The Obama administration’s proposal for food aid reform is evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, but it is still a big step in the right direction. Overall, the administration estimates that the proposal would allow roughly the same level of funds for food aid to reach an additional 4 million people, and do so more quickly in emergencies.
Washington is abuzz with rumors that the White House budget will include a far-reaching reform of US food aid that moves away from in-kind food aid transported on American ships. Even though no details are available, the plan faces considerable resistance from agricultural and maritime interests that profit from the current system. But current practices are inefficient, costly, and slow and most development advocates support the administration’s desire to shake things up.
President Obama announced $3 billion in new private sector investments in agriculture in three African countries at a packed event in Washington, D.C., last Friday. The New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition is the cornerstone of the United States' 2012 G-8 commitments to development led by USAID and administrator Rajiv Shah. There's a lot to like about the partnership: presidential leadership, a link between public and private investment, and a focus on policy change. But all eyes are on how the relatively modest investments will be implemented and whether they can reach the ambitious poverty reduction targets.
A new report from the Chicago Council on Global Affairs applauds U.S. government agencies for food security leadership but calls on them to up the game in the face of rising global challenges and shrinking aid budgets. While it is a positive assessment, the report highlights some areas of concern that could affect U.S. leadership in future years.
Congress last week released a draft farm bill that includes some promising fixes to the notoriously inefficient U.S. food aid system.
The House Budget Committee passed its budget alternative last week that calls for reduced spending for international affairs. The accompanying report gives some details on the cuts the Committee is recommending.
I recently challenged readers to take matters into our own hands and rename the unpronounceable and unimaginative GAFSP. GAFSP is the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program at the World Bank to which several countries and the Gates Foundation have pledged contributions.
This is a joint post with Connie Veillette
The G20 agriculture ministers seem to agree: they're all for food security, as long as it doesn't cost anything. The communiqué from last week's summit in Paris has lots of nice rhetoric and some good ideas, but no resources to implement them. In some cases, new priorities duplicate other efforts; in others, the ministers overlooked policy options that would have a big impact and cost little – or even save money – as with increased trade access or ending export restrictions and biofuel subsidies.
For example, take the proposed new Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) “to improve the quality, reliability, accuracy, timeliness and comparability of data on agricultural markets (production, consumption and stocks);” who could disagree with that? But the UN Food and Agricultural Organization already collates and publishes much of the available data (as well as regularly reporting on the outlook for food and individual commodity markets), and USAID’s Famine Early Warning System Network (FEWSNET) reports on a wide range of conditions that could lead to famine. So is the need really for a new system to do pretty much the same thing or is the need for resources to help developing countries build the capacity to improve local data collection that can then be fed into the FAO system?
GAFSP. That’s Global Agriculture and Food Security Program, the fund at the World Bank to which several countries and the Gates Foundation have pledged contributions.
G-A-F-S-P…..sounds like Gaspy.
That’s the question the Chicago Council on Global Affairs is asking and they are inviting you to weigh in by answering a brief survey here.