A new resiliency lens in ending hunger

The World Food Program not only deserves this year’s Nobel Peace Prize for its efforts against a pandemic-driven surge in hunger, it also deserves a nod for its new view of individuals in distress. 

AP/file
Porters offload sacks of a maize from the World Food Program in the seaport of Mogadishu, Somalia.

In June as the pandemic was hitting more countries, the leading humanitarian organization – the World Food Program (WFP) – announced it would undertake the biggest response in its history. It planned to meet head-on an upsurge in the number of victims of hunger – from 97 million worldwide before the pandemic to an estimated 138 million.

For this “impressive ability to intensify its efforts,” the Nobel committee awarded this year’s peace prize to the WFP on Friday. The committee also cited the agency’s work in preventing “the use of hunger as a weapon of war and conflict.”

While the WFP described the prize as both “humbling” and a “proud moment,” spokesman Tomson Phiri also wanted the world to know about its ongoing shift in approach. “One of the beauties of WFP activities is that not only do we provide food for today and tomorrow, but we also are equipping people with the knowledge, the means to sustain themselves for the next day and the days after,” he said.

Like many aid organizations, the WFP is seeing poor people less as victims or beneficiaries of other people’s largesse and more as people capable to deal with a disaster with strength and intelligence. Its programs are now designed to let local people identify community priorities and drive the agenda for both emergency relief and for building up their water and land resources as well as self-governance to ensure food security.

“It’s not just about humanitarian dollars. How do we use every humanitarian dollar for a developmental opportunity?” WFP Executive Director David Beasley recently told Congress.

Or as the former head of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, José Graziano da Silva, put it, “To save lives, we also have to save livelihoods.”

This emphasis on individual resiliency and community-led development took off in 2015 when the United Nations set a goal to end persistent hunger by 2030. The U.N. called for participatory decision-making “at all levels,” not just a top-down approach driven by governments and international groups.

For its part, the WFP has invested in early warning systems to detect famine as well as the rehabilitation of forests, water ponds, irrigation systems, and feeder roads. The agency has become better at probing how people in poverty perceive themselves. This “growing body of experience ... allows us to put resilience-building at the heart of our programs,” according to the agency’s website.

Efforts at peacemaking have long relied on changing the perception of each individual’s worth – whether in ending wars or famines. Now with the WFP rewarded for its fight against hunger, it can also be honored for how it honors those it helps.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.