As global socioeconomic systems evolve, structural failures characterised by gaps in social safety nets and mental health treatment (Limenih & MacDougall et al, 2023) emerge in response to social and economic problems. These broader political problems are no longer producing isolated crises but sustained conditions of precarity that erode the capacity to endure among men, adolescents and women. This deterioration is a result of the persistent feelings of entrapment and adversity rooted in social, structural, economic and development factors. Nowhere is this more evident than in survival economies, where survival is not a virtue but an obligation, one that, for many, becomes impossible to sustain.
In such contexts, psychological distress is not incidental but systemic, and suicide emerges not as an anomaly, but as a foreseeable outcome of prolonged instability. It is crucial to note the phenomena is not addressed uniformally as there are substantial differences between suicide rates in the Global South and high-income nations where suffering is experienced regardless of economic stability (Machado, 2025). This is seen in Japan where suicide rates remain the highest even though it is a G7 nation (Yamauchi, Shimazaki et al, 2025).
Despite this, suicide remains underreported, stigmatised, and frequently misinterpreted across much of the Global South, limiting the development of culturally grounded explanations and responses (Akanle, 2021). While it is often defined as the intentional act of ending one’s life (Nkechinyere & Eseadi, 2023), such definitions are insufficient in environments where the conditions of living themselves become unsustainable. To frame suicide as an individual, moral, or spiritual failing is to obscure the broader forces that produce it. It ignores the slow attrition of everyday life, the normalisation of deprivation, uncertainty, and exhaustion that wears individuals down over time.
This article argues that in survival economies, suicide must be understood as a structurally produced outcome rather than a personal failure. Drawing on insights from Émile Durkheim, particularly his concept of anomic suicide, it situates self-harm within broader social and economic disorganization (Berk, 2026; Yang & Lester, 2025) rather than placing blame on the individual. In doing so, it does not seek to reduce lived suffering to theory, but to examine the conditions that repeatedly produce it and to question the systems in which endurance is demanded, but not supported.
Rather than perceiving suicide as an anomaly in these settings, it must be understood as a predictable outcome of survival economies as suicides peak when theres institutional, political and economic decline. Therefore analysing the incomprehensive institutional measures for prevention, shifts the narrative from individual or social choices to a more holistic approach for prevention (Ozbilgin, Demirbag et al, 2024). These survival economies are often characterised by the lack of national survival, disrupted commodity supply, limited advanced technology, lack of sovereign independence, stunted economic prosperity and overreliance on other countries (Yuzue & Sekiyama, 2025). In these economies there are predictors of collective societal breakdown which are evident in alcoholism or homicide (Muller & Abrutyn et al, 2021).
In this discussion these survival economies are discussed in relation to Durkheims elaboration of the causation of anomic suicide expressed due to disruptions in social order and social mechanisms (Kolodziej-Sarzynska et al, 2019). The variations in social, economic, cultural and religious conditions in different regions lead to the inhibition or exacerbation of suicide rates. This discussion does not seek to reduce lived suffering to theory, but to examine the conditions that repeatedly produce it, to recognise suicide as a systemic outcome and not personal failure.
Emile Durkheims earlier work inspired this discussion by demonstrating the organisation of a society that produces suicide as a byproduct based on its moral structure and social forces (Berk, 2026). The main precursor of a disorganised society is economic instability which has implications on mental health, income stability, job security and employment. (Yang & Lester, 2025). From a Marxist perspective these are often embedded in a capitalist system and worse so in survival economies where individuals are seen as instruments that bolster economies whilst being excluded from the security and fulfilment produced from their labour. In survival economies that are characterised by the aforementioned characterstics whenever debt is incurred, there is adaptation to scarcity, loss of land and the associated status that comes with it, which brings about shame, isolation and hopelessness due to the limited solutions and institutional mechanisms that are available to alleviate the socially produced burdens hence heightening the risk of suicide (Shiva, 2004). In countries like Malawi the majority of the population relies on subsistence farming and small-scale trade due to high levels of unemployment, poverty, and informal employment, the socio-economic pressures affect people living in rural areas severely in both social, economic and psychological ways. (Gama & Makamo,2026).
This is also seen in Ghana where the unpredictability of income for smallholder farmers due to postharvest loss and limited access to safety nets, subsidies and foodaid produce long-term distress and suicidal ideation (Kansanga, Piennah & Luginaah, 2026). This intersects with poor healthcare services, low standard of living, increased physical labour with exposure to hazardous situations which are risk factors exacerbating the chances of suicide (Behere & Mansharamani, 2020), because of the cycles of dependency, insecurity and lack of independence with heightened responsibilities. This evidence supports Durkheims argument that the cause of anomic suicide is due to the low levels of social integration and regulation (Ozbilgin, Demirbag et al, 2024).
Moreover, the structure of social institutions in most African countries prohibit the access to mental health services due to a myriad of reasons. Although suicide is increasing on the continent, the perceived taboo and social stigma associated with help-seeking behaviours prohibits the chances for any timely interventions (Akanle,2021). This problem bleeds through into the lack of inclusion of mental health services in the primary health care systems due to limited resources that may not serve people in rural areas where impacts of economic decline are felt on a grander scale (Kansanga, Piennah & Luginaah, 2026). This supports Durkheim's initial argument where he alludes to the effects of grand social change on individual wellbeing and the inability to handle the adjustment (Josit, 2024). Additionally, most primary health care services lack trained personnel, outreach programmes and resources to support individuals who feel hopeless and distressed leaving them with the option of suicide (Gama & Makomo, 2026).
To add, the gender paradox in suicidal behaviors and actions where males exhibit higher rate of suicide than females supports the idea Durkheim alluded, that the lack of alterations in the perception of gender roles are symptoms of anomie suicide as they are misaligned and rigid (Kolodziej-Sarzynska et al, 2019). Durkheims work in Le Suicide insinuates that the lack of involvement women have in society economically would entail lower suicide rates as they are insulated from the regulations and restrictions of life. However societies have undergone profound socio-economic shifts and evolution in cultural expectations tied to femininity and masculinity with an increased integration of women in social-economic realms, therefore acknowledging that gender roles and expectations are in fact regulated by society and the norms of navigating abrupt social changes can manifest in anomic crisis.
Although Durkheim does not directly address unemployment in his work we can see this strain mirroring his framework where limited access to mental health services and limited resources can be attributed to unemployment, underemployment and economic displacement leading to heightened emotional distress, depression and hopelessness (Kolodziej-Sarzynska et al, 2019).
Moreover, socio-cultural factors inclusive of the socialisation and traditions pertaining to the roles men play in society; for instance to be providers, remain stoic and unemotional highlights the gender paradox in the suicide rates between males and females in different African countries (Gama & Makomo, 2026). Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony stipulates the “unchallenged influence of dominant cultures” (Dhungel, 2025), which helps in understanding how societies normalise suffering through language, expressions and cultural beliefs. Endurance can be encouraged even if it is not ideal and this can be framed through religion, laws of nature and morals to inhibit vulnerability or expression. This is seen in Malawi as it is socially expected for males to endure hardship with taught phrases such as “bola moyo” (atleast i have life) ,“zapa dziko izi” (these things are of the earth), “tiza njoya kumwamba (we shall enjoy in heaven) amongst other phrases which promote deep seated feelings of isolation in struggles due to fear of being misunderstood in-turn promoting poor psychological health, low-self esteem, learned helplessness and suicide attempts (Shaikh, Acquah et al, 2016).
Furthermore, in survival economies illness is an economic shock that is not absorbed well. This is seen with the death-centric approach taken when an individual is diagnosed with HIV/AIDS (Faidas, Gaynes et al, 2025) where people are discriminated against jobs, experience mockery and classified to be weak individuals with poor future prospects. This leads to deep seated hopelessness and reinforces stigma making it difficult for individuals to seek help and feel drawn to suicidal ideation and the act itself. An attempt to ensure increased elements of happiness and life satisfaction by introducing cash transfers, improved health care that has mental health pathways, improved educational outcomes and access to basic necessities would curb the rates of suicide as seen in Malawis Mchinji Social Cash Transfer Pilot study in 2006 ( Shaikh, Acquah et al, 2016).
We cannot study any society without the facets that make it whole, ignoring the interconnectedness of these facets would make Durkheims argument illegitimate, therefore understanding the degree to which economic crisises affect suicide rates would be pivotal in reversing these effects (Lestari,2026). Reversing the psychological consequences of survival economies requires more than isolated interventions; it demands structural transformation. As discussed in this article the psychological consequences of survival economies cannot be understood separately from the economic systems that structure them and Marx’s work reinforces the argument by showing us how capitalism brings about self-destruction through exploitation, alienation and deprivation due to the consumerist society we live in. This inturn bolsters suicide as people lack fulfilment and feel estranged from their communities and labour (Worrell, 2026). In survival economies this translates into precarious labour, material exploitation, chronic insecurity, psychological and economic alienation producing hopelessness, anxiety and social fragmentation. Policy changes and alterations to the modern economy would alleviate pressures faced by individuals in different societies and reduce suicide rates.
Lastly, integrating mental health into primary healthcare systems, expanding rural outreach, reducing stigma, and strengthening social protection mechanisms such as cash transfer programmes are critical steps (Kansanga, Piennah, & Luginaah, 2026; Gama & Makomo, 2026). Evidence from Malawi’s social protection initiatives, including the Mchinji Social Cash Transfer Pilot, demonstrates that improving access to basic resources can enhance life satisfaction and reduce vulnerability to distress (Shaikh, Acquah et al., 2016). However, these measures must be understood not as standalone solutions, but as part of a broader effort to address the structural conditions that produce distress in the first place. Without such reforms, survival economies will continue to generate not only material deprivation, but forms of psychological exhaustion so profound that death becomes conceivable as release. In this context, suicide is not a deviation from the system as it is one of its most revealing outcomes. To confront it meaningfully requires shifting the focus from individual pathology to structural accountability, and from narratives of endurance to demands for sustainable, dignified living conditions.