Authors : Lemi Joseph Benea; Vinsam Owino Ouko

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 10 - October

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/mbknkwb4

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/pje2fcmu

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25oct547

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : Background Market instability remains a persistent challenge in fragile economies, particularly in post-conflict contexts such as South Sudan. Agricultural producers in these settings face severe price volatility, driven by weak infrastructure, limited market access, and recurring insecurity. This study examined the link between market access constraints and commodity price volatility within South Sudan’s agricultural value chains, focusing on how road quality, information asymmetry, and conflict events affect welfare outcomes for rural households.  Methods A mixed-methods approach was adopted using time-series data from 2014–2024, covering major agricultural markets across five regions. Price volatility was estimated through a Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity (GARCH) model, while causal relationships between volatility and welfare indicators were analyzed using Two-Stage Least Squares (2SLS) regression with rainfall, road density, and conflict frequency as instrumental variables. Supplementary qualitative data from key informant interviews contextualized the econometric findings.  Results and Findings The results revealed that high price volatility significantly reduced household income by 8.2% and food consumption scores by 3.9 units (p < 0.001). Poor road networks and limited access to market information amplified volatility effects, particularly in remote counties. Policy simulations suggested that rehabilitating 500 km of rural roads, improving information access by 25%, and reducing conflict by 40% could jointly decrease price volatility by 18.5% and increase average household income by 24.6%. These findings underscore the structural nature of market inefficiencies in South Sudan’s fragile post-war economy.  Conclusion Market access constraints are central drivers of commodity price instability in South Sudan. Targeted investments in rural infrastructure, peace enforcement, and information systems can mitigate volatility and enhance agricultural welfare. Addressing these systemic barriers is essential for stabilizing rural livelihoods and promoting long-term economic recovery.

Keywords : Price Volatility, Market Access, Agricultural Value Chains, Fragile Economies, South Sudan, GARCH, 2SLS, Post- Conflict Recovery.

References :

1. Aker, J. C. (2010). Information from markets near and far: Mobile phones and agricultural markets in Niger. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(3), 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.2.3.46
2. Barrett, C. B. (2008). Smallholder market participation: Concepts and evidence from eastern and southern Africa. Food Policy, 33(4), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.10.005
3. Bellemare, M. F. (2015). Rising food prices, food price volatility, and social unrest. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 97(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aau038
4. Brück, T., Justino, P., Verwimp, P., & Avdeenko, A. (2016). Measuring violent conflict in micro-level surveys: Current practices and methodological challenges. World Development, 79, 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.10.020
5. Deaton, A., & Laroque, G. (1992). On the behavior of commodity prices. Review of Economic Studies, 59(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297922
6. Dercon, S. (2002). Income risk, coping strategies, and safety nets. World Bank Research Observer, 17(2), 141–166.
7. Engel, R. F. (1982). Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity with estimates of the variance of United Kingdom inflation. Econometrica, 50(4), 987–1007. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912773
8. FAO. (2021). Food security and resilience in South Sudan: Situation update and response framework 2021–2023. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
9. Fafchamps, M., & Gabre-Madhin, E. (2001). Agricultural markets in Benin and Malawi: The operation and performance of traders. World Bank Economic Review, 15(3), 427–450.
10. IMF. (2023). South Sudan: Selected issues paper. International Monetary Fund Country Report No. 23/144.
11. Justino, P. (2012). War and poverty. In M. Garfinkel & S. Skaperdas (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Peace and Conflict (pp. 676–706). Oxford University Press.
12. Martin, W., & Anderson, K. (2012). Export restrictions and price insulation during commodity price booms. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 94(2), 422–427.
13. Mwaura, F., & Okoboi, G. (2014). Climate variability and crop yield volatility in Uganda: An econometric analysis of maize and beans. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 9(4), 1–17.
14. National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2022). Consumer Price Index and Market Bulletin Reports 2018–2022. Government of South Sudan.
15. Ravallion, M. (2016). The economics of poverty: History, measurement, and policy. Oxford University Press.
16. Rodrik, D. (2010). Diagnostics before prescription. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(3), 33–44.
17. South Sudan Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MAFS). (2023). Annual Agricultural Performance Report 2018–2023. Government of South Sudan.
18. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2022). Post-conflict economic recovery and resilience in South Sudan. UNDP Policy Paper Series.
19. World Bank. (2022). South Sudan Economic Monitor: Towards a More Inclusive and Sustainable Recovery. World Bank Group, Washington, D.C.
20. Zivot, E., & Wang, J. (2006). Modeling financial time series with S-PLUS. Springer Science & Business Media.