|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
 |
  |
Food Aid and Food Security
February 1995
>> This Is USAID >> USAID Policy Papers >> Food Aid and Food Security
Preface Measures to Improve Food Security
Food Aid Management Objectives
Program and Management Policy Conclusions
Wednesday, 11-Jul-2001 16:48:37 EDT
1. There is growing difference among countries in terms of their ability to provide food security to their people. As a result, many millions of people, particularly in the poorest countries, have little prospect of escaping a marginal life of hunger and malnutrition. Food aid is a resource which is uniquely suited to addressing this need--in fact current P.L. 480 legislation instructs USAID to give priority to the neediest countries. VII. Program and Management Policy Conclusions
Many different ways can be devised to determine which countries are "neediest." There are indices which have been developed by USAID, FAO and others. All have their strengths and weaknesses. It is sensible not to be too rigid in defining need, especially since P.L. 480 itself provides some flexibility in country selection. However, all measures point to basically the same set of countries, most of which are in sub-Saharan Africa, as being most needy. There are also many needy people in South Asia, though the trends there are more encouraging.
Greatest priority in allocating food aid, particularly for Title III programs, should go to countries most in need of food, which will mean for the foreseeable future an increasing share of U.S. food aid will go to sub-Saharan Africa.
Within countries, USAID will continue to give priority to assisting food insecure households. Targeting mechanisms will be developed for community level assessments so that assistance reaches the most vulnerable and provides for sustainable improvements in food security.
2. P.L. 480 provides a flexible definition of food security, and USAID has adopted an equally flexible definition in PD 19. This provides a range of possible interventions within the terms of law and policy, allowing line managers in USAID and the PVOs to adapt specific interventions to country circumstances. Nevertheless, it is also important for USAID, working with the PVOs for the programs they manage, to convey clearly the priorities to be used in allocating resources.
Experience has shown the surest way to achieve improved availability, access and utilization of food is through increases in agricultural productivity and improved nutrition for the poor. Such programs increase incomes and reduce the cost of food in real terms, together with more effective utilization of this food by the poor. USAID will always be prepared to support any program which promises similar results. Title III resources will be allocated to programs with direct linkages to increased agricultural production and consumption. Title II resources will focus on improving household nutrition, especially in children and mothers, and on alleviating the causes of hunger, especially by increasing agricultural productivity.
3. Resources available for food security programs are under increasing budgetary pressure. The overall need to reduce the federal deficit will continue for the foreseeable future. In the case of food aid, declining U.S. agricultural surpluses is expected to result in elimination of 416(b) surplus commodities. In the case of FAA resources, competition from other priorities and earmarks will limit funding available for agriculture. (Note that some of these priorities, such as population programs, can also have a significant impact on food security.)
As a practical matter, food aid is a key resource directly available for food security programs. However, there is growing evidence that food, programmed by itself, has uneven impact as a development resource. Food aid is most effective when used in conjunction with other resources in promoting increased agricultural productivity and improved household nutrition. Food will be programmed where it has intrinsic value as food. This also means USAID missions with significant food aid programs will need to ensure that adequate resources are made available to fund complementary activities needed to assure maximum impact. These resources can come from dollar appropriations, Title III local currency generations or Title II monetization.
USAID will also be expected to maintain appropriate central support for food security programs in terms of research and field support.
Food aid should be integrated to a greater extent with other USAID assistance resources. Greater priority on this integration must be the responsibility of both missions and the PVOs. Proceeds from monetization of food should complement direct feeding programs or should be used to enhance agricultural productivity and improve household nutrition.
4. USAID is committed to bringing food aid programs into a "managing for results" system. This will help ensure the greatest possible impact from scarce food aid resources. It will help ensure that complementary resources necessary for success are identified and allocated. It will help shift the focus of discussion on USAID programs and policies from levels of inputs provided (either dollars or food) to the impact of those resources.
USAID also intends to assist its partners, the PVOs and the World Food Program, move in this direction. As USAID and its partners reach agreement on the objectives and results intended and are confident of the basic soundness of program plans, it should be possible for USAID to leave routine oversight of implementation of food aid programs to these partners. To reach this objective, it will be important for food aid program proposals to demonstrate the same analytical rigor required of dollar funded programs. This will require some "capacity building."
Ultimately the success of food aid programs must be measured by sustainability of results. In large measure, sustainability will depend on the capacity of local institutions.
Greater attention and resources will be allocated to strengthening the program development and management capacity of USAID's food aid partners: Private Voluntary Organizations, the World Food Program, and local non-governmental organizations.
5. The growing number of complex emergencies, which frequently include emergency feeding as a major relief component, have created pressure on food aid development budgets. USAID is committed to the policy position that sustainable development, including food security as a high priority, is essential in the long run to preventing these complex emergencies--or at least mitigating their human impact.
USAID is also committed to responding effectively to emergencies. Reconciling these two positions in the current budgetary environment is very difficult. Certainly more effective coordination and wider burdensharing among donors for emergencies is part of the answer. Better planning for complex emergencies, which can extend for many years, is also important. In addition, the Executive Branch and Congress need to develop new mechanisms to provide necessary food aid to cope with sudden-onset emergencies, of which Rwanda is a recent example. Greater flexibility needs to be developed so that necessary resources are available to respond to emergencies without draining away food aid planned for development programs.
6. Food aid provides the largest share of resources allocated to emergencies. In the past it has played an important role in the relief to development continuum. For example, in the 1992 drought in Southern Africa, it was programmed to utilize normal commercial channels as well as targeted feeding programs to reach hungry people in their villages, without resort to refugee camps. Local currency was used to provide necessary inputs to encourage an early return to normal agriculture.
Equally important, food aid development programs often focus at the grass-roots level, helping to build the food security resilience of the poorest families. At this level it is possible to support individual coping strategies for short- and long-term food security. When drought or civil strife comes, families which have prepared are better able to weather the crisis.
Greater priority will be given to the relief to development continuum. Food insecure countries must be prepared to cope with recurring drought and even with political conflict. Equally important, relief programs must ensure families are able to return as quickly as possible to productive lives.
 |
|||
Last Updated on: July 11, 2001 |
