Institute Notes: A Dialogue on Overcoming Hunger and Poverty

More on the Madrid Conference

The text of Secretary of State Clinton's video-taped remarks to Summit attendees can be found here.

Also, this article provides some interesting details from the conference. There has been a good deal of talk about the need to coordinate the US response to international hunger - this GAO Report being but the most recent example. The question batted around at the Madrid Conference is how such a coordinating mechanism would operate at the international level.One proposal is to create a new global partnership - less a new structure and more a loose but coordinated alliance - consisting of civil society, business, donor and recipient governments and multilateral institutions.

No decision was reached at the conference on a way forward.

Little Outcome from the Madrid High Level Conference

The good news, for what its worth, is that 62 ministers from 126 countries including a delegation from the United States, attended the Madrid Conference held on Monday and Tuesday of this week. Attendees were even greeted by a message from Secretary of State Hilary Clinton.

But that's about the extent of the good news - at least on first blush. A note from the chair reports that all present recognized the need "to mobilize adequate, predictable, and flexible funding that have already been committed," and to "identify financing gaps and the additional resources needed for existing anti-famine mechanisms." This is a good start, but given that during 2008 well over $20 billion was pledged, the world's poor and hungry people struggling doubly as a result of food price volatility and the recent economic turmoil, deserve more than the recognition that existing pledges should be met. Prior to the Conference, MSF called for "a concrete funding and action plan" to address the plight of the world's 55 million severly malnourished children. This is a good place to start, though long-term food and nutrition security demands more.

"The Great Disruption"

An article by this name in the current (September) issue of The Atlantic, contains a succinct summary of “How scarcity, affluence, and biofuel production are wreaking havoc on food prices.”  Through text and graphics, the inter-relationships of increasing demand, biofuel mandates and use of cereals for biofuel production, food insecurity, trade restrictions, political turmoil are effectively summarized. The article points out how production of food has become increasingly concentrated – the top five corn producers grew 77 percent of the world’s supply in 2006 (while the top five oil producers supplied only 43 percent of the world’s oil). As a result, significant shifts in these major producing countries -- as in the U.S., where one-third of the corn production is now going into biofuel production – has major knock-on effects on global supplies and, in turn, on political stability and trade relations. This is a point that Bread for the World and other observers have been making since (and even before) the food crisis first broke into public awareness late last year. Food has become a source of international tension – further clouding prospects for any comprehensive trade reform – and the increasing prices are hurting poor, import-dependent nations the most.

G8 Leaders’ Statement on Food Security – Half a Loaf?

As I highlighted in my blog post of July 9, the number of “food-insecure” (i.e., hungry or malnourished) people in 70 developing countries increased by 130 million during 2007, to a new total of 980 million. How did the G8 leaders respond to this massive increase in global hunger and misery? 

The leaders’ rhetoric on global food security is not bad. (For the full statement, follow this link.) They express their “deep concern,” renew their commitment to address this multifaceted and structural crisis,  set a specific target of 6.2 percent growth in African agricultural productivity, and pledge (again) to conclude a Doha round that is “ambitious, comprehensive and balanced.” They express support for ending export restrictions and for local purchase of food aid. In line with President Bush’s pre-summit comments, they agreed to set up a G-8 experts group to monitor the implementation of commitments.

Another positive note in the statement is the G-8’s commitment to “explore options on a coordinated approach on stock management, including the pros and cons of building a ‘virtual’ internationally coordinated reserve system for humanitarian purposes.” This is something that Bread for the World strongly supports.

Declining Global Food Security (i.e., increasing hunger)

It’s official. According to the USDA’s Food Security Assessment, 2007, the number of “food-insecure” people in 70 developing countries increased by 15 percent during 2007 – from 850 to 980 million. That’s another 130 million more individuals consuming less than 2,100 calories/day (the nutrition target set by the FAO) and subject to hunger, malnutrition and associated ills. This, after years of progress in reducing hunger in percentage if not absolute terms, particularly in Asia.

According to the USDA assessment, in 2002 the declining commodity prices of the last few decades changed direction. Grain prices jumped about 50 percent from 2005-07, and although some moderation is projected, prices are expected to remain at high levels in coming years. For poor people, who spend more than half of their disposable income on food, the impact is devastating. The recent oil price hikes add to the financial burden because the higher energy import bill puts further pressure on national budgets and can result in squeezing out imports of food.   

Rome Food Summit: What Happened and Will It Make A Difference?

Forty Heads of State and 100 by Ministers along with members of intergovernmental and civil society organizations gathered last week in Rome to discuss the food prices crisis. The conference concluded with the signing of a Declaration of the High Level Conference On World Food Security. In order to alleviate the hunger afflicting 862 million people in our world today, and in the ongoing effort to successfully reduce by half the number of hungry people by 2015 as was committed in the MDGs, the Declaration included Immediate and Short Term Measures.

The two immediate lines of action are: respond immediately to requests for food assistance from countries in needs and support for agriculture production and trade. In the first line of response member states pledged to provide resources to the relevant UN agencies, deliver food aid more rapidly and re-align food prices and budgeting with realistic expectations for countries most affected by food shortages and higher prices. The second line of action urged immediate changes to be made in trade policies in addition to support for country-led initiatives meant to allow farmers access to markets and more affordable seed and fertilizer. Covering the actions included in the Declaration may cost $30 billion a year says Jacques Diouf, Director General of the FAO. “The problem of food insecurity is a political one,” he said. “It is a question of priorities in the face of the most fundamental of human needs.” The Declaration calls for “development partners to undertake initiatives to moderate unusual fluctuations in the food grain prices” and “all relevant organizations and cooperating countries” to enact policy which will benefit small scale farmers. The Declaration also included a pledge by members of the World Trade Organization to complete the Doha Development Round.

In addition to short term measures, the Declaration included Medium and Long-Term Measures. Six points, under the heading Medium and Long Term Measures, addressed the need to increase food production, bolster investment in science and technology for food and agriculture, liberalize international trade policies, and gain an in-depth understanding posed by biofuels. All six points called for “people-centered policy framework.”

But the Declaration and whole Rome process are already being criticized: The absence of small-scale farmers is a “reflection of how disconnected and dis-linked our multilateral agencies are from the situation on the ground” stated Ajay Vashee, Director of the International Federation of Agriculture Producers (IFAP). Speaking at the 38th World Farmers’ Congress which unites “600 million independent family farmers in 115 organizations from 80 countries around the globe,” Vashee added that “The people who have the ability to actually do something about this crisis were precluded. . . I’m worried about the importance and priority of farmers in this whole equation.”

Another Long Term Measure established in the Rome Declaration was to urge governments to address the climate and land challenges facing their countries agriculture production. A major recovery effort will need to take place to counter the negative consequences of asset-depletion as farmers are forced to eat their own livestock in order to feed their families, eat their seeds, or ruin their farming land by planting nutrient-draining crops. On June 6, Jan Egeland the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advisor on Conflict, was on the edge of the Sahara Desert observing the food situation and the impact of climate change in this tenuous region. In Niger he wrote, “Tens of thousands of people are yet again in a critical nutritional situation this year, and millions are food insecure. A new film made by the UN showed the desperate situation of some of the pastoralists here. In it herders described themselves as 'living in a cage' because they have less and less access to grazing land, as land is taken for agriculture and the desertification of what is left is relentless.”

Updated numbers on global hunger

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has updated its estimate of food insecurity around the world. The most recent data is from 2004. It is estimated that in 2004, 862 million people were suffering from hunger, up from 854 million in 2003. Although this does not represent a increase in the proportion of people (relative to population) who experience hunger, it is the largest increase in recent years and suggests that the progress we had witnessed in the previous decade is slowing and that a much greater effort and a substantial increase in resources are needed. The rise in global food prices in the last two years is pushing people on the edge of poverty into poverty and is devastating those who are already poor (to learn more see here). We are likely to see further increases in hunger if the international community does not take action.

There are promising signs. This week world leaders and heads of all the UN agencies, including the World Bank and IMF, meet in Rome to discuss the food crisis and develop a plan of action. Jacques Diouf, the head of FAO is calling for an additional $30 billion in development assistance for improving agricultural productivity in poor countries. The food crisis will also be on the agenda at the G8 Summit in Japan and the UN General Assembly session in September.

The FT has just begun an excellent series on the food crisis, see here and here and has in depth analysis of the crisis on its website.

World Scientists’ New Proposal to Feed the Poor

The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) launched their report, April 15. Four hundred experts on agriculture and development worked on the report which outlines ways in which “agriculture can feed a world with an exploding population and a changing climate, while reducing poverty and environmental degradation”

The report is a result of a four year assessment involving scientists from more than 100 countries. It engaged non-governmental organizations, consumer groups and the private sector. The central question of IAASTD is core to what Bread for the World’s mission. The report is extensive (it is more than 2000 pages) and looks at the potential of agricultural knowledge and science and technology to reduce hunger and poverty, improve rural livelihoods, and achieve environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development in poor countries.

The report’s release coincides with heightened concern over rising world food prices and the IAASTD report responds to this growing concern by arguing that global farming needs to change radically to avoid future food shortages.

The report advances several important arguments. Among them:

• In the past agricultural science has emphasized increasing agricultural production at the expense of environmental, social or economic sustainability.
• Trade liberalization in agriculture has not benefited all countries that have opened their markets. This is because some developing countries which have liberalized agricultural trade have not made improvements in basic infrastructure and institutions that are necessary to relieve hunger and poverty, and improve and protect the environment. And;
• Agricultural research and development efforts have focused on only a handful of crops without advancing knowledge or improvements in other staples foods, some of which are important to Africa, for instance tef in Ethiopia. In advancing agricultural science in similar countries, the IAASTD report acknowledges that “Genetic erosion is of particular concern in sub-Saharan Africa because many countries have a wide range of crops and livestock species that are considered relatively unimportant on a global level but are important as local staples.

The report also stresses that “we have little time to lose if we are to change course. Continuing with current trends would exhaust our resources and put our children’s future in jeopardy.”

Is GM the Answer?

The debate to feed the world hungry through increased production using genetically modified (GM) crops is back. At one point in the past, GM crops were seen as a crucial way to reduce poverty and hunger. But these days there is more controversy over their safety and environmental impacts.

In a great resource on increasing food prices, The Financial Times asks two very important and timely questions:

1) “Are GM crops the answer to the challenge farmers and consumers face as changing weather patterns disrupt agricultural production;” and

2) “Do GM seeds increase crop yield as demand raises?”

Here are the answers from two opposing groups on the prospects and problems of GM crops. A recent report from International Service Acquisition of Agro-Biotech Applications (ISAAA’s) indicated that GM crop in the world will double by 2015.  ISAAA’s “mission is to contribute to poverty alleviation, by increasing crop productivity and income generation, particularly for resource-poor farmers, and to bring about a safer environment and more sustainable agricultural development”. Their report also highlights overall agricultural use in the world have shown a tremendous increase in the past 10 years. 

Local Purchases Create win-win Situations to Hunger

Recently, food insecurity has become a burning topic in my home country. This is reflected in my phone calls home. I call Ethiopia very often and my usual question of “what’s new?” seems to have the same answer in the past months: everything, including food, has become very expensive. As the price of food increases, many people in developing countries will find a greater reliance on food aid. In 2008 WFP identified what is referred as “hunger global hotspots” - Afghanistan, Chad, DRC, Ethiopia, Iraq, Kenya, Somalia and Zimbabwe. Part of the problem in these countries may be local availability of food, but a much bigger problem, and the one that is faced in Ethiopia is that food is simply becoming more expensive.

Last year my professor attending a conference at Western Michigan University challenged a group of economic experts on the issue of rising food prices: why does the Ethiopian government continue to claim that the economy is going strong while millions of their own citizens can’t afford to buy enough food because of high prices? The response he received was as unconvincing to him as it was to me, and in any case what I hear on the ground is different from their response.