From 2010 to 2011, food stress probability and the affected population rose sharply, peaking during the global food price crisis. After stabilizing in mid-2011, food stress declined from 2012 to 2014, reaching a low in 2013, reflecting economic stabilization and better climatic conditions. Starting in 2015, the model estimates show a sharp rise, with peaks in 2016 and 2017 that align with FEWS NET trends, climatic shocks, and political instability.

From 2018 onward, the model indicates worsening food insecurity, with consistently high food stress from 2019 to 2022. These levels highlight Afghanistan's ongoing challenges, driven by conflict, economic disruptions, and adverse climatic events. After 2022, a slight improvement in food stress aligns with a stabilizing exchange rate and lower food and fuel prices. FEWS NET data during this period are interpolated due to the absence of assessments between June 2021 and February 2023.

The bottom panel of Figure 6 shows sharper fluctuations in food crisis risks compared to food stress. The model reveals significant volatility from 2016 to 2020, coinciding with droughts, conflict, and economic shocks. The left panel shows that food crisis estimates are more variable than food stress estimates, indicating that severe food security shocks are typically shorter. Estimated values spiked during the 2010-2011 global food price crisis, while historical values remained low, possibly due to under-reporting or the model's sensitivity to early warning signs.

Peaks in estimated values during the crises of 2016, 2017, and 2018 demonstrate the model's ability to detect early warnings of risk escalation. From 2019 onward, historical and estimated trends converge, though the model shows higher peaks, capturing extreme events not fully reported. Note that no assessments were caried out between June 2021 and February 2023 and the FEWS NET data is held constant over the period. This suggests the model's utility as a versatile tool for identifying potential crisis escalation before periodic assessment data reflect it.

# 6. Discussion

## 6.1 Joint Effects of Climatic Shocks and Economic Variables

This study analyzed the impact of climatic and economic shocks on food security in Afghanistan. The findings highlight that the impacts of climatic shocks, economic factors, and structural constraints on food insecurity must often be interpreted together, emphasizing the need to monitor interconnected indicators. For instance, monitoring drought risks alone is insufficient for early warning applications or policy interventions and must be combined with additional indicators for context. In our model, droughts measured by rainfall and negative NDVI anomalies show higher food insecurity risks when occurring together. Drought alone increases food stress by 4.5 percentage points (1 z-score deviation), while its joint occurrence with negative NDVI anomalies results in a 13.3 percentage point increase, illustrating compounded effects. Seasonal factors further heighten these risks, especially during the pre-harvest lean season.

Economic variables add complexity. In our model, rising food prices reduce food stress by 1 percentage point for every 10%, reflecting mixed impacts for producers and consumers. However, food prices often rise concurrently with fuel prices and exchange rates, collectively worsening food insecurity conditions. A 10% increase in both food and fuel prices leads to a 9 percentage point increase in food stress probability. We also found that global food price hikes amplify food insecurity, making domestic inflation resulting from global pass-through net negative for food security. Finally, 28