IV National Food Security Programmes (NFSP)

Since the World Food Summit: five years later in 2002, a significant number of countries have confirmed to FAO their strong interest in implementing nationwide food security programmes and are seeking help in their design. While the Organization acknowledges that the course to be followed in each country will be different, it recommends that governments consider adopting strategies which simultaneously address both the production and access dimensions of food insecurity, in line with the two "tracks" outlined above. But, in order to implement such strategies, there may be a need for accompanying institutional and policy reforms. This section looks particularly at the process of moving towards inclusive national-scale food security programmes and at the necessary reforms.

In most countries, many activities are already taking place which contribute in one way or another to improved food security, and so one way of approaching the design of a national programme is to explore how these various initiatives can be scaled up towards attaining national coverage. Such an approach is implicit in the initial concept of the SPFS which called for pilot activities to be progressively extended to new areas and ultimately expanded to cover all communities in the nation. An alternative approach is to adopt a national goal - such as the World Food Summit goal of reducing hunger by half by 2015 - and to work back from this to design programmes to achieve this objective. Some countries, such as Brazil (Box 6) and Sierra Leone (Box 7), have taken such a goal-driven approach, but have been more ambitious, aiming to eradicate hunger with the 4 and 5 year terms of office of their respective Presidents. For those countries that subscribe to the concept of the Right to Food^[19], the need to fulfil this right for all citizens in the shortest possible time may determine the shape and scale of a NFSP.

Enabling Actions

Whatever the starting point and strategic goal for NFSP design, programmes built around the twin-track approach to food security promoted by FAO, WFP and IFAD, necessarily have a number of common enabling features. These include:

• Leadership, coordination and partnerships

• Good governance, stability and peace

• Supportive policies and laws

• Monitoring and reporting systems

Leadership, Coordination and Partnerships

While much can be done to improve food security through local initiatives and projects, it is most unlikely that a national-scale programme will succeed without very strong leadership and visible signals of commitment from the highest levels in government. This is partly because of the inherent complexity of the programme and the need to engage many different sectors and institutions in its design and implementation. But it is also because of the need to curtail the strength of groups within society who have a vested interest in maintaining dependencies and who may seek to exert their influence to undermine the effectiveness of redistributive programmes. Ideally national leadership should stand above the interests of any political party for, otherwise, it will be unable to assure a fully national approach to hunger reduction.

The World Food Summit and the Millennium Summit processes explicitly acknowledged the need to nurture the political will to bring about the fundamental changes in social values implied by the commitment to reduce poverty and hunger. What is most important now is that, where developing country leaders and their people demonstrate this will and commitment, they should feel confident that this will be reciprocated by supportive action by the international community (see Reciprocal Commitment by the International Community, below). In the absence of international support, there is a real danger that leaders in developing countries will run into insuperable opposition in their quest to end hunger and be unable to sustain the required effort.

A commitment to a national and inclusive programme for food security usually implies a need for new institutional arrangements which bring together the various actors, both within government and in civil society. Within the public sector there has often been a division of responsibility for different aspects of food security and nutrition and no single entity has an overview of the subject, resulting in fragmented and often partial action, especially at local level. Emergency interventions may have been led by an independent commission or a unit within the Office of the President or Ministry of the Interior, which may also have responsibility for monitoring the food situation and issuing advance warnings of impending emergencies. Ministries of Agriculture have been held accountable for the production dimensions and, if a safety net is in place, this has usually been run by a Ministry of Social Welfare. Programmes to combat malnutrition tend to be led by Ministries of Health, and the Ministry of Education, often in combination with local authorities, may operate school feeding programmes.

In most countries NGOs and religious organizations play important roles in contributing to food security, especially in emergency situations, arranging for food distribution. Many continue to work with communities after the emergency has passed, contributing to more sustainable livelihood improvements. In many countries, there are strong and broadly representative farmers’ associations, which can not only provide support services to their members but also ensure that farmers have a voice in policy dialogue and decision-making.

At times of food emergency, most countries are able to put in place effective coordination mechanisms, which usually include the presence of the concerned UN agencies - FAO, WFP, WHO, United Nations Childrens’ Fund (UNICEF) - as well as donors and NGOs, both national and international. These mechanisms tend to have a short-term focus and to concern themselves with crisis planning and logistics. Once the emergency has passed, they often become dormant.

Only a few countries have yet set up arrangements for a coordinated approach towards addressing the longer-term dimensions of food insecurity, although this is clearly essential if inclusive programmes are to be designed and implemented. In some cases, this has involved the establishment of a Ministry for Food Security (e.g. Mali, Brazil) or adding food security responsibilities to the portfolio of an existing Ministry (such as Agriculture or Social Security). Another model is to create a National Food Security Council which draws together all the main actors from both government and civil society, with a mandate which may go beyond operational coordination, to advise on policy and to set priorities. Such models can be replicated at provincial and local levels.

Government action alone is unlikely to succeed in eliminating hunger. Rapid progress in hunger reduction requires the building of partnerships between government, civil society and the business community, and the mobilisation of the population as a whole in a truly national campaign, in which all citizens recognise that they can play a part in one way or another to the achievement of the goal. The concepts of partnerships between all institutions committed to ending hunger, of mass mobilisation and voluntarism lie at the heart of the proposal to develop National Alliances Against Hunger^[20], which is being promoted by the International Alliance Against Hunger, whose founder members are the Rome-based UN agencies and some international NGOs. Clearly there is an important role for the private sector, because of its major role in both farm input and food markets, in such Alliances.

A key element in establishing the institutional environment for effective action towards hunger eradication is, therefore, likely to be the creation of some form of National Alliance. How such an Alliance comes into existence will, of course, vary from country to country. In some cases, leadership will come from the highest levels of government, but this will quickly lose credibility if it becomes politicised. In others, the initiative may be taken by NGOs or religious groups, committed to a more equitable and just society. UN agencies, including FAO, may advocate the formation of Alliances, but must be conscious of the need for national leadership to emerge. For greatest effectiveness, Alliances should require their members to make time-bound commitments to undertake well defined actions for which they would periodically hold themselves accountable. Ultimately success in hunger reduction depends on well-coordinated local level actions and hence the opening of chapters of the Alliance all around the country, building on local commitment, may be envisaged.

In countries which subscribe to the concept of the Right to Food, human rights coordination mechanisms may also give added impetus to actions to address chronic hunger and malnutrition. One of the important aspects of the concept of the Right to Food is the clear attribution of accountability for fulfilling this right, with the first line of accountability resting with the individual, and then moving upwards to the family and community, with the State becoming ultimately accountable for ensuring the ability of individuals to secure their right to adequate food. If this right is also "justiciable", it becomes, of course, all the stronger.

Good Governance, Stability and Peace

Strong and enlightened leadership, combined with large-scale social mobilisation is central to ensuring that interventions are well managed and that they reach the intended beneficiaries. But it is also important to put in place effective oversight systems which can assess the performance of the various elements of comprehensive food security programmes and identify and resolve problems in programme delivery. Such oversight systems must have the full engagement of the intended beneficiaries and representatives of the communities in which they live, particularly if they are to be successful in identifying and preventing malpractices in programme implementation. This implies effective decentralisation.

The impact of economic and social instability and of conflict on food security is well understood, given that many of the most intractable food emergency situations have occurred in war-affected areas. Hence measures which contribute to stability and peace are bound to have a significant impact on hunger reduction. Post-conflict situations are usually marked by a rapid resurgence in food production, as displaced persons and demobilised combatants return to their lands and as improved security creates confidence amongst farmers to plant larger areas and to start rebuilding livestock numbers. The challenge is to build on this spontaneous response and to lay the foundations for longer term growth and prosperity.

It is often overlooked that the linkage between social stability and food security works both ways. The pattern of local conflicts during the last decade of the 20^th century suggests that these have frequently emerged and dragged on in countries and regions beset by serious food insecurity. As a corollary, it would seem legitimate to claim that progress in reducing the threat of hunger would cut the risks of conflict.^[21]

Supportive Policies and Laws

Some of the most extreme examples of food insecurity have been induced by adverse policies. Thus, for instance, in the early 1980s, Ethiopia pursued a compulsory grain requisition programme which deterred farmers from planting crops and reduced their ability to retain food in store between successive harvests. This was followed by a villagisation programme which moved farmers away from their traditional homesteads and surrounding lands, disrupting their normal farming routines and leaving their crops prone to destruction by roaming livestock.

Policies and laws governing land tenure often play a determining role in food security, depending on whether they lead to broadened access to natural resources or to a greater concentration in the hands of those who are already well-off. And this has a knock-on effect on access to credit, given the importance of security of tenure in providing collateral for loans.

Policies which result in subsidies or tariff barriers may affect food security both positively and negatively, with a rise in prices stimulating an expansion of production, while low food prices may make food more accessible to a larger number of poor families but serve as a disincentive for farmers. Similarly, macro-economic policies, particularly those which affect the exchange rate, impact on food security by affecting the competitiveness of a country as a buyer or a seller on the international market. Over-valuation of the exchange rate frequently occurs in mineral-rich countries, reducing the competitiveness of their farm exports in global markets and flooding domestic markets with cheap food imports. Macro-economic policies may also affect income distribution and employment, both of which have major implications for food security.

There is also likely to be an impact on food security of policies on the role of government in agriculture and rural development and on administrative decentralisation. Where governments seek to retain responsibility for providing services that may be more efficiently offered by the private sector or by farmers’ organizations, their impact is likely to suffer. Similarly, subsidised government supply of fertiliser or tractor services will deter private investors and perpetuate inefficiencies which ultimately damage producers. Strongly centralised and statally managed approaches to food security are not likely to be successful in stimulating local initiatives, if only because they exclude the key players from decision-making processes.

This suggests that when a country indicates its intention to embark on a national-scale food security programme, it should be encouraged to make a review of the major policies and laws impacting on food security with the aim of identifying needed adjustments. Some governments may find it useful to undertake such a review in a human rights context. An adoption of the principles underlying the concept of the Right to Food could provide an excellent point of reference against which to determine the extent to which policies contribute to or detract from the achievement of national food security goals as well as to identify accountability for their attainment.

Monitoring and Evaluation

One of the reasons for under-investment in food security may be that there are few well documented success stories to which attention can be drawn. The fact that the global figure for the number of undernourished has been reported to be almost constant year after year since the World Food Summit tends to reinforce popular perceptions that little is being achieved towards the reduction of chronic undernourishment.

For most of the pilot projects in which FAO has been engaged under the SPFS, there is some information on yield response to innovations which have been introduced and sometimes the yields gains achieved by participating farmers are translated into estimates of net financial benefits. Even if these benefits are often considerable, they say little about the overall impact of interventions on food security and nutrition within a community, still less on the country at large. Such information needs to be collected and analysed, at least for a few specimen countries, both to demonstrate that resources have been well used and to show that the application of recommended approaches to improving food security is, in fact, attaining the intended results in terms of reducing the number of hungry.

One very good reason that so little is known about the impact of inclusive food security programmes is that they are still very new. Most food security interventions in the past have been directed at relatively narrow aspects of the problem, often aiming to raise the productivity of small-scale farmers which will, in many cases, make a contribution to reducing chronic hunger but is bound to fall short of addressing all the dimensions of the problem. Such approaches also miss out on the potential synergy between different interventions, which is likely to be significant if complementary hunger reduction measures are taken up simultaneously within the same community or administrative region. It is also true that, except in a very few countries, even efforts to improve nutrition through raising farm productivity and diversity of foods tend to have been at a pilot level, affecting few farmers relative to the total number surviving in food-insecure conditions.

Where countries are committed to embarking on large-scale multi-component food security interventions, it is vital to put in place a comprehensive impact evaluation system from the very outset, including anthropometric studies, conducted over a number of years. These will hopefully confirm the viability of adopting a twin-track approach towards eradicating hunger, as outlined in the earlier sections of this paper. Where conditions would allow, especially in terms of local institutional competence, such studies should be extended to consider also the fiscal and economic impact of the programmes.

Programme Components

Components of national food security programmes will vary from country to country, responding to local needs and opportunities as well as availability of resources. Where programmes are intended to be inclusive, addressing all the major underlying causes of food insecurity and sectors of the food insecure population, they are likely to involve many of the following elements.

This is not to imply that all national food security programmes should necessarily include all of these possible components. Indeed, one of the advantages of programmes for food security is that many components can bring about significant improvements in their own right. This makes it possible to build up programmes progressively in line with the growth in institutional capacities and availability of resources. For a rapid and lasting impact on the number of hungry persons, however the more quickly an all-embracing programme can be put in place the better.

Reciprocal Commitment by the International Community

Underlying the concept of the Global Summits of the 1990s, including the World Food Summit, as well as of the Millennium Development Goals, is that it is in the shared interest of all countries of the world to see an improvement in the livelihoods of the poorest members of the global population, and that this should be reflected in joint action by poor and rich nations. This concept of shared responsibility was also at the heart of the Financing for Development Conference in Monterrey in 2002. The principle of reciprocal obligations also underlies the NEPAD concept and was reflected in the Maputo Declaration in 2003 at which African Governments pledged their commitment to increase domestic funding for agriculture, rural development and food security to 10% of national budgets within 5 years. Finally, it is central to the goals of the International Alliance Against Hunger.

What one would like to see is a situation in which a developing country which commits itself irrevocably to the achievement of the World Food Summit goal can feel confident that it will be able to draw on international support to the extent needed for success. Such support may take various forms, including assistance in formulating programmes and projects; loans, grants and debt swaps, as well as possibly food aid, for programme implementation, and greater market opportunities for its products. Training and capacity building through South-South Cooperation may also be an attractive option.

One of the major tasks facing the IAAH (International Alliance Against Hunger) will be to develop the necessary sense of solidarity between rich and poor nations committed to eradicating global hunger and to show that such a compact can really work.

The Possible Role of FAO

In launching the SPFS, FAO has tended to assume a rather dominant and visible role in the design and implementation of pilot projects. As food security programmes are scaled up, however, it is vital, if they are to be sustainable, that they be strongly led nationally and that they be implemented through partnerships such as National Alliances Against Hunger. If genuine national ownership and effective partnerships are to emerge, however, FAO must deliberately assume a less prominent role. FAO has a strong vested interest in the success of national food security programmes, but the Organization must resist the temptation to "drive" them. Instead, FAO should try to create ample space for others to enter the field but remain prepared to serve in a catalytic role and to respond to requests to fill gaps within areas in which it has competence. Given the need for the engagement of many different actors in successful food security programmes, the Organization must also broaden its points of contact within governments, not confining itself principally to work with Ministries of Agriculture.

In general terms, the interest of the Organization is probably best served not through taking on responsibility for implementing very large projects in support of national programmes, but through ensuring that the national commitment to reduce food insecurity is reflected in an ample allocation of resources, whether domestic or external, for nationally run programmes. Until FAO adopts far-reaching reforms in its own administrative procedures, its comparative advantage lies not in managing large-scale projects on behalf of governments, but in providing critical technical inputs as and when requested by them.

The types of inputs that FAO may most usefully offer include:

• Assistance, especially through guidance on methodologies, in assessing the extent, location and underlying causes of hunger and malnutrition, as an essential input into the design of comprehensive food security programmes and into targeting interventions.

• Advocacy for concerted efforts to reduce hunger, linked to technical support through the IAAH for the creation and operation of National Alliances Against Hunger so that these start to drive hunger eradication processes.

• Inputs into strategic planning and policy reform for hunger reduction, integrating these, where appropriate, within the PRSP process.

• Guidance to national teams in the formulation of comprehensive National Food Security and Nutrition Programmes.

• Assistance in developing a legal basis for food security, including drafting of legislation related to the Right to Food.

• Engaging partners, especially sources of South-South Cooperation but also NGOs and the socially responsible corporate sector, in providing technical and financial support for programme implementation.

• Design and implementation support for monitoring and evaluation systems, and consolidation of their findings for reporting at regional and global levels.

• Designing institutional arrangements for enhanced food security and building national institutional capacities for implementing food security and nutrition programmes, especially through training.

• Networking between national programmes, including facilitating the sharing of experiences in successful institutional and technical innovations.

Concluding Observations

The World Food Summit goal is still attainable by 2015. The fact that, each day, less time is available to meet the goal must be seen as a spur for decisive action rather than a cause for resignation. Enough countries are making good progress to show that rapid large-scale hunger reduction is entirely possible. There is a need for a new boldness and for the balance to be shifted from seemingly endless debates on how to eradicate hunger towards much more direct action with the hungry, doing things which we know can have an impact. While some aspects of the hunger problem may still defy solution, the knowledge and experience exists on how to address most of its manifestations. Moreover the cost of eradicating hunger is miniscule in relation both to gross global wealth and to the enormous benefits which would accrue to individuals - now facing an unnecessarily curtailed life on earth - and to mankind as a whole. There can be no excuse for bequeathing hunger eradication as a task for another generation to complete, when all the means exist - and only the will is lacking - to fulfil it in our day.