View previous stories
	Hunger on the rise due to soaring food prices - 50 million more hungry people in 2007 by UN Food & Agriculture Organization   July 2008, Rome/Brussels   The number of hungry people increased by about 50 million in 2007 as a result of high food prices, FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf said today addressing a conference at the European Parliament in Brussels.   “Poor countries are feeling the serious impact of soaring food and energy prices,” Dr Diouf said. “We urgently need new and stronger partnerships to address the growing food security problems in poor countries. No single institution or country will be able to resolve this crisis. Donor countries, international institutions, governments of developing countries, civil society and the private sector have an important role to play in the global fight against hunger.”   Dr Diouf said that the present crisis is a combination of rising demand for agricultural products, due to population growth and economic development in emerging countries; the rapid expansion of biofuels; and insufficient supply as production is negatively affected by climate change, in particular drought and floods, at a time when cereal stocks, at 409 million tonnes, are at their lowest levels in 30 years. These trends are exacerbated by the speculation of hedge, index and other funds on the futures markets.   High prices of agricultural inputs are a major obstacle for developing countries to increase agricultural production. From January 2007 to April 2008, fertilizer prices in particular shot up at a much faster rate than food prices.   Future challenges   In order to reduce the number of undernourished in the world and meet growing demands, global food production needs to double by 2050. Production increase must occur mainly in developing countries where the poor and hungry live, and where more than 95 percent of the projected population increase will occur. Their farmers will need access to modern inputs, storage facilities and rural infrastructure.   World agriculture will also have to address major challenges, like water control and climate change. More than 1.2 billion people today live in river basins with absolute water scarcity and the trend of increasing water shortages is worrisome, but sub-Saharan Africa is using only four percent of its renewable water resources. The world is losing 5-10 million hectares of agricultural land every year due to severe degradation, but in Africa, Latin America and Central Asia there is a great potential for expanding land under cultivation.   “Governments and farmers will also have to cope with the burden of climate change on agriculture. If temperatures rise by more than three degrees, yields of major crops like maize may fall by 20-40 percent in parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America”, Dr Diouf said. In addition, droughts and floods are likely to intensify and could cause greater crop and livestock losses.   Investing in agriculture   “The present situation is a result of the international community’s neglect of agriculture in developing countries for a long time,” Dr Diouf noted. “The share of agriculture in official development assistance has declined from 17 percent in 1980 to only three percent in 2006. Investment in agricultural research in developing countries is less than 0.6 percent of their Gross Domestic Product, compared to more than five percent in the OECD-countries.”   Increasing agricultural production in developing countries will only be achievable by additional public and private investment. “FAO estimates incremental public investment needs at about US$24 billion every year – this includes increased resources for water management, rural roads, storage facilities, as well as research and extension,” Dr Diouf said.   Supporting farmers in developing countries, through the supply of seeds and fertilizers, should be a priority in order to increase agricultural production in the poorest countries. Cereal production by Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries (LIFDCs), excluding China and India, declined by 2.2 percent in 2007, particularly in Africa, and may fall further in 2008 as poor farmers are unable to pay for adequate inputs at ever increasing prices.   “FAO is currently engaged in 35 countries supporting food production with the supply of improved seeds, fertilizers and other essential agriculture inputs for this summer planting season, and expects to be operational in many more countries in the coming weeks,” Dr Diouf said. In addition, FAO has recently approved projects under its Technical Cooperation Programme to initiate with input support for food production in 54 poor countries.   Providing balance of payments and budgetary support to food deficit countries should also be given priority, Dr Diouf said. LIFDCs food import bill has increased by about 37 percent in 2007 and may increase by another 56 percent in 2008. It is now four times higher than its level in 2000.   “Over the medium and long terms, the focus should be on boosting investment in agriculture, both public and private, to improve rural infrastructures and allow small farmers to benefit from market opportunities. This should be accompanied by institutional capacity building to ensure the sustainability of agricultural development,” Dr Diouf stressed. Visit the related web page
	Globalization requires Safety Net, U.N. Says by Washington Post / Reuters & agencies   July 2008 (Washington Post)   Greater government intervention is needed to moderate the severe economic swings and inequalities that seem to be an unavoidable byproduct of globalization, according to a United Nations report released yesterday.   Pointing to food riots in dozens of poor countries whipsawed by soaring prices for wheat and other staples, and to the rising income inequality that has become a too-common feature of economies in the developed world, the report says that no one is immune from the sometimes cruel consequences of global economic forces. But governments should do more, both individually and collectively, to protect people from their harshest impacts, it says.   The U.N."s 2008 World Economic and Social Survey calls for greater regulation of international capital flows, more generous foreign aid and the guarantee of a minimum income to the world"s poorest residents. Domestically, countries should do more to cushion their citizens against economic changes that have left them less secure. In poor countries, the insecurity can take the form of hunger and food shortages; in developed nations it often means stagnating wages and growing income inequality.   "Markets cannot be left to their own devices in respect of delivering appropriate and desired levels of economic security," the report says.   Global competition, which erodes the security of businesses, unstable capital flows, which crimp investment and growth, and food shortages are sometimes viewed as beyond the ability of governments to control. But the report says that is the wrong response. What is needed, it says, is "more active policy responses to help communities better manage these new risks."   The U.N."s assessment was echoed in a separate report published yesterday by the International Monetary Fund.   The IMF study warned that the recent sharp increases in food and fuel prices have had serious global impacts, and that import-dependent poor and middle-income countries were the most adversely affected. The report also said that food and fuel prices were likely to remain high and ease only gradually, raising inflation, and worsening poverty in these countries.   "Some countries are at a tipping point," IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said at a news conference announcing the release of the study. "If food prices rise further and oil prices stay the same, some governments will no longer be able to feed their people and at the same time maintain stability in their economies."   "The food price surge is expected to take longer than usual to unwind. We expect continued upward pressure from demand," said Thomas Helbling, an IMF adviser. "We see no reason to not see these trends continue."   The IMF called for a multilateral approach to address the situation, involving broad cooperation among the countries affected, donors and international organizations.   The U.N. report calls for a range of interventions to provide support, including greater public investment in agriculture for poor countries and "a better balance of economic and social policies." It also said that even during economic booms governments should remain mindful of the downturns that can strike quickly, and set aside money to deal with them.   July 2008 (Reuters)   World Bank President Robert Zoellick has urged swift action from Group of Eight industrial nations and major oil producers to address a worsening global food and energy crisis pushing more of the world"s people into poverty and destabilising economies.   "We are entering a danger zone," Zoellick wrote in a July 1 letter to Japan"s Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda.   "What we are witnessing is not a natural disaster - a silent tsunami or a perfect storm. It is a man-made catastrophe and as such must be fixed by people," he said in the letter, which was copied to leaders of the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, and the United Nations.   For the first time since 1973, Zoellick said countries were being hit by a combination of record oil and food prices, threatening more countries with rising poverty and social instability. Food riots have already occurred in some 30 countries and unrest over high fuel prices is spreading.   Mr Zoellick said $US10 billion ($A10.48 billion) will be needed for emergency food aid and to help countries deal with the double impact of rising food and fuel prices.   The combined effects of rising food and fuel prices in 41 countries - such those imposed by India and China on rice, or by Argentina, Kazakhstan and Russia on wheat - have contributed to rising prices and food shortages.   "These numbers translate into broken lives and stunted potential," Zoellick said.   World Bank assessments indicate another 50 countries will need support for social programs that target the poor and to distribute seeds and fertilisers to farmers to help boost farm production, he said.   He said immediate action was needed to ensure that the UN"s World Food Program was properly funded to get emergency food aid to people in worst-affected areas.   Additionally, oil producing nations should be urged to contribute some of their profits to alleviate poverty in poor countries hardest hit by the rise in fuel costs.   Zoellick said the World Bank is seeing evidence that countries are fearful that the global food market is breaking down.   Zoellick said the G8 and international community should consider a global reserve system for food emergencies. Such a system would be similar to that of the International Energy Agency (IEA), which coordinates the release of emergency oil reserves by member countries.   "We should look at the notion of some virtual humanitarian stop system, perhaps building on the type of logic the IEA has used for oil stocks," Zoellick told reporters.   He also appealed for an increase in assistance to the World Bank, urgent steps were also needed to get seed and fertilisers to poor farmers, especially in Africa, in time for the next planting season to boost yields, Zoellick added.   July 2, 2008   Food Independence and Real Democracy, by Frances Moore Lappe. (Huffington Post)   As about 30 countries scramble to protect their citizens from hunger by limiting food exports, the title of a front-page New York Times article calls out: “Hoarding Nations Drive Food Costs Ever Higher.”   But where does responsible government action end and hoarding begin? (If the Irish government had begun a little hoarding instead of exporting grain in 1845, many deaths could have been avoided in the Irish potato famine.) It’s not an easy question to answer, suggesting as it does that it might be a perfect time to ask how countries got into this no-win, export-or-not quandary to begin with.   Part of the answer is the longstanding premise, proposed by international lending agencies, that nations should use their farmland to grow what’s most profitable in world trade and use the proceeds to import food as needed. For decades countries have been “encouraged” — even by making it a condition of a needed loan — to use prime farmland to grow luxury and non-food items from coffee to cut flowers for export, and to adopt an agricultural model dependent on imported fertilizers, pesticides, and seeds.   Surely today’s deepening crisis reveals the danger here. The end of hunger and real food security require provisioning from domestic resources wherever possible. This approach, combined with a solid international grain reserve to be released in response to unforeseeable setbacks, has the best chance of assuring adequate food supplies.   Could we Americans ever breathe easy if we were dependent on imported food for our very survival? I doubt that any people could. Why is that “energy independence” is embraced, but you never even hear anyone utter the phrase “food independence?”   Analysts go on vying to tease out the varied pieces of the puzzle of today’s renewed hunger crisis: Is it “hoarding” that’s to be blamed? Is it heightened speculation? Is it the growing Asian elite’s market-demand for grain-fed meat? The rising price of oil? The diversion of food to produce agrofuel? But these questions avoid asking why we have failed to end hunger even in the good times.   For years, the world’s more-than-ample supply of food — keeping well ahead of population growth — has left over 800 million hungry. Because we’ve not grasped the root causes, today’s prices risk pushing another one hundred million people into the ranks of the hungry. No amount of lifting of agricultural trade barriers will address this longstanding, now intensified, crisis.   Understanding hunger begins here: In our world where the bottom 40 percent of us have to survive on just over three percent of world income and eight in ten live in societies where inequalities are worsening, the real “hoarding” is done by those with vastly disproportional income: Their market demand diverts 37 percent of the world’s grain and about a third of the world fish catch to livestock, and now almost a third of U.S. corn to ethanol.   How could this extreme and worsening inequality happen? Because of our thin concept of democracy — that elected government plus a one-rule economy (highest return to existing wealth) are all we need to meet human needs. As a result, economic and political power concentrate in such a way that policies emerge which defy the values and common-sense of most citizens.   For, where are everyday citizens who would choose to have their survival dependent on the vagaries of volatile international markets? Nowhere.   Thus, our hunger crisis is actually a democracy crisis. Hunger can be eliminated only as we remove the influence of concentrated wealth over public choices and ensure the ongoing, healthy distribution of power. The sooner we start recasting the crisis thusly, the sooner we’ll all be able to thrive.   * Frances Moore Lappé of the Small Planet Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is the author of sixteen books.
	View more stories