Beyond corrective? An assessment of compensatory disaster risk management approach for food security in the context of climate change in Siaya County, Kenya

Abstract

Globally, compensatory approach has been practiced through insurance, contingency funding, safety nets, and agricultural subsidies to transfer risks of climate change, aid timely and sufficient response to enhance food security as sustainable Development Goal (SDG) number 2. Climate change has negatively affected food crop production amidst implementation of corrective measures such as drought tolerant crops yet food insecurity is still on the rise. This hence stages curiosity on the next available approach as compensatory disaster risk management to reduce the residual risk of climate change and enhance food security among households in Siaya County. The study assessed the compensatory disaster risk approach in mitigating the negative impacts of climate change for improved food security among households in Siaya County. Pressure and release model was used to guide this study. The study used descriptive research designs. A sample size of 385 households was determined using creative research system for the study where sampling techniques comprised of Multistage and proportionate sampling for household respondents. Secondary data were obtained from the publications, Journals, internet sources and newspapers while primary quantitative data was collected using questionnaires. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze quantitative data with the help of Statistical Package for Social Scientist (SPSS) Version 20.0.  The results are presented in a figure. Findings from the inferential statistical analysis reveals a mixed picture of how households in Siaya County engage with different compensatory risk management strategies to cope with climate risks. Among the options assessed, agricultural subsidies stood out as highly significant (χ² = 12.19, p = 0.001). This suggests that many households actively make use of these subsidies as a key way of managing the lingering effects of climate-related challenges. On the other hand, strategies such as social safety nets (χ² = 19.10, p = 0.045) and crop insurance (χ² = 11.23, p = 0.05) showed low statistical significance. This indicates that while some households use them, the uptake is moderate or somewhat inconsistent across the county. Interestingly, access to contingency funds showed no statistical significance at all (χ² = 19.10, p = 0.09), pointing to minimal reliance on this particular measure by households. The study concludes that while agricultural subsidies are widely embraced and play a vital role in helping households manage residual climate risks, other risk management options like social safety nets, crop insurance, and contingency funds are either underutilized or inconsistently accessed. These insights underscore the need to strengthen awareness, improve accessibility, and enhance institutional support for a wider range of risk management options. Doing so would better equip households to cope with the ongoing impacts of climate change and improve food security in Siaya County. The findings provide valuable evidence for both national and county governments as they shape policies aimed at managing residual climate risks and promoting food security through risk-sensitive, sustainable development strategies.