1 .. ABSTRACT
2. INTRODUCTION
4 CHAPTER 1
Food security.
Improving Food Security for World Food Prize
Food Assistance
Nutrition Assistance Programs Provided by the FNS:
Programs Improve Measures of Food Insecurity
5 CHAPTER 2
PREVENTING MALNUTRITION..
U.S. Policy in Food and Nutrition
The Roadmap to End Global Hunger
Create a White House Office on Global Hunger
Resurrect the Congressional Select Committee on Hunger
Specific Recommendations and Funding Targets
The Roadmap Becomes Legislation
The Way Forward
Emphasis on Nutrition
Humanitarian Assistance
Development Assistance
6 Innovative and future technology - Usman Y. musa CHAPTER 3
Food Insecurity..
Climate Change and Food Security
U.S. Department of State Effort on Food Security
The State Departments strategy has 7 seven pillars:
Support research and development of agricultural technologies and expand access to knowledge and training.
The U.S. Experience to potentially address the problem of hunger elsewhere.
Nutrition Assistance
Experience of China and India
New Technologies
Coordinating U.S. Global Health Initiatives
Political Will
The Role of Food Aid
7 CHAPTER 4
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY.
Chinas Agricultural Productivity Imperative
Urbanization to Promote Agricultural Productivity
China Ramps Up Peri-Urban Farming for Beijing Consumers
The China-Brazil Connection
8 CHAPTER 5
CROPS AND FOOD DIVERSITY.
Ensuring Food Security
Adapting to Climate Change
Reducing environmental degradation
Protecting Nutritional Security
Reducing Poverty
Ensuring Sustainable Agriculture
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Target
9 CHAPTER 6
CROPS AND FOOD DIVERSITY.
Climate change and the future of crop diversity
10 CHAPTER 7
RURAL INVESTMENT
SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION
sustainable food production
Environmental impact of food production
Actions to make food production more sustainable
Use natural resources efficiently
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to help maintain air quality.
Protect marine resources
Procure food ingredients from sustainable sources
Use environmentally efficient food packaging
Food technologies securing our future food supply
Printing food Customized to the consumer
New breeding techniques: Improved crops feed more mouths
Regulations the new food production processes
The final verdict
11 CHAPTER 8
TRADE AND FOOD COMMODITY MARKET.
The Agricultural Commodities Market..
Understanding Agricultural Commodities
What Influences Agricultural Commodities Prices
How Are Agricultural Products Traded?
Agricultural commodities are staple crops and animals produced or raised on farms or plantations.
Oils seeds
Dairy products
12 CHAPTER 9
Sustaining Urban Food Systems
Food production
Scope and Criteria
Resilience to climate change and productivity
Food Production:
Food Distribution
Food Safety and Nutrition:
International Food Security:
13 CHAPTER 10
Usage of renewable energy
The reliability, security, and resilience of the energy system underpin virtually every sector of the U.S. economy. Power outages can initiate cascading impacts across other critical sectors, potentially affecting our economic and national security..
Risks to energy security.
Equipment and infrastructure used in the production.
Energy Delivery.
Climate change and energy
14 CHAPTER 11
Biodiversity and genetic diversity of seeds and domesticated animals..
Climate effects
15 CHAPTER 12
New potential sources of revenue for smallholders.
Changing conditions.
Earlier spring run off
Lower peak run off
Decreased stream flow in late summer
Warmer stream temperatures
Increased evapo transpiration promotes snowmelt, increases surface evaporation of reservoirs, and stresses crops
Increased noxious weed pressure
Potential for longer and more intense wildfire seasons
16 CHAPTER 13
Healthy crops
Stressors and impacts
Crops cape.
Useful tools for a changing climate
17 CHAPTER 14
Dependency on arable land and weather patterns..
Building Food Resilience.
Land-Based Transportation
Flooding.
Higher temperatures..
18 CHAPTER 15
Investment in rural infrastructure, research and technology..
Recognizing and addressing vulnerabilities..
Building strategically.
Additional benefits in the near term
Investing in Rural Infrastructure.
19 CHAPTER 16
investment in plant and livestock gene bank
The value of crop improvement
Combating degradation, land erosion and displacements..
Two greatest environmental concerns
Fragile ecosystems
Infrastructure linkage
20 CHAPTER 17
Narrative
Innovative, leap-frogging, and affordable technological advancement use
Agriculture
Healthcare..
Can Leapfrogging Clear the Biggest Hurdles?
21 CHAPTER 18
Massive cultural and knowledge changing
22 CHAPTER 19
Improving sustainable local economic growth.
What is Sustainable Development?
Favoring the least developed human settlements..
In industrialized countries, the consumption patterns of cities are severely stressing the global ecosystem, while settlements in the.
PROGRAMME AREAS
A. Providing adequate shelter for all
Objective
Means of implementation..
Improving human settlement management
Improving urban management..
Improving the level of infrastructure and service provision in poorer urban areas..
Strengthening urban data systems
Improve the urban environment by promoting social
organization and environmental awareness through the participation of
local communities in the identification of public services needs.
Financing and cost evaluation.
Human resource development and capacity-building
Promoting sustainable land-use planning and management
Scientific and technological means..
Human resource development and capacity-building.
Strengthen existing programmes and promote an international.
Promoting the integrated provision of environmental infrastructure: water, sanitation, drainage and solid-waste management
Governments to respond adequately.
Adopt policies that minimize if not altogether avoid
23 CHAPTER 20
Preparing and disseminating international guidelines for adaptation to national and local needs...
Human resource development and capacity-building..
Promoting sustainable construction industry activities.
Financing and cost evaluation..
24 CHAPTER 21
Vast positive impact on human life quality and areas.
Novelty, practicality, and replicability..
Replicating Studies
Replicating Effects..
Reproducing Results..
25 CHAPTER 22
Improving the ecological footprint.
26 CHAPTER 23
ZERO HUNGER TO REDUCE POVERTY..
Focus on the special needs of Africa
IMPROVE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY AND ENHANCE LIVELIHOODS AND FOOD SECURITY IN POOR RURAL COMMUNITIES.
DEVELOP AND CONSERVE NATURAL RESOURCES
EXPAND RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE (INCLUDING CAPACITY FOR FOOD SAFETY, PLANT AND ANIMAL HEALTH) AND BROADEN MARKET ACCESS
STRENGTHEN CAPACITY FOR KNOWLEDGE GENERATION AND DISSEMINATION (RESEARCH, EXTENSION, EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION).
investments in building staff capacities and in improving facilities and equipment, estimated to cost about US$350 million annually.
ENSURE ACCESS TO FOOD FOR THE MOST NEEDY THROUGH SAFETY NETS AND OTHER DIRECT ASSISTANCE.
MAKING THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE ENVIRONMENT CONDUCIVE TO POVERTY AND HUNGER REDUCTION.
MAKING THE DOMESTIC POLICY ENVIRONMENT CONDUCIVE TO POVERTY AND HUNGER REDUCTION.
POLICIES FOR PRIORITY AREAS OF THE ANTI-HUNGER PROGRAMME.
URBAN HUNGER
ACTION AGAINST HUNGER'S WORK IN NIGERIA
End global hunger
Common causes of hunger
Where in the world is hunger the worst?
Solution.
Conclusion.
References
ABSTRACT
This Project is identifies urbanization issues affecting food system sustainability. Since the nineteenth century and the onset of industrialization, cities have been both the product and motor of food systems, which are expanding worldwide despite the impression that they are non sustainable. Since both the problems and resources are concentrated in cities, the latter are also a source of innovation, which can in turn help enhance the sustainability of food systems.
Smart integration of technology can help create sustainable urban food ecosystems (UFEs) for the rapidly expanding urban population in the developing world. Technology, especially recent advances in digital-enabled devices based on internet connectivity, are essential for building UFEs at a time when food production is increasingly limited on a global scale by the availability of land, water, and energy. By 2050, two-thirds of the world will be urbanand most of the net world population growth will occur in urban regions in the developing world. A food crisis is looming, with the developing world ill-prepared to sustainably feed itself. We identify 12 innovative technology platforms to advance the UFEs of the developing world: (1) connectivityinformation delivery and digital technology platforms; (2) urbanized services; (3) precision agriculture (GPS, IoTInternet of things, AIartificial intelligence, sensing technology); (4) CEAcontrolled environment agriculture, including vertical farms; (5) block chain for greater transparency, food safety, and identification; (6) solar and wind power connected to micro grids; (7) high-quality, enhanced seeds for greater yield, nutrition, climate, and pest resistance; (8) advanced genetics, including gene editing, synthetic biology, and cloud biology; (9) biotechnology, including micro biome editing, soil biological, cultured meat, alternative proteins to meat and dairy; (10) nanotechnology and advanced materials; (11) 3-D printing/additive manufacturing; and (12) integration of new tech to scale-up underutilized, existing technologies. The new tech-enabled UFEs, linked to value-chains, will create entrepreneurial opportunitiesand more efficiently use resources and people to connect the nexus of food, water, energy, and nutrition.
Introduction
The urban population tends to be out of touch with agricultural production, and the city food culture increasingly moves towards fast food, processed foods, distributed by large centralized supermarket chains that are not rooted in the life of city neighborhoods. Many consumers, especially, those with low incomes, eat too little fruit and vegetables because of the cost but also because it is not part of their culture and habits.
Millions live with hunger and malnourishment because they simply cannot afford to buy enough food, cannot afford nutritious foods or cannot afford the farming supplies they need to grow enough good food of their own. Hunger can be viewed as a dimension of extreme poverty. It is often called the most severe and critical manifestation of poverty.
Rural households are the most heavily burdened by the consequences of poverty and hunger. In addition to causing hunger, poverty limits a rural communitys ability to invest in its own development.
In a world of abundant wealth and resources, where enough food is produced to feed everyone on the planet, it is unacceptable that hundreds of millions of people suffer from hunger. Right now, poverty, conflict, and climate change are contributing to hunger and suffering around the world. And in four countries South Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, and northeastern Nigeria 20 million people are facing severe food insecurity and looming famine.
Today, more than 50% of the world population lives in cities and by 2050, urban centres will gather more than 80%. Meanwhile, per capita calorie consumption in the EU27 exceeds daily requirements by 36% since the early 1990s.
The current food system cannot meet this growing food demand of cities sustainably. It results in significant environmental impacts, but also social inequity in terms of access to balanced and affordable nutritious food in cities.
The network will focus on:
GROWING fruit and vegetable in the city, in gardens, in parks, on rooftops, on balconies, on derelict lands etc., safeguarding & improving fertility of lands;
DELIVERING food stuffs in a more sustainable and less carbon intensive way;
ENJOYING more sustainable food (local products, without pesticides, seasonal and fresh products, etc.) while improving diets (reducing the share of animal protein and processed foods), using products that meet environmental and sustainability criteria (certification), and preventing waste (food and its packaging).
This transition will involve changes in perceptions, attitudes and finally behaviors.
We are strongly motivated both by the topic addressed by our network and the unique URBACT framework that enables cities to learn from each other and truly improve their policies.
Furthermore, the poorest urban households spend 6080% of their income on food (Reardon, 2016). A food crisis is looming, exacerbated in coming decades by the impact of climate change, bulging youth populations, large migrations from rural areas to citiesand inadequate infrastructure, education, and economic opportunities.
CHAPTER 1
Food security
821 million people just over one in nine are malnourished, as reported by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Advancing sustainable, agricultural-led growth increases the availability of food, keeps food affordable, and raises the incomes of the poor. AGP works together with the Office of Global Food Security and the United States Agency for International Developments (USAID) to advance Feed the Future (FTF), the U.S. governments global hunger and food security initiative, to combat acute food insecurity and the G-7 New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, a partnership among G-7 and African governments, and the private sector.
AGRICULTURAL FOOD SECURITY
Improving Food Security for World Food Prize
The World Food Prize recognizes individuals who have advanced human development by improving the quality, quantity, or availability of food in the world. Each year more than 4,000 institutions and organizations are invited to nominate candidates for the prize. The World Food Prize Laureate Announcement Ceremony is held in June at the Department of State where the president of the World Food Prize Foundation announces that years winner of the World Food Prize, a Nobel equivalent. The official award is presented at a ceremony at the Iowa State Capitol in Des Moines, Iowa, every October in conjunction with the Norman E. Borlaug International Symposium.
Food Assistance
The office played a leading role negotiating the 2013 Food Assistance Convention (FAC), which replaced the 1999 Food Aid Convention. The new convention expands the traditional focus of previous Food Aid Conventions and now includes all forms of food assistance that will protect and improve access to food for those most in need. The FAC also includes a new commitment structure, a broader toolbox of eligible activities and food assistance products, as well as a commitment to improved transparency and accountability. The objectives of the Food Assistance Convention are to prevent starvation, reduce hunger, improve food security, and improve nutrition by:
Addressing the food and nutritional needs of the most vulnerable populations through coordinating food assistance;
Ensuring that food assistance is timely, effective, efficient, and based on local need; and
According to the United Nations' Committee on World Food Security, Food security is defined as "the condition in which all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life" (4)
According to the Economic Research Service (ERS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), a reported 11.8% of US households (15 million households or 40 million people) were food insecure at some time during 2017. This can be further broken down into households that have low food security and households that have very low food security. Among households with children, 15.7% of households with children have low food security with 7.7% of the children being food insecure (7).
Food insecurity can have detrimental impacts on both the physical and mental well-being of a person, especially a child. Food insecurity for a child can lead to "increased hospitalizations, poor health, iron deficiency, developmental risk and behavior problems, primarily aggression, anxiety, depression, and attention deficit disorder " (1). These complications can then lead to poor academic performance, subsequent health disparities and poverty in the child's future. In order to curb these problems, there are policies and programs made by the government in an attempt to curb these food insecurities.
The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) under the USDA is a federal agency that focuses on giving nutritional aid to people that are suffering from food insecurity. The FNS provides service to 1 in 5 Americans (6), and currently has 15 domestic nutrition assistance programs, that are listed below. However, I will only delve into one or two programs.
Nutrition Assistance Programs Provided by the FNS (5):
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
National School Lunch Program (NSLP)
School Breakfast Program (SBP)
Special Milk Program (SMP)
Summer Food Service Program (SFSP)
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)
Farmers Market Nutrition Program/ Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP)/(SFMNP)
Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACSFP)
Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP)
Temporary Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP)
-Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR)
Food Assistance for Disaster Relief (FADR)
Nutrition Assistance Block Grants
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP)
One of the most well known food assistance programs is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or more commonly known as SNAP. It was previously known as the Food Stamp Program, and it provides assistance for low- and no-income people in the United States. A person of low income must apply to their residential state to determine if they are eligible for SNAP. If they are found eligible, they will receive an Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) card where they will receive monthly payments that can be used to buy food from participating stores (FNS). In 2017, the average SNAP benefit received by a recipient was around $126 per month, to sustain the cost of $1.40 per meal per person (2).
The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) was established after the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act was passed in 1946. This program provides low-cost or free lunches to eligible students in public and nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions (FNS). According to FNS, over 30.4 million children participated in the NSLP. The schools that provide free or reduced lunch are reimbursed for each meal served. Children can be eligible for the NSLP if their household participates in certain Federal Assistance Programs like SNAP. They can also be eligible if their household income meets well below the poverty line (11).
Programs Improve Measures of Food Insecurity?
A study conducted by the USDA in 2013 observed the impact of SNAP benefits in households after six months of receiving the assistance. The study concluded that "Participating for 6 months was associated with a decrease in food insecurity of about 5 to 10 percentage points. SNAP was associated with lower percentages of households that were food insecure, that experienced very low food security, and in which children were food insecure" (10). The graph in the background shows both a cross-sectional and longitudinal study of both food insecure and very food insecure households at the beginning of receiving assistance and six months after. Both low and very low food secure households decreased in food insecurity within six months of receiving benefits, indicating that this program does, in fact, help improve food insecurity.
While SNAP helps many families curb food security, there are some families that are above the required poverty line that makes them eligible for SNAP but still have a low enough income that makes them still food insecure (2). Families that are stuck in this gray area may be unable to receive any financial help from any government programs since most of them are based on eligibility. In addition, some families that do receive SNAP may not receive enough benefit to fully get them out of being food insecure. So, yes, the SNAP program does help improve food insecurity overall in a national scope, but domestically among every household, SNAP may barely help.
A summary report of a study conducted by the USDA stated that programs like the NSLP were associated with lower food insecurity and that "Studies also found that child nutrition programs improved diet quality and academic performance for children in low-income and food-insecure households" (8). However, other studies show that that is not the case. A 2012 study conducted by students at Texas A&M University found that individual participation in NSLP had no statistically significant effect on children's food security (3). The study did admit that the data may not fully represent the full contribution of the NSLP as the data was gathered from a days worth of participation. This study was also conducted in 2012, compared to the USDA's summary that was reported in 2017, so the impact of NSLP on child food security may have improved. Regardless, it would make logical sense that the NSLP would partially aid in household food security as it relieves the parents of worrying about what their child has to eat during the school day, so I would conclude that the NSLP somewhat helps improve food insecurity.
The image in the background shows the statistics from the Southern Education Foundation that concluded that around half of the student population in every state, more so in southern states, is eligible for free or reduced lunch. With children being the forefront of our future, it is imperative to make sure that each child is getting enough to eat to maintain focus during school. And although well over half of the students in every state are eligible for free or reduced lunch, that may not mean that over half of the student population have free or reduced lunch. Many undocumented immigrant families avoid applying for free and reduced lunch in fear that they may be exposed as undocumented and be deported or separated from their families (5). Since undocumented families usually have low paying jobs or jobs that pay under the table to avoid the government, it is usually these families that require the most help when it comes to food insecurity, but cannot receive help from these government programs without risking themselves as undocumented. So again, yes, this program does help improve food insecurity on a national scope, but when compared on a local scope, it may not help every family that needs assistance.
There are many programs and policies that have been implemented by the government in order to curb the food insecurity that is prevalent in America. While we only covered two of the fifteen programs offered by the Food and Nutrition Services, we can see that some programs are a lot more effective than others, but all the programs do aid in food security to some degree. Some programs directly help with food insecurity by providing money for families to use for groceries (SNAP) or by providing fresh free foods (CSFP). Other programs helped indirectly, mostly targeting students, by giving students free or reduced lunches or breakfasts (NSLB, SBO, SMP) so that parents have less of a burden when it comes to providing both themselves and their children with three meals a day.
While these food security programs help many families and improve national food insecurity, they do not help improve food insecurity for families that do not fit the criteria of what the USDA would consider as food insecure. Some families are stuck in a gray area where their income is just above the line for eligibility for assistance, but still low enough that they cannot afford food for their whole family. There are also many undocumented families that immigrated to America that are unable to receive welfare benefits since they are not citizens or want to avoid receiving benefits from the government in fear that they will be deported, especially with the increasing anti-immigration sentiment that has been happening. So, while these policies do help improve national food insecurity, they only help the families that fall within the strict criteria that the USDA has set, while other families that fall short of these criterion may still struggle with bringing food to the table.
reports from 2018, which shows that American households have finally returned to food security levels experienced prior to the economic downturn beginning in late 2007. It also shows that federal food assistance programs relieve food insecurity for most participating households.
The USDA Economic Research Service annually analyses survey data collected from roughly 37,300 households across the US on questions related to adequate food access, or what is termed household food security. The Household Food Security report shows that 11.1 percent of households were food insecure in 2018, meaning they did not have access to an adequate and healthy diet at some point during the year. This was a decline from a high of 14.9 percent in 2011 and the same level reported in 2007.
The share of households that have very low food security also declined in 2018 to 4.3 percent, well below the 5.7 percent of households with very low food security in 2008. Very low food insecurity means that a household reduced their food intake due to a lack of resources at some point during the year, such as skipping or reducing the size of meals. Fortunately, only 0.6 percent of households with children experienced very low food security in 2018, with authors of the report explaining that children are usually shielded from the disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake that characterize very low food security.
We typically think of households with very low food security as reflecting hunger, but the two concepts are not necessarily the same. And it is revealing to hone in on the conditions experienced by these households. According to the report:
In the 2018 survey, households classified as having very low food security (representing an estimated 5.6 million households nationwide) reported the following specific conditions:
98% reported having worried that their food would run out before they got money to buy more.
97% reported that the food they bought just did not last and they did not have money to get more.
96% reported that they could not afford to eat balanced meals.
97% reported that an adult had cut the size of meals or skipped meals because there was not enough money for food; 90% reported that this had occurred in 3 or more months.
94% reported that they had eaten less than they felt they should because there was not enough money for food.
69% reported that they had been hungry but did not eat because they could not afford enough food.
47% reported having lost weight because they did not have enough money for food.
32% reported that an adult did not eat for a whole day because there was not enough money for food; 25% reported that this had occurred in 3 or more months.
The report also noted that When households experience very low food security in the United States, the resulting instances of reduced food intake and disrupted eating patterns are usually occasional or episodic, but not usually constant.
Federal safety net programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the National School Lunch Program, are designed to help relieve these more severe food disruptions. The report reveals that the majority of SNAP households and recipients of free or reduced-price school lunches were food secure while receiving benefits. Among households that received SNAP in the 30 days prior to taking the survey, 86.9 percent did not experience very low food security and among those receiving free or reduced-price school meals, 92 percent did not experience very low food insecurity.
This means that SNAP and the National School Lunch Program relieves food insecurity for most participating households. But these data also highlight the importance of a strong economy. Data trends show that when the economy is strong, household food security rises even as fewer households participate in food assistance programs due to increases in employment and earnings.
CHAPTER 2
PREVENTING MALNUTRITION
Good nutrition is the bedrock of child survival and child development. Well-nourished children are better able to grow and learn, to participate in their communities, and to be resilient in the face of disease or disaster.
Every day, nearly 7,500 children under age 5 die from malnutrition. And for millions of children, chronic malnutrition will result in stunting an irreversible condition that literally stunts their physical and mental growth.
The first 1,000 days from the start of a womans pregnancy to a childs second birthday offer a window of opportunity for preventing under nutrition and its consequences. UNICEF targets this period with support for breastfeeding, nutrition-rich foods for infants and micronutrient supplements.
By focusing on these first 1,000 days, UNICEF has helped cut the number of children badly affected by stunting by nearly 100 million since 1990.
UNICEF purchases between 75 and 80 percent of the world's supply of Ready-To-Use Therapeutic Food, a "miracle" treatment formulated to bring children who are suffering from severe acute malnutrition back from the brink. UNICEF works with manufacturers to increase supplies of the product and keep prices down. And thanks to the UNICEF Kid Power movement, UNICEF is reaching even more kids in need.
U.S. Policy in Food and Nutrition
The U.S. government can play an important role in the fight to end global hunger, and there is a renewed sense of political will to address these issues. This chapter covers what is being done to reorient U.S. policy in food and nutrition from the perspectives of the Roadmap to End Global Hunger, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Chicago Initiative on Global Development. As described by moderator Jackie Judd of the Kaiser Family Foundation, the following presenters discussed what the U.S. government can and should do to help avoid future food crises and mitigate the negative nutritional effects of those that cannot be avoided.
THE ROADMAP TO END GLOBAL HUNGER
James McGovern, B.A., M.P.A.
U.S. House of Representatives
Although these are interesting and challenging times, the issue of ending hunger must take on a renewed sense of importance and urgency. The United Nations estimates that the number of hungry people in the world is over 1 billion (FAO, 2009). A statistic of this magnitude is difficult to comprehend. The number is so huge that some may lose the human ability to feel itor some may be overwhelmed and choose to ignore the crisis. The fact is this: there are some issues that cannot be solved in this lifetime, but ending hunger is not one of them. Ending hunger can be achieved with political will. This presentation addresses the Roadmap to End Global Hunger. It will discuss how an idea was born, how it turned into the report titled The Roadmap to End Global Hunger, and how the recommendations of that report have been translated into legislation, spearheaded by Jo Ann Emerson and James McGovern.
Background
In May 2008, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report that described why donor nations, including the United States, were failing in their efforts to help sub-Saharan African nations meet the first Millennium Development Goal of cutting hunger in half by 2015. The authors of this report, Tom Melito and Phil Thomas, briefed the co chairs of the House Hunger Caucus about the report and its findings. One of the central issues that was raised was the lack of coordination and the lack of any clear strategy about how the United States would make an effective contribution to reducing the incidence of hunger and malnutrition in sub-Saharan Africa, or work with those nations on how to create longer-term food security.
This led the House Hunger Caucus to begin discussions about the need for a specially appointed coordinator or office or a Hunger Czarto oversee a comprehensive, government-wide strategy to address global hunger and food security. This person would be responsible for helping to coordinate the often very uncoordinated food security programs on the ground. The global food crisis of 2008 put into sharp relief how many programs the United States has on food aid, nutrition, and food security and how they are spread over a variety of federal departments, agencies, and jurisdictions. The same problem exists on Capitol Hill, with global food security programs under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Foreign Affairs, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, to name just the principal committees.
This led Jo Ann Emerson and James McGovern to lead a crusade for a comprehensive government-wide strategy and for a coordinator on global hunger and food security. The day after he was elected President in 2008, a bipartisan letter was sent to Barack Obama from 116 members of Congress, calling for a comprehensive government-wide strategy and the appointment of a White House coordinator of such a strategy. In addition, meetings were held with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as well as members of the Obama transition teams for the Department of State, USAID, and USDA, to discuss the importance of a comprehensive, government-wide strategy that would maximize efforts to reduce global hunger and promote nutrition and long-term food security.
In spring 2008, a diverse group of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) began talking about drafting a blueprint for the next administration on how U.S. programs and policies could more effectively and successfully address global hunger, nutrition, and food security. The NGOs had their own jurisdictional problems, with some focusing mainly on emergency and humanitarian relief operations, while others were engaged in agricultural development, women and children, health and hygiene interventions, research and development, or market development; the list of their various issue, field, and regional expertise goes on and on. After months of discussion, this broad-based coalition found consensus. As a result, in February 2009 the findings and recommendations were released and presented in a reportThe Roadmap to End Global Hunger.
The Roadmap to End Global Hunger
The Roadmap is noteworthy for being simple, straightforward, and brief. It recommends that U.S. government actions to alleviate global hunger and promote food security be the following:
ComprehensiveIt must involve a government-wide effort and integrate all programs.
Balanced and flexibleU.S. actions must carefully balance and meet emergency needs, longer-term investments in agriculture, and safety nets for the most vulnerable, especially during this global food and financial crisis.
Sustainable U.S. actions need to increase the capacity of people and governments to ultimately feed and care for themselves, reduce the impact of hunger-related shocks (whether they are natural or man-made), and be environmentally sustainable and responsive to the new challenges of climate change.
AccountableThe comprehensive strategy and individual programs need clear targets, benchmarks, and indicators of success. Monitoring and evaluation systems to measure and improve programs need to be developed and implemented.
Multilateral Not only should the United States contribute its fair share to the multilateral efforts to address global hunger, nutrition, and food security, but its strategy should also strengthen the multilateral effort and provide international leadership.
The Roadmap recommends four basic actions to alleviate hunger and promote food security.
Create a White House Office on Global Hunger
To lead the efforts of this office, the President would appoint a global hunger coordinator. Concretely, the purpose of the office and the coordinator is to create a permanent entity to pull all related federal agencies together and design and carry out a comprehensive government-wide strategy. Equally important, this position holds the backing of the President and ensures accountability that assignments are carried out, determines what is and is not working, what can be improved, and what needs to be eliminatedwithout regard to turf, budget, or other individual agency interests.
Resurrect the Congressional Select Committee on Hunger
This would allow one central committeeand the Roadmap proposes it be bicameralto focus on issues of hunger, nutrition, and food security.
Required Components of a Comprehensive Strategy to Alleviate World Hunger
The components of a comprehensive federal strategy to alleviate world hunger and promote food security require, first, a well-managed emergency response capability. Second, a comprehensive strategy must include safety nets, social protection, and the reduction of the risk of disaster. Two types of nutrition programs are required: one that focuses on mothers and children, emphasizing comprehensive nutrition before the age of 2; the other incorporates nutrition across the board in all food security programs. Finally, market-based agriculture and the infrastructure necessary for its development must be in place. In all of these areas, the Roadmap proposes a special emphasis on and sensitivity to the centrality of women in securing sustainable food security, increased agricultural development and productivity, and the reduction of malnutrition, undernutrition, and hunger.
Specific Recommendations and Funding Targets
The Roadmap provides specific recommendations and funding targets across a number of accounts in order to measure whether the administration and its agencies are on track to meet these critical global requirements.
The Roadmap Becomes Legislation
House Resolution 2817, the Roadmap to End Global Hunger and Promote Food Security Act of 2009, was introduced on June 11, 2009. The legislation references the total increased investment of $50.36 billion called for over 5 years, fiscal year (FY) 2010 through FY 2014, for agricultural development, nutrition (including maternal and child programs and for other vulnerable populations), school feeding programs, productive safety net programs, emergency response, research and development, and technical assistance programs. In addition, under this bill, the first increase in agricultural development funding for FY 2010 was targeted at $750 millionand President Obama exceeded that and asked for $1 billion.
The Way Forward
President Obama has designated Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to coordinate a government-wide approach to create, design, and implement a comprehensive U.S. strategy on global hunger, nutrition, agriculture development, and food security. This has been implemented and has been reflected in the Presidents FY 2010 budget, and the Presidents announcements at both the G20 meeting in London and the G8 Summit in Italy. The Roadmap recommendations and the NGOs that make up the Roadmap Coalition have played a critical role in supporting the U.S. coordinated effort.
A number of organizations and voices all pushing in the same direction for similar priorities, such as the Partnership to End Hunger and Poverty in Africa, are important contributors to the Roadmap. The majority of resources will be invested in the areas of greatest need, including Africa and South Asia; however, a number of regions where nations are on the verge of breakthroughs should be included as well. For example, Guatemala and Brazil are carrying out Zero Hunger campaigns, including a special emphasis on ending child hunger. With their leadership, there is a hemisphere-wide initiative to end hunger in the Americas. The United States should be included in this effort and should find ways to support it and contribute to its success.
Emphasis on Nutrition
In June 2009 at the World Food Prize meeting, Secretary Clinton highlighted the seven principles for a food security strategy. The strategy was worrisome because it did not include nutrition. This was different from the comprehensive message presented by Secretary Clinton in a briefing received in April 2009. In addition, nutrition once again failed to have a central role in the announcement at the G8 on agricultural development and global food security.
The emphasis must be made to focus on the under-two population, and the staffing, resources, funds, and coordination must be mobilized for this priority. At the same time, nutrition should be more fully incorporated and emphasized in all anti hunger and food security programs. All children need nutritious food, so programs for vulnerable children should fully integrate nutrition into their policies, programs, and projects. Nutritious meals need to be provided to school-age children, and nutrition education must be provided to the children, teachers, parents, and communities served by those schools. Nutrition education should be promoted for pregnant women, in addition to all families and communities that are beneficiaries or touched by such programs. Emergency operations should emphasize nutrition, especially for children of all ages, and use foods that meet the special nutritional and developmental needs of children.
As part of a comprehensive vision, nutrition and food security programs need to integrate the necessary global health interventions into their projects, including deworming, immunizations, vitamin A supplements, and micronutrient fortification, as well as clean water, hygiene, waste management, and even watershed management. That is a comprehensive approach. That is a government-wide approach. That is the Roadmap.
USAIDS RESPONSE TO THE FOOD CRISIS AND PREVENTING MALNUTRITION FOR THE FUTURE
Michael Zeilinger, M.D., M.P.H.,
Chief of Nutrition Division, Bureau for Global Health
U.S. Agency for International Development
USAID defines food security as existing when all people at all times have both physical and economic access to sufficient food to meet their dietary needs for a productive and healthy life. There are three main components to food security by USAIDs definition availability, access, and use and they are each interrelated with the others. Any of these three by itself does not achieve food security. The determinants of food security vary from country to country, region to region, and community to community, but USAID and the U.S. government must strive to achieve food security by addressing the problem comprehensively. Food availability is defined as including sufficient quantities of food from household production, other domestic output, commercial imports, or food assistance. Food access includes adequate resources to obtain appropriate foods for a nutritious diet. This depends on income available to the household, the distribution of income within the household, and the price of food. Food use, or consumption, includes the proper biological use of food, requiring a diet providing sufficient energy and essential nutrients, potable water, and adequate sanitation, as well as knowledge within the household of food storage and processing techniques, basic principles of nutrition, and proper child care and illness management. This presentation will focus on food use or consumption.
Humanitarian Assistance
The global food price crisis began in 2007, and prices peaked in the middle of 2008. In response to the increase and the needs resulting from this crisis, the U.S. Congress provided $1.825 billion to USAID under the Presidents food security response initiative. This was in addition to existing funds allocated for humanitarian assistance. With these additional funds, USAID focused mostly on addressing the emergency needs of countries that were most affected by the price increase and provided them with humanitarian assistance. The majority of these supplemental funds were used to provide increased emergency food assistance to such countries as Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Ethiopia. USAID also funded local and regional purchases to complement Title II resources, and it addressed the immediate impact of rising commodity prices on U.S. emergency food aid programs.
In addition, with the geographic focus in Africa, USAID began to implement longer-term programs that addressed the underlying causes of food security. These programs created diversified household assets, improved economic opportunities for the most vulnerable, preserved livelihood access, increased agricultural productivity, promoted seed quality, supported improved management of acute malnutrition and water and sanitation programs, and reduced the risk of disaster through planning and management and improved irrigation techniques.
Development Assistance
In addition to the humanitarian response, $200 million in development assistance was made available by Congress to focus on increasing agricultural productivity in two key regions, East and West Africa. In West Africa, this money was provided to increase agricultural productivity of staple foods, stimulate the supply response, and expand trade of staple foods. In East Africa, the money strengthened the staple food markets to support local and regional procurement. Finally, funding was also provided to the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) to disseminate off-the-shelf technologies in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.
CHAPTER 3
Food Insecurity
In 2008, there was a crisis when food prices increased drastically, but for most of the countries in which USAID works, food insecurity was already a major problem. It remains a major problem with a higher level of poverty and malnutrition than existed just 2 years ago. The United States has primarily responded to global hunger through humanitarian assistance. While this is essential for reducing the suffering of those devastated by humanitarian disasters, the underlying causes of chronic food insecurity need to be addressed, and food insecurity needs to be eradicated through comprehensive programs that address all three pillars of food securityavailability, access, and use (consumption).
How does food insecurity happen?
Climate Change and Food Security
The earth has warmed over the past 100 years by almost 1ºC. By now it is no longer contentious to assert that this is anthropogenic.1 The atmospheres carbon dioxide concentration has increased by one-third since 1750, predominantly due to the burning of fossil fuel, but also because of deforestation. More importantly, the rate of increase is somewhere between 100 and 1,000 times faster than the rates observed historically.
How will climate change affect the crops that feed the world? The average temperature in Europe in the summer of 2003 was 3.6ºC higher than average, although rainfall was normal. That summer, between 30,000 and 50,000 people died from heat-related causes, a statistic that received much attention. But the effect on crops received little notice: Italy saw a 36 percent decrease in maize yield, while France experienced a 30 percent reduction in maize and fodder yields, a 25 percent decrease in fruit harvests, and a 21 percent reduction in wheat yields. Summer temperatures this high will become more frequent in the coming decades, and by mid-century, such record high temperatures are likely to be the norm. Familiar crops do not survive well at these temperatures, and even a brief period of very high temperatures at the critical time of flowering and pollination can devastate a crop. Temperature also influences how fast a plant develops and reaches maturity. Higher temperatures speed plants through their developmental phases. Annual crops like corn, wheat, and rice set seed just once and then stop producing. As temperature increases from the crops optimum, the growing period is shorter. Both the shortening of the growing period and the decrease in photosynthetic efficiency at higher temperatures reduce yields.
Irrigation can be used to cool crops at critical times, however many countries are already unsustainably over pumping aquifers. These include three of the big gest grain producersChina, India, and the United States. More than half the worlds people live in countries where water tables are falling.
The primary options to address these issues include more efficient agriculture, particularly with respect to water use; intensive crop breeding; modern molecular genetic modification for both drought and heat tolerance, as well as insect and disease resistance; and development of new crops. Some of this can be done immediately; some will require research and changes in public opinion.
Overall, investments in agricultural development have declined. Historically, rural poverty decreased and agricultural productivity increased with (1) better education, (2) new technologies, and (3) investment. It is essential that the recent trend toward providing food aid at the expense of investing in agricultural research and development be reversed.
Unfortunately, many well-meaning people around the world today believe that genetically modified crops are dangerous. What this means for the present is that modern science cannot be used to improve crops in many countries, including most of Africa. Although the U.S. regulatory apparatus is not completely prohibitive, it is dauntingly complex and so expensive that public-sector researchers have largely turned away from molecular crop improvement. Progress needs to be made in moving toward a regulatory framework that is based on actual risks and real scientific evidence, not hypothetical risks and popular fears.
U.S. Department of State Effort on Food Security
Secretary Clinton sees food security as one of the areas in which the State Department can make a difference. An interagency committee has been working to lay out a vision, goals, and strategy. The vision is straightforwardthe United States envisions a world in which all people have reliable access to safe, nutritious, and affordable food. The goals are familiar and very much in line with the Millennium Development Goals. The goals are to:
Halve the proportion of young children who are undernourished;
Halve the proportion of people who suffer from hunger;
Halve the proportion of women and men living on less than $1.25 a day; and
Build sustainable agriculture systems that create jobs, increase incomes, and raise agricultural productivity without harming the environment.
The State Departments strategy has 7 seven pillars:
1.
Increase farm and farmer productivity.
2.
Stimulate pos tharvest private-sector growth.
3.
Enable private-sector investment and development.
4.
Increase trade flows.
5.
Support women and families in agriculture.
6.
Use natural resources sustainably.
7.
Support research and development of agricultural technologies and expand access to knowledge and training.
The substance of the first pillar is expanding access to land, seeds, fertilizer, and irrigation, with an emphasis on womens access, as well as expanding extension services, training and credit, and working with social entrepreneurs. The second is about transportation networks, storage facilities, and food processing, as well as local procurement, transport, and distribution of emergency food aid. The third is about creating private-sector markets, streamlining business regulations, addressing land tenure, and supporting the development of local organizations to increase participation in decision making. The fourth pillar of the strategy is about developing regional markets, lowering trade barriers, helping to develop food safety standards, improving market information and communications systems, and improving access to finance for agricultural trade and agribusiness development. The fifth is adapting services and training to the needs of women, increasing their access to credit, financial services, education, and land ownership, as well as improving child nutrition through school feeding programs. The sixth is about promoting sustainable agricultural practices and adapting agriculture to climate change. The seventh is about increasing support for the CGIAR; facilitating public-private partnerships, as well as collaborative partnerships between U.S. universities and universities in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and Latin America; and creating a competitive award fund to support research.
The overall strategy relies on the development of country-led plans that bring all stakeholders to the table, as well as the coordination of multilateral support through the UN High-Level Task Force on Food Security. At present, the State Department policy group is engaging with other agencies to develop a whole-of-government approach.
USDAS RESPONSE TO THE CRISES AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
Rajiv Shah, Under Secretary and Chief Scientist
U.S. Department of Agriculture
This presentation discusses lessons learned from the U.S. experience and what that means as the country goes forward to try to integrate agriculture with nutrition. Although this is not the first time the global community has come together to try to significantly reduce hunger and poverty in an agriculture-focused manner, it is perhaps the best chance to succeed.
Background
An estimated 1.1 billion people live on $1 a day, and a large portion of that population is dependent on agriculture for its basic economic opportunities and its basic access to foods (The World Bank, 2009). Agriculture is a central component of global extreme poverty. It is not the entire solution to all poverty, but it is simply the largest slice of the most extreme poverty.
A number of people in the world suffer from hunger, which is defined as not having enough basic calories to meet energy needs in a very basic and subsistent manner. A few years ago, this was estimated at 840 million (FAO, 2006), and in 2008 it increased to 960 million (FAO, 2008). It is now reported that there are more than 1 billion hungry people in the world (FAO, 2009). This is a number that is very difficult to comprehend. In addition, 10 million children die each year because they have poor nutrition that makes them prone to diarrheal and infectious diseases that they do not have the physical capacity to survive (Black et al., 2003). These are complex and interrelated problems.
The U.S. Experience to potentially address the problem of hunger elsewhere.
The U.S. experience offers a template for how to potentially address the problem of hunger elsewhere. A long time ago, the United States was a largely agrarian society that struggled to provide enough food to meet the needs of its population. The country was hyper dependent on and responsive to the rain-fed agriculture that was variable, challenging, and difficult. The land-grant university system was developed by Abraham Lincoln in the 1860s, and it started to systematically invest in agricultural research. Coupled with that system, an extension service was created, which today is the most dramatic way to deliver information to farmers that has ever been created. It is the largest adult education program in the country. Basic extension services are the primary means for developing public-sector electronic content that reaches farm communities and rural communities through the e-extension service. Today, 4-H programs are able to reach more children than any other structured program in the federal governmentabout 6 million children participate in 4-H programs each year.
The coupling of research and extension helped increase U.S. productivity. In addition to these, a third critical component is the developing of structured markets. In the United States, markets have existed and improved over time because of the phytosanitary2 standards that allow commodities to be traded and that allow people to understand what buyers are buying and what sellers are selling. Systems have been in place to ensure the protection of the food supply and our food safety. Such basic market mechanisms often do not exist in the countries that face the biggest burden of hunger.
Nutrition Assistance
The largest percentage of the USDA budget is committed to nutrition assistance programs. Such programs target children, vulnerable populations, and communities that would not otherwise have access to basic food items and would have to spend a very high percentage of their disposable income acquiring food. The United States has a low-cost food supply in which only 11 percent of the average Americans disposable income is spent on food. In the countries with the most vulnerable populations, approximately 7080 percent of total disposable income is spent on acquiring food. In that environment, when food prices increase, it presents difficult challenges to some very vulnerable populations. The nutrition assistance component of having a robust, active, and self-sustaining agriculture system is an important component that is often overlooked.
Experience of China and India
Lessons can be learned from other countries, including China and India. Over the past few decades, both countries have pursued effective agricultural development strategies and have significantly increased their agricultural productivity through the Green Revolution and crop varieties, along with a range of other policy interventions. China has been far more successful at translating those agricultural productivity gains into reductions in the rates of malnutrition; India has been far less successful. In India, there was less investment in lagging regionsthose parts of the country that did not experience the increases in productivity and incomeand were essentially left behind as a result. In addition, India lacked infrastructure in nutrition support for rural communities. Even today, a disjointed system exists where there are significant and persistent rates of rural malnutrition and rural poverty, despite having a significant growth rate that created a modern middle class in India. These experiences can provide lessons as new food security strategies are implemented in a range of countries. It will be important to couple nutrition-oriented efforts with agriculture programs in order to maximize their impact.
New Technologies
Research and science can offer unique contributions to the intersection of agriculture and nutrition. Several technologies exist that can improve basic human nutrition in a targeted way for children and women. The first is bio fortification. This approach takes the staple foods that some of the poorest populations depend on and enhances them with the micronutrients that women and children need, like vitamin A, zinc, and folic acid.
One example is the orange-fleshed sweet potato. A joint project between the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Harvest Plus bred higher amounts of beta carotene into sweet potato varieties in parts of Africa. This project caused a lot of debate and concerns about whether it would actually make a difference in childrens health. Data now demonstrate that introducing a sweeter, orange-fleshed product into the daily food supply has doubled the serum retinol3 in vitamin Adeficient children in northern Mozambique and northern Uganda. The initiative was successful because the product tastes good and children like it. A great deal of investment in agricultural technology development or agricultural foods and productivity has not taken into account the preferences of the people. For bio fortification initiatives to be successful, it is important to allow farmers to taste different varieties that are created, and then target efforts on those traits the people want most. This type of research is important and must target the customers. For example, if the customers are malnourished children under 5 years, see what they like, and use that feedback to inform the research.
Another example of a scientific contribution is vegetable breeding. A number of programs are focused on breeding improved varieties of vegetables, while also making sure they are pest and disease resistant. Such research systems exist in the United States and are a reason that the United States is the world leader in agriculture. People in lower-income countries suffering from food insecurity need the same types of research systems to protect their own ability to produce food, particularly vegetables, because they help achieve dietary diversity and improve micronutrient sufficiency in families.
The third area of technological promise concerns livestock. As families incomes grow from $2 a day to $10 a day, some of the first luxury items that are brought into the market basket of goods they consume are meat products and dairy productsand thus higher levels of protein. Yet there has been very little effective investment in dairy productivity, livestock improvement, genetic improvement for animals, or pasteurization technologies that would allow smallholder farmers (who dont have access to large chilling plants or other types of energy systems) to protect their product from spoiling in order to sell it into a more formal market. These technologies are being developed and need to reach small farmers through food security initiatives.
Coordinating U.S. Global Health Initiatives
A number of U.S. initiatives that currently exist could naturally be blended, such as food and nutrition programs with HIV/AIDS programs. It was noted that the administration is working to integrate the various agencies and programs into one comprehensive plan. A wide variety of issues are part of a worldwide global health initiative; however, food and agricultural issues do not attract the same interest as a number of other issues. For example, AIDS and malaria initiatives get much support worldwide, especially when compared to the international hunger effort, whose political resonance is not nearly as developed or as widespread. It is positive to note that governments, NGOs, and foundations are beginning to take hold of this issue and develop the political will to make these issues an important part of global development efforts.
Political Will
Sustaining political will is an important element to defeating global hunger and under nutrition. How can this be sustained in an environment in which so many important issues are on the table? Policy makers are faced with a multitude of simultaneous issues, so the key is to find leaders who are willing to sustain the effort and articulate the problems in a way people can understand. For example, in the area of food assistance, the public does recognize the moral and humanitarian aspect, which has helped gain support for food aid. However, agricultural assistance has fallen off the map and needs to be restored. People have become disengaged with trying to help people help themselves in the world of agriculture. It was noted that because food security is now on the Presidents agenda, support is growing because people realize that food and economic issues affect everyonenot just the NGO and university communities, but the American private sector and corporate world as well.
The Role of Food Aid
The view was expressed that the United States should not lead its fight against global hunger with food aid (although food aid should not be decreased and more flexibility should be allowed for local purchase of food). Food aid becomes more important in emergency situations when there is no other food available for purchase, or where buying food in the market would greatly disrupt the market and increase prices in others areas. In the United States, there are some important constituencies involved in food aid, including commodity groups and shippers, that make reform of food aid challenging.
U.S. Leadership in coordinating the number of organizations that work in the nutrition landscape was discussed.
The role of the United States as a leader in coordinating the number of organizations that work in the nutrition landscape was discussed. It was noted that a coordination role is more important than a commanding role. It is important for the United States to listen to what works in other countries and help guide sustainable food security solutions according to the local context.
It was noted that in the field, although there are competing interests, there is actually much more synergy among various agencies and groups than is seen in Washington, DC. Typically, the countries with the worst hunger and development indicators actually have more synergy within the U.S. overseas missions. In these situations, those on the ground see what needs to be done and are able to put aside their differences to improve the dire situation in that country.
Chapter 4 to chapter 23 and pictures of this project it contains confidential documents.
Kindly contact
Usman Yahaya Musa
About this project at
Usmanmrky@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment