Feeding hunger and insecurity

More documents

Recommendations

Info

5. The global response to high food prices: what is being done?Monitoring ProgressThe CFA falls largely silent on how the response willbe monitored, advocating for an internal monitoringsystem drawing on the multitude of systems alreadyin place to track malnutrition and food security.Three issues arise (1 and 2 are discussed furtherin section 6):The need for appropriate indicators. Improvedagricultural production, access to markets,trade liberalisation, access to food are all vitalto resolve the global food security crisis, butif the CFA is to focus on vulnerable groups,nutrition must become the principle outcomeindicator of policy success or failure.The need to improve and connect existingmonitoring to the decision-making process.The need for an external monitoring system toensure actors deliver on their promises. HungerAlliance and other bodies see a substantialrole for NGOs in providing the link between theglobal framework and implementation at thelocal level.Effective monitoring will guarantee neither compliance,nor success, but is essential if we are tomake real progress in alleviating this form of poverty.Concrete commitments are required, and thelack of political will remains the greatest impedimentto the eradication of hunger.Participation and OwnershipCompliments must first be given to the HLTF fortheir efforts to make the design of the CFA an inclusiveprocess. However, the CFA will only besuccessful if it ensures an inclusive platform foraccountability, ‘ownership’ and participation at alllevels of planning, implementation and monitoring.To date, policy debate surrounding the CFA hasbeen remarkably lateral, dictated by the UN agenciesand IFIs without significant influence from affectedcountries. In fact, many governments areyet to endorse the Framework. A major pillar ofthe CFA is the push for greater support for smallscalefarmers, though the voice of smallholders isnoticeably absent from the deliberation process.The question remains: will the international communityendorse and establish an enforceable rightto food?The CFA aims to be the catalyst for action byproviding governments, international and regionalagencies and organisations, and civilsociety groups a menu of policies and actionsfrom which to draw appropriate responses.(HLTF 2008:vii)Action Against Hunger remains sceptical, butopen. The CFA provides a high quality, holisticapproach to high and volatile global food prices,outlining what is needed to address both shortand long-term needs. However, a number of ambiguitieswithin the document and the lack of clearleadership and support threaten to undermine theopportunity to effectively tackle malnutrition andfood insecurity in an environment where politicalsupport is waning as the financial crisis continuesto put strain on the economies of donor countries.Hunger must be kept on the agenda; it must begiven priority.5.1.2 The Global Partnership onAgriculture and Food SecurityFirst suggested by France and the UK at the RomeSummit in June 2008, and endorsed by the G8 amonth later, the Global Partnership on Agricultureand Food Security (GPAFS) remains conceptual –a partnership bringing together developing countrygovernments, multilaterals, universities, researchinstitutes, non-governmental organisations, farmers’organisations, civil society organisations, privatefoundations, the private sector and other institutionsto tackle global food security as a unit(FAO/CFS 2008). More will, hopefully, be knownabout the form the GPAFS will take after the highlevelmeeting on “Food Security for All”, in Madrid,scheduled for late January (sometimes referred toas the Madrid Meeting). As it stands, the GlobalPartnership represents a new architecture to com-38ACF International NetworkFeeding Hunger and Insecurity
5. The global response to high food prices: what is being done?bat hunger and food insecurity, whose first missionwill be to ensure global food security remains aglobal political priority. The expected roles of theGPAFS will be to:for mutual accountability between donors andtheir partners. It is vital that decisions made bythe new body are needs-driven and not donordriven.encourage effective coordination of differentactorstackle emerging global policyreform international institutions, where neededensure developing countries fully supportinterventions and approachesThe ambiguity surrounding the potential focus,structure and methods of the Global Partnershipmakes it hard to assess the possible impact of theinstitution. In this regard, Action Against Hungerhas mainly questions. At what level will the GPAFSbe focused; will it be a national or a global tool foraddressing food insecurity and malnutrition? Whowill provide leadership? What will be the relationshipbetween the Partnership and the CFA? Morespecifically, will the former endorse the latter? Willthe GPAFS last? Will it achieve real results?Action Against Hunger, Save the Children, Concern,Care International and Tearfund (2008) articulated,in a joint statement, four critical elementsneeded to form the Global Partnership.The GPAFS must prioritise malnutrition alongsidefood security and agriculture as did theCFA, specifying explicit nutrition objectives.While food security and malnutrition are linked,ensuring access to adequate quality of foodswill not prevent malnutrition, and specificallymicronutrient deficiencies.Donors must commit the additional fundsneeded to allow the GPAFS to function fullyand effectively. To date, funding has been relativelyshort of the estimates provided by theCFA and shorter of the calculations producedby Action Against Hunger.The GPAFS should be guided by the ParisDeclaration on Aid Effectiveness and striveCivil society must have an audible voice withinthe Partnership. Current proposals fail to acknowledgethe crucial role civil society (globallyand nationally) can play in providing a voiceof those in need and improving independencefrom donors and governments alike. Ultimately,the legitimacy of the GPAFS will depend onthe meaningful inclusion of the various actorswithin civil society.Lawrence Haddad, Director of the Institute of DevelopmentStudies, is quoted by the InternationalDevelopment Committee (2008:38), saying “[w]hilethere are exceptions, very few truly joint initiativesmanage to transcend the institutional fights for resourcesand media limelight.” Action Against Hungersupports the pursuit of greater coordination ofaid, but asserts that there is a real need for strong,singular leadership and sustained, committed politicalsupport in the fight against food insecurity andhunger. This applies both to the CFA and GPAFS.The Madrid Meeting will shed some light here, butit is difficult to see how another global ‘partnership’will be able to meet needs with desired results in arespectable timeframe.5.1.3 The United NationsFour agencies within the vast United Nations networkare pertinent to the current debate. The WorldFood Programme was first to react to rising foodprices. FAO and IFAD gained increasing recognitionas major players in the future of global foodsecurity. Finally, UNICEF has established itself,over the years, as champions for the treatment ofchild malnutrition – a vulnerable group that is notcatered for by general food aid.The World Food ProgrammeThe World Food Programme (WFP) has taken aleading role in the campaign against rising foodACF International Network Feeding Hunger and Insecurity 39
Page 3: Feeding Hunger and InsecurityField
Page 6 and 7: Executive SummaryKey MessagesThe cr
Page 8: executive summarybuffers and greate
Page 11 and 12: List of FiguresFigure 1.1Figure 1.2
Page 13 and 14: List of AbbreviationsACFCARCFACFSCR
Page 15 and 16: © ACF / S. Hauenstein Swan1. Intro
Page 17 and 18: 1. IntroductionFigure 1.2: Map depi
Page 19 and 20: © ACF / S. Hauenstein Swan2. What
Page 21 and 22: 2. what caused the global food pric
Page 23 and 24: 2. what caused the global food pric
Page 25: © Julien Goldstein3. Households in
Page 28: 3. households in crisis: who loses?
Page 31 and 32: 3. households in crisis: who loses?
Page 33: 3. households in crisis: who loses?
Page 36 and 37: 3. households in crisis: who loses?
Page 38 and 39: 4. The Hunger Crisis:4. What Happen
Page 40 and 41: 4. the hunger crisis: what happens
Page 50 and 51: 5. the global response to high Food
Page 54 and 55: 5. The global response to high food
Page 66 and 67: 6. What More is Needed?The global f
Page 68 and 69: 6. what more is needed?non-food nee
Page 70 and 71: 6. what more is needed?Box 7: Hunge
Page 72 and 73: 6. what more is needed?Box 8: Malaw
Page 74 and 75: 6. what more is needed?Table 6.3: T
Page 76 and 77: 6. what more is needed?and local in
Page 78 and 79: 7. ConclusionData from Ethiopia sho
Page 80 and 81: ReferencesAbebe, Y., Stoecker B.J.,
Page 82 and 83: Referencesable at: http://www.iht.c
Page 84 and 85: AnnexesAnnex 1: Real international
Page 86 and 87: annexesAnnex 5: Percentage househol
Page 88 and 89: annexesAnnex 7: Harriss’ typology
Page 90 and 91: A HUNGER WATCH PUBLICATIONhunger Wa
Page 92: ACF INTERNATIONAL NETWORKSiège d

Feeding hunger and insecurity

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?