FAO. FAO & WFP. (2020). FAO-WFP early warning analysis of acute food insecurity hotspots: July 2020. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). [CrossRef] Food Crisis Prevention Network. (2020). Burkina Faso. Available online: https://www.food-security.net/en/datas/burkina-faso/ (accessed on 14 April 2022). Fund for Peace. (2020). Fragile states index 2020–Annual report. The Fund for Peace. Gilligan, D. (2020). Social safety nets are crucial to the COVID-19 response: Some lessons to boost their effectiveness. In J. Swinnen, & J. McDermott (Eds.), COVID-19 and global food security (pp. 102–105). Chapter 23. Part Seven: Policy responses. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). [CrossRef] Hamadani, J. D., Hasan, M. I., Baldi, A. J., Hossain, S. J., Shiraji, S., Bhuiyan, M. S. A., Mehrin, S. F., Fisher, J., Tofail, F., & Tipu, S. M. U. (2020). Immediate impact of stay-at-home orders to control COVID-19 transmission on socioeconomic conditions, food insecurity, mental health, and intimate partner violence in Bangladeshi women and their families: An interrupted time series. The Lancet Global Health,8(11), e1380–e1389. [CrossRef] Hirvonen, K., De Brauw, A., & Abate, G. T. (2021). Food consumption and food security during the COVID-19 pandemic in Addis Ababa. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,103(3), 772–789. [CrossRef] HLPE. (2020). Impacts of COVID-19 on food security and nutrition: Developing effective policy responses to address the hunger and malnutrition pandemic. Rome. Hoddinott, J. (1999). Choosing outcome indicators of household food security. Technical Guide #7. International Food Policy Research Institute. INSD. (2020). COVID-19 impact monitoring at the household level-Burkina Faso. Bulletin n◦3. INSD & World Bank. Kansiime, M. K., Tambo, J. A., Mugambi, I., Bundi, M., Kara, A., & Owuor, C. (2021). COVID-19 implications on household income and food security in Kenya and Uganda: Findings from a rapid assessment. World Development,137, 105199. [CrossRef] Karpman, M., Zuckerman, S., Gonzalez, D., & Kenney, G. M. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic is straining families’ abilities to afford basic needs (p. 500). Urban Institute. Koos, C., Hangoma, P., & Mæstad, O. (2020). Household wellbeing and coping strategies in Africa during COVID-19–Findings from high frequency phone surveys. Chr. Michelsen Institute Report No.4. Kumar, P., & Kumar Singh, R. (2022). Strategic framework for developing resilience in Agri-Food Supply Chains during COVID 19 pandemic. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications,25(11), 1401–1424. [CrossRef] Laborde, D., Martin, W., Swinnen, J., & Vos, R. (2020). COVID-19 risks to global food security. Science,369(6503), 500–502. [CrossRef] Laborde, D., Martin, W., & Vos, R. (2021). Impacts of COVID-19 on global poverty, food security, and diets: Insights from global model scenario analysis. Agricultural Economics,52(3), 375–390. [CrossRef] Mahajan, K., & Tomar, S. (2021). COVID-19 and supply chain disruption: Evidence from food markets in India. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,103(1), 35–52. [CrossRef] Mahmud, M., & Riley, E. (2021). Household response to an extreme shock: Evidence on the immediate impact of the Covid-19 lockdown on economic outcomes and well-being in rural Uganda. World Development,140, 105318. [CrossRef] Mitiku, A., Fufa, B., & Tadese, B. (2012). Empirical analysis of the determinants of rural households food security in Southern Ethiopia: The case of Shashemene District. Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review,1(6), 132–138. Muche, M., Endalew, B., & Koricho, T. (2014). Determinants of household food security among southwest Ethiopia rural households. Asian Journal of Agricultural Research,8, 248–258. [CrossRef] Nchanji, E. B., Lutomia, C. K., Chirwa, R., Templer, N., Rubyogo, J. C., & Onyango, P. (2021). Immediate impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on bean value chain in selected countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Agricultural Systems,188, 103034. [CrossRef] Ouoba, Y., & Sawadogo, N. (2022). Food security, poverty and household resilience to COVID-19 in Burkina Faso: Evidence from urban small traders’ households. World Development Perspectives,25, 100387. [CrossRef] Pan, D., Yang, J., Zhou, G., & Kong, F. (2020). The influence of COVID-19 on agricultural economy and emergency mitigation measures in China: A text mining analysis. PLoS ONE,15(10), e0241167. [CrossRef] Pu, M., & Zhong, Y. (2020). Rising concerns over agricultural production as COVID-19 spreads: Lessons from China. Global Food Security,26, 100409. [CrossRef] Ravallion, M. (2020). Pandemic policies in poor places. CGD Note (April 24). Center for Global Development. Rudin-Rush, L., Michler, J. D., Josephson, A., & Bloem, J. R. (2022). Food insecurity during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in four African countries. Food Policy,111, 102306. [CrossRef] Sawadogo, N., & Ouoba, Y. (2023). COVID-19, food coping strategies and households resilience: The case of informal sector in Burkina Faso. Food Security,15, 1041–1056. [CrossRef] Economies 2025,13, 155 22 of 22 Smith, M. D., Kassa, W., & Winters, P. (2017). Assessing food insecurity in Latin America and the Caribbean using FAO’s food insecurity experience scale. Food Policy,71, 48–61. [CrossRef] Syafiq, A., Fikawati, S., & Gemily, S. C. (2022). Household food security during the COVID-19 pandemic in urban and semi-urban areas in Indonesia. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition,41, 4. [CrossRef] Tapsoba, T. A. (2022). Remittances and households’ livelihood in the context of COVID-19: Evidence from Burkina Faso. Journal of International Development,34(4), 737–753. [CrossRef] Tendall, D. M., Joerin, J., Kopainsky, B., Edwards, P., Shreck, A., Le, Q. B., Krütli, P., Grant, M., & Six, J. (2015). Food system resilience: Defining the concept. Global Food Security,6, 17–23. [CrossRef] United Nations (UN). (2020). Policy brief: The impact of COVID-19 on food security and nutrition. Available online: https://unsdg.un.org/ sites/default/files/2020-06/SG-Policy-Brief-on-COVID-Impact-on-Food-Security.pdf (accessed on 5 April 2024). Varshney, D., Roy, D., & Meenakshi, J. V. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on agricultural markets: Assessing the roles of commodity characteristics, disease caseload and market reforms. Indian Economic Review,55(1), 83–103. [CrossRef] Welfens, P. J. (2020). Macroeconomic and health care aspects of the coronavirus epidemic: EU, US and global perspectives. International Economics and Economic Policy,17, 295–362. [CrossRef] WFP. (2020). COVID-19 will double number of people facing food crises unless swift action is Taken. World Food Program. Yankey, O., Essah, M., & Amegbor, P. M. (2025). The COVID-19 pandemic and self-reported food insecurity among women in Burkina Faso: Evidence from the performance monitoring for action (PMA) COVID-19 survey data. BMC Women’s Health,25, 42. [CrossRef] Zidouemba, P. R., Kinda, S. R., & Ouedraogo, I. M. (2020). Could COVID-19 Worsen Food Insecurity in Burkina Faso? The European Journal of Development Research,32(5), 1379–1401. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.