Exchange to Change Sept 2017 20170911 E2C zomer web | Page 9

INTERVIEW
doubly tied, to American farm products,
and to international transport by ships
under an American flag. This leads to
huge inefficiencies. US tied food aid is
one-third to one-half more expensive than
untied food aid that is bought in or near
the country of destination. It also takes
on average three months longer for tied
food aid to arrive at destination, a key
issue in dealing with humanitarian crises,
where timeliness is sometimes a matter
of life or death. Finally, the content of food
packages is also a matter of concern, as
American food products may be unsuited
to the very different climatic and cultural
context in which they are dispensed. their families, but also the economy at
large. Conversely, when malnutrition is
not addressed, there are lasting adverse
consequences on the length and quality
of life, with wider social and economic
repercussions. There is also a perverse
interaction between conflict and food
insecurity. Conflict often causes food
insecurity, just as food insecurity may
trigger unrest over land and food that
easily spreads into broader conflict and
political instability. One can also expect an
effect on international migration. A recent
WFP cross-country study concluded that
a 1% increase in food insecurity increases
migration by 1.9%.
KJK: The government of South Sudan
formally declared famine, but a
combination of factors such as bad
governance eventually resulted in a
disorganized nation and food insecurity.
Civil society cannot speak up because they
are not in a free state where information
flows freely and laws are respected. They
are not speaking out in a well-organized
and coordinated way because they fear
lives would be in danger. International
donors are doing all they can to release
the funding for humanitarian projects, but
the country’s needs have overwhelmed
the resources provided. KJK: The long term results of this will be a
completely destroyed economy in which
getting a daily meal, especially for the
common man, will be a nightmare. This
will lead to more groups coming up in
resistance. Corruption and nepotism will
increase in the public as well as private
sector when it comes to employment
and the division of the national cake.
The only export that can make the
country progress, oil, will not happen
as the conditions would not permit it.
The agricultural sector will be in a bad
condition as well. Due to economic
crises, raping and anti-social behaviours
might increase and there will be a
general deterioration of health. All these
challenges will lead to displacements both
internally and externally as we already see
today. Due to fear of possible destruction
even after peace has come, most might
prefer to live in exile and little or no
investments will be made in South Sudan.
E2C: What could be the (most
important/likely) long term
consequences of this food crisis? (e.g.
refugees, economic growth, conflict,
health…)
LDA: South Sudanese people face a threat
to their lives as the conflict and food crisis
continues. They have been pushed to the
brink; women and children are the most
affected. Humanitarian assistance alone
can accomplish very little in the absence
of meaningful peace and security, both
for aid-workers and the crisis-affected
communities.
RR: Avoiding malnutrition has been shown
to have very high economic and social
returns for the individuals helped and
E2C: Is there any other relevant (but
overlooked) aspect or important lesson
that you want to highlight?
KJK: Politicians and people from the
military with bad interests have exploited
young people to protect themselves and
prefer them to remain in darkness instead
of encouraging them to return to schools
and vocational centres. Women and
girls are also among the most affected,
9
although they do not participate in any
way in the creation of the conflict. They
become widows, fall victim to gender
based violence, have the burden of taking
care of their families alone as the men are
either displaced in war or killed. Despite
the fact that women, girls and young
people are heavily affected by the crisis,
they are often overlooked and neglected
during peace negotiations.
LDA: The scale of the crisis has
overwhelmed the humanitarian
community. Donors must work in a
harmonized and synchronized manner to
warrant that national and international
NGOs are receiving adequate and
continued funding to respond to the
very urgent needs. Moreover, donors
should provide funding for long-term and
development activities including resilience
and recovery. In other words, there should
be funding that creates a linkage between
short term lifesaving and recovery as
well as longer term development so
that linking relief, rehabilitation and
development (LRRD) is made possible.
RR: The World Food Programme, for
instance, aims to deliver one third of its
support through cash-based transfers.
This is positive, but I would argue that this
share must go up. The problem will be the
US. There have been efforts under the
Bush and Obama administrations to
soften the tying of food aid, but the
lobbies of farmers, the shipping industry
and American NGOs have so far effectively
resisted major changes. Under the present
Trump administration it is unlikely that
much progress will be made. But the
better use of food aid instruments by aid
agencies – more cash, less food-in-kind –
is maybe somewhat too narrow a lesson
to draw. Any serious analysis of the
underlying causes will conclude that food
crises cannot be properly addressed from
a technocratic food assistance perspective
only. That is an equally important lesson
to draw when devising a strategy to fight
future large-scale food crises.
E xchange to change S eptember 2017