tional donors provided food for more than 90 million people in
more than 80 countries.34 But food aid is, at best, a palliative,
and the increase in food prices highlights the shortcomings of
relying solely on food aid to reduce global hunger. Long-term
food security depends on increasing the supply of food and raising the earning potential of poor people. Broad-based growth
in agriculture and the rural economy is crucial. Increasing development assistance for agricultural development is necessary
to this end.
More development assistance by itself won’t suffice. For donor resources to be effective, developing countries themselves
have to provide supportive policies and the bulk of the extra
investments. But developed countries can support agricultural
development in a number of ways: working with farmers, especially smallholder farmers, to provide the resources they need
to improve their yields; promoting good governance; providing
technical assistance and advice on how to strengthen institutions and accountability; and supporting research and development to improve agricultural productivity in the longer term.
Developed countries should also reduce trade barriers and
subsidies for their own agriculture. Donor governments and
financial institutions need to step back and encourage developing country governments to determine their own policies,
rather than requiring them to adhere to agendas determined in
Washington or other foreign capitals. They should not promote
their own policies or technology interventions over others that
may be better suited to local conditions. Governments and civil
society in developing countries will need to work out their own
options based on what will work for them.
The ultimate test of aid effectiveness is how much it contributes to the goal of ending global hunger and poverty. In the
case of the Green Revolution and agricultural development
more broadly, the test results are in: foreign aid in combination
with domestic political backing and supportive policies saved
the lives of millions of people and launched many countries on
the path to sustained poverty reduction and economic growth.
Certainly, we know enough about the benefits of investing in
agricultural productivity to make a powerful case for increased
donor support.
6
Ibid.
7 Bathrick, David (October 1998), Fostering Global Well-Being: A New Paradigm to
Revitalize Agricultural and Rural Development, International Food Policy Research
Institute.
8
Timmer, Op. Cit.
9
World Bank, Op. Cit.
10
Ibid.
11
NEPAD PowerPoint presentation, Accelerating CAADP Implementation in
Rwanda; PowerPoint Presentation.
12
United Nations (2007), World Economic and Social Survey.
13
Timmer.
14
Alexandra Spieldoch (2007), A Row to Hoe: The Gender Impact of Trade
Liberalization on Our Food System, Agricultural Markets, and Women’s Human Rights,
International Gender and Trade Network.
15
World Bank.
16
World Bank Independent Evaluation Group (2007), World Bank Assistance to
Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa.
17
Ibid. Countries include Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African
Republic, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria,
Tanzania, Uganda.
18 The commitment has been made under CAADP (the Comprehensive Africa
Agriculture Development Program), an initiative of the New Partnership for
African Development (NEPAD).
19
Data available from the NASFAM website: www.nasfam.org/
20
Martin Ravallion (Jan. 2008), Lessons for Africa, World Bank Dev. Research
Group.
21
Ibid.
22
Nhan Dan (February 16, 20 08), “Vietnam leads Way in Tackling Poverty,
Says WB,”: http://www.nhandan.com.vn/english/life/160208/life_v.htm
23 President Jakaya Kikwete, remarks at CGD symposium “Power and Roads
in Africa: A Tanzanian Perspective,” December 14, 2007.
24 U.K. Development Minister Sriti Vadera speech to mark the launch of the
World Bank’s “Doing Business Report,” October 12, 2008.
25
Timmer.
26
Von Braun, Joachim, M.S. Swaminathan and Mark W. Rosegrant (2004),
Agriculture, Food Security, Nutrition and the Millennium Development Goals,
International Food Policy Research Institute.
27
Timmer.
28
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Op. Cit.
29
OECD/DAC, Statistical Annex of the 2007 Development Co-operation
Report, December 2007
30
WDR, pp 41-42. While this decline was common to bilateral as well as
multilateral aid, the decline in the latter was more pronounced.
31
Endnotes
1
A package of economic policies pushed by the donor community during
the 1980s and 1990s as a condition for financial support involving, inter alia,
fiscal discipline, trade liberalization, privatization, competitive exchange
rates, tax reform and generally reduced government regulation and role in
the economy.
Sanders, Edmund and Tracy Wilkerson (April 1, 2008), “U.N. food Aid
Costlier as Need Soars,” Los Angeles Times.
32 International Food Policy Research Institute (August 2003), How Much Does
2
It Hurt? The Impact of Agricultural Trade Policies on Developing Countries.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (April 11, 2008),
“Poorest Countries Cereal Bill Continues to Soar, Government Tries to Limit
Impact,” FAO Newsroom.
3 The 862 million reflects the number of undernourished people in 2002-2004.
http://www.fao.org/faostat/foodsecurity/Files/NumberUndernourishment_
en.xls.
4
Timmer, Peter (2005), Agriculture and Pro-poor Growth: An Asian Perspective;
Center for Global Development.
5
World Bank (2007), Agriculture for Development: World Development Report for
2008.
www.bread.org
33
Currently, only about 4 percent of the USAID budget is available for
unencumbered use to promote the largely microeconomic reforms that
can speed economic growth in poor countries. Another 20 percent or so
is available for promoting economic growth in a particular sector or for a
particular country or region. For all donors, aid directed at agriculture and
economic growth (including economic support infrastructure) amounted to
19 percent of the total. (OECD DAC 2005 statistical annex)
34
United Nations World Food Program (2007), 2006 Food Aid Flows.
Bread for the World Institute 7