El Niño

Amartya Sen’s Enduring Lesson for Philippine Food Security

A COUNTRY can have food in its markets and still have families that cannot afford to eat well. A good harvest does not automatically guarantee that every household has enough to eat, just as an increase in agricultural production does not necessarily make a nutritious diet affordable.

This distinction, central to the work of Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, is particularly relevant to the Philippines as food inflation accelerates and the country prepares for the risks associated with El Niño.

The Philippine Statistics Authority reported on October 6 that headline inflation rose to 7.2% in September 2026 from 6.1% in August. Food inflation increased to 6.8% from 4.6%. Vegetable inflation reached 10.7%, while rice inflation rose to 20.3% from 19.4%. These are year-on-year changes, not monthly price increases.

For a minimum-wage worker, a jeepney driver, a market vendor or a family dependent on irregular earnings, these figures have an immediate meaning. They affect how much money remains after buying rice, fish and vegetables, paying for transport and electricity, and meeting children’s educational needs.

The problem is not necessarily that food is unavailable. A family may continue buying rice but reduce its consumption of fish, eggs, fruit and vegetables. Its diet becomes less nutritious even though food remains available in the market.

The development challenge is therefore twofold: to maintain reliable food supplies and to ensure that ordinary Filipinos can afford an adequate, nutritious diet without sacrificing other essentials.

Amartya Sen’s Enduring Lesson from the Bengal Famine

In Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation (1981), Amartya Sen challenged the assumption that hunger can be explained simply by examining how much food a country produces or possesses.

His entitlement approach examined how people obtain command over food through employment, wages, their own production, trade and other economic arrangements. A worker who loses employment, a farmer whose income collapses or a fisherfolk household facing higher operating costs may lose the ability to obtain food even when food remains available in markets.

Sen’s analysis of the Bengal famine of 1943 became an influential contribution to the study of hunger. The historical causes of that famine remain the subject of scholarly debate, and his work should not be interpreted as suggesting that production and supply never matter. His enduring insight is that aggregate food availability alone cannot explain who goes hungry, why deprivation occurs or how it can be prevented.

This is an important perspective for the Philippines. Food security cannot be assessed solely through rice harvests, import volumes, warehouse stocks or retail prices. These indicators matter, but they must be considered alongside household incomes, employment, market access and the cost of a nutritious diet.

A family whose earnings remain unchanged while food prices rise may have to reduce its consumption of nutritious foods or cut spending on health and education. There may be no visible shortage, yet its food security has deteriorated.

Rising Food Prices and the Coming El Niño Risk

The immediate concern has a forward-looking dimension. In its October 6 announcement, the Department of Agriculture attributed recent food-price pressures to weather-related supply disruptions, higher logistics costs and rising oil prices. It also outlined preparations for El Niño.

The department reported that ₱6.2 billion had been released from a requested ₱45 billion UPLIFT package, which includes support for El Niño-related interventions. These figures describe the package and funding release reported by the government; they should not be confused with proof that the entire amount has already been spent on drought preparedness.

The government has identified risks to agriculture, fisheries and livestock as dry conditions develop. The extent of the eventual impact will depend on rainfall, water availability, crop conditions, irrigation and the effectiveness of local preparations.

The economic channels are clear. Fuel costs affect farm operations, fishing, processing and transportation. Water shortages can affect yields, while inadequate storage and distribution can increase losses before food reaches consumers.

The latest retail-price data also show why the analysis must be precise. The PSA reported that regular-milled rice averaged ₱49.79 per kilogram during October 1–5, slightly below the ₱50.00 recorded during September 1–5. Yet the October price remained substantially higher than the ₱40.20 recorded during the comparable period in October 2025.

The short-term easing of a particular price does not erase the cumulative pressure on household budgets. Nor does it establish that every food commodity is becoming more expensive at the same pace.

The appropriate response is to prepare early, monitor local conditions and ensure that assistance reaches affected farmers, fisherfolk and vulnerable consumers before a supply disruption becomes more severe.

What the Bangkok Meetings Mean for Food Security

The October 2026 Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group provide a wider economic context.

The World Bank’s October 6 East Asia and Pacific Economic Update, titled Riding the AI Wave, projects regional growth of 4.5% in 2026. Its main focus is the uneven adoption of artificial intelligence, productivity, infrastructure, skills and job creation. It is not primarily a food-security report, and its findings should not be presented as a specific prescription for Philippine rice policy.

Nevertheless, its emphasis on infrastructure, productivity and better employment is relevant to food security. Agricultural productivity must translate into sustainable farm incomes and reliable supplies. Better roads, ports, energy systems and digital services can also help producers reach markets and reduce avoidable costs.

The IMF’s October 13 World Economic Outlook, Resilience Under Strain, Urgent Choices, projects global growth of 3.1% in 2026 and 3.4% in 2027. Global headline inflation is projected at 4.7% in 2026 before easing to 4.1% in 2027.

The IMF’s analysis of cost-of-living crises emphasizes temporary, targeted support for vulnerable households. Such assistance can protect purchasing power while avoiding the potentially high fiscal costs and market distortions associated with broad measures designed to suppress prices.

At the Bangkok meetings, the IMF’s International Monetary and Financial Committee also warned on October 17 that conflicts and disruptions to critical waterways and trade routes threaten energy and food security.

For the Philippines, these developments reinforce the importance of resilience. External shocks can add to domestic pressures arising from weather, production costs, logistics and household incomes. The country therefore needs both effective immediate assistance and sustained investment in its food system.

The World Bank’s Philippines Assessment: Protecting Vulnerable Households

The World Bank’s June 4 report, Building the Filipino Middle Class: Towards Resilient Futures and Poverty Eradication, provides a more direct national perspective.

The report found that the poverty rate had fallen to 15.5% in 2023 from 23.5% in 2015. Yet nearly 28% of Filipinos remained vulnerable or at risk of falling back into poverty, while the secure middle class had barely expanded since 2018.

A family can be above the poverty line without being financially secure. A sudden increase in food prices, an illness, unemployment or a weather-related loss of income can quickly undermine its ability to meet essential needs.

The World Bank recommended strengthening the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), including considering inflation adjustments to benefits and extending coverage to vulnerable households. It also recommended better agricultural insurance and more effective agricultural spending to help lower food prices sustainably.

The Bank’s Sustainable Agricultural Transformation Project, approved in March 2026 with US$1 billion in financing, is expected to benefit at least five million farmers. Its objectives include higher productivity, crop diversification, climate resilience, improved market access and reduced post-harvest losses.

The challenge is to ensure that these initiatives translate into better livelihoods for farmers and more affordable, nutritious food for consumers.

Six Priorities for a More Secure Food System

1. Protect Household Purchasing Power

The government should assess whether existing social-protection programs adequately reach families affected by rising food prices. Where justified, inflation adjustments to 4Ps benefits and better coverage of vulnerable households could help protect purchasing power.

Assistance should be timely, transparent and targeted to need. The objective is to prevent families from sacrificing nutrition, education or essential health care when living costs rise.

This is not simply a welfare concern. Protecting household nutrition supports children’s development, health and future productivity.

2. Strengthen Farmers’ Productivity and Climate Resilience

Farmers need reliable access to irrigation, appropriate seeds, extension services, affordable financing and effective crop insurance. Water-saving technologies and climate-resilient practices can help reduce exposure to weather shocks.

Agricultural insurance is particularly important for small producers who may lack the savings to recover from a failed crop. Support should be accessible and responsive to actual losses.

The needs of irrigated rice farmers, vegetable growers, upland farmers and small-scale fisherfolk are not identical. Programs should reflect local conditions and promote diversification where it is economically and environmentally appropriate.

A food system that makes production financially unviable for farmers will not remain secure over the long term.

3. Reduce Costs from Farm to Market

The price consumers pay reflects more than production costs. Transport, storage, processing, spoilage and distribution all contribute to the final price.

Investments in farm-to-market roads, ports, warehouses, cold chains and drying facilities can reduce avoidable losses and improve the movement of food between producing and consuming areas.

Better market information can help farmers compare prices and identify buyers. The objective should be to identify genuine logistical bottlenecks and excessive costs, rather than assume that every difference between farm-gate and retail prices represents an unjustified margin.

4. Prepare Early for El Niño

Weather forecasts should inform irrigation schedules, water allocation, planting decisions and local contingency plans. National agencies should coordinate with local governments, farmers’ organizations and fisherfolk groups.

Where risks are identified, farmers should receive timely advice on planting calendars, water management and appropriate crop choices. Assistance should be ready for affected livelihoods and local supply disruptions.

Preparedness must be geographically specific because drought risks and agricultural impacts will vary. Investments in irrigation rehabilitation, water storage, watershed protection and better forecasting can also reduce vulnerability over several seasons.

5. Put Nutrition at the Center of Food Security

Rice is essential to Filipino diets, but food security is broader than the availability or price of one staple.

A healthy diet also requires access to fish, eggs, vegetables, fruit and other nutritious foods. When budgets become tight, families may continue purchasing rice while reducing more expensive sources of protein and micronutrients.

School feeding, maternal and child nutrition initiatives, food safety measures and better access to affordable nutritious foods should therefore remain important priorities.

Monitoring should examine not only staple prices but also whether lower-income households can afford a sufficiently diverse diet.

6. Make Agricultural Spending Deliver Measurable Results

Public programs should be evaluated according to whether they improve farm productivity, stabilize farmer incomes, reduce post-harvest losses, strengthen climate resilience and make food more affordable.

Better coordination among national agencies, local governments, farmers’ organizations and private businesses can help identify bottlenecks and avoid duplication.

Transparent reporting and reliable data can help determine which programs are working and where adjustments are necessary. Public spending should address identifiable constraints and be judged by measurable development outcomes, not allocations alone.

Balancing Consumer Affordability with Farmers’ Livelihoods

Food prices are understandably sensitive in the Philippines because rice is central to household budgets. Yet the development challenge should not be framed as a choice between protecting consumers and protecting farmers.

Consumers need food at prices they can afford. Farmers need the means to cover costs, invest and earn a sustainable livelihood. Both are essential to a secure food system.

Measures that reduce retail prices without addressing supply conditions can weaken production incentives or shift costs elsewhere. Conversely, leaving households exposed to sharp price increases can damage nutrition and living standards.

The IMF’s emphasis on targeted assistance provides a useful principle: support vulnerable households while allowing policies to address the underlying causes of high costs. Better logistics, agricultural productivity, insurance, market information and effective competition can reinforce that approach.

Rice policy will remain important, but the broader objective should be a food system that protects consumers without undermining the livelihoods of producers.

Food Security Is Ultimately About People

The most meaningful test of food policy is not simply whether the country produces more rice, allocates a larger agricultural budget or records satisfactory economic growth. It is whether a farmer can earn a viable livelihood, whether a market vendor can operate efficiently, whether a worker can feed a family and whether a child can grow up without the lasting consequences of inadequate nutrition.

Amartya Sen’s contribution reminds us that hunger can arise from an inability to obtain food even when food remains available. The Philippines’ challenge is to apply that insight before rising costs and weather disruptions force more families into difficult choices.

The government, private sector, farmers, fisherfolk, local communities and development institutions all have roles to play. Better infrastructure, agricultural productivity, climate resilience, targeted social protection and effective public spending can reinforce one another.

Food security is achieved not merely when food reaches the market, but when people can obtain it, afford it and nourish their families with dignity.