TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 8 °C Sunday 19 May, 2013

Column: Zero hunger – the only acceptable target

On World Food Day, a United Nations and EC official for agriculture declare that progress has been made in tackling hunger – but that one in eight people is still undernourished.

When will there be a harvest for the world?
When will there be a harvest for the world?
Image: AP Photo/Seth Perlman

THE 32nd WORLD Food Day being marked today brings mixed news regarding the fight against hunger.

Latest figures show that we have made progress in reducing hunger in the past two decades. Around one billion in the world went hungry in 1990: today 868 million are still undernourished and, with an extra push we can achieve the first Millennium Development Goal of halving the prevalence of hunger on the planet by 2015.

However, we should be concerned with the fact that one in eight persons are still undernourished, that progress against hunger has slowed since 2007 and that we seem to be losing the battle in Africa and the Near East. In these regions, the hungry have increased from 192 million to 275 million, with 234 million of them in sub-Saharan Africa.

Moreover, we have the wider challenge of a forecast 60 per cent increase food demand by the middle of the century. Add to this the challenge of climate change, water scarcity, the depletion of soil quality and biodiversity loss, and one can realise just how serious the global food security challenge has become. And this is where policy is vital in setting the right direction and providing the predictability that the agriculture sector needs – whether in developed or developing countries.

Meeting the challenge to end hunger will depend on transforming political will into concrete action, strengthening global governance of food security, promoting pro-poor long-term economic growth, creating enabling environments for sustainable production, supporting small-scale production, building resilience and reinforcing social protection.

“Investment in rural areas”

To achieve this, we need to increase public and private investment in rural areas. However, over the last 30 years, financial aid for agricultural cooperation and development has fallen significantly, although there are signs that the trend has been reversed recently. Policy can play a role in providing the stability that will encourage this investment.

We also need to bring together all the knowledge that exists in the world concerning agriculture and economics, as well as public policy, in order to promote family and small-scale farming. Let’s not forget that over 70 percent of the world’s extremely poor live in rural areas and many of them are subsistence or small-scale farmers.

Every day, the FAO and the European Union are concerned with food security, working together with national governments to achieve this goal. We are part of a greater effort that includes other international organisations, farmers’ associations, NGOs, civil society and the private sector – the participation of all is essential in the fight against hunger.

Important partners in this effort are cooperatives. The theme of this year’s World Food Day highlights the role of agricultural cooperatives in feeding the world. They are of crucial importance because they allow small-scale producers to access the information, tools and
ervices they need. This allows them to increase food production, market their goods and create jobs, improving their own livelihoods and increasing global food security.

We also know that while small farmers acting alone often do not benefit from higher food prices, those acting collectively in strong producer organisations and cooperatives are better able to take advantage of market opportunities.

“Price volatility in agricultural markets”

This is especially important in the current context of increased price volatility in agricultural markets. The establishment of the Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) last year has given the international community a new and effective instrument in responding to uncertainty. It is already giving an important contribution by increasing market transparency, facilitating coordinated international response and highlighting the extent to which there is sufficient global production available to make up for the drought-related losses in certain major producing countries this year. This is one important component of the global governance of food security, which has the Committee on World Food Security as its
cornerstone.

While the goal of halving world hunger is within reach and remains our short-term priority, we should look beyond 2015 towards a much more ambitious target: the total eradication of hunger, answering the call made by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in launching the “Zero Hunger Challenge” at the Rio+20 Sustainable Development Conference in June.

At Rio+20 the international community sent out a strong message – that we cannot call development “sustainable” as long as millions of people continue to suffer from hunger and extreme poverty. The Zero Hunger Challenge offers us a comprehensive set of bold goals – zero hunger, zero stunting for children under 2, all food systems sustainable, 100 per cent increase in smallholder productivity and income, zero loss of waste and food – to favour our advocacy work and move towards the sustainable future we all want.

With hunger, the only acceptable number is zero.

  • Dacian Ciolos is European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development.
  • José Graziano da Silva is Director General of the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO).

About the author:

Dacian Ciolos, José Graziano da Silva

Read next:

Comments (9 Comments)

  • The problem is that ending global hunger isn’t profitable. Massive inequality and poor people starving to death can be a nice little earner for the wealthiest businessmen

    Reply
  • As stated above food prices are only going one way unless a REAL alternative to oil is found

    But 1billion in 1990 & 860million now. How much has the global population risen in that time?

    Naturally I don’t want to cull half the population but resources are finite & an ever expanding planet will only cause misery for more. We need some method of controlling birth rates. The Chinese tried 1 child per household but that hasn’t stopped the growth

    Reply
  • Michael 16/10/12 #

    Food vs Real Money tells a lot of the story.

    Central Banks with inflationary policies are what is starving a lot of people and making good food unaffordable.

    Deflation is not a bad thing; food prices would fall.

    Reply
    • There will be no long term deflation of food prices…

      Population is rising.
      Oil prices are rising.
      Water resources are being over consumed.
      Climates are changing forcing adaption to the current food supply model, adaption reduces yeilds
      Governments subsidies for agriculture are under pressure by rising debt levels in the USA/EU
      As you move millions of people out of poverty and millions more from low to middle income they use more energy, more oil and switch to labour, energy and resource intensive food eg. meat/imported foods.

      Inflation is a symptom of all of the above not the cause there of…

      Reply
    • Some of the ways in which we operate however are contributing to the problems you mention above

      an over dependence on oil products (eg petrochemicals used in fertilizers for agriculture and many other products) pushes up oil prices

      Not using or investigating alternative sources of energy pushes up oil prices

      Current farming methods misuse water resources ( how much water is used to intensively farm products eg oranges which we then fly half way round the world ..contributing to global warming ).

      Climate change driven in part by over dependence on oil and our crazy way of sourcing food from the other side of the world, and also the intensive farming methods used in modern agriculture.

      I agree with you Andrew that government subsidies for agriculture are under pressure, but I don’t think they were ever sustainable ( paying people NOT to produce something???? )

      We can do a lot about all of the above, and so change the inflationary policies of banks and governments.

      We don’t have to be passive and say inflation is a symptom and can’t be reversed.

      Reply
    • Michael 16/10/12 #

      Two economically intelligent responses. I’m in shock.

      Paying farmers not to produce, then wondering why the price of food is climbing…hmmmm

      Reply
    • Such a complex web… Its volatility and speculation that cause most the problems. Some places if they aren’t paid not to produce they’ll burn half of it to make what’s left worth harvesting… Or in a swing state like Florida taking away a sugar subsidy can swing the US presidential election.

      You also can’t tell people not to eat oranges… The only solution would be an orange tax. But that has its own problems.

      Reply
  • You have so many people the freaking polar caps are melting. What does it take to get your attention? You are NEVER going to end world hunger as long as you keep doubling the population. We are in the middle of the greatest mass extinction since the Permian.
    There are just too freaking many of us. Nature will deal with you.

    Reply
  • Not saying don’t eat oranges at all

    In certain climates it makes perfect sense where they will grow naturally without excessive irrigation, and be eaten locally.

    Yet we are brainwashed to think that a glass of orange juice is an essential part of our breakfast.
    Why not drink apple juice , or the juice of a fruit grown in Ireland, if you feel fruit juice is an essential part of the day and pay a local farmer and producer a fair price for that same juice.

    The carbon environment benefits, the local economy benefits.

    Reply

Add New Comment