The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has urged governments to assess their food support systems and prepare temporary measures to protect vulnerable households from potential food price shocks linked to a strengthening El Niño and disruptions to agricultural inputs.
The warning comes as climate authorities monitor an increasingly strong El Niño event.
The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said in its September 10, 2026 assessment that there is a greater than 90 per cent chance of a very strong El Niño during the Northern Hemisphere autumn and winter of 2026-27.
Sea-surface temperature anomalies in the eastern equatorial Pacific had exceeded 3°C, with the Niño-3.4 index reaching 1.8°C in August.
In an X update on September 24, 2026, the IMF said the potential weather shock comes alongside risks to fertiliser and energy supplies, which could increase production costs and place further pressure on food prices.
The Fund maintained that governments should review their food assistance programmes before a crisis intensifies and determine whether subsidies, vouchers or direct food distribution would be appropriate.
“The food security of millions of people, particularly in low-income households, is coming under renewed pressure from two different forces. The possibility of a stronger or even ‘super’ El Niño has renewed concerns about food security in vulnerable agricultural regions. At the same time, an escalation of the war in the Middle East could further disrupt fertilizer and energy supplies, increasing production costs for farmers and potentially raising prices,” the IMF said.
The Fund said the impact of rising food prices can be particularly severe for poorer households because food can account for more than half of household expenditure in some countries.
It cited the 2015-16 El Niño as an indication of the potential scale of another major climate-related food shock. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that more than 60 million people worldwide were affected by El Niño-related droughts, floods and extreme weather during that episode.
Southern Africa was among the worst-affected regions. FAO reported that about 40 million people were projected to be food insecure during the 2016-17 lean season, while cereal production was expected to fall by 12 per cent compared with the already reduced 2015 output.
The IMF maintained that governments should answer four questions before deciding how to intervene: whether food is available, whether affordability is the main problem, whether markets are functioning properly and whether beneficiaries can be effectively targeted.
It said the answers should guide governments in choosing between price subsidies, vouchers and direct food transfers.
“When a crisis hits, price subsidies are often the first response. They can be deployed quickly and require limited administrative targeting capacity, so are attractive when speed is critical. But they are also a costly instrument, often benefiting richer households that consume more and are less price-sensitive.”
The Fund recommended that subsidies, where necessary, should be exceptional, temporary and transparent, with governments focusing assistance on vulnerable households and viable small businesses.
It said vouchers can provide more targeted assistance where countries have functioning social registries and digital payment systems capable of identifying and reaching households that require support.
However, the IMF warned that financial assistance alone cannot address situations where food is unavailable because of disrupted supply chains, conflict or natural disasters.
“When food is physically unavailable, direct in-kind food transfers are essential and can save lives. But they can be costly to implement. If used for too long, they can suppress demand for locally produced food, reducing prices and weakening incentives for domestic farmers and food producers to expand production,” it said.
The Fund also warned that prolonged subsidies can place pressure on government finances and divert resources from longer-term investments such as agricultural research, infrastructure, health and education.
“Therefore, clear exit strategies are critical. Temporary crisis measures can easily become permanent, especially when they are perceived as entitlements.”
The latest warning comes as FAO also urges governments to act before climate forecasts translate into agricultural losses. FAO says the 2015-16 El Niño affected more than 60 million people and generated about $5 billion in humanitarian appeals across 23 countries.
The IMF highlighted that governments should therefore strengthen their food assistance systems before prices rise and establish clear time limits for emergency interventions.
“There is no universal blueprint for food assistance. To help governments act quickly, they should invest before a food price surge occurs in assessing their food support systems and plan for time-bound support,” the IMF said.
With the current El Niño forecast expected to evolve through the 2026-27 season, governments face pressure to determine in advance how they will respond if agricultural production, food availability and household purchasing power come under renewed strain.