Feeding hunger and insecurity

3. households in crisis: who loses?Figure 3.5: Coping strategies adopted in Bangui, CAR, September 2008 in response to food price increasesGiving preference to childrenBreastfeedingReduction in meal frequencyReduction in portion sizesReduction in dietary diversityConsumption of less preferred foods020 40 6080100Percentage of populationSource: ACF 2008bReduced food consumption without changes inincome and expenditure?In Bangui, the most common household reactionto high prices is to eat less preferred, less expensiveand less diverse foods. This was followed bya reduction in portion sizes (see figure 3.5). Evenwhen staple food consumption remains largely thesame, micronutrient intake will be reduced. Section4 explains in detail how this type of behaviouris common among poorer groups and can result inthe deterioration of a person’s nutritional status.In September 2008, households reported eatingfewer meals than a year earlier. Before the crisis, 50percent of the household had two or more meals perday while that number more than halved after the crisis(now 24 percent). However, when asked whethertheir situation had changed over the last few months,63 percent of the households felt that the impact ofthe food price rises had a relatively moderate impacton livelihoods (see figure 3.6). Only 10 percent ofsurveyed households reported a decrease in incomeand an increase in expenditure – this may have significantlong-term consequences for these families.Figure 3.6: Self-perceived change in household income and expenditure between 2007 and 200813%14%Income and expenditure unchanged or betterIncome decreased and expenditure increasedIncome decreasedExpenditure increased10%63%Source: ACF 2008bACF International Network Feeding Hunger and Insecurity 19