May 2008: Write a letter to the editor: long-term solutions to hunger require foreign aid reform

Despite global promises to halve hunger by 2015, the number of people suffering from undernourishment continues to grow, from 842 million in 2006 to 854 million in 2007. Even before this current crisis, malnutrition contributed to the death of a child every five seconds. We are in the midst of a global food emergency that threatens to push 100 million people back into extreme poverty and drive hundreds of thousands more into starvation. Soaring food prices have impacted not only the ability of the poorest to buy food, but also the ability of the World Food Program (WFP), the UN agency that is the single largest distributor of U.S. food aid, to purchase food. In Bangkok, for example, the price of rice rose from $460 per metric ton on March 3 to $780 five weeks later.

This crisis is not just a result of regional crop failure or political unrest. It is a consequence of policies that too often and too consistently prioritize the interests of rich countries over the social and economic needs of the poor. It is not a question of food production: we are struck daily by images of stacks of grain for sale that the poor desperately need but can no longer afford to buy because these policies have driven up the cost of the staples of life.

The U.S. and other donor countries must respond with short-term emergency relief for people that are suffering from this crisis. But this relief is only temporary and will not provide a long-term, sustainable solution to chronic hunger and malnutrition. The U.S. must now reexamine how our foreign aid policies undercut our global health and development priorities and perpetuate the systemic causes of this crisis. Write a letter to your editor informing your newspaper and community of the contradiction in U.S. foreign policy and the urgent need for Congress and the next president to undertake major foreign aid reform.

Sample Letter

Follow the guidelines for letters to the editor provided by your local papers. Always include your address and phone number with your submission. Make your letter short (150–250 words) and punchy. To write a letter through the RESULTS website, go to http://capwiz.com/results/dbq/media.

Engage	Thank you for your recent coverage of the global food crisis. Experts estimate the rise in food prices may drive 100 million people deeper into poverty. The problem is not a lack of food, but a lack of political will to ensure people do not go hungry.
Problem	Immediate relief is necessary, but will not address the underlying causes of global food instability. While the U.S. publicly states a commitment to helping poor countries, our policies frequently conflict with the achievement of those goals. For example, we deliver hundreds of millions of dollars of food aid every year, but mandate that the food must be purchased from subsidized U.S. agribusiness and shipped on U.S. vessels. For every dollar we spend on food aid, 65 cents is spent on shipping and other processing costs.
Inform about the Solution	Foreign aid must be clearly focused on bettering the lives of poor people. Programs should be held accountable for demonstrating clear, measurable results in health, education and economic opportunity in the lives of the poorest — those living on less than a dollar a day.
Call to Action!	A cabinet-level Department of Global Development could help create the opportunity for such reforms. With the support of Congress, it should be a priority for the next administration to work efficiently and effectively toward the end of poverty.

A “Silent Tsunami”

Global pressures and imbalances have lead to soaring food prices for cereal staples that the poor rely on to survive. Josette Sheeran, head of the World Food Program (WFP), has called the wave of price increases and food instability moving through the world a “silent tsunami” that threatens every developing country. She warned, “For the middle classes, it means cutting out medical care. For those on $2 a day, it means cutting out meat and taking the children out of school. For those on $1 a day, it means cutting out meat and vegetables and eating only cereals. And for those on 50 cents a day, it means total disaster.”

Causes of the Global Food Crisis

Typically, a food crisis is localized and brought on by a decline in production, such as a massive crop failure or political and civil unrest. This crisis is different. Food riots have erupted in Bangladesh, Egypt, Haiti, Indonesia, Mauritania, Mexico, Senegal, Somalia, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. Record fuel and fertilizer costs have increased the price of food, severe droughts and flooding have caused some decline in supply, and affluent populations in India and China have grown, causing a spike in demand. However, the underlying causes of the globalized nature of this food crisis are found in the political and economic policy decisions that have come at the expense of the poor. These policies include:

Biofuels: The increasing demand for biofuels, which convert cereals into fuel, accounts for almost half the increase in the consumption of major food crops in 2006– 07.[1]
Cash crops: The shift from local food production into cash crops like coffee and flowers, which was promoted by institutions like the World Bank, has fulfilled rich country demands for these goods while undercutting poor countries food sovereignty.
Economic policies: International financial institutions have urged the dismantling of government safeguard institutions like marketing boards that once protected farmers and consumers from massive price-shifts. Subsidies and trade policies have allowed “dumping” of U.S. commodities in impoverished countries, which undermines domestic food producers.
Tied aid: U.S. law mandating that food aid be purchased from U.S. suppliers and shipped on U.S. vessels decreases the value of U.S. food assistance.
Agricultural underinvestment: Low donor and developing country government investment in small-scale agriculture, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, has created systems unable to respond to local needs.

Food Crisis Underscores Urgent Need to Reform U.S. Foreign Aid

The global food crisis shines a spotlight on the systemic imbalances between the global North and South and the policy incoherence of U.S. foreign aid. Although U.S. foreign policy asserts a commitment to sustainable development, U.S. foreign assistance — including food aid — lacks a clear focus on poverty alleviation. One egregious example of this contradiction is the practice of “tying” aid, i.e., requiring recipients to spend all or some of the aid on purchasing U.S. goods and services. While tied aid is a problem in all sectors of U.S. aid deliverance, the inefficiencies, higher costs, and negative development impacts of this conditional aid is clearly evident as the U.S. works to respond to the food crisis.

Besides China, U.S. is alone among major donor countries in refusing to prioritize local and regional purchases of food aid and direct cash transfers (through NGOs and the WFP) whenever possible, which is cheaper and increases the impact of food aid dollars. Direct commodity transfer of food aid is on average 50 percent more expensive than purchasing food locally and 33 percent more expensive than purchasing food regionally.[2] The requirement that 75 percent of food aid be carried on U.S. ships may add an additional 50–75 percent to delivery costs.[3] The GAO found that these restrictions resulted in long delays in food delivery and 65 percent of food aid being spent on “non-commodity expenses,” that is, not food.[4]

The European Union has shifted policies so that approximately 97 percent of its food aid is locally or regionally procured. In contrast, only 1.4 percent of U.S. food aid was procured locally or regionally and the remaining 98.6 percent was direct commodity transfer, making the U.S. the largest provider of in-kind aid.[5]

Urge the Next Administration to Reform U.S. Foreign Assistance

In addition to immediate relief where needed, the next president, with the support of Congress, must ensure our foreign assistance programs are clearly focused on ending poverty. A cabinet-level Department of Global Development could provide a powerful voice for global poverty issues within and across the U.S. government, and create an opportunity for meaningful foreign assistance reform.

[1] World Economic Outlook: Globalization and Inequality. International Monetary Fund, October 2007.

[2] The Development Effectiveness of Food Aid: Does Tying Matter? OECD, 2005.

[3] The United States: Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Peer Review 2006, OECD.

[4] Various Challenges Impede the Efficiency and Effectiveness of U.S. Food Aid. General Accountability Office, April 2007.

[5] Food Aid Flows 2006, Food Aid Monitor, INTERFAIS 2007, World Food Program.