Reforms
to farming policy in the USA could have a major positive impact on how the
country provides food aid to countries in crisis.
US aid programmes will begin to source food from local sources |
Every year the USA gives
around $2billion worth of food aid, making it one of the world's
largest donors. It is, therefore, important that this aid is distributed
as effectively as possible, since it will affect so many people in so many
places. However, some experts have been critical of the existing system
and would like to see changes that would offer better support to people in
need.
Currently food aid is
shipped from the USA and is often given as part of a process
called monetisation, where NGOs sell donated food in order to fund aid
activities. This influx of cheap or free food can very quickly depress
regional markets and harm food security in the long term. The Agriculture
Act of 2014 begins to change this process and creates increased provision for sourcing food
from regional markets, rather than from US farms.
Sourcing food locally a better option
Most aid agencies in other
countries have already stopped using monetisation and focus primarily on
local and regional procurement of food for aid. Equally, the last two US
presidents have both pushed for reform in the past, but were blocked by
the country's Congress. Though change was often opposed on the grounds
that it was better to give people food directly, many activists
and insiders believe the real reasoning was very different.
Andrew Natsios,
administrator of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), tells
Irin news that only groups who had a financial stake in the current
system, thought it actually worked.
Frederic Mousseau, policy
director of the Oakland Institute, agrees, stating that opposition in
the past has been because of pressure from US agribusiness and shipping
firms. Even now campaigners are sceptical about the impact that this
legislation will actually have on food aid distribution.
Modest change to US food aid programmes
Some commentators view the
current changes as too small to have the required effect. For
example, Chris Barrett, a leading food analyst at Cornell University,
believes that the US food aid programme will remain largely restricted to
buying in the US and shipping overseas. Broadly, campaigners are adamant
that reform cannot end here, and that this modest change must be followed by
more progress in the future. However, this new legislation does at least
offer a starting point.
Eric Munoz, policy adviser
for Oxfam America, has been working on the issue of food 10 years,
and tells Irin that this is the first time that he has seen it seriously
debated. Most importantly, he does not think the debate is over and plans
to continue pressing for further reforms that would more effectively get
food to the people who need it. No doubt all parties will now be looking
towards the future of this new piece of legislation and what it will mean
for people inside and outside the USA.
No comments:
Post a Comment