Report on the Global Food Inflation Crisis and its Implications for the Sustainable Development Goals

A United Nations special event has examined the drivers and consequences of the 2021–2023 global food inflation crisis, highlighting its severe impact on the advancement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 2 (Zero Hunger). The sustained increase in food prices has disproportionately affected low-income nations, undermining global food security and nutrition.

Drivers of the Crisis: A Multi-faceted Challenge to Global Stability

The surge in food prices resulted from a confluence of global shocks that disrupted supply chains and agricultural markets, creating significant obstacles for several SDGs. The primary drivers included:

• The COVID-19 Pandemic: Disrupted global logistics and production.
• Conflict and Instability: The war in Ukraine, a major shock to commodity markets, underscored the link between SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and global food security.
• Extreme Weather Events: These events, linked to SDG 13 (Climate Action), have increasingly impacted agricultural yields and supply chain reliability.
• Economic Factors: Surging energy prices, expansive fiscal spending, and loose monetary policies further exacerbated inflationary pressures.

From 2020, food price inflation consistently outpaced general inflation, peaking at 13.6 percent in January 2023. While rates began to decline by mid-2023, the cumulative effect over five years has been a more than 35 percent increase in global food prices, significantly hindering progress towards poverty and hunger reduction targets.

Disproportionate Impacts on Vulnerable Nations and Progress on the SDGs

The crisis has had a devastating and unequal impact, severely impeding progress on SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Setbacks for SDG 1 and SDG 2

Low-income countries have borne the brunt of the crisis. Key statistics reveal the extent of the challenge:

1. While global median food inflation peaked at 13.6 percent, it reached 30 percent in low-income countries in May 2023.
2. At the height of the crisis, 65 percent of low-income countries and 61 percent of lower-middle-income countries—collectively home to over 1.5 billion people—experienced food inflation rates above 10 percent.
3. Analysis indicates that a 10 percent increase in food prices in these nations is associated with a 3.5 percent rise in moderate or severe food insecurity and a 1.8 percent increase in severe food insecurity, directly reversing gains made under SDG 2.

Amplifying Inequalities (SDG 10)

The crisis has magnified existing disparities. Structural and gender inequalities amplify the negative effects, particularly in nations with high income disparity. A concerning trend is the failure of falling global commodity prices to translate into lower consumer prices in low-income countries, prolonging the economic strain on the most vulnerable populations and widening the gap between developed and developing nations.

Policy Recommendations for Resilient Agrifood Systems and SDG Achievement

The upcoming State of Food Security and Nutrition (SOFI) 2025 report will advocate for a balanced and coordinated set of policy responses to mitigate the effects of food price inflation and build resilience in line with the SDGs. Achieving these goals requires a multi-pronged approach that supports SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Strategic Interventions

Recommended policy actions focus on strengthening national capacities and transforming agrifood systems to withstand future shocks:

• Targeted Fiscal Measures: Implement time-bound social protection programs to safeguard vulnerable households, directly supporting SDG 1 and SDG 2.
• Credible Monetary Policies: Adopt transparent monetary policies to effectively contain inflationary pressures and create a stable economic environment for development.
• Strategic Investments: Increase investment in agrifood research and development, transport and production infrastructure, and market information systems. These investments are crucial for improving productivity and resilience, contributing to SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and ensuring long-term food security.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger

   • The article’s central theme is the impact of global food price inflation on food security and nutrition. It explicitly discusses how rising food prices have hindered efforts to improve global food security, directly connecting to the goal of ending hunger and ensuring access to food.

2. SDG 1: No Poverty

   • The article emphasizes the disproportionate impact of food inflation on low-income countries and vulnerable households, which spend a larger portion of their income on food. This directly relates to poverty, as high food costs can push people into poverty or deepen existing poverty. The recommendation for social protection programs also aligns with poverty reduction strategies.

3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • The text highlights that low-income countries have “borne the brunt of rising food prices,” with food inflation peaking at 30% compared to the global median. It also explicitly states that “Structural and gender inequalities amplify these effects,” linking the issue directly to the goal of reducing inequalities within and among countries.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger

   • Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round. The article directly addresses this by stating that high food inflation has hindered “attempts to boost global food security and nutrition” and leads to a rise in “moderate or severe food insecurity.”
   • Target 2.c: Adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets… to help limit extreme food price volatility. The entire article is a discussion of the “sustained increase in global food prices,” “food price inflation,” and “volatility in agricultural markets,” which are the core concerns of this target. It also recommends investing in “market information systems” as a policy response.

2. SDG 1: No Poverty

   • Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all… and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable. The article explicitly recommends “social protection programs to safeguard vulnerable households” as a key policy response to mitigate the effects of food inflation.

3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… sex… or economic or other status. The article’s mention that “Structural and gender inequalities amplify these effects” directly relates to the need for greater inclusion to build resilience against economic shocks like food inflation.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For Target 2.1 (End Hunger)

   • Indicator 2.1.2: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population. The article provides specific data related to this indicator, stating, “A 10 percent increase in food prices in low-income countries is associated with a 3.5 percent rise in moderate or severe food insecurity and a 1.8 percent increase in the proportion of individuals experiencing severe food insecurity.”

2. For Target 2.c (Limit Food Price Volatility)

   • Indicator 2.c.1: Indicator of food price anomalies. The article is replete with data for this indicator. It notes that “food price inflation has consistently outpaced overall inflation,” peaked globally at “13.6 percent” in January 2023, and peaked at “30 percent in low-income countries” in May 2023. It also tracks the overall increase, stating that “food prices around the world have increased by more than 35 percent” over five years.

3. For Target 1.3 (Social Protection Systems)

   • Indicator 1.3.1: Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems. While the article does not provide a specific number, it strongly implies the need for this indicator by recommending “targeted and time-bound fiscal measures, such as social protection programs to safeguard vulnerable households.” Measuring the implementation and coverage of these programs would be the direct way to track progress on this recommendation.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: fao.org