Just $6bn Will Save a Generation From Starvation, Says UN
G8 agriculture ministers try to halt 'spiral of hunger' created by drought, falling prices and credit crunch
Agriculture ministers from the world's richest countries are holding an unprecedented meeting this weekend as the United Nations warns that hunger threatens to "spiral out of control" in the wake of the financial crisis.
The three-day meeting, which opened in Italy
yesterday, will address a growing food crisis as harvests threaten to
slump at a time when record numbers of people are already hungry. Crops
are being hit by a combination of bad weather, falling food prices and
farmers' being refused credit to buy seeds and fertilisers.
It is the first time that the agriculture ministers of the G8 leading economies have held such a meeting, and they have invited their counterparts from China, India, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Australia, Argentina and Egypt to join them in Treviso "to work out a common route to lead us out of the crisis and respond to the world food emergency".
The UN's World Food Programme warned: "As the global financial crisis deepens, hunger and malnutrition are likely to increase as incomes fall and unemployment rises. The world is at a critical juncture where we risk watching hunger spiral out of control. We cannot afford to lose the next generation."
The crisis began even before the start of the credit crunch, at a time of record harvests. About two years ago food prices started to rise abruptly, despite the bumper crops, mainly because of the increased use of corn to make biofuel, particularly in the US, and increasing meat consumption – which mops up grain supplies to feed livestock – by the rising middle classes in developing countries such as India and China. Prices of wheat and corn doubled in a year – and rice more than trebled – leading to the first steep and sustained rise in hunger in decades.
A record crop last year did not help much. It brought the cost of grain down in rich countries, which saw most of the increased production, but not in developing ones where the poor live, partly because their currencies fell against the dollar in which international prices are set.
Yet it led to farmers in Europe and the US planting less this year because they can expect lower returns at a time when it is harder than ever to get loans. The US Department of Agriculture reported this month that 7 per cent less land is being used to grow wheat, in a country that helps to supply 100 nations around the world.
China – which feeds a fifth of the world's people off just a 10th of its cropland – did increase sowing but, in another cruel twist of fate, was then hit by its worst drought in nearly 70 years, cutting yields by up to 40 per cent. And drought has also led to a similar slump in another of the world's great grain-growing regions, Argentina, Paraguay and southern Brazil.
All this means, says the Food and Agriculture Organisation, that harvests are set to fall his year "in most of the world's major producers". The UN adds that it would cost $6bn (£4bn) to stave off the resulting hunger, which would be "relatively inexpensive compared to the trillion-dollar rescue packages designed to save financial institutions".
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
25 Comments so far
Show AllMost people will never admit the main problem of far too many humans and our 'unfettered growth' which is the biggest part of the problem. Then you combine those people's idea, that they have been hoodwinked into believing, that the corporate world will be the one to solve the problem. Once again, read(I know that is a challenge for most of you) Mike Davis' book 'Late Victorian Holocausts' where the history that is being repeated is documented. Only this time because of the even bigger number of people the climate will be an even more destructive force. It is all in that book.
Throwing the money at the UN is the worst solution to this crisis.
Lack of agricultural production is a systemic problem, where size and connections really do matter.
Many small farmers in the US will suffer the same credit crunch that small businesses are suffering in the current depression.
Without access to credit, farmers will not be able to purchase the inputs, will not be able to pay seasonal labor and will not be able to pay to transport food to markets.
In underdeveloped countries, the situation is much worse, since subsistence farmers never have access to credit and are thereby dependent on weather and local market conditions.
One of the major problems of famine in 1985/86 in Africa was the lack of seed. Subsistence farmers try to save suficient seed for next years crop. In times of famine, they eat their seed. How do they repace this.
In Africa, there are a handful of large seed companies. Most companies have an extremely limited ability to produce enough seed in good years, much less in bad years.
Most subsistence farmers do not have title to their land, have a collateral value on their land and cannot borrow against their land. In bad years, they do not have the ability to borrow for seed and other inputs.
The only solution to world hunger is to let subsistence farmers compete with much larger commercial interests. We must encourage local lending insitutions that will advance modest amounts of money against "untitled" land.
Bill Clinton raises billions of dollars for the developing world. Most of this goes into "experts" and modern development systems. Get rid of the foreign experts and set up lending institutions that allow farmers to compete.
Village entrepreneurs can develop seed banks,"commercial" gain storage can exist, local transportation entrepreneurs are waiting, the internet should provide an "Ebay" for agricultural production in the third world.
Most peasant farmers or subsistence farmers want to make a profit. One of the reasons for "growth" in China is the return of the profit incentive after the days of Maoism. Until a country has a surplus, socialsim and communism do not work. Socialism and communism are later stages of development. Most countries have not arrived at these stages.
Access to credit is key to any community. Credit, however, has to be available to all levels of entrepreneurs (including farmers) and not just to toxic banks.
View agriculture as a business. Take away obstacles to fair competition and grow your way out of these problems.
Good one ducksawce!
Posted: 19 Apr 2009 10:15 PM PDT
One of the most exclusive millionaire's clubs is causing trouble again. The US Senate has used the language of food security to write a pork-filled manifesto for genetically modified agriculture. If you've got one, call your Senator and demand that they strip out their support for GM crops. Full press release from Food First below the fold. ... read more »
hmmm....i can't tell if this'll work (clicking on 'read more')---if not, google 'raj patel's blog' (author of 'stuffed and starved') for some interesting info about a pretty huge chunk of change being readied for big agra's gmo biz....
and right on! to moondoggy's comment about 'the earth is our mother'.... we need to reach a tipping point regarding acknowledging and living according to that truth and soon!
You can't eat money! Throwing money at the problem will solve nada. We need to learn sustainability, to live within our means. Everyone should spend time getting dirty and we'll all eat plenty, and solve a host of other problems as well.
The earth is our mother. We treat her well, and she'll do the same.
So, here's another quote from Thomas Jefferson:
"No occupation is so delightful to me as the culture of the earth and no culture comparable to that of the garden." -Thomas Jefferson
With the global population exceeding 6 billion humans, well - that's less than $1 per person.
So is the answer more money? Or fewer people?
Why do we recoil at a so-called 'economic crisis' but continue seeing the rampant, unending spiraling growth in the human population as some kind of divine right.
Starvation is a symptom of the problem, not the problem. And more money - or more food - is not the answer.
Which is why the Billl Gatess Doomsday Seed Vault is so ominous. What exactly is that monopolist and Monsanto up to anyway? A world die-off?
Getting ready to release more mosquitoes on the crowd listening to him?
The man rose to wealth by plagiarism and anti-trust market manipulation. I don't think his "final solution" has in it, your or my best interests at heart: only his.
Maybe instead of a "MoonRaker" solution, Bill, we should let this famine just progress naturally with no intervention pro or con.
That's what I think.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
According to this article, there is going to be a food shortage no matter what? 6 billion dollars does not replace shortfalls until next growing season. Something odd though,"they (farmers) can expect lower returns this year at a time when it is harder than ever to get loans." Less credit will lower supply and therefore cause-HIGHER returns.
Egad! $6Bn is what America's bankers pay themselves as bonuses every year.
And if the poor don't starve they will get sick. Who will send them medicines?
AP IMPACT:
Tons of released drugs taint US water - BigPharma flushes it's extra to make Super Bugs!
How many people could 1500 Indian farmers feed with a few microbanks replacing the loansharks?
How many people could Mexico feed without NAFTA dumping? And so it goes.
It would be a waste of money or should I say another money laundrying scheme to put $6,000,000,000.00 more dollars out there for the 'elite' to divvy up accordingly.
And as horrible as it is that 'starvation will spiral out of control', it will include the unacceptable reality of nature not being able to produce enough to feed everybody and the unreal reality of the the 'elite' preventing production to feed everybody so that they may once again make vast profits at the masses' expense or in this case demise. Before you get mad about this, read Mike Davis' book 'Late Victorian Holocausts' to get the idea of how wonderful humans really are, especially the 'elite' and corporate fiends that put their wealth above all else.
And it really should behoove everyone to consider the ridiculousness of allowing the 'unfettered' growth of the human population on this planet and the effects of that growth. What is amazing is that from about the middle of the 20th century, 1950, the human population tripled to 6.6 billion people from just 2 billion people which should be very alarming but through the eyes of religion, politics and economics this was made to look as some fantastically good thing, and people believe it.
Now the real possibilities are coming to light and just throwing around another huge clump of change for a few to benefit from will be nothing different than a drug addict using up what is there and going looking for more. Human's, enmasse, are not too bright when the political, religious and economic systems are left to function without question because far too many people have been led to such a strong belief in those systems that their faith in them is almost incontrovertible.
Send food and Planned Parenthood.
Do any of the population control people keep up with current statistics and data? Population growth is slowing worldwide, and will level off at about 10 billion by 2100. That is a big number but would be sustainable with more equitable economics and the reigning in of global warming.
The notion that the Catholic church has anything to do with population growth is terribly outdated. Virtually all Catholics around the world disregard the old prohibition on birth control. The only exception is the extremely conservative form of US-Catholicism, originally derived from Ireland - but no longer practiced there either. To answer another poster, aside from the ranting from my conservative Irish catholic father, I know of no official Catholic prohibition of masturbation, and even if it does exist, it is obviously widely disregarded.
"Population growth is slowing worldwide, and will level off at about 10 billion by 2100. That is a big number but would be sustainable with more equitable economics and the reigning in of global warming."
Faith based assertion.
They should forgive 3rd world debt while they're at it.
Great idea. Especially after the unintended (call me naive) consequences of world bank or IMF loans.
"The crisis began even before the start of the credit crunch, at a time of record harvests."
----------------------------
It is in the economic crises that the contradiction between the progressive socialization of production and the private appropriation which serves as its driving power and its support, breaks out in the most extraordinary way. For capitalist economic crises are incredible phenomena like nothing ever seen before. They are not crises of scarcity, like all pre-capitalist crises; they are crises of overproduction. The unemployed die of hunger not because there is too little to eat but because there is relatively too great a supply of foodstuffs.
Ernest Mandel
An Introduction to
Marxist Economic Theory
http://www.marxists.org/archive/mandel/1967/intromet/
As far as I am concerned let the Catholic Church sell off some of their billions in artifacts and feed them. It's due to them and other religions that we have this global crisis in the making. It isn't going to get any better until they start dealing realistically with birth control. And quit allowing superstition and ignorance to guide them. We no longer need every human being conceived to repopulate the earth. We are currently populating ourselves into a oblivion we aren't easily going to be able to get out of. They seem to imagine we can go on over populating and there will be no repercussions. So as I said before let the Catholic Church and the Mormon's feed them. They can start using some of the billions they have raped from their faithful followers and the tax free welfare dollars they get every year from the government that allows them to become multi-billion dollar corporations.
The Catholic Church and other religions that frown on direct birth control through devices, drugs, abortion, and indirect through masturbation and homosexuality are not the cause. These beliefs are artifacts of the pre-technological era, when life expectancy was barely to reproductive age and children were free labor in the pursuit of survival. Most people in modern societies give lip service (at most) to these views as they go about their pre-marital sex lives and later family planning, and only get uncomfortable when a bishop or evangelcal calls them out for considering other issues while supporting a candidate.
The only use for these beliefs today is attainment and exercise of power.
The cause is the ascent of our species through public sanitation, clean water, medicine, vaccines and antibiotics, crop and livestock breeding, and technological agriculture. We have been outrunning Malthus' math for 200 years, but we may be at the point of unsustainability. Multiple crop failures and over fishing could lead to unprecedented disasters.
Lifting the social conservative global gag rule will enable NGOs to educate third world women about the family planning techniques used in the west. Combine that with technology, improved life expectancies and other inducements, and the global population will level out. That will be the easy way. The hard way will be die-backs.
We can still maintain the earth as a garden, but we have to control population and stop producing excess GHGs and pervasive pollutants like mercury, dioxins, radioactive elements, and ozone depleters while maintainig sustainable technologies that support us.
In many societies having multiple children increases the chances of survival. These poorer socieities many of them agricultural based depend upon larges broods for the harvest. Not everywhere is industrialized and westernized.
This is especially true in countries which have high incidences of malaria, tuberculosis and AIDs.
These, and other diseases, occur during the "rainy" periods when labor is at a premium.
Gee. Only 6B to save a generation from starvation....deal of the week I guess. So exactly WHO would that 6B go to I wonder? Percy Schmeiser? Small farmers in Africa? Guatemala? Small CSAs throughout the G8 nations? Boosting efforts to educate everyone with a huge public media blitz on agrarian living skills and the lessons of history around Big Agra's 'Green Revolution' monumental successes and failures both social and ecological? Grassroots efforts to get those Victory Gardens in to replace all those wasteful Kentucky bluegrass lawns? I don't know. I was born in 54, same year Arbenz' democratically elected govt. in Guatemala was ousted thanks to the CIA's support of United Fruit Company's business interests, so have seen too many decades of this rhetoric about 'saving' the hungry, only to wind up with economic disparities ever-widening. Are we supposed to believe now that the G8 ag ministers AREN'T beholden to mammoth corporate entities like Monsanto, ADM, Cargill, etc in working out that "common route" to "respond to the world food emergency"? Will there be any discussion among these ag ministers about the part that globalized monoculture ideology has played in CREATING said emergency? Will these meetings be public and transparent and include the voices so regrettably left out of the decision-making in meetings past?....the indigenous, the poor, the landless, the women, the deep ecologists and bioregional ethicists of the world? Any gardener is all too familiar with weather's 'cruel twists of fate', but even more cruel are the twists of debt-creation and the commodification of the natural world we all depend on. Can someone show us a pie graph of where each of that 6B is intended to go to relieve hunger? I'm just wanting to get clear on what is meant by hunger. You must forgive my skepticism in this Orwellian world we're living in since at LEAST 1984.... are we talking the belly hunger of landless families or the 'hungry ghost' type hunger of the insationable already excessively wealthy persons (particularly corporate 'persons') here?
I agree. No specifics put forth. Is the $6b for one year? Would it be used to directly purchase food or to loan or grant money to third world farmers? What happens if the multiple droughts aren't cyclical but induced by climate change and steadily becoming worse?
That was not a good news for all of us, we all know that we are now experiencing an economy crisis, that could possibly lead us into hunger. This is very alarming where we really have to save money and of course food for out future. cooljulie
After reading articles about climate change written by James Hansen and others in the field, I'm remembering statements made in reference to how over the years they had been blocked by governments from explaining to the public, what climate change would really look like.
Even recently, I remember statements saying that they were still being careful not to "panic" the public". This was say up until the last few months. But I am still worried that over all the true nature of climate change is not being explained to the general public. Most people do not go to sites like CD or listen to NPR radio... Yes, there have been shows on TV and of course, we had Gore's movie. But these are all up against those who come out to oppose the climate change issue. So what message does the public get?
Even with Obama coming out to actually address and do something about climate change, the full impact of what can result from this event, is not brought to the awareness of most people. Because if it were, we would not see any coal fired power plants in operation. In other words, if the reality of climate change were put forth, everyone would stop what they are doing and co2 would stop rising. I know this sounds simplistic, but it is so true, so true.
Don't be ridiculous, that money can be so much better spent on weaponry and giveaways to the very wealthy. What on earth was this author drinking?