Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
World Food Program Issues 'Emergency Appeal' For Funds
ROME -- With food and fuel prices soaring, the United Nations agency charged with feeding the world's hungry has launched an "extraordinary emergency appeal" to cover costs and avoid having to cut aid, a senior official said Monday.
The World Food Program called on donor nations for urgent help in closing a funding gap of more than $500 million by May 1. If money doesn't arrive by then, Executive Director Josette Sheeran said in a letter to donors, the WFP may be forced to cut food rations "for those who rely on the world to stand by them during times of abject need."
The poorest face hunger as people around the world are being "priced out of the food market," Sheeran told reporters Monday in a conference call.
Citing food prices that had ballooned 55% since June, the WFP disclosed a $500-million shortfall Feb. 25, and the gap has continued to grow ever since, Sheeran said.
WFP officials declined to put a figure on the current shortfall, saying it was a moving target, but experts estimated it in the range of $650 million.
The Rome-based WFP feeds at least 73 million people in nearly 80 nations with an annual operating budget of $2.9 billion.
"We've never quite had a situation where aggressive rises in food prices keep pricing operations out of our reach," Sheeran said.
The WFP has issued emergency appeals in the past for natural disasters or wars, but never for a market-generated crisis, she said.
Letters to donors containing the new appeal for an "emergency allocation" were dated March 20 and sent over the weekend. Copies were made available to journalists.
Although the WFP has been sounding an alarm for a couple of months, the appeal to the donors made the warning a stark reality.
In the letter, Sheeran noted that the WFP had attempted to reduce its costs by turning to local and regional markets to buy up to 80% of the food it disburses, a share that grew by 30% over the previous year.
"This not only saves on food and transport costs but is a win for local farmers, helping to break the cycle of hunger at its root," she wrote. "But even with our mitigation efforts, the cost of our food purchases has risen 55% since June 2007" and an additional 20% since Feb. 25. "Such increases show no sign of abating any time soon."
In addition to being hit by spiraling costs of grains and other staples, WFP operations have been hurt by record-high fuel prices and other transport costs.
Food commodities are becoming more expensive because of rising demand in developing countries, natural disasters and climate change, and the shift of millions of tons of grains to the production of biofuels.
The United States is the largest single contributor to the WFP, accounting for about 40% of the agency's food and money donations, followed by the European Union. U.S. officials have already warned that it is likely they will be cutting donations to global humanitarian organizations because of higher costs.
Sheeran said that the people at greatest risk are those who live on $1 a day or less, but that officials are also bracing for what the U.N. is calling the "new face of hunger." These are people who may have access to food but can no longer afford to buy it.
The shortfall does not take into account the anticipated swelling in the number of people in need. Eventually, if prices continue their ascent, the WFP crisis will grow even more critical.
Thus far, only one nation, Afghanistan, has made a formal request for additional assistance.
President Hamid Karzai in January asked the WFP to help feed an additional 2.5 million people.
Numerous countries, however, have inquired, Sheeran said.
"We have yet to speak to any country that does not have concerns," she said.
2008 The Los Angeles Times



37 Comments so far
Show Allbut my cat is caudated.............
BUGSBBUNNY
nah, i'm digited.........
Thanks for sharing the word 4thefuture. Blessings.
Hey coco... I made it to 680! After a couple of tries...lol...(ya think a wabbit would've known caudate meant with a tail... lol).
How truly amazing... useful fun.
What an elegant idea some good soul came up with. A little bit of fun equalling a little bit of food. It costs me nothing but nevertheless I was able to donate at least a cup of rice (lol...I said it took a couple of tries to beat coco!)
Such a simple thing... and I was directly responsible for feeding someone today... and tomorrow... I wonder if coco is caudated?
A tiny mercy...every day. Times that by thousands or even tens of thousands playing once a day and pretty soon you are talking real food here.
Thank you kindly 4thefuture.
This isn't going to get any better. Oil prices are what is pushing the price of grains up along with global warming causing crop damage. As the first world increasingly feels the pain of bad policy at home there will be less of a willingness to support problems in the third world.
Malthus, unfourtunately, had his math right even if his proposed solutions were abhorent.
ezeflyer,
you wrote - "How about a referendum on letting each person decide what their taxes will fund?"
I wrote - "Careful what you wish for. You might want to look into who is paying most of the taxes."
Do you want the money that the very rich pay to be directed by their wishes? This is not about percents - its about dollars. I agree that the tax code is screwed up, but my point is not that the the rich are paying their share, just that their taxes account for a lot of what the government gets. I am personnaly for a federal sales tax that collects on consumption. However, anything can be corrupted.
$2.9bn annual budget for feeding 73mn people works out to roughly $40 a [year] per person.
How do they pull off such a magical feat? Buying in large, huge volume, sure, and obviously; but does this alone provide the really whole explanation?
And that $40 a year per person covers for the transportation cost, so the costs of fuel and drivers, and I expect also pilots. So it's not like buying $40 worth of food from local production and when you buy by going to the farm so that you're not paying for transport workers.
Amazing.
As for the USA should make up for the whole or a good part of the $500mn shortfall, which someone further above said should be done, I was instead thinking that this'd be trivial for the rich-pig philanthropists of this world to make up for; so easily that it would not even take up anywhere near half of all of the interest they make on their riches in a year.
After all, the U.S. govt is like totally BANKRUPT; it has NO real money. It's dependency on China is quasi-total.
And because of that, I figure that before the U.S. govt gives a lot of money for aid to people in need, the top priority should be the Iraqi refugees, all 4mn+ of them, and Afghans; besides many other victims of direct and next-to-direct US crimes against humanity. If the U.S. govt is going to place many future generations of U.S. citizens in debt, then it may as well be for helping the victims of US crimes.
The rest of the world could easily make up for the $500mn+, and it'd be a "drop in the bucket" for philanthropists. Bill Gates alone wouldn't notice giving up this relatively little, trivial amount of money from his many, many $billions. And he's far from sole to to be majorly rich philanthropist; many or most of whom are richer than many countries are.
And then I saw the post by Mr Obvious:
" Mr. Obvious March 25th, 2008 12:11 pm
Why all the US bashing? The article says "The United States is the largest single contributor to the WFP, accounting for about 40% of the agency's food and money donations." ..."
For once we agree, and that wraps up what I have to say in this post.
Maybe we could build McDonald's in these places where people are hungry.
Or Wendy's. Or just cut the body-fat off my waddling fat fellow American's, use it for feritilizer and grow food w/ it. Feed someone really hungry.
Maybe we could build McDonald's in these places where people are hungry.
Or Wendy's. Or just cut the body-fat off my waddling fat fellow American's, use it for feritilizer and grow food w/ it. Feed someone really hungry.
Empathy comes from relating to the experience, and most American's denigrate the rest of the world while they stuff themselves and wave their flags.
Not much chance they will care.
BUGSBUNNY AND 4THEFUTURE.
ooooooohh i'm hooked on the freerice..........it's really great. i've just donated 4000 grains and up to level 42. what a fantastic way to help the hungry.....................
You want to do something with that Stimulus Package/bribery check from Bush?
Send it to this organization.
The Bush Administration has a free market ideology that resists any type of aid. The market fundamentalists of the Bush Administration don't support aid programs or government services in Iraq because they want the market to solve the problems. However, what type of free market are they supporting when they use the military to steal the resources of other countries?
It is heartening to finally see food relief agencies putting emphasis on buying food locally. Like the article says it is a win for local farmers. They will no longer be undercut by imports, will not have to deal with imported GM foods the people do not want, and they can grow foods that are culturally acceptable to their people. Via Campesina, the international peasant farmer movement calls this "Food Sovereignty", and it would do the UN and other relief agencies well to learn and embrace the concept.
Food aid should not be a way for agribusiness corporations to take control of a needy nations food system as it has been in the past. Nations suffering from famine are not incapable of feeding themselves, they are prevented from doing so by weather, crop failure, civil war, or corrupt governments that use local agriculture to pay off World Bank loans or fill their own bank accounts. The world should respond with help in times of need, but creating food dependence helps only corporate agribusiness.
Helping local farmers recover form natural disasters will indeed help "break the cycle of poverty at its root"
Great comment by willybill.
I agree with mountaineer. It would be interesting to see how much of this bribery (I mean refund) check will be spent on cigarettes and beer.
Or send that bribery check to an Iraqi refugee program. As a retiree, I only get $300 and will not invest it in this country...that's for damn sure!
Willybills proposal is fine.
But, subtracting the rebate, I still gave over $10,000 in various US fedral taxes (I'm counting FICA and medicare) in 2007.
Wouldn't it be nice to imagine the day when our government practiced "tithing" and sent just a tenth of this amount to international UN ans NGO based humanitarian causes - with no imperialist strings attached.
Give local. Grow a community garden with your rebate check. We all should grow our own food. Otherwise we to will be standing in a line.
Just saw an article in the morning paper about the soaring price of fertilizers and what that will mean for US farmers. The blame for the high price is on the weak dollar and the increased demand from places like China. Perhaps more of us will turn to growing our own food and purchasing it locally.
Why all the US bashing? The article says "The United States is the largest single contributor to the WFP, accounting for about 40% of the agency's food and money donations." It would seem like if food is available locally, then the local governments could figure out how to distribute it fairly. If the local suppliers are behaving unfairly, then why should we buy their goods and reward this behavior?
I like willybill's suggestion, too.
"Sharing is divine. When you share, you recognize God in your brother."
- Maitreya
"The only thing that can remove poverty is to share."
- Mother Theresa
Please spend a few minutes of your time at www.freerice.com where every correct word means a donation of 20 grains of rice. I try to do it a few times a week. It's easy and you learn some new words.
4THEFUTURE
what a great idea freerice is. i've just donated 600 grains of rice in a few minutes. i hope they really do donate it................
Willybill, thank you for your excellent suggestions.
In the Episcopal (Anglican) church where I grew up in, we were taught that it is more blessed to give than it is to receive. I believe it. When I share with others, I feel better than if I hoard it for myself. It's just natural.
How about a referendum on letting each person decide what their taxes will fund?
ezeflyer - Careful what you wish for. You might want to look into who is paying most of the taxes.
Recycle1 March 25th, 2008 12:06 pm
"Just saw an article in the morning paper about the soaring price of fertilizers and what that will mean for US farmers."
Google EM
Effective Microorganisms are supposed to have the potential to do away with chemical fertilizers.
The picture accompanying the article is heartbreaking, isn't it? Puts a lot of my personal concerns into perspective.
Terran - Want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge?
What is so sad is that I see people living in $500,000 dollar houses who have run out of oil because they cannot afford to buy it.
Who is running the world economy, that so many people are without?
I think it is greed by a few corporations.
Let the corporations send the checks.
evelyna - Sorry, I do not feel for the people living in half million dollar houses that cannot afford oil. My wife and I can afford to live in a $500,000 dollar house if we borrowed what we could, but choose to live in an $45,000 house. If you gamble, then you can lose. Sorry, but I don't want to bail these folks out. They are gluttanous and reap what they sow.
Working in the schools, whenever I have a classroom with computers and students with free time, I encourage the students go to freerice.com and spend some time improving their vocabulary and donating some rice.
Once again, that "Stimulus Package/bribery check/hush money" could REALLY be put to good use...a local charity....the World Food Program or even to help an Iraqi or Afghan refugee. Also, a great way to piss off TPTB who expect the money to go to Wally World or Exxon Mobil. Do your soul a favor and make the commitment ...I have.
Interesting. 2.9 billion $ annual operating budget to feed 73 million people. I assumes that means food support for that period on the basis of need through the year for the stated number of people.
The amount is about the same as required by the US admin to fund the pursuance of the war in Iraq for one month. That's obscene.
MO42
'puts a lot of my personal concerns into perspective' and until people like you realize what it means to scavange for a few grains, this world will not progress.
AAGIT8T
i just learned about freerice.com. from another c.d. poster. it's a great concept and an educational way to help others struggling to find food. why this should be the case is beyond me. i cannot comprehend why people are starving in this world. it defies logic. why can't we share? why are we so mean? why are we so misanthropic? and now the wfp are in dire straits.
who is going to help these hapless hungry people?
RICHSMITH2
'that's obscene'
it's more than obscene.....there hasn't been a word yet invented to describe it.
Mr. Obvious said:
"ezeflyer - Careful what you wish for. You might want to look into who is paying most of the taxes."
I checked. I hope you will too:
Who Really Pays Taxes in America?
Taxes and Politics in 2004
By Cheryl Woodard, Executive Director of AskQuestions.org
Edited by Christy Harrison
Posted April 15, 2004
Download the PDF of this article
Fifteen years ago, socialite Leona Helmsley bragged, "only the little people pay taxes," but then she went to jail for tax fraud. Unfortunately, Helmsley's statement is even more accurate today than it was at the time.
Tax fraud is estimated at $311 billion this year, more than the entire budget for Medicare, and more than last year's revenues at Walmart or General Electric. Most cheaters go unpunished. What's worse, the legal tax system is rigged to favor rich people and large corporations at the expense of ordinary citizens and small businesses. Even when everybody abides by the law, middle-income households pay more taxes than rich ones. And politicians keep handing out tax favors to their campaign contributors – at our expense.
A chorus of academics, journalists, and private citizens are warning that a tax system favoring the rich fuels the growing concentration of wealth in America – and therefore threatens our economic growth and even our democracy.
Middle class spending is the growth engine in a free market economy, and when taxes rob the middle class in favor of the rich, the economy shuts down. Huge fortunes also produce political power that is hard to control. That's why all modern democracies use their tax laws to prevent excessive concentration of wealth. And that's why we need a fair taxes campaign in America.
In this election year, both candidates are certain to say a lot of things about taxes. But neither of them is likely to talk about fraud, favoritism and abuse of power – unless voters raise these issues and ask for reforms.
Who Pays Taxes?
The Tax Code Fuels Wealth Concentration
The Inherent Unfairness of Income Taxes
The Estate Tax Gets a Death Sentence
Social Security Taxes Subsidize Income Tax Cuts
States Raise Taxes to Compensate for Federal Cuts
Fraud Costs More than Medicare
Corporate Tax Incentives Fail to Deliver
Practical Solutions to the Tax-Based Class War
Books and Internet Resources
Who Pays Taxes?
The short answer is this: you and I pay the taxes that rich and powerful people ought to pay, but don't.
In the year 2000, at the height of the last economic boom and before the most recent round of tax cuts were enacted, IRS data shows that the richest 400 taxpayers paid 27% of their income in federal, state, and local taxes. On average, these 400 taxpayers each had taxable income of $151 million. All other taxpayers had average taxable income of only $34,600, and yet their tax burden was 40%.
Political candidates always focus on income taxes. But we have to look at all taxes people pay to grasp how our tax system has been quietly transferring the tax burden from the wealthiest households to the rest of us for the last twenty years.
Journalists Donald Barlett and James Steele point out that this inequity results from a political system that has been put up for auction: "Over the last three decades, America's elected officials have turned a reasonably fair tax code into one crafted for the benefit of those who give the largest campaign contributions, enjoy the greatest access, hire the most influential lobbyists, or otherwise exercise power beyond that enjoyed by average citizens."
Corporations have been profiting in Washington, too. In 1965, individual taxpayers paid 66% of all US income taxes, and corporations paid about a third. But by 2000, the corporate share had dropped to 18%, just about half what it used to be.
A recent Congressional study reported that 63% of US corporations paid no income taxes at all in 2000. Six in ten American corporations reported no tax liability for the five years from 1996 through 2000, even though corporate profits were growing at record-breaking levels during that period.
The Tax Code Fuels Wealth Concentration
continued at:
http://www.askquestions.org/articles/taxes/
Teach them to fish and you feed them for a lifetime. In particular, teach them awareness of their local wild foods, food preservation and stockpiling, selective seed saving, traditional polyculture, land and water rights, the need for local food sovereignty, and frightful folk tales of the bloodthirsty capitalist monster.