Famine

The word “famine” is commonly understood to mean a severe lack of food, but there is no official definition of famine in international humanitarian law. This is why referring to a situation as a “famine” often triggers debate as to whether the situation in question really amounts to and qualifies as famine.

Armatya Sen, recipient of the 1998 Nobel Prize for Economics, explains that famine can occur even when food is available and that the definition should turn primarily on the issue of access to food and the capacity of the population (social, means) to get food.

Famine is very much a political matter—and so is the definition given to it. It is therefore no surprise that many definitions exist and that different stakeholders use different indicators and definitions to qualify famine (calorie intake, food supply, food consumption, mortality rate, etc.). (I). The causes of famine must be understood in order to develop appropriate relief measures (II). In situations of international and non-international armed conflict, international humanitarian law (IHL) prohibits the use of famine as a method of warfare against civilians, and violation of thes rules may constitute a war crime (III).

I. Definition and Criteria of Famine

The various actors involved in the prevention and management of food crises use several types of definitions and practical criteria. Given this diversity of approaches (A), the integration of different criteria and medical indicators plays an important role (B).

A. The diversity of criteria

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) calculates the number of people undernourished in each country based on the number of people who do not have enough food to lead an active and healthy life (based on the food energy one person needs daily; for example, an adult male needs 2,100 calories per day).

Another food-consumption-based definition states that famine is a “sudden collapse in level of food consumption of large numbers of people” (Scrimshaw, 1987). Another mortality-based definition defines famine as an “unusually high mortality with unusually severe threat to food intake of some segments of a population” (M. Ravillion, 1997).

For its part, an organization such as Doctors Without Borders (MSF) defines famine as “a situation in which access to, and availability of food is severely reduced. Households are completely destitute and dependent on aid. Survival strategies such as distress migrations of entire populations are employed. This is an exceptional situation, where the prevalence of global acute malnutrition is substantially elevated not only in children, but in adolescents and adults as well, and accompanied by high mortality. Large-scale deployment of food distribution and feeding programs are essential.”

There is nevertheless a broad consensus that food security and famine should be understood as complex issues, full comprehension of which requires a multidimensional approach: understanding of medical, social, environmental, food security, and security issues, among others.

To that end, there have been efforts to standardize and organize assessments of food scarcity (Howe and Devreux, 2004). These efforts led to the creation, in February 2004, of the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC).

B. The Integrated Food Security Phase classification (IPC)

The IPC was developed by a multi-agency partnership comprising eight major United Nations (UN) agencies and international NGOs, including the World Food Programme (WFP), FAO and the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWSNET). The IPC approach has gradually gained importance and this tool was officially used to certify the situation in Somalia in 2011 as a famine.

The IPC includes medical and food security indicators in its assessment of famine situations.

According to the IPC, evidence of three specific outcomes is required for a famine to be declared: (1) at least 20% of households are facing extreme food shortages with limited coping capacity; (2) the prevalence of acute malnutrition must exceed 30%; and (3) crude mortality rates must exceed two deaths per 10,000 people per day.

To classify a situation, the IPC uses multisectoral indicators that take into account the multidimensional aspects of food security: crude mortality rate, acute malnutrition, stunting, food access/availability, dietary diversity, water access/availability, coping mechanisms, livelihood assets, civil security, and risks.

For a given geographical area (region, country or more confined area), the IPC then classifies the food security situation according to five levels called “phases” that represent different levels of severity: (1) generally food secure, (2) moderate/borderline food insecurity, (3) acute livelihood and food security crisis, (4) humanitarian emergency, and (5) famine/humanitarian catastrophe.

Medical and Food Security Indicators for Famine

Critics of this approach point to the fact that the quality, methodology, and reliability of information collected is often questionable, particularly in complex and politically sensitive settings where famine occurs; information or data is often the result of political compromise, which in turn undermines the quality of such an approach.

The IPC defines famine as a “regional failure of food production or supply, sufficient to cause a marked increase in disease and mortality due to severe lack of nutrition and necessitating emergency intervention, usually at an international level.”

Famine early warning systems have been set up by major international stakeholders; they include, notably, FEWSNET, set up by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the integration of IPC on an ongoing basis within national countries and other UN agencies’ initiatives led by the FAO and WFP.

II. The Causes of Famine

Contrary to popular belief, famine is not properly classified as a natural disaster. Rather, famine is largely a political and social phenomenon. Often, the causes of famine cannot be summarized as a general problem of food availability. Many studies on situations of famine have demonstrated that famine is not the result of general food shortages, but rather of political and social problems that affect the distribution network and sharing of existing foodstuffs inside a country. The work of Amartya Sen has shown that the non-democratic nature of a political regime and the existence of a state of conflict are also factors that affect the evolution of famine.

Thus, famine is not inevitability tied to natural scourges or climatic conditions. Rather, famine is often caused by the weakness or failure of social or national solidarity frameworks. In the context of an armed conflict, famine may also be used as a method to weaken the enemy, part of a population and their leaders. In such contexts, humanitarian relief operations may be obstructed through a delivery system dependent on the cooperation of national authorities. Humanitarian actors must refer to International Humanitarian Law (IHL) to uphold victims’ access to food aid. They must also analyze the causes of a famine closely.

III. The prohibition of famine in international humanitarian law and international criminal law

In situations of armed conflict, international humanitarian law prohibits the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare (API Art. 54, APII Art. 14). This prohibition has been recognized as a rule of Customary International Humanitarian Law (CIHL, rule 53) that is applicable to both situation of international and non-international armed conflicts. The IHL is binding on all belligerents, whether or not they have ratified the humanitarian conventions. It therefore also applies to non-state armed actors and groups (A). Violation of this rule of IHL may constitute a war crime under the Statute of the International Criminal Court (B)

A. The prohibition of famine under IHL

This prohibition includes the intentional destruction of food essential to the survival of the population, as well as the refusal to allow humanitarian relief when the civilian population is suffering from shortages of goods essential to its survival.

IHL also prohibits attacks on or destruction of food products, agricultural areas intended for the production of foodstuffs, crops, or livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation works. These goods are protected by IHL as objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population (API Arts. 54.2, 54.4; APII Art. 14; CIHL rule 54).

Under IHL, starvation remains an authorized method of warfare against combatants only. Special rules are applicable to besieged locations were civilians and combatants are mixed together. The parties to a conflict must ensure the “free passage of all consignments of essential foodstuffs, clothing and tonics intended for children under fifteen, expectant mothers and maternity cases” (GCIV Art. 23, GPI Art.70 GPII Art.18.2 DIHC 55). The prohibition of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare precludes the deprivation of food by blockade, under the same rules that govern the protection of food from attack.

Furthermore, violation of these rules of IHL has been recognized as a war crime in international armed conflicts by the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

B. Famine as a war crime under the ICC Statute

It provides that “deliberately starving civilians as a method of warfare, by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including the intentional prevention of relief supplies provided for by the Geneva Conventions” constitutes a war crime when committed in international armed conflicts (Art. 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute). Thus, a siege that results in the deprivation of food from a civilian population (in particular through the deliberate refusal of humanitarian assistance) is explicitly considered a war crime falling within the jurisdiction of the ICC in the context of an international armed conflict.

In situations of international and non-international armed conflict, IHL authorizes relief actions of an exclusively humanitarian and impartial nature if civilians suffer from a shortage of supplies essential to their survival, such as food and medical supplies (GCIV Arts. 17, 23, and 59; GPI Art. 70; AIIAs Art. 18.2; IHL rules 55). The right to humanitarian relief and supplies has become an obligation under customary international humanitarian law applicable in the same terms to international and non-international armed conflicts. Rule 55 of the CIHL stipulates that “the parties to the conflict shall allow and facilitate the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief for civilians in need, which is impartial in character and conducted without adverse distinction, subject to their right of control.

In 2019, the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statutes adopted an amendment to the definition of war crimes relating to non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) that expands the definition of this crime in such situations. The new Article 8(2)(e)(xix) of the ICC Statute prohibits as a war crime in NIACs the intentional use of deprivation of food as a method of warfare by depriving civilians of objects essential to their survival, including the deliberate obstruction of relief. However, this amendment is only applicable to the 16 States that accepted it in August 2024.

Despite the low ratification rate of this amendment by States, the use of famine against civilians and the intentional deprivation of humanitarian assistance may also fall under other ICC definitions of war crimes or crimes against humanity applicable in NIACs, such as inhuman treatment, persecution or extermination, if these practices meet the criteria for these crimes: (Arts. 8.2.b.xxv and 7.2.b of the ICC Statute).

Indeed, the intentional infliction of starvation may, under specific circumstances, amount to a crime against humanity such as persecution or “extermination” (Arts. 8.2.b.xxv and 7.2.b of ICC Statute).