Your Excellency Mr Somsak Thepsutin, Minister of
Agriculture and Cooperatives of Thailand
(Representative of the Prime
Minister of Thailand),
Your Excellency Mr Young M. Vivian, Prime
Minister of Niue,
Your Excellencies Honourable
Ministers,
Distinguished Heads of Delegations,
Your
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
I would like to express my profound gratitude to the Government and to the people of the Kingdom of Thailand for the warm welcome extended to all participants of this meeting.
I would like to express my gratitude also to the Honourable Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, and the Ministers and Vice-minister present here, for kindly accepting our invitation to share their perspectives, wisdom and guidance on the themes of this meeting.
I wish to welcome Mr Yong, Secretary-General of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Mr Rahim, Secretary-General of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), and all the other professional and civil society organizations that are represented here today. Their role is crucial to ensuring success in our efforts to develop agriculture and to combat hunger.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to the Asian Development Bank and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), for jointly convening with FAO this important meeting. The joint convening of this meeting reflects the excellent collaboration between these two institutions and FAO and bears testimony to the firm commitment of all of us to support the subregional organizations - ASEAN, SAARC and PIF - to enhance food security, alleviate poverty and promote rural development.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
At the World Food Summit of 1996, Governments agreed to eliminate hunger from the world and set an objective of halving, by 2015, the number of the undernourished. The Millennium Summit held in September 2000 also reaffirmed the World Food Summit target. Nonetheless, as we all are aware, progress towards the WFS goal is very slow and we still have a long way to go. The world has some 842 million people suffering from hunger, of which 798 million, or almost 95 percent, live in the developing world. Approximately 503 million, accounting for 63 percent of the undernourished people in the developing countries of the world, live in this region. The Asia and Pacific region is also home to about two-thirds of the world’s poor, subsisting on income below the poverty line of $1 a day.
Hunger, or lack of access to adequate food, is one of the most painful aspects of poverty. Fighting hunger should thus form a fundamental part of any strategy to eradicate poverty. The causes of poverty and chronic hunger are well known and documented, as are the solutions. The Asia and the Pacific region, while still harbouring the highest number of the poor and hungry, is also the leading example in the world to demonstrate that the war against hunger and poverty can be won. This is a continent which is feeding 57 percent of the world’s population with only 37 percent of the world’s arable land. Per capita agricultural land availability in Asia and the Pacific (0.16 ha) is lower than in the rest of the world (0.37 ha). Despite a low and decreasing per capita supply of (use of) agricultural land, per capita daily calorie intake increased from 2 553 in 1989-1991 to 2 706 in 1999-2001. This resulted in a 57 percent increase in the food production index during the period which witnessed an agricultural GDP growth of more than 3 percent annually. In terms of progress in reducing hunger, the proportion of undernourished in the total population declined from 20 percent in 1990-1992 to 16 percent in 1999-2001.
These positive results are anchored on gains in productivity per unit of land achieved through expansion of irrigation and greater user of improved technologies and inputs. For example, in the 1990s the irrigated area in the region expanded by nearly 18 percent, from 147 million hectares in 1991 to 173 million hectares in 2001. Fertiliser use per hectare of land in Asia and the Pacific is 130 kg against the average of 67 kg in rest of the world.
The key lesson learned from the development experience in the region is that the strategy for achieving sustained and equitable growth of the rural areas, home to majority of the poor, hinges on a drive for an improved economic environment, human resource development, participation of the private sector, civil society organizations, good governance, and judicious use of public resources in the provision of key public goods. The region has also demonstrated that, although economic growth is necessary for poverty reduction, it is not sufficient. Poverty reduction requires its own inclusive and broad-based pattern, particularly broad-based agricultural growth, so that the poor can benefit from the growth process by enhancing their access to markets and improving their ownership of productive assets.
In agriculture, the best opportunities for growth lie in increasing productivity and cropping intensity with the adoption of improved irrigation, watershed management, technology and farming practices. For the majority of the rural poor, the expansion and improvement of livestock, fisheries, forestry management and agro-forestry are also important. These experiences are succinctly internalized in the FAO Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS), which is currently operational in 21 countries of the region. In support of the SPFS, FAO has mobilized US$56.6 million, of which US$9.2 million from FAO’s own resources and US$13.3 million from the countries themselves. The donor community has contributed US$34 million through FAO. Furthermore, the SPFS has promoted the use of technical expertise available in the developing countries of the region for the benefit of other developing countries within the region. Under its South-South Cooperation Programme, a total 393 experts from six Asian countries are currently providing technical support to 21 other countries of the region in achieving food security and sustainable agricultural development.
The region still faces several challenges and constraints to sustainable agricultural development; these include, among others, problems related to sustainable management of natural resources, the spreading of plant pests and animal diseases, consumer concerns about food safety and inadequate food marketing systems. Furthermore, globalization and the international and regional trade and economic environments impose additional challenges, which call for collaboration at regional and subregional levels to attain sustainable poverty reduction and food security, as trade and distribution of food and agricultural commodities, as well as opportunities for alternative livelihoods, transcends national boundaries.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The spread of the highly pathogenic avian influenza in several areas in Asia is a disaster for livestock production and a threat to human health. Although it has not happened yet, the so-called “bird-flu” presents a risk of evolving into a dangerous human pathogen, and a serious hazard to food security and food safety. FAO is encouraged by the initiatives and timely responses of the Asian countries and their development partners in containing the spread of the disease and - eventually - eliminating the immediate emergency situation. However, the extent of the current outbreaks of avian flu clearly demonstrates the need for improved regional collaboration and communication. Countries and regional and international organizations have to collaborate in the prevention and mitigation of such disastrous disease outbreaks in the future, and enhanced mechanisms have to be developed and established which comprise surveillance, early-warning, and early response for both animal and plant pests and diseases as foreseen in EMPRES (Emergency Prevention System for Transboundary Animal and Plant Pests and Diseases) launched by FAO in 1994.
In addition, the avian influenza crisis is an opportunity to address emerging policy dimensions such as the need for sustainable agricultural practices (from the farm to the table), building up healthy farming systems, and introducing further improvements to food safety and biosecurity issues. The needed structural changes should be guided by overriding concerns for pro-poor livestock development, friendly to the environment and granting due respect to both producers and consumers of livestock products.
Of course, the Asia and the Pacific region has the capacity to face these emerging challenges as it has faced other challenges in the past. Recognising the implications of interdependence and the linkages of trade with development issues has resulted in the establishment of several regional, subregional, as well as international alliances/groupings, such as ASEAN, APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation), SAARC, and PIF. Some of these, with the support of their member governments, are engaged in efforts to eradicate poverty, hunger and food insecurity, through regional/subregional approaches.
The 12th SAARC Summit held in Pakistan last month, recognised, very appropriately, poverty alleviation as the greatest challenge of South Asia and declared poverty alleviation as the overarching goal of all SAARC activities. Among other initiatives, it approved a Plan of Action on Poverty Alleviation and signed the Framework Agreement on South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA). These reflect real commitment and political will - a critical need - for inter-country collaboration for economic development, eradication of poverty and food insecurity.
ASEAN strives to provide adequate levels of food supply and food accessibility within its member countries and, at the same time, enhance the competitiveness of its food sector. It is also engaged in implementing the Strategic Plan of Action on ASEAN Cooperation in Food, Agriculture and Forestry (1999-2004), the ASEAN Plan of Action on Rural Development and Poverty Eradication and the ASEAN Action Plan on Social Safety Nets. ASEAN countries have also acceded to the Agreement on the ASEAN Food Security Reserve.
The PIF members, recognising the importance of a regional perspective and particular problems faced by small island economies, have also adopted a regional approach to food security. The FAO Trust Fund for Food Safety and Food Security is funding two important components of the Regional Programme for Food Security (RPFS), and acts as a catalyst for mobilising further financing and donor support for a wider programme. These components are: Enhancing Food Production and Security, and Strengthening Agricultural Trade and Policy. The first one focuses on investments on specific production activities while the second emphasizes activities on trade facilitation and food safety norms and standards.
These developments are very encouraging and provide an excellent base to launch innovative joint programmes to complement national actions to achieve World Food Summit and Millennium Development Goals. Such programmes can focus on addressing problems of a transboundary nature affecting sustainable agriculture and rural development by promoting the evolution of complementary agricultural production patterns based on comparative advantages and the adoption of mutually beneficial common agricultural policies. They can also promote inter-regional infrastructure development; the fostering of trade harmonization and liberalization policies; economic integration; improvement of food quality and safety standards; export diversification; and integrated early warning systems for the region.
In this context, I would like to emphasize two points for consideration by the distinguished participants of this meeting. First, the regional/subregional cooperation efforts should pay particular attention to activities that would help achieve the immense potentials for fair trade expansion unleashed by the Uruguay Round Agreements and the establishment of the WTO. While the agenda of greater trade liberalization and market access for developing countries’ exports should be pursued vigorously, countries in the region must work together to develop and harmonize the sanitary and phytosanitary standards and rules which presently constrain agricultural trade among countries within the region and with others outside the region. The second issue that should be tackled urgently is the decline in the commitment of national, as well as international, resources to agriculture and rural development.
Poverty is basically a rural phenomenon in Asia and the Pacific, with 76 percent of the rural population in the region classified as poor, with the highest concentration amongst agricultural households. Thus achieving the Millennium Development Goals with respect to the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger critically depends on the allocation of adequate resources for these sectors. Supporting and promoting investment in agriculture and rural development at national and international levels should, therefore, be at the top of the agenda of regional cooperation.
FAO remains ready and committed to support such regional efforts and programmes. The role of active and progressive regional financing institutions like the Asian Development Bank in supporting regional and national efforts to fight hunger and achieve sustainable food security and rural development is increasingly recognized and appreciated.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am sure that this meeting will permit further exchange of ideas and views among the Regional Economic Organizations attending, and between them and development partners, and will arrive at a consensus on priority areas of collaboration and commit itself, through a joint declaration, to pursue those priorities.
I thank you for your kind attention, and wish you successful deliberations.
Mr Prime Minister, Excellencies, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,
First, let me join Mr Diouf in welcoming you to this important conference. The high level of representation today underlines the importance of the issues we have gathered to discuss.
WHAT IS THE CHALLENGE?
The challenge is to “Halve extreme poverty and hunger by the year 2015.” This is the first and most important of the Millennium Development Goals agreed by the international community.
In recent decades the Asia and Pacific region has made remarkable progress in eliminating poverty. Strong economic growth has raised per capita incomes higher in most countries in the region. As a result, while in 1990, about 32 percent of the people in the region were living on less than $1 a day, this proportion had fallen to 22 percent by 2000. The absolute number of poor also fell from 900 million in 1990 to 720 million by the end of the decade. This is truly an impressive achievement and one that translates into more education, better health, longer lives and greater opportunities for tens of millions of Asians.
But it is important to note that the region’s performance was driven largely by the progress in India and the People’s Republic of China. Excluding these countries, the number of poor in the region remained at about 170 million. It is also worth noting that while rural poverty declined from 39 to 28 percent, urban poverty fell at a much more modest pace, from 24 percent in 1990 to 20 percent in 2000.
In 2000, some 720 million people in Asia and the Pacific continued to survive on less than $1 a day. Another 1.2 billion people had barely more than that, making ends meet with less than $2 a day. Indeed, despite its success, Asia remains home to 60 percent of the world’s poor. This is unacceptable.
Hunger is one of poverty’s most obvious manifestations. This region is also home to just under two-thirds of the developing world’s undernourished. In 19910, 20 percent of the people in Asia and the Pacific were hungry. By 1995, that proportion had fallen to 16 percent, and that is where it remained in 2000. That means one in six people in the region do not have enough to eat. More than 500 million people - eight times the population of Thailand - still do not get enough food to meet basic nutritional requirements and to allow them to fulfil their economic potential.
If we are to achieve our goal of reducing by half the number of people suffering from poverty and hunger we need to do more.
MEETING THE CHALLENGE
What can be done?
The Asian experience suggests that success in the fight against pover1y requires policies that simultaneously strengthen three key areas of development. These three pillars for poverty reduction are economic growth, social development and good governance.
Empirical evidence across countries demonstrates that robust and sustained pro-poor economic growth is the single most important factor in attaining rapid poverty reduction. India, China, Thailand and Viet Nam are among the countries where rapid growth has resulted in a significant drop in poverty in the last decade. The success of East and Southeast Asian economies also underlines the importance of dynamic public policy and an active role of the state in providing the conditions for rapid growth.
One such condition is the availability of adequate infrastructure, in both urban and rural areas. Asia is currently under-investing in infrastructure. Even before the Asian financial crisis, only about 4 percent of GDP was allocated for infrastructure against a requirement of 6-7 percent. Following the crisis, the investment levels have dropped. This needs urgent attention if growth is to be sustained and poverty and hunger reduced.
Secondly, social development policies that promote greater participation by the poor in economic and social activities are needed to make sure that the benefits of economic development are shared by all. Asia’s experience, including that of Thailand, highlights the crucial role played by investments in basic services such as the delivery of health, education, and water.
The third pillar is good governance - the ability of a country to formulate and implement sound policies, and to ensure accountability in fiscal administration and efficiency in the delivery of public services. This is crucial to achieving inclusive growth. Without sound policies and strong institutions, the challenges of poverty and food insecurity cannot be met.
Of course, the primary responsibility for poverty reduction lies with countries themselves. Success in meeting each of the MDGs will largely depend on the commitment and capacity of individual countries to promote their own poverty reduction strategies and to strengthen the three pillars I have just discussed.
Preparation of a clear national strategy to reduce poverty is a complex and time-consuming process. But it is essential. It requires good analytical work to identify the root causes of poverty and the constraints to poverty reduction. Based on this knowledge, key targets for poverty reduction and strategic priorities to achieve them need to be identified and agreed among key stakeholders, and sufficient financial resources mobilized.
While each country must lead its own poverty reduction efforts, without strong collaboration between developing and developed countries, achievement of the first MDG, and, in fact, all MDGs, becomes unlikely. This reality led to the international community’s commitment to set an eighth goal, which requires a collaborative effort between developed and developing countries to deal with pressing global economic and trade issues.
It is estimated that subsidies to the agriculture sector in developed countries amount to about $300 billion annually. This is approximately six times global annual flows of official development assistance. The establishment of an open and non-discriminatory trading system would bring massive benefits to developing economies, and accelerate their progress in reducing poverty. It is urgent that global trade talks resume soon and are concluded successfully.
Finally, developing nations recognize that regional cooperation can play a critical role in promoting economic growth, providing regional public goods, and addressing security and other concerns, all of which contribute to poverty reduction. In recent years, the region’s economies have become increasingly integrated. We must work together to sustain this positive trend. This meeting presents a great opportunity to deepen regional cooperation aimed at reducing poverty and food insecurity. Support of regional cooperation has been a high priority of ADB.
CONCLUSION
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Asian Development Bank is committed to play its part in meeting the Millennium Development Goals and to helping build a better future for the hundreds of millions of Asians who remain poor and hungry. This region has made real progress in the past 13 years. But if we are to achieve these goals developing countries, developed countries and the international community must all work more effectively, more efficiently and more closely over the remaining 12 years.
This conference brings together the technical experts and the decision-makers who can ensure that happens in Asia and the Pacific. ADB is eager to work more closely with you. We must start now.
Thank you.
Excellency Mr Somsak Thepsutin, Minister of Agriculture and
Cooperatives of Thailand;
Mr Jacques Diouf, Director General of
FAO,
Mr Van der Linden, Vice-President of ADB,
Mr Keng Yong
Ong, Secretary General of ASEAN,
Mr Rahim, Secretary General of
SAARC,
Excellencies, Distinguished Representatives, Ladies and
Gentlemen,
I am delighted to welcome you to this regional high-level meeting on subregional cooperation for the eradication of poverty and food insecurity in Asia and the Pacific.
Poverty reduction is now the overarching goal of UNESCAP. Two-thirds of all the poor in the world live in Asia and the Pacific. Despite notable economic growth and some success in reducing income poverty during the last decades, still approximately 800 million people in this region live on less than a dollar a day. Poverty has many sides and manifestations, but the most extreme of them is not having enough food to eat.
In order to make our work more focused on the most pressing issues in the region, I initiated a reform process in UNESCAP. UNESCAP now concentrates its efforts on three areas: reducing poverty, managing globalization and addressing emerging social issues. The focus of this conference relates not only to poverty reduction. It also deals with some of the most relevant social problems in the region, such as the marginalization of women, which affects their access to food. And it is about the process and the consequences of regional economic integration, of which the subregional organizations are important actors.
There are different ways in which UNESCAP works towards the reduction of poverty. Because economic growth is a fundamental requirement for reducing poverty, we monitor and analyze the macroeconomic and social trends in the region. The Economic and Social Survey, published every year by UNESCAP, is the best example of this work.
Equally important, we identify and document specific and targeted interventions to alleviate poverty that are successful and innovative. Through pilot projects, these practices are replicated under different circumstances across the region. Not only do these pilot projects improve the living conditions of the people involved, the projects determine the conditions and support required to replicate and up-scale these practices.
Another of UNESCAP’s responsibilities is monitoring the progress of countries in the region towards achieving the targets stated in the Millennium Declaration. For this, we have joined our efforts with UNDP in a project that supports the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals in Asia and the Pacific. A report on the progress that individual countries have made towards these goals has been produced last year and has been distributed to you among the documentation for this meeting. You will also have the opportunity to view a film on the MDGs in the Asian and Pacific context.
There is a second phase of this project that will extend the collaboration to other agencies in order to create new synergies in this field. The objective is to promote policies that support the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and to facilitate the understanding of key strategies and options. A depository of regional experiences and lessons that may be adopted by other countries will be provided to assist in this objective.
In the Millennium Declaration, the countries resolved to create strong international partnerships for economic and social development. “Responsibility for managing worldwide economic and social development [...] must be shared among the nations of the world and should be exercised multilaterally. As the most universal and most representative organization in the world, the United Nations must play the central role”. UNESCAP, as the regional commission of the United Nations Secretariat, is uniquely placed to promote regional and subregional partnerships in Asia and the Pacific in support of poverty reduction and food security. Indeed, we frequently hold consultations with subregional organizations on issues of economic and social development in this region, and we hope to continue this in the future.
This meeting is a good opportunity to build partnerships for eradicating extreme poverty and hunger. During these two days, different international organizations, subregional economic organizations, representatives from governments and civil society will work together to strengthen the cooperation in the area of poverty and food security. Each institution should bring to this meeting its strengths and skills and complement them with those of the other partners.
It is also one of the roles of UNESCAP to stimulate policy dialogues on important issues for the region. At this regional high-level roundtable meeting, the problems of poverty and food security should be discussed from the perspective of the subregional organizations and by doing so, new elements will be added to the debate and new partnerships and ideas for action will emerge.
Most of the hungry people in the world live in our region. One of the main conclusions of our Report on the Millennium Development Goals is that, for most countries, the progress achieved in the past decade is not enough to reach the targets. It is our hope that your deliberations will bring new ideas and commitments from all the partners involved and that the subsequent efforts will be strengthened in the years to come.
Your Excellency Prime Minister of
Niue,
Honourable Ministers,
Mr Director-General of
FAO,
Mr Executive Secretary of UNESCAP,
Mr Vice President of
Asian Development Bank,
Distinguished Heads of Delegations Ladies and
Gentlemen,
As His Excellency Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is unable to make it to this important meeting, I, as the Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives, was assigned to deliver this inaugural statement.
On behalf of the Prime Minister and of the Thai people, I extend a very warm welcome to each one of you. We are very delighted to have the honour to host this regional high-level roundtable meeting.
This meeting is intended to seek cooperation in eradicating poverty and food insecurity, especially in the Asia and the Pacific region. In spite of rapid and continuous economic growth, the largest number of the poor and hungry is still in this region.
Human resource development to which we have always professed our highest priority still cannot meet its targeted objective as poverty and food insecurity still exist. This may be because there is something wrong in our development models. Therefore, we are here to discuss and exchange our experiences in order to collectively derive the practical solution to poverty elimination.
As a developing nation, Thailand has its own experience with eradication of poverty and hunger, which may be different from those of other countries. However, this difference is a lesson that we can amply learn from one another. The present government continues to accord high priority to the Millennium Development Goals. The Prime Minister has declared his noble determination, as Thailand’s commitment to the international community, to absolutely eradicate poverty within six years.
The main problems of poverty, which the government has learned from the registration of the poor, are: the lack of land for cultivation, indebtedness and the lack of stable occupation. To provide the opportunities to the disadvantaged, the government has set measures such as the decentralization of administration to the local level, the allocation of land for agricultural use, the One Village One Product Project, the Asset Capitalization Project, and the People’s Bank Project.
Besides, in the present day world, which is also called by many as the global village, there is growing interdependence among countries through movement of people, knowledge, goods and services, and financial resources. And there are issues transcending political boundaries that must be addressed in a multi-country framework, as the recent experience with bird flu has amply shown. Thailand is therefore actively pursuing many bilateral, subregional, and regional cooperative activities under the framework of ASEAN, Greater Mekong Subregional Programme, BIMSTEC and several other arrangements that enable us to address common problems collectively.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am confident that this meeting will facilitate further deliberations towards identification of the priority areas of cooperation and the modalities that will strengthen existing cooperation to address the current and emerging issues. I wish you all every success in meeting your objectives and sincerely hope that the results will make the intended contribution towards alleviating poverty and enhancing food security of our less fortunate citizens. Please rest assured of Thailand’s full support and participation in regional initiatives to meet the objectives set in the World Food Summit of 1996.
I wish you a pleasant stay in Thailand. Thank you for your kind attention.
As we all know, Asia and the Pacific region has seen enormous economic growth in the past three decades. And, yet, poverty remains a massive problem. It is widely known that two-thirds of all the world’s poor and the highest absolute number of poor people live in Asia and the Pacific.
And, as pointed out in a number of the papers prepared for this meeting, 70 percent of Asia’s poor live in the rural areas. This means that rural development and poverty alleviation will be crucial in achieving MDG-l in the Asia and Pacific region.
Consequently, IFAD has focused the bulk of its efforts in the region at the national and, indeed, at the grassroots level. Our regional strategy (IFAD Strategy for Rural Poverty Reduction in Asia and the Pacific, March 2002) posits that IFAD can playa catalytic role by focusing on the less favoured areas remote uplands and mountains, marginal costal areas and rainfed areas and the less favoured groups within these areas. Fundamental to our strategy are emphases on changing unequal gender relations, enhancing productivity of staple foods in less favoured areas, reforming property and tenurial rights of marginalized minorities and especially indigenous peoples, and empowering and expanding the capabilities of the poor and vulnerable through self-help, local accumulation and new skills and technologies.
IFAD has put special emphasis on two key groups: women and indigenous peoples (IPs). Why? Because IPs are a major subgroup of rural poor and 70 percent of the world’s indigenous peoples live in Asia. And the severity of poverty is always higher for women; they face greater hardship in lifting themselves and their children out of poverty. We believe that the gender dimension is key to poverty alleviation.
As pointed out in the papers prepared by FAO and ADB for this meeting (FAO: Regional Organizations in Asia and the Pacific, page 11; ADB: Rural Development Policies in Asia and the Pacific: Lessons Learned and Future Course of Action, paragraph 61), because of the inherent difficulties in addressing agriculture and rural development at the regional level, there is a tendency to focus efforts at the national level.
So, the difficult but interesting challenge we are all facing is how our respective efforts at the local and national levels can be enhanced through regional programmes and cooperation. This is the subject of our meeting today and tomorrow, and we are fortunate, in this regard, to have the benefit of some excellent analytic papers by UNESCAP, ADB, FAO and others to structure our discussions. They have done a superlative job in identifying the need for concerted action in this area, at the regional level.
Despite our focus to date on the local and national, IFAD has been making efforts at the regional level. For example, we are a major supporter of CGIAR research centres in the region, with links to the NARS. Many IFAD grant-funded projects have been regional ones in pro-poor agricultural research, training, policy analysis and implementation support. One major emphasis has been on finding sustainable agricultural technologies for less favoured areas. Our support of ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics) led to the development of the world’s first hybrid pigeon pea to be bred successfully under resource-poor conditions. We also support sustainable and regenerative technologies, which have special significance for indigenous peoples.
But more can and must be done including, particularly, through existing regional and subregional organizations in this region. Drawing from IFAD’s Regional Strategy for Asia and the Pacific, as well as some of the excellent papers prepared by ADB, FAO and UNESCAP, we table for your consideration a six-point agenda:
First, as noted by UNESCAP in its technical paper (The Incidence of Poverty and Food Security and the Progress in Achieving the Millennium Development Goals in the Asia-Pacific Region), we agree that one important component of regional support to complement poverty reduction efforts at local and national levels would be the identification and dissemination of “good practices”. We believe that IFAD can make a contribution by tapping into our comparative advantage based on our 25+ years of experience as the only international financial institution that has focused exclusively on the reduction rural poverty.
Second, and related to this first point, IFAD aims to playa catalytic role in its areas of strength as an innovator, sharing its successes for up scaling and replication. We have already had some experience in this area with ADB, among others; we need to build on this experience, capturing lessons learned. Regional mechanisms could be useful to facilitate upscaling and replication. Here, we were struck by the ideas in the UNESCAP paper, among other things on building the capacity of replicators (page 15) at the regional level.
Third, the issue of sustainable natural resource management, as highlighted in the FAO paper (page 16) and the ADB paper (paragraph 63), can and should be the subject of cross-border collaboration. For example, diseases, air, seas, river basins and fisheries do not recognize national boundaries. IFAD, as noted above, has already done some important work in sustainable pro-poor agricultural technologies that could be shared and upscaled at the regional level beyond current levels.
Fourth, we agree with FAO’s assessment that, while largely a national and local issue, there is scope for regional initiatives to promote equity and access to productive assets, especially support for vulnerable groups to take advantages of the opportunities presented by trade integration. As noted, this is already at the heart of IFAD’s regional strategy at the grassroots level; the challenge will be to find ways and means to address the issue more globally and regionally. Globalization and markets, and its impact on less favoured areas and groups, is already one of IFAD’s prime areas of concern in the region. Indeed, our 2004 Governing Council, which took place only last week, had trade and rural development as one of its major themes. An interactive panel discussion on this topic centered around a background paper prepared by IFAD entitled “Trade and Rural Development: Opportunities and Challenges for the Rural Poor”. Issues included: how to reduce small farmers’ dependence on traditional exports to developed countries, how to diversify into higher-value products, how to enter into the value-added chain, how to address tariff escalation issues, and how much to focus on developed country markets as opposed to regional, national and local markets in and among developing countries. The paper points out that real barriers to internal agricultural trade in many developing countries are often as high as barriers to entry into developed country markets. Moreover, agricultural trade among developing countries is subject to significant tariff and non-tariff barriers. These are complex issues and can only be properly addressed not only at the global but also at the regional levels. In this connection, Asian SREOs will have a role to play. We think that this document is relevant to the deliberations of this roundtable, so we have submitted it to the Secretariat to make available to those of you who may be interested; your feedback to us in IFAD would be most welcome.
Fifth, policy dialogue is another area where a regional approach could be useful in creating an enabling environment for rural development and poverty alleviation. (See ADB paper, paragraph 18). IFAD has been active in promoting policy dialogue through support of pro-poor advocacy groups at the local level; this can and should be brought to a higher level. As mentioned, IFAD views gender as a key issue; given the subregional disparities in this area, gender may be a fit area for subregional approaches. Other policies that may be approached - or at least shared - at the regional level include macro-credit and rural enterprises. In all of these areas, collaboration among governments in the region, international agencies, as well as NGOs, should be promoted. Food security is, of course, a key issue. We would agree with FAG (page 4) that at the household level, for those groups that IFAD is most concerned with, lack of access to food is basically an outcome of poverty, and our focus should therefore be on poverty alleviation.
Sixth, in the area of governance, we would point out the primary importance of peace and stability for development. We salute the fact that ASEAN has played a key role in preventing conflict among member states in the region. But we are also concerned that conflict within countries, which threaten development efforts, can be found in a number of countries in the region. IFAD’s Regional Strategy (page II) points out that rising inequality and persistent poverty, together with forms of exploitation and social injustice, will sooner or later lead to conflict and insurgency. But peace is more than just the absence of conflict; to be positive, peacemaking must eliminate the structures that support unequal fulfilment within or between countries and address the wrongs done to those who suffer from unequal power relations, including gender relations. Here, again, regional cooperation can help; the challenge will be to identify and define the opportunities and modalities.
IFAD looks forward to a fruitful discussion at this meeting. Finally, many thanks again to FAO, ADB and UNESCAP for a superlative job in preparing and organizing this meeting.
The South Pacific region is characterized by amongst other things the diversity of its physical environment. We have the high islands as can be found in Samoa, Fiji, French Polynesia and others where soils are extremely fertile. Then we have the low laying atolls of Tuvalu, Niue, Kiribati and others where soils are thin and easily exhausted. In some instances this imbalance is re-dressed by the presence of a rich marine resource.
In a number of our small island countries the resources are such that it can sustain only the existing population and, unless another kind of resource that is marketable outside the country is found, there can be little economic growth.
We have a number of agencies in the region whose existence - in part - is to address the socio-economic disparity among our countries. We have found that in certain things, it is best for us to approach the problem in a collective way, particularly when a resource is unevenly distributed. It is in recognition of this uneven distribution that led the region to establish one of its most successful agencies, the Forum Fisheries Agency. Island countries were able to come together under this umbrella to negotiate an arrangement with distant fishing nations who harvest our marine resources.
In a similar way, we are addressing the problem of the elimination of poverty and food security in a collective way under the auspices of FAO. In this regard I must make mention of the very generous assistance from the Italian government to the Forum Island countries.
To accomplish social and economic progress the Pacific region must come together. Globalization is something which we still need to come to terms with and we’re still grappling with trying to understand the effect on small island countries. I am reminded of what one of the early Kings of this country, Thailand, said when he was introducing modem education. In effect what he said was that we should not smother the child’s individualism with too much curriculum! There are some countries in my region who feel the same way about globalization. Having said that, however, we recognize that in terms of our size, we need to get together which is precisely what we’re doing with FAO under the Special Programme for Food Security.
It is accepted that sustainable socio-economic development, where the benefits are evident in all sectors of the population, can lead to the alleviation and ultimately the elimination of poverty and provide security in the supply of food. The basis on which you have built your sustainability - what if that was threatened? I speak from personal experience because my small island country is facing that exact same dilemma.
Some of you will know that some six weeks ago my island state was devastated by the worst cyclone in living memory with winds gusting up to 300 kilometres an hour and phenomenal seas of up to 60 metres high. In a matter of hours, the basis on which we had built and were continuing to build our sustainable development programme was literally wiped from the face of the earth. Absolutely swamped by high seas.
How can we restart? Where can we look for the necessary assistance to start again? This is the reality of small vulnerable island states. My island, Niue, is a high atoll - but what of some of my neighbours who are almost at sea level? What hope is there for them? We look to gatherings such as this to give us some answers.
It is a great pleasure for me to participate at this important meeting, being held in this historic city Bangkok. I am happy to see all my distinguished colleagues and the Director General of FAO, Executive Secretary of ESCAP and the Vice President of ADB who have been instrumental in organizing this important roundtable. I am also privileged to be able to utilize this opportunity to share some of my thoughts regarding the role of subregional cooperation for eradication of poverty and food insecurity from this region and particularly from South Asia.
Mr Chairman,
During the last three decades, Asia has experienced enormous positive changes in terms of economic growth, food production, and decrease in poverty and malnutrition. In the 1960s, South Asia was deficient in food production. Thanks to the green revolution, now it is a food surplus region. Food production in Bangladesh has made a great leap during the last three decades. Rice production has increased from 9.5 million tons in 1966-67 to more than 25 million tons in 2002-03; Wheat production, increased from 0.06 million tons in 1967-68 to nearly 1.8 million tons the in mid-nineties.
The achievements in the agriculture sector of Bangladesh are the result of effective public policy interventions in a market-driven agriculture sector. Public investment for agriculture was made in agricultural research and extension services, seed and other input delivery systems, and irrigation and flood control.
Agricultural research in Bangladesh has successfully released more than 350 improved varieties of different crops. More than half of the land is now irrigated and over 65 percent of the rice area and all of the area under wheat have been covered by the high yielding varieties. Strengthening of agriculture extension services, liberalisation of agricultural input markets, and overall efficient governance of the sector have played a defining role in this respect. Domestic efforts were complemented, and in many cases even led, by international efforts, particularly in agricultural research and development. International institutes like IRRI and CIMMYT have also played an important role in this process.
Mr Chairman,
Increased production of foodgrain has increased per capita availability of foodgrains. Consequently, increased foodgrain production accompanied by a reduction in the per unit cost of production resulted in a decrease in the real price of rice and wheat. This has been one of the mechanisms through which we have been able to reduce poverty, particularly for the landless in rural areas of Bangladesh. The urban poor have also benefited from the decrease in the real price of foodgrains considering the fact that more than 60 percent of their budget is spent on food.
The long-term trend in poverty has experienced a notable decline since Bangladesh’s independence in 1971. A Household Expenditure Survey (HES) in 1973-74 reported that 71 percent of the population lived below the poverty line. By the year 2000, this share has come down to 40 percent. During the 1990s, poverty declined, as per head count ratio, at the rate of one percent per annum. However, this would look rather meager once compared with the trends in the emerging economies of the Southeast Asia region.
Mr Chairman,
Even though we have made considerable progress in poverty reduction, hunger still remains one of the elusive challenges before the region. In my own country, Bangladesh, a quarter of the population, i.e. about 30 million people are at present considered as “ultra poor” and they suffer from chronic food insecurity and severe malnutrition. Forty-four percent of the population still cannot meet the minimum required nutrient intake of 2 122 kilocalorie per day, though food availability at the national or local level is not a problem.
Not only in Bangladesh but also in many other countries of the region or even in the world, hunger and malnutrition remain widespread. Each day 800 million people of the world go hungry. At present 170 million children under five years of age suffer from malnourishment. About 24 000 people die every day in the world from hunger or hunger-related causes. Half of the children in the least developed countries are malnourished. More grimly, South Asia has been hosting the highest number of undernourished persons which has increased from 289 million in 1992 to 303 million in 1999, defying the declared MDG. This situation is a human tragedy on a vast scale in the era of globalisation. Paradoxically, the situation has precipitated and is being perpetuated not because of the absence of material resources and not because of lack of social awareness and public policies. I would like to maintain that this is happening largely because of our deficiency in political will to act together and our failure to mount a purposeful, coherent and time-bound regional and subregional effort to end food insecurity and poverty from this region. According to the UNDP Human Development Report 2002, 29 percent of the population in my country, Bangladesh, subsist on the equivalent of US$1 a day and 78 percent on US$2 a day. The increase in food production and enhanced availability of food has a positive impact on the reduction of poverty and hunger. Global leaders are aware about the situation and have committed themselves to solve the problem.
You may recall that Heads of States and Governments agreed at the United Nations to a set of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the first one which espouses: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger through (i) halving, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than US$1 a day, and (ii) halving, between, 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger.
At the first World Food Summit (WFS), held in Rome in 1996, Heads of State of countries of the world had “reaffirmed the right of access to safe and nutritious food consistent with the right to adequate food and fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger”.
Building on past achievements, we can reduce the share of poor people by half in our region. However, this would require joint efforts and we will not be able to solve the problem if we act alone. These are regional problems rather than problems of one particular country. Therefore, all counties in the region must make a concerted effort. To this end, we would definitely need an effective and participatory alliance of all stakeholders in the region which our international development partners will find worthwhile supporting.
Mr Chairman,
We have developed a National Strategy for Economic Growth and Poverty reduction in Bangladesh. Our strategy emphasizes pro-poor economic growth for poverty reduction. We believe, “For rapid poverty reduction, the Government’s priority is to develop the rural areas where most of the poor people live. This requires accelerated growth of agriculture and the rural non-farm sector. A rapid agricultural growth will sustain high growth with better capacity to reduce poverty through enhancing rural wages, creating synergies for diversifying the rural economy, and enabling the supply of low-cost food to improve nutritional status and food security of the people.”
Mr Chairman,
In Asia, the relationship between water, poverty, and the environment is complex. About 40 percent of Asia’s cropland is irrigated and helps produce about 70 percent of its food. In South Asia, water scarcity is increasing over time. Optimum utilization of water resources in South Asia demands concerted action by us. If any country wants to have a larger share of water by depriving others, either by over utilization of water from the river or diverting the water, then it is bound to have a serious negative effect on the ecology and environment. [A neighboring county’s] plan to connect more than two dozen rivers, including the Ganges and the Brahmaputra, by digging canals to divert major common river waters unilaterally to its southwest states will, if implemented, put Bangladesh’s agriculture under grave threat as 85 percent of its dry season surface water depends on these two major rivers. A study shows an increase in arid zones. Experts view that such an act will destroy not only the delicate ecology of Bangladesh but also its economy, and the livelihood of millions will be jeopardized. The long-term effect of an increase in salinity, caused by droughts resulting from water diversion, will surely wreak havoc among Bangladeshis living in the coastal areas because it will also impact crop pattern and fisheries, which provide livelihood to the poor in that region of Bangladesh. We all know the success story of water sharing in the Southeast Asia region and in our South Asia region too. We can benefit from developing similar water sharing arrangements.
Agricultural development in the twenty-first century would depend to a large extent on utilization of biological and remote sensing sciences, and information and communication technology (ICT). Less developed countries in this region have limited resource endowments for this. Therefore, networks and regional collaboration would enable poor countries to successfully use biotechnology, GIS, and ICT for the benefit of the less-advantaged i.e. the poor farmers of this region.
Mr Chairman,
I would like to draw your attention to an IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) report which forecasts a regional cereals deficit averaging around 20-25 million tons per year by 2020 in South Asia. Last week, the IRRI Director General, Dr Ronald P. Cantrell, in an interview with Reuter pointed out that many rural rice communities in Asia are growing increasingly restless, as productivity stagnation leaves them trapped in poverty; they urgently need new technologies to make them more productive and competitive and to lift them out of poverty. I strongly feel that these desired technologies would come through the use of biotechnology-assisted breeding programmes. Therefore, countries having limited facilities may augment their limitation through networking, partnerships and collaborative research.
Mr Chairman,
Hunger and food insecurity can only be fought with the combined efforts of all development stakeholders towards the shared goal of “food for all”. If this concern could be shared at the regional level, the partnership will last and will lead towards actual poverty eradication. Participation and partnering will likewise continue to be strengthened with the NGOs and scientific and business communities within this region through structured interchange and enhanced dialogue.
Though there are enormous political and socio-cultural diversities among our countries in Asia, common economic interests and shared perspectives and approaches to food security and poverty alleviation have tied our fortunes together, or rather tied our misfortunes together. Our task is to translate the potential adversities into concrete opportunities for our people. Only through a concerted regional effort can we hope to effectively address our difficulties and advance our common interests.
Thank you for your attention.
Honorable
Chairman,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
May I congratulate you on your election as Chairman of this regional high-level roundtable meeting. I join the other delegates in congratulating the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (FAO-RAP); the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP); and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for jointly organizing this meeting.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In the Malaysian perspective, food security can be divided into two major components. The first is the right to access to food while the second is to be self-sufficient in food production. Even though Malaysia has been classified by FAO as a low vulnerable country in terms of right to access to food, the government has been giving more emphasis to the agriculture sector. In this respect, the policy thrust for the agriculture sector is to transform it to be modern, dynamic and competitive. This is clearly specified in the Third National Agricultural Policy 1998-2010 (NAP3), which provides the agricultural policy framework for the country. Through the NAP3, we expect to maximize the income of farmers by way of optimizing utilization of resources so as to enhance food security, increase productivity and competitiveness in the sector, deepen linkages with other sectors as well as create new sources of growth for the sector.
Although the contribution of the agriculture sector to GDP was only 3.6 percent in 2003, its importance cannot be denied as a source of food and security. Agriculture will continue to remain as one of the major sectors of the Malaysian economy as the sector is expected to increase food production so as to reduce imports and increase exports. In fact, Malaysia’s greatest challenge is to reduce dependence on imports of agricultural and food products. The 1997/98 economic downturn has enlightened the government on the huge trade deficit in agriculture and food products.
In line with the nation’s incorporated policy, private sector participation in food production is very important. We have received a favourable response from the private sector in three major subsectors, that is, aquaculture, food crops and livestock. To further encourage private sector involvement in this sector, we have in place permanent food parks and satellite farms specially meant for private sector participation in medium and large scale commercialized food cultivation.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Rural development in Malaysia is almost synonymous with poverty eradication. Under the current Eighth Malaysia Plan, poverty eradication strategies are directed towards eradicating absolute poverty and increasing the income and quality of life of the poor and low income groups; increasing the size of middle income groups; targeting specific groups such as the hardcore poor among all communities; and developing remote/interior areas and regions.
Through these strategies and poverty eradication programmes, Malaysia has been able to reduce the incidence of poverty from 7.5 percent in 1999 to 5.1 percent in 2002, while the number of poor households declined by 1 percent from 360 100 to 267 900. Similarly, the incidence of hardcore poverty also decreased from 1.4 percent in 1999 to 1.0 percent in 2002, while the number of hardcore poor households declined from 66 000 to 52 900. In addition, 92 percent of houses in the rural areas have been provided with electricity, while 86 percent received clean water supply in 2003. Schools, clinics and rural roads were also constructed. Efforts have also been undertaken to diversify the sources of rural income so as to accelerate rural development.
Rural development and poverty eradication efforts have been an integral component of national development since independence in 1957 and the government’s leading role has certainly contributed to the achievements in poverty eradication. Other critical success factors include continuous budgetary support, full commitment and political will, clear identification of programmes to match the needs of the target groups as well as the target groups’ awareness and understanding of their roles and responsibilities.
Malaysia will continue with its efforts to further reduce the incidence of poverty. Future poverty eradication programmes will be more target-specific, especially addressing issues of poverty among specific vulnerable groups in both the rural and urban areas. The government hopes to achieve the target of 0.5 percent incidence of poverty by the year 2005. Barring any untoward events, I am confident that we will be able to achieve this target.
Malaysia’s success in eradicating poverty and food insecurity does not mean that the country can rest on its laurels. Globalization, liberalization and Malaysia’s current development policies have a direct implication on poverty. As Malaysia advances further into the information age and with emphasis on the K-economy, as well as the move of the economy towards capital intensive and high value-added activities, the demand for knowledge and skilled workers also increases. It is important that all sectors of the population benefit from the K-economy. To this effect, remedial measures will have to be taken as otherwise it will widen the income disparity and the digital divide between the poor and the non-poor.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
With globalization and cross-border movement and activities, it cannot be denied that countries can achieve more through collaboration, either between countries or with regional and subregional organizations. As we are all aware, the Asia Pacific region has various organizations addressing issues on agriculture, trade, marketing, rural development and poverty eradication, fisheries, agricultural cooperatives, economic and rural development as well as financing. It is therefore obvious that there exist varied opportunities and scope for enhancing cooperation in the fields of economic development and growth, credit and finance, R&D, cooperatives and commodity development as well as measures to establish and improve food security and eradicate poverty.
ASEAN member countries are aware that ASEAN is a very active regional organization in the Asia Pacific region. Through ASEAN and its various subregional organizations such as the ASEAN Ministers of Agriculture and Forestry Meeting (AMAF), the ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Rural Development and Poverty Eradication (SOMRDPE) and the growth triangles, a lot of emphasis and attention have been given to enhancing agriculture productivity, food security as well as rural development and poverty eradication.
Malaysia has participated actively in activities of ASEAN and its subregional organizations and I must admit that such participation has enabled the nation to reap benefits. For example, in terms of food security, the ASEAN Food Security Reserve Board (AFSRB) has developed strategies to increase the level of food security among member countries, especially for commodities such as rice, soy, maize, sugar and others. Nationally, to further enhance food security, a rice stockpile has been established and a government agency has been entrusted to manage the stock to meet requirements for the duration of 2-3 months. Similarly, the East Asia Emergency Rice Reserve (EAERR) offers opportunities for further collaboration in assuring the supply of rice in times of emergency. Currently, Malaysia has agreed to allocate 6 000 metric tones of rice for this regional cooperative effort. Malaysia is also committed to providing food assistance in times of natural disaster to member countries.
Growth areas avail themselves of opportunities for implementation of projects on a subregional basis amongst countries. BIMP-EAGA is eyed as a major location in ASEAN of high value-added agro-industry natural resource-based manufacturing and high-grade tourism. Further development of these components will create more opportunities in the field of employment, trade, food production and socioeconomic development thereby uplifting living standards and quality of life for participating countries.
Collaboration in the fisheries sector is actively pursued through the Southeast Asia Fisheries Development Centre (SEAFDEC). Last month the Centre came up with appropriate responsible aquaculture technologies to help alleviate poverty and ensure food security in rural areas through the Aquaculture for Rural Development Programme. In addition, it has also come up with appropriate and responsible seed production technologies in support of aquaculture and stock enhancement programmes which would eventually contribute to food security and sustainable development in the fishery sector.
Beyond the ASEAN region, Malaysia has also collaborated with other Asia-Pacific countries such as Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan. Through the import of foreign labour from these countries, Malaysia helps contribute to the increase in income and poverty eradication to the countries providing the labour, while Malaysia gets the workforce it requires.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
These are just but a few examples of regional and subregional collaboration that Malaysia is involved in. Malaysia’s participation and involvement in such collaboration with ASEAN and amongst ASEAN countries as well as other countries has enabled it to share its experiences and expertise, whilst at the same time learning from others. I believe that the sharing and exchange of experiences and knowledge will certainly go a long way in helping countries in their development efforts and in developing their own expertise.
As countries become dependent on others for their own well-being and development, it is certainly obvious that collaboration will be looked upon as an avenue and opportunity to tap the experience and expertise of others. Moreover, collaboration at the regional level enables countries to discuss issues and share common problems. Through collaboration, issues can be resolved amicably.
While I agree that collaboration plays an important role in the world today and remains an important avenue for countries to work together, there must be a commitment from all parties. There must be sincerity and a common need to share and to assist countries involved. Only then can collaboration achieve the desired objectives and results.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Malaysia is aware that collaboration will enable countries to derive greater benefits. Collaboration will allow weaker countries to benefit from the success and experience of others. In this regard, I believe that there is a greater need now for countries in the Asia-Pacific region, and in particular within ASEAN, to collaborate and to work even harder together if we are really serious and committed to eradicating poverty and food insecurity. As it is, about two-thirds of the world’s poor live in our region. It is our responsibility to help improve the livelihood of these people. On the other hand, these regional and subregional organizations must also play an active role to ensure that any collaboration will bring benefits to the countries involved.
On reflection, while it is important to have regional and subregional collaborative initiatives, it is also more important for individual countries to undertake efforts to address these issues themselves. Some of Malaysia’s experiences that have enabled her to achieve success in eradicating poverty and food insecurity have been the political commitment in addressing these issues continuously over a long period of time: the policies, programmes, projects as well as resources that have been in place for the past 40 years, beginning from the era of our New Economic Policy up to the current National Development Policy. In addition, a good delivery system was established to ensure that the resources reached the target groups. We have been fortunate that Malaysia has always been peaceful and politically stable. All these factors have contributed to lowering our incidence of poverty and food insecurity, and to the overall progress of the country as a whole.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In conclusion, I would like to state that Malaysia will continue to support regional and subregional collaboration in the Asia-Pacific region in the pursuit of poverty eradication and food insecurity. At the same time, I would like to urge all countries to provide adequate focus and resources for the alleviation of poverty.
Thank you.
Mr Chairman and Distinguished Delegates,
Ladies
and Gentlemen,
I remain deeply honoured for having been given this opportunity of exchanging views and delivering a statement at this meeting. Today’s high-level meeting is an initiative to strengthen subregional programmes, in its battle against the eradication of poverty and food-insecurity in the Asia-Pacific region. And the presence of Heads of Government, the Ministers concerned, the high-level representatives of the UN agencies and other Institutions and Organizations, is a testimony to the significance of this meeting.
Mr Chairman and Distinguished Delegates,
The International Community had in good faith made commitments to combat the scourge. It was done at the Rome Declaration of World Food Security and the World Food Summit of 1996 and again at the World Food Summit five years later in 2002. Tragically, however, the Asia-Pacific region still remains the abode of roughly two-thirds of the world’s 1.2 billion poor and hungry people. Under such circumstances, it is our fervent hope that this meeting will foster collaboration and give further impetus to the efforts in the alleviation of hunger and poverty in rural areas.
Mr Chairman,
The Government of Myanmar, while pursuing national economic development, has given full support to the development of agriculture and irrigation through national initiatives and with our own resources. And in summarizing the performance achieved for the year 1990-91 to 2000-01, I am glad to inform that the crop sector averaged an annual growth rate of 5 percent; the livestock and fishery sector averaged an even higher rate; and the forestry sector, an environmentally friendly growth.
In recognition of the central role rice has played in determining the food security and the welfare of the urban and rural poor, rice had been designated as the National Crop of Myanmar since 1992. And during the last decade, the total area as well as irrigated area of rice increased by 26 percent and 108 percent respectively. Consequently, rice production also rose by 47 percent, reaching 21.8 million metric tons in 2002-03.
And with a view to further accelerating the production of rice, the Government terminated the direct purchase of paddy by state agencies last year, and adopted a new rice trading policy to ensure free trade. Rice constitutes a major crop in this region, and I would like to congratulate Dr Jacques Diouf and Dr Cantrell for their earnest efforts and contribution to the successful launching of the International Year of Rice 2004.
The IYR 2004 had very effectively generated awareness and interest in the essential role of rice in maintaining food security and inter alia the alleviation of poverty. And in order to sustain the momentum, it will be necessary to work closely with FAO and IRRI to strengthen research and development efforts, and make rice a profitable crop for rice farmers and, in turn, sustain its production. Since the Asia and Pacific region is a major rice producing and consuming region, we should do our best to place rice and rice research at the core of the international development agenda.
Mr Chairman,
A significant contribution to Myanmar’s enhanced crop production was the increasing irrigation coverage made available by the government mainly with its limited own national capital resources. 155 irrigation projects were additionally completed between 1988 to 2003, bringing a further 0.8 million hectares under irrigation. The area under irrigation expanded from 12 percent of the total sown area in 1988 to 19 percent in 2003.
Again, in our shift towards a market economy, the livestock and fishery sectors gained substantial benefits, with increasing private, both foreign and indigenous, participation. So far, large-scale commercial livestock ventures still remain minimal, but in terms of meat production, chicken, duck and pigs gave a three-fold increase and beef and mutton a two-fold increase, consequently giving rise to a per capita meat consumption of 4.3 kg (1991-92) to 9.0 kg by 2000-01. And, as a country committed to strengthening its livestock production, we deeply regret the outbreak of avian flu in some of our neighbouring countries, and sincerely hope it will be contained and will soon be a thing of the past.
Incidentally, there were more private sector responses to the overtures of the fishery sector. Currently, marine fish production is operated mainly by joint venture companies and, similarly, the large increases in inland fishery production stems from private sector aquaculture farms. As a result, total fish production rose to 1.189 million tons (2000-01) as against only 0.68 million tons in 1985-86, and export earnings that were only US$15.4 million in 1989-90 had increased to US$251.5 million by 2001-02. And, as a corollary, Myanmar’s per capita fish consumption at 28.4 kg remained three times higher than its corresponding per capita meat consumption.
Mr Chairman,
The said achievements undoubtedly contributed to the incomes and welfare of the rural community. At the same time, the government, in providing supplementary support to the measures, also invested heavily in infrastructure, such as irrigation, roads and bridges, information technology and communications, etc.
The government has been according full support to the rural areas through the Ministry for Progress of Border Areas and National Races and Development Affairs, the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, the Ministry of Forestry and other related ministries. However we are aware that there still remains a lot more to be done. Myanmar’s rural population currently stands at 71 percent and rural poverty is estimated around 22.4 percent of its total population.
In cognizance, the government of Myanmar has been rigorously engaged in providing rural areas with better and smooth transport; adequate water supply; access to education; access to better health care; generation of off-farm incomes and employment opportunities, while tendering supportive policies for expansion and intensification of food crop production.
Mr Chairman,
Myanmar joined ASEAN in 1997 and has been subscribing to its intra-ASEAN as well as extra-ASEAN aspects related to food security, food trade policies, agro-industries and industrialization, technology transfer, research and development and investments.
Myanmar’s share of industry to its GDP is still low in comparison to most of the countries in the region. Under the evolving global aptitudes, value-added products have come to have more appeal and it is envisaged that investment, economic and technology cooperation within ASEAN and from other sources would be of invaluable assistance in enlarging Myanmar’s industrial base. It will in turn offer employment and off-farm income to the rural areas and serve as a mechanism in combating rural poverty.
We fully realize the need of food security for international, regional and national stability. We have spared no efforts in enhancing our food production and currently remain contributors to regional food security as a member of the ASEAN Emergency Rice Reserve Scheme. We are also actively participating in the pilot phase for East Asian-ASEAN Rice Reserve activities.
Myanmar also actively took part in adopting the first phase of the implementation of the Framework of the ASEAN Plan of Action on Rural Development and Poverty Eradication and the ASEAN Plan on Social Safety Nets, and other related ongoing ASEAN programmes.
Mr Chairman and Distinguished Delegates,
The United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have stemmed from the Millennium Summit 2000, and these noble goals were adopted therein by the largest gathering of Heads of State and Government.
The first and most important millennium goal calls for the halving of the number of poor and hungry by 2015 and the other important goals are to tackle pressing issues such as gender inequality, inaccessibility to education, poor health care and lack of clean water; and the MDGs remain the working framework and criteria for measuring the degree of development success.
Agriculture and rural development remains central to any strategy geared towards the alleviation of poverty and food insecurity. And if there is a lack of growth in income, food insecurity and poverty will continue to persist and fair trading practices can play an important role in combating both.
Currently, globalization and trade liberalization have transcended national boundaries. As such, we highly appreciate that the gathering here today will, in addition to identifying subregional priorities and strengthening the dialogue between nations and Subregional Economic Organizations (SREOs) and regional technical and donor agencies, will also be addressing the pressing needs for the establishment of a level playing field in international trading practices.
Mr Chairman and Distinguished Delegates,
We remain gathered here today, with noble aspiration as to the alleviation of poverty and food insecurity and are duty bound to give a helping hand to these millions of poverty stricken fellow-beings, and offer them a decent life on this planet.
Thank you.
Mr Chairman, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, and Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am delighted to be invited to this high-level roundtable meeting and to be given the opportunity to share my views with you. Given the theme and the level of participation, this is a very important forum and is organized at a time when the memories of the historic SAARC Summit recently concluded in Islamabad are still fresh in that region.
I would like to begin with more general remarks first.
The world is more prosperous today than it was a decade ago. There are more options and choices available for a better human living now than there were in the past. But this is an aggregate picture and masks the faces of more than 800 million people who do not have adequate access to food, the most basic human right and means of survival.
Food insecurity is not only a problem of the food-deficit, poor nations of the world, but it is also a serious threat to the peace, stability and prosperity of other nations, regionally and perhaps, globally too. But, despite accelerated efforts and commitments at different levels towards fighting the problem, progress has been slow; and with business as usual it may take prohibitively long time - probably decades - to achieve the MDG concerning the food security set for 2015.
The past three decades have achieved less than a 20 percent reduction in the number of hungry and under-fed people in the world. This was despite significant expansion of cultivation frontier and large increases in food grain productivity in many countries of Asia during the period. In most of the food-insecure countries, the cultivation frontier is closing and yield gaps are narrowing; and therefore significant increases in domestic food production (food availability) will not be possible without a major technological breakthrough resulting in another, much more successful and evenly distributed, Green Revolution.
But an increase in food production or availability is not enough. The world produces enough food for all. Yet, as we know, a large mass goes to bed hungry, not knowing whether and when it will get the next meal. It is important that the poor people have enough income to access the food that is available in the market. Economic poverty is a dominant cause of food insecurity, and unless the present levels of poverty are reduced drastically, the problem of food insecurity cannot be solved permanently.
Opportunities for income generation and poverty reduction are there within agriculture; but this will require considerable diversification in agricultural production system, from the traditional subsistence-oriented system to one that involves commercial production of high-value commodities that can increase farm incomes from limited lands. Of course, this will require improvements in access to markets - regionally and globally. This is where regional/subregional cooperation and collaboration becomes important.
Mr Chairman,
Whose role and responsibility is it to end hunger? A multitude of actors - ranging from the hungry people themselves at the local level to the governments at the national and regional levels, and to donors and developed country governments at the international level - have a role to play in this. As such, the responsibility to end hunger must be shared by all these actors, and all of them must pursue their respective set of priorities for action.
At the local level, there is a need for the poor people to understand their development problems, potentials and priorities and initiate collective actions to implement those priorities. The key is to put people in the center stage and to help them internalize and manage the development process. Social mobilization has proved to be an effective tool for this.
At the national level, governance needs to be improved; a participatory, decentralized and pro-poor policy environment needs to be brought in place; the service delivery system needs to be reformed and based on the principle of public-private partnership; and public institutions, including the national agricultural research and extension system, need to be re-oriented, strengthened and made responsive to the needs of women and the poor and marginalized people.
At the regional and subregional levels, full and effective implementation of various agreements that are made among the member countries is essential to foster cooperation and collaboration among them to more effectively fight the problem of poverty and food insecurity in their respective region and subregion. In the South Asian context, for example, full and effective implementation of the 12th SAARC Summit agreement and the provisions made therein will accelerate the pace of cooperation and development in that region.
At the international level, there is a need for the developed country governments to translate into actions their commitments reflected in the 8th MDG concerning global partnership for development. More specifically, they need to step up their current low level of ODA to the developing countries and reduce (or eliminate) agricultural subsidies to open their markets.
Mr Chairman,
Allow me to briefly mention the condition of Nepal in relation to the problem of poverty and food insecurity and highlight the key development agenda that we have adopted to fight this problem.
Agriculture remains the most important sector for the people and economy of Nepal. It contributes 40 percent GDP, absorbs 70 percent of the labor force and provides livelihood to more than 80 percent of the population, which lives in rural areas. However, despite efforts, agricultural productivity has remained low (US$140 per agricultural worker). Even though land productivity is relatively higher (US$649 per hectare), the small landholding size (0.8 ha) means that average household income is low. As agriculture is the main source of income in rural areas, the link between poverty and food insecurity is very close.
Even though the country produces enough food for its people, half of Nepal’s 75 districts are classified as food-deficit. This testifies the spatial mismatch between production and requirement. Not only do the poor people lack economic access to food, the internal distribution system is also weak and has failed to ensure physical access to food in a timely and reliable manner.
Poverty alleviation has been the single most important goal of development efforts, particularly since the Ninth Plan. Nepal is currently in the realm of the Tenth Plan, which has continued the previous thrust and has accorded highest priority to agriculture, especially through effective and full-scale implementation of the Agricultural Perspective Plan formulated in 1995. The current Plan strategy is to focus on high, sustainable and broad-based economic growth, development of the social sector and rural infrastructure, implementation of targeted programmes and good governance.
The major focus of the current Plan in agriculture is to contribute to achieving high and sustainable economic growth and poverty alleviation and improvement in the food and nutrition status of the people by increasing agricultural productivity through the provision of integrated packages of inputs and services. The strategy is to generate and disseminate agricultural technology, to increase farmers’ access to agricultural inputs and credit, and to commercialize and diversify agriculture.
A more market-oriented system, decentralization and participation of stakeholders in the design, monitoring, and implementation of agricultural development are major threads of policy framework adopted by the Government to achieve the Tenth Plan goal.
Effective participation requires transparency of decision, accountability to stakeholders, and adequate incentives. Targeting of programmes to vulnerable and disadvantage groups is often not achieved because of the lack of operational methods for targeting and lack of local capacity. Successful cases in programmes and projects are not going to be sustained unless institutionalized. Policy implementation is not successful unless it is credible. Credibility requires consistency and compliance with commitments
Poverty reduction is also a process closely linked with the political economy of the production system. In most countries a democratic ideology that focuses on the welfare of the masses and assigns a supreme role to the people in deciding on the question of leadership must be able to institutionalize enough checks and balances in the system so that it does not become a vehicle for increasing the welfare of the few at the cost of the many. Many best practices in fact can succeed at the pilot level but upscaling and replicating them at the national level can prove to be difficult unless the political leadership builds a constituency that has a vested interest in pushing the programme in the nation. It is very much a political process and this is a point that needs regular attention.
Mr Chairman,
Distinguished Excellencies, Ladies
and Gentlemen,
I am very honoured and indeed very pleased to be invited to address this Regional High-level Roundtable Meeting on Spearheading Subregional Programmes and Cooperation for Eradication of Poverty and Food Insecurity in Asia and the Pacific, in my capacity as Minister of Agriculture, Forests, Fisheries and Meteorology of Samoa. We thank FAO and the organizers of this meeting for inviting Samoa to participate.
Samoa remains committed to the Millennium Development Goals and World Food Summit (WFS) Declarations of fighting hunger through every means possible of alleviating poverty available to us both nationally, regionally and internationally.
Samoa retains a highly agricultural society and economy. In 2002 about 80 percent of households were classified as “agriculturally active” with the population of these agricultural active households comprising more than 76 percent of the population in Samoa. An estimated 52.2 percent of the 14 778 agriculturally active households derive income from agriculture.
During the five year period from 1995-2000, agriculture contributed 9.9 percent average to the GDP at current prices with fisheries average contribution of 8.2 percent to GDP, giving a total of 18.1 percent average contribution to total GDP. Figures for 2001 and 2002 remain at 6 percent and 8 percent consecutively.
A favourable Human Development Index (HDI) of 0.700 suggests the absence in general of acute hunger and under nutrition in Samoa. Although national food supply availability appear sufficient, anecdotal evidence points to the high incidence of relative poverty and food insecurity, particularly among youth and some economically disadvantaged households in Apia and the peri-urban areas. A clearer picture of Samoa’s present food situation and a rigorous analysis of likely future food risks at the household and country levels should emerge when national indicators for poverty, food insecurity and income inequality can be successfully compiled.
What is obvious is the existence of health problems caused by imbalances in nutrition. Poor nutrition related problems include (a) increase in the prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetics, linked to changes in dietary patterns; (b) (protein) deficient diets among infants; and (c) iron deficiency anemia among pregnant and lactating mothers and children. There have also been recorded cases of chronic micronutrient deficiencies, leading to so called “under nutrition”.
Mr Chairman,
The policies and guidelines outlined in the strategy for the Development of Samoa 2002-2004 reflects the importance of the agricultural sector and the commitment of the Government to programmes for increasing output, in both subsistence and commercial farming, through focused crop research and greater extension support services to farmers, as well as the identification of overseas markets for agricultural produce and fish products. More work also needs to be done to try and meet the often onerous quarantine requirements of export markets.
Major institutional strengthening is also being undertaken to enhance policy development, planning and management and service delivery in agriculture. At the community level, urban and rural people are actively encouraged to participate in food production business and enterprises based on agriculture. Developments in Samoa’s beef industry, for example, offer new opportunities once self-sufficiency is achieved and business and market opportunities open up for the industry’s products.
In fisheries, actions are being taken to promote the optimum and ecologically sustainable use of the country’s fishery resources and develop suitable alternatives such as aquaculture, inshore management plans and shell- fish farming, to substitute for harvesting depleted resources.
The National Forest Policy (1995) aims at restoring the balanced multi-use functions of forestry, strengthening forestry administration, and encouraging customary owners to become more committed to the protection of remaining indigenous forests, and reforestation activities. A community forestry programme has been developed to support reforestation efforts, and to diversify approaches to land use, and to increase community involvement and responsibility for forest management and future forest resource needs.
Mr Chairman,
At the heart of the policies and actions undertaken by the government of Samoa at the national level, including the agriculture and fisheries sector, is the creation of economic opportunities available to our people and households.
This, in the final analysis, is the proven, effective way to combat poverty and food insecurity, as well as address the inequities in income distribution.
Mr Chairman,
For a small island state like Samoa, a key complement to domestic action is international support. At the regional level, Samoa is firmly committed to organizations that work with Pacific nations in economic and social development. The eradication of poverty and food insecurity in the region involves several broad integrated objectives and specialised technical fields implemented by regional as well as international organizations.
Crop protection and integrated pest management activities, comprising mainly research projects, including field testing, analysis of performance and data, and gene bank management, have been spearheaded by regional organizations such as the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) and institutions such as the University of the South Pacific (USP).
The sustainable management of natural resources and finding solutions to environmental concerns are integral parts of measures to alleviate poverty and guarantee food security. The work of the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) and the South Pacific Applied Geosciences Commission (SOPAC) are all vital in this regard.
Drawing attention to problem areas including those related to poverty requiring the intervention of the Pacific leadership is part of the coordination role of the Pacific Forum Secretariat.
Another important part of this organization’s responsibility is developing and facilitating trade, a necessary part of any comprehensive plan aimed at poverty alleviation and food security.
The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations and, particularly through its regional office and its subregional office, is the catalytic medium in the development of agriculture at the grass roots level. Programmes such as the Regional Programme for Food Security in the Pacific Island countries, CODEX Alimentarius, Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping Systems (FIVIMS), Food Balance Sheets, Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS), TCP’s and Telefood, to name a few, have helped island governments implement policies and programmes to reduce poverty and food insecurity in the region. There is no doubt that many people and households in the Asia-Pacific and around the world have been saved or spared from the misery of poverty due to the work of FAO.
However, because of country specific needs and priorities in areas beyond the resource capacities of small island nations, the ability of regional and international organizations to help is also limited to what they can do within their own resource constraints.
Technical research in protecting crops, improving yields and reducing costs of production is the key to addressing structural causes of poverty and food insecurity, and appropriate assistance at the national level and to regional and international organizations is vital.
Besides regional and international organizations, bilateral donors including Australia, Canada, China, Japan, New Zealand and the European Union (and its members such as Italy to name one) continue to provide much needed assistance to Pacific island nations in the development of agriculture and other alternative income opportunities with the ultimate aim of eradicating poverty. As a small island recipient state, we are very grateful to the bilateral donors for their help. I should, however, make a quick note here in the context of the well-known adage that the “lasting solution to poverty is not through providing food but in providing the means to produce food”.
We find that many times our efforts to diversify agriculture and give farmers opportunities to sell their produce to overseas markets are sometimes frustrated by lack of market access; very often, through non-tariff and administrative barriers, as my country has experienced in the area of quarantine requirements. I hope that these impediments to trade, and our ability to provide opportunities for our farmers, will soon be removed.
Samoa is committed to the eradication of poverty and food insecurity in Asia and the Pacific and will continue to contribute to these very noble causes by whatever means possible.
Finally, I wish to thank the organizers for the opportunity to speak at this very important conference.
Soifua and God bless.
