Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
and Agriculture
www.InterAction.org Results
Broader engagement with development stakeholders, increased investments
1400 16th Street, NW
Suite 210 and longer duration of programs will result in greatly enhanced impacts and
Washington, DC 20036 more efficient use of development resources.
202-667-8227
Background U.S. implementation of agricultural development and food
security programs has been marked by fragmented respon-
Persistent high food prices, malnutrition and poverty in sibilities and inconsistent or conflicting policies. Three
vulnerable developing countries threaten the well-being U.S. Government departments (State, USAID and Agricul-
of hundreds of millions of people. High food prices have ture) play prominent roles, while others have more limited
also destabilized governments and created political unrest. responsibilities. Taken together, this pattern makes coordi-
After years of declining investment in agriculture and poor nation within the U.S. Government difficult, and with other
policy choices by governments, market systems in many donors and host country governments, extremely challeng-
developing countries lack the ability to respond to higher ing. Consolidation of lead responsibilities for food security
food prices with increased production. Yet U.S. domes- and the appointment of a food security coordinator within
tic policies in the areas of international trade, agricultural USAID would facilitate management of the multi-agency
subsidies and biofuels continue to put upward pressure on effort, resulting in fewer overlaps and greater consistency.
global food prices. Domestic agricultural subsidies place The “Aid Effectiveness” agenda that has emerged from
farmers in poor countries at a competitive disadvantage, the Paris Declaration promises to reshape roles and rela-
while the economic losses that poor countries experience tionships in international development. Yet effective imple-
because of U.S. trade tariffs exceed the total value of U.S. mentation of these principles has been constrained by an
development assistance. interpretation of “country ownership” that lacks consistent
A comprehensive approach to reduce poverty, improve standards. Country-led development will be most effective
nutrition and emergency interventions for vulnerable pop- when it mobilizes all sectors of society to participate in sus-
ulations is essential. Traditional program stovepipes that tained development activities. The U.S. should ensure that
separate agricultural development, nutrition and social its support for country-owned development means that
protection have constrained responses to the linked vul- the private sector, civil society and local communities are
nerabilities of poverty and inadequate diet. Adequate nutri- involved not just in initial consultations, but also in imple-
tion—particularly for vulnerable women and children under menting and monitoring ongoing development programs.
two years of age—must be a central objective of programs The principles that inform the Aid Effectiveness agenda
for economic growth and agricultural development. U.S. in developing countries could also improve efficiency and
development policies still do not adequately reflect the effectiveness among U.S. stakeholders in international
interconnected nature of these challenges or the most development. Improved coordination between the U.S.
effective and efficient strategies to address them. Food Government and civil society would also yield important
security programs need to address the livelihood needs benefits. While private sector investment, remittances,
of poor households and women, the nutritional needs of foundation support and private individual donations have all
vulnerable mothers and children, and the risks that eco- been rising, these vital resource flows have not been coor-
nomic shocks and climate variability impose on marginal dinated with—and so do not leverage—government devel-
households, small-scale farmers and rural communities. opment assistance. Current U.S. Government approaches
Focused assistance of various sorts, including safety net to formulating development policy do not systematically
systems, nutrition and improved emergency management incorporate the valuable but largely untapped resource of
and response must complement longer-term agricultural the NGO community’s 40-plus years of experience in pro-
development programs. Together, these interventions moting international agricultural development and boosting
provide a continuum of assistance that addresses the full the production of small-scale farmers.
spectrum of hunger—urban and rural, chronic and acute— Environmental protection is another domain in which pol-
while ensuring that the nutritional needs of children in the icies promoting food production and intensive resource use
critical period from conception to two years of age are met. have not been reconciled. The close links between rural
Over the past three decades, the U.S. decreased its sup- ecosystems and agricultural production systems mean
port for agricultural development to only 2 percent of U.S. that the resilience and stability of each can only be ensured
foreign assistance. Steps to reinvest in agriculture and food by addressing both. Continued reliance on conventional,
security reflected in the L’Aquila Food Security Agreement high-external input approaches to agricultural production,
and the Administration’s Feed the Future Initiative (FTF) sig- rather than on less resource demanding regenerative sys-
nal important changes, but U.S. funding commitments to tems continues to foreclose effective options in sustainable
these initiatives have not yet been fully met. Ramping up rural development. As climate change reduces yields and
these investments will be critical to decreasing the need for water availability in many developing countries, this area
humanitarian relief and assistance in the future by enhanc- will assume increasingly urgent importance for agricultural
ing local capacity. policy makers and program managers.
Contributors to the Food Security and
Agriculture Policy Brief
Organization URL
Academy for Educational Development www.www.aed.org
Church World Service www.churchworldservice.org
International Center for Research on Women www.icrw.org
Lutheran World Relief www.lwr.org
Save the Children www.savethechildren.org
ActionAid US www.actionaidusa.org
Helen Keller International www.hki.org
One Campaign www.one.orgus