Recent research has raised concerns about the use of a universal mortality threshold for declaring famine, arguing that this method may not accurately reflect how starvation develops in different populations. A paper published in The Lancet by researchers from Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and their colleagues suggests that current standards can delay recognition and response to mass starvation.
The authors highlight that the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) uses an absolute mortality rate—specifically, two deaths per 10,000 people per day—as its benchmark for declaring famine. According to them, this approach can leave widespread starvation officially unrecognized until it is well advanced. They point out that focusing only on absolute rates overlooks significant relative increases in death rates among certain age groups.
Evidence from the Dutch Hunger Winter is cited as an example. During this period, there were notable declines in birth weights and fewer births overall, followed by a sharp increase in child mortality. In March 1945, infant mortality in major cities rose to four times its prewar level, while deaths among children aged one to four increased seven-fold. Despite these dramatic changes, researcher Lumey noted: "these dramatic increases would not meet the current IPC famine threshold for children under five."
The paper also emphasizes that mortality data are lagging indicators; by the time thresholds are met, many preventable deaths have already occurred. The process of classifying famines can be influenced by political factors as access to reliable data is often limited or manipulated.
"Identifying earlier indicators of famine stress could shorten the time between acute food insecurity and rising mortality," said Lumey. "A more sensitive and context-specific approach would support faster humanitarian action."
The study's co-authors include Ingrid de Zwarte from Wageningen University and Alex de Waal from Tufts University.
