• OKERNEL_P2
• csmli-1
• stem-1

• OKERNAL_G1
• csmli-2
• stem-2

Briefing: Lessons from past food crises

World leaders gather in Rome Tuesday for a UN food crisis conference. What does history teach about how to handle such shortages?

from the June 2, 2008 edition

Page 2 of 3

Page 1 | 2 | Page 3

What is the impact of this crisis?

Brown argues that the effects of this crisis are very different from the 1970s. Then, he says, the impact was geographical with famine in the African Sahel and Bangladesh. Today, he says, hunger no longer hits just a few specific countries, but hits the lowest income groups around the world.

Still, as incomes rise globally, fewer may actually experience hunger. In many parts of the world, food takes a far smaller percentage of family budgets than it did a generation ago. In rich countries, the FAO says, it has gone from around 30 percent in the 1970s to less than 10 percent of the budget today. In middle-income countries, food costs have also fallen proportionally, though they still take up a sizable chunk of the weekly paycheck (30-40 percent). So the public response this time around has been more anger than hunger.

But in poorer countries, the pinch is felt. "When you look at food as a percentage of the consumer price index in poor countries, it's [still] more than 50 to 60 percent of household spending," says Abdolreza Abbassian, secretary of intergovernmental group on grains for the UN's FAO.

The number of people considered "food insecure" (i.e. who go hungry) is starting to rise back above 850 million, after having fallen consistently for decades to 800 million, according to the FAO.

What can be learned from the resolution to previous crises?

Both the 1930s and 1970s crises generated blue-sky thinking about how to feed the world. The 1970s gave rise to a boost in research and development and the green revolution. "The analogy today would be [to spur research in] GM (genetically modified food)," says Mr. Abbassian. "One of the lessons is to look at research in food technology and whether this has room to improve. People have to look at agriculture from scratch. Research has been neglected for so long."

What institutional responses have been helpful?

During this crisis – like those in the past – governments have initially acted to either protect their consumers or their producers, with mixed results. Some like Mauritania and Egypt are now spending money to increase food assistance to the poor. Cash handouts are better than food handouts, nongovernmental organizations say.

Two dozen countries have reduced import duties in an effort to make food cheaper for their citizens. Others are trying to boost local infrastructure to help local producers.

Longer term, Oxfam spokesperson Amy Barry calls for basic measures like better storage facilities, roads, and ports to ensure that produce in developing countries by smaller producers competes on a level playing field. The World Bank has noted that better transport links in Congo helped to brake accelerating food prices in 2006.

What institutional responses have not been helpful?

Predictably, many governments have rushed to restrict exports to ensure that their own people don't go hungry while their produce is being shipped overseas. But national hoarding, history tells us, tends to perpetuate the global shortage, pushing up prices. "It's more a result of panic reaction rather than rational thinking," says Abbassian. "Export restrictions – taxes and bans – that we have seen starting with Russia, Ukraine, and Argentina, prolong the situation."

After initiating export bans in March, Cambodia and Pakistan recently lifted their bans on exporting rice – and prices have started to ease.

1 | Page 2 | 3 | Next Page