A
joint report, by FAO, IFAD and WFP has warned that small, import-dependent
countries, particularly in Africa, are especially at risk of becoming more
vulnerable to poverty and food insecurity.
Many
of them still face severe problems following the world food and economic crises
of 2006-2008, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International
Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the World Food Programme (WFP)
said in “The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2011″ (SOFI), an
annual flagship report they jointly produced this year.
In the report, published on October 10, the three
Rome-based UN agencies projected that “food price volatility
featuring high prices is likely to continue and possibly increase, making poor
farmers, consumers and countries more vulnerable to poverty and food
insecurity.”
Such
crises, including in the Horn of Africa “are challenging our efforts to achieve
the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of reducing the proportion of people who
suffer from hunger by half in 2015”, the heads of the three agencies, Jacques
Diouf of FAO, Kanayo F. Nwanze of IFAD and Josette Sheeran of WFP lamented in a
foreword to the report.
The
FAO’s best estimate of the number of hungry people for 2010 remains at 925
million, an increase of 75 million, compared to the 2006-2008 FAO estimates of
850 million. No estimates have been produced for 2011, as the methodology FAO
uses for calculating the prevalence of hunger is currently under review.
The Gambia is a “small,
import-dependent country” and in recent years, the hunger situation has been noticed
to getting worst.
“The
hunger situation is not getting any better, the percentage of the population
below the minimum levels of dietary energy consumption is on the increase, with
15 percent in 1990 and 35 percent in 2008,” lamented Siga Fatima Jagne, a
senior official of the Advocacy Group, Pro-poor (Pro-PAG), during a UN
Development Programme Forum in December 2010. “Though the percentage of
underweight children less than five years has dropped slightly, from 21 percent
to 16 percent during the same period, unemployment is high and skills levels
are low.”
Jagne,
who presented a paper telling the Gambia Government what it must do to attain
the millennium development goals (MDGs) by 2015, said the government must step
up efforts to achieve MDG1: “End poverty
and hunger”, with nearly 60 percent of the people living below the food poverty
line in 2010, compared to 33 percent in 1990. A new household economic survey
is expected to provide updated information on poverty hunger statistics in The
Gambia.
“But even if the
MDG were achieved by 2015, some 600 million people in developing countries
would still be undernourished. Having 600 million people suffering from hunger
on a daily basis is never acceptable. The entire international community must
act today and act forcefully to banish food insecurity from the planet”, the
three heads of the UN food agencies said.
“Governments
must ensure that a transparent and predictable regulatory environment is in
place, one that promotes private investment and increases farm productivity. We
must reduce food waste in developed countries through education and policies,
and reduce food losses in developing countries by boosting investment in the
entire value chain, especially post-harvest processing. More sustainable
management of our natural resources, forests and fisheries are critical for the
food security of many of the poorest members of society.”
However, Siga
Fatima Jagne noted
that there is a lack of transparency in Gambia, citing MDG8: “Global
partnership”, from which development aid continues to flow into the country
from bilateral (government-government) and multilateral donors (World Bank,
IMF, ADB, EU etc).
“Some
of these aid flows come with strings and conditions attached. The aggregate
total aid flow is difficult to establish due to the lack of transparency in
some organizations,” she stressed.
This
year’s report “The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2011″ (SOFI) focuses
on high and volatile food prices, identified as major contributing factors in
food insecurity at global level and a source of grave concern to the
international community, revealing that the “demand from consumers in rapidly
growing economies will increase, the population continues to grow, and further
growth in biofuels will place additional demands on the food system.”
Moreover,
food price volatility may increase over the next decade due to stronger linkages
between agricultural and energy markets and more frequent extreme weather
events, but this will only make “smallholder farmers and poor consumers”
increasingly vulnerable to poverty while short-term price changes can have
long-term impacts on development, according to the report.
Painfully,
the report added that “Changes in income due to price swings that lead to
decreased food consumption can reduce children’s intake of key nutrients during
the first 1000 days of life from conception, leading to a permanent reduction
of their future earning capacity and an increased likelihood of future poverty,
with negative impacts on entire economies.”
But
price swings affected countries, populations and households very differently,
the report found. The most exposed were the poor and the weak, particularly in
Africa, where the number of undernourished increased by 8 percent between 2007
and 2008 while it was essentially constant in Asia.
Some
large countries were able to shelter their food markets from the international
turbulences through a combination of trade restrictions, safety nets for the
poor and releases of food stocks. However, trade insulation increased prices
and volatility in international markets compounded the impacts of food
shortages in import-dependent countries, the report said.
For now, the Rome-based
UN agencies, FAO, IFAD and WFP said stronger economies and high food prices
present incentives for increased long-term investment in the agricultural
sector, which can contribute to improved food security in the long run. When
farmers react to higher prices with increased production it is essential to
build on their short-term response with increased investment in agriculture,
with emphasis on initiatives that support smallholders, who are the main food
producers in many parts of the developing world.
At
the same time, targeted safety nets are crucial for alleviating food insecurity
in the short term, they said, but warned that it must be designed in advance in
consultation with the most vulnerable people.
They
stressed that investment in agriculture remains critical to sustainable,
long-term food security. Key areas where such investments should be directed
are cost-effective irrigation, improved land-management practices and better
seeds developed through agricultural research. That would help reduce the
production risks facing farmers, especially smallholders, and mitigate price
volatility.
They do not
loose sight that
“private initiatives by millions of farmers and rural entrepreneurs will form
the bulk of agricultural investments. High food prices have also provided
incentives for increased investments by corporate investors (including
cross-border public and private entities) in all parts of the agricultural
value chain.”
And
it is important that all investment considers and respects the rights of all
existing users of land and related natural resources, benefits local
communities, promotes food security and environmental sustainability, and
contributes to adaptation to and mitigation of climate change impacts. Together
with increased investments, greater policy predictability and general openness
to trade are more effective than other strategies such as export bans, the
report noted.
It
said restrictive trade policies can protect domestic prices from international
price swings, but such restrictions often also increase susceptibility to
domestic production shocks, thus failing to reduce domestic price volatility.
Restrictive trade policies also risk increasing volatility and prices on
international markets.
- Author: Modou S. Joof for The Voice Newspaper
No comments:
Post a Comment
The views expressed in this section are the authors' own. It does not represent The North Bank Evening Standard (TNBES)'s editorial policy. Also, TNBES is not responsible for content on external links.