Irish Aid, the Government’s programme for oversees development managed by its Department of Foreign Affairs will expand funding to subsidize seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers and increase maize production for families at risk of hunger in Malawi.  The Belfast Telegraph states, “The cash will also improve infant and maternal nutrition by supporting research to provide high-quality, disease-free seeds for mothers and young children.”

Peter Power, Ireland’s Minister of State for Overseas Development, advocates “Since the national agricultural programme was introduced in 2006 in response to the food crisis in Malawi, the number of people needing food aid has fallen from more than five million to fewer than 150,000.” These measures have allowed Malawi to move from being a net importer of maize to a net exporter, a critical step taken towards goals of eventual economic self-sufficiency.

However, Malawi faces further challenges as more than 50% of the country remains below the poverty line.

Posted by Patricia Lee.

The recent issue of Time Magazine reflects on how America eats, what it pays for its food and the source of its food supply.  Citing that:

For all the grumbling you do about your weekly grocery bill, the fact is you’ve never had it so good, at least in terms of what you pay for every calorie you eat. According to the USDA, Americans spend less than 10% of their incomes on food, down from 18% in 1966.

The article discusses how the rise of corn as an ingredient in many foods has increased the supply of food available to Americans.  Over time, the agricultural subsidies paid to produce corn, large-scale farm operations and consumer preferences have contributed to a cycle of cheaper, but in some cases, less healthy food.  Several recent high-profile recalls, the use of antibiotics in raising farm animals and health problems like diabetes are increasing the concerns of many Americans about their food supply.

The article also discusses the environmental impact of large-scale food production, as well as the effect it has on prices of organic foods and healthier foods like fruits and vegetables.

In addition to the cover story, there is also a comparison of how an organic hamburger is produced versus a conventional hamburger.  There are several photo essays including one that shows families from around the world, detailing the amount they spend on food and what they typically buy.

A new report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found that the U.S. is overpaying for the purchasing and delivery of food aid that it donates to those in need, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia.  Despite being the largest overall donor of food aid, the practice of buying food products from U.S. farmers and shipping them overseas on American ships costs the U.S. more and delays aid deliveries.

The practice of the U.S. government subsidizing U.S. farms by buying surplus food products for aid has been criticized in the past for keeping global food prices artificially low and preventing farmers in developing countries from earning enough from their crops to avoid poverty.

Some of the findings in the GAO report included:

• Food aid purchased and shipped from the U.S. cost 29% to 34% more than if procured locally
• International in-kind food aid deliveries averaged between 106 and 112 days longer to deliver than locally produced food aid
• Local food procurement faces the dangers of being hampered by inefficient suppliers, poorer food standards, weak logistics and poor infrastructure

The report concludes with the call to make changes to current policy,

“the timely provision of food aid is critical in responding to humanitarian emergencies and food crises, and LRP [Local and Regional Procurement] has the potential to better meet the needs of hungry people by providing food aid in both a more timely and less costly manner. To fully realize this potential,however, challenges to its effective implementation must be addressed.”

Among some of the challenges that need to be addressed, the report recommended,

• A gradual shift by the U.S. from exclusively offering internationally grown food aid to supporting locally grown food
• Increasing food “market intelligence” to assist developing countries with gauging food prices and keeping locally grown crops competitive
• Clarify the U.S. laws pertaining to food aid so that U.S. agencies dealing with food aid would be able to support LRP

A Kansas City Star article points out that any change in the policies on food aid purchases and shipping would fall under the responsibility of the House of Representative’s committees on agriculture and transportation.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) held an event on April 8, 2009 with Professor Olivier De Schutter, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food.  Professor De Shutter presented an analysis of the global food crisis titled “From Malthus to Sen.”  Following his remarks, he took questions from Steven Schonberger from the World Bank and Gawain Kripke from Oxfam America.

During his talk, Professor De Schutter made the point that the global food supply may be sufficient, but access to food has become one of the most dangerous barriers for the hungry.  Some of these barriers include uneven trade policies and imbalanced markets for food products.  Steven Schonberger focused his statements on the need to keep global food prices lower to prevent future food crises.  Gawain Kripke spoke on the idea of food as a human right, and the new U.S. administration’s opportunity to address global food issues.

In addition to the account of the event, a summary of De Schutter’s report and Schonberger’s presentation are also available.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization director-general, Jacques Diouf, called for restraint in tightening credit as a response to the global financial crisis while speaking at the biennial UN food policy conference in Bangkok, Thailand.  In another example of the tie between the global food crisis and the economic downturn, Diouf voiced concern that the tightening of credit could lead to a repeat spike in food prices, as farmers would find it more difficult to expand production.

After the  2007 and 2008 surges in the price of corn, rice, and other grains, prices have fallen by a third.  However, grains prices are still 27% higher than in 2005, and global stocks remain low.  And although several countries have invested more heavily in agriculture as part of their respective economic stimulus initiatives, food policy analysts are wary that a constriction of credit could negate any progress made.

Diouf also appealed to the leaders of the Group of 20 (G-20), the collection of heads of government and state from the 20 largest industrialized countries, to address agriculture initiatives during the group’s summit this week in London.  Diouf pushed for the inclusion of a food crisis discussion to alleviate the effects of the global economic slowdown on the developing world.

How do you think the G-20 might address the global food crisis?  Leave your reactions and questions in the comments section of this post.

______________________________

Do you have a question about food security you would like to hear addressed at the Town Hall?  Click on the “Town Hall Questions” link to the right to submit a question and learn about this special event.  Posted questions may be presented to the panelists at the Town Hall on April 4th.

At the World Affairs Councils of America’s (WACA) Annual Meeting in February, Charles MacCormack , president and CEO of Save the Children, spoke about how the 2008 Global Food Crisis has impacted the UN Millennium Development Goal (MGD) for fighting global hunger.  Watch the video of his remarks at the conference and hear him address factors affecting to food scarcity and threatening food security.

Some questions to consider: Since the Millennium Development Goals aim to halve global hunger by 2015, how close is this goal to being achieved?  What are the most pressing obstacles that the UN community would have to overcome to achieve this MGD?

The Great Decisions 2009 article on the “Global Food Crisis” identifies U.S. agricultural subsidies as an example of a divisive issue between developed countries and developing countries, particularly as they try to negotiate a fair, free trade system.

The U.S. government provides subsidies, or payments, to farmers or agribusinesses (often large-scale, corporate farms) for their crops, especially if the market price of their crop is low.  Subsidies allow U.S. growers to continue growing their crops and therefore keep the overall supply of the crop high, in turn keeping the market price down.  U.S. laws also require that food aid come from subsidized U.S. crops, which leads to accusations of “dumping.”  Farmers in developing countries argue that they cannot compete with U.S. growers who receive subsidies, potentially making them more reliant on international food aid.

In his speech before Congress last night, President Barack Obama stated,  that in the next budget he would seek to “…end direct payments to large agribusinesses that don’t need them,” which would reflect a major change in U.S. policy.  An article from Reuters looks at President Obama’s remarks, their implications and reactions from groups on all sides of the subsidies debate.