8. Progress in International Agricultural Adjustment
8. Progrès accomplis en ce qui concerne 1'Ajustement agricole international
8. Progresos realizados en el réajuste agrícola internacional
EL PRESIDENTE: El .tema previsto para esta reunión de la mañana, como se indico ayer, es el numero 8 de nuestra agenda:"Progresos realizados en el reajuste agrícola internacional", cuyo documento es el C 77/20. El Subdirector General del Departamento de Política Económica y Social, Dr. Islam, va a presentar el tema.
N. ISLAM (Assistant Director-General, Economie and Social Policy Department):Document C 77/20 presents the Director-General's report on the progress of international agricultural adjustment, with specific reference to the eleven guidelines formulated and endorsed by the Eighteenth Session of the Conference in 1975. The guidelines fall into four groups: production, consumption, trade and international assistance. The first three guidelines relate specifically to production targets and policies.
In regard to guideline 1, which refers to the performance of the developing countries in increasingfood production, there has been intensive discussion in the last two meetings of this Commission. Short-falls from the target of a 4 percent increase in food production have been emphasized; continuing difficulties faced by the most seriously affected countries have been underlined.
Guideline 2 relates to the increase in the flows of resources, both financial and physical and techni cal, into the agricultural sector in support of increased production and investment. There has been an increase over the past few years in agricultural investment in the developing countries. Data available on this however remain too scanty to permit very definite or firm conclusions. However, the flow of the resources for investment in agricultural, research in the developing countries has been augmented. This form of investment yields results only after a time lag.It helps generate an in crease in production in the future.
Guideline 3 concerns national agricultural policies in both the developing and the developed countries. A widely held policy objective in the developing countries is the attainment of food self-sufficiency, or at least an increase in the degree of self-sufficiency. However, the progress towards increased self-sufficiency in food production has been very .uneven.For the developed countries the concept of a rational use of resources has multiple interpretations.Ir refers in the first place to a more efficient allocation of resources between the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors, including a selective and gradual shift of the locus of increased agricultural production to producers in the developing countries, where costs are lower.In the short run it also embraces such considerations as the ability and willingness of the developed countries to meet emergency food needs, as well as to build stocks to even out fluctuations in supply and ensure world food security.
We have an effort to quantify the order of magnitude of the impact: of a wide range of policy measures in the developed countries in respect of agriculture.The domestic support policies, through their impact on the pattern and magnitude of domestic production and demand, determine exportable surpluses as well as import requirements; consequently they affect not only world stocks of food grains and world food security but also export prospects of developing countries.This analysis confirms the conclusion that agricultural protectionism in developed countries is an important fact which requires serious assessment.
Turning to guidelines 4, 5 and 6, relating to food consumption and nutrition, the years under review marked the beginnings of an increased awareness of the need for and implications of integrating nutri tion policies.By now it is evident that the target set by the World Food Conference Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition cannot be achieved within the stipulated time period of a decade.Experience to date underlines the need for more realistic and politically acceptable policies and programmes of action in this area.
The experience of the last few years relating to trade and stocks shows mixed progress in terms of guidelines 7, 8 and 9. The developing countries' share of world agricultural exports continues to decrease whereas their share of world imports is rising, although 1976 appears to have been an exception. The policy framework for international trade has not undergone significant modification in the period under review.There has been some improvement in the Generalized Scheme of Preferences.
The negotiations on the Integrated Commodity Programme of UNCTAD centered on a common fund, as well as the negotiations in GATT, are progressing to a crucimi stage. The report notes progress in the availability and use of financing arrangements under the International Monetary Fund and the STABEX scheme of the EEC to compensate for shortfalls in export earnings. On the whole it may be stated that in the matter of improvement of trading opportunities for agricultural products, including processed materials, little significant progress has been made. Furthermore, there is a widespread fear that protectionism in general may have been.gaining increased support in recent months. It is more than ever necessary to guard against these forces.
While the terms of trade of agricultural products for manufactured goods have declined from the peak levels reached during the commodity boom of 1973/74, they remain higher than at the beginning of the seventies. In the discussions yesterday in this Commission the divergence in the movements of the terms of trade of individual commodities was emphasized. I must hasten to add that the benefits have been shared unequally among the developing exporting countries. In so far as world food security is concerned, much has already been said in the course of the last few days. The position is well known to you.
Finally, guidelines 10 and 11 relate to international assistance to the agricultural sector pf the developing countries. The flow of external financial resources for agricultural development falls considerably short of target.The food aid target of 10 million tons has not quite been reached.
In the last few pages of the report we have brought together the major issues which, directly or indirectly, have emerged from the monitoring and assessment exercise. The list of issues is not, of course, exhaustive.It seeks to focus on those issues on which there seems to be neither an adequate or complete understanding nor a consensus as to appropriate approaches. These issues, therefore, may warrant your further attention.
The present report represents a first attempt by FAO to monitor and assess progress in world food and agriculture according to a set of guidelines and targets. We have linked our assessment of recent experience with international agricultural adjustment to the pursuit of the new international economic.order. We look forward to your suggestions and views as to how to improve our analysis in the future so that we can proceed in a manner which will be more helful to your discussions.
EL PRESIDENTE: Gracias, Dr. Islam.
El Sr. Relator Rittershaus nos va a informar sobre las opiniones que se han vertido sobre este tema en el Plenario, si es que las hay.
L. RITTERSHAUS (Rapporteur from Plenary to Commission I): International Agricultural Adjustment and further steps to achieve it have figured, in many delegations' statements. However, not many of them went into greater detail about the specific objectives the respective governments considered of foremost importance, nor did a clear picture emerge as to what priorities most countries wanted to be observed.
Many countries mentioned the elaboration of a new international economic order as one of the most urgent medium-term tasks before FAO. It appears that International Agricultural Adjustment constitutes in the eyes of many governments an essential element of this order; this was, for instance, the viewpoint put forward by the delegates of Nigeria, Austria and Kenya. The latter added that in his view progress was slow because in the relevant international negotiations the positions taken by the developed countries took only insufficient account of what were the developing countries' essential objectives. A similar position was taken by the delegate of Yugoslavia.
Most developing countries reported insufficient progress of the 4 percent increase target of food production as laid down under the DD2 strategy. Many of them felt there was a link between this insufficiency in growth and the lag in the international resource flow into the agricultural sectors of developing countries. This was in particular a viewpoint supported by the distinguished delegate of Burma. On the other hand several countries stressed the importance of self-reliance, such as the delegates from China and from Albania. They and several other delegations rather felt that maximization of domestic efforts were the key to decisive progress in the achievement of - growth targets in food production.
Most delegations reported on their countries' investments in agriculture and it was gratifying to hear that the large majority indicated strong increases in the resource flow. A particularly impressive case in point was the one reported by the delegate of Algeria who noted that in the last 10 years
fiscal investment in the agricultural sector had increased by 300 percent, not considering special programmes. However, many countries underlined at the same time that in spite of similar increases in domestic investment their agricultural sectors could still absorb many more funds.
This was closely linked with incentives to farmers encouraging them to expand production. A very impressive intervention by the delegate of Canada explained how great the production potential of farmers was, but in order to bring it out fully farmersneeded adequate incomes, incomes which could sustain comparison with revenue levels in other sectors of the national economies. This also applied to the developing countries, as the delegate of Burundi indicated.
Policies such as those designed to promote better incomes for agricultural producers necessarily had repercussions upon price levels, and here the delegates of Canada, the United States and Prance had demostrated how adequate producer prices were a necessary pre-condition to sufficient output levels. However, many sectors from developing countries deplored high food import prices which their countries had to pay in order to cover their food deficits. At the same time, however, most of the speakers from the Third World who touched on this subject deplored the insufficient prices which agricultural exports from the developing countries were obtaining. Most delegations seemed to feel that an adjustment between these two conflicting viewpoints would have to be a major aim of any meaningful international agricultural adjustment.
Another point touched upon was the transfer of technology required for the expansion of agricultural production while a number of delegations mentioned this point and wanted FAO to take an active hand in elaboration and transfer of particularly adapted technology, several speakers warned that a careful selection should be made in order to avoid wrong technological orientations. The delegate of Zaire, for instance, pointed out that while wheat and rice technology had been very highly developed, Central Africa was still lacking an appropriate technology for cassava production. I think this is all I have to report.
EL PRESIDENTE: Bien, señores; ustedes seguramente recordarán que la Conferenciaren su 18° período de sesiones, aprobó once orientaciones como marco general de política en este tema del reajuste agrícola internacional y pidió al Director General que emprendiera un análisis de los progresos realizados en la consecución de los objetivos políticos, acorde con el tema agrícola internacional y que preparase para esta Conferencia una primera evaluación de esos progresos.
El Sr. Islam ha hecho ya una introducción del tema con unas informaciones que yo creo son interesan tísimas, además de las que contamos en el documento y el Sr. Rittershaus nos ha informado sobre las principales opiniones que se han vertido en el Plenario de la Conferencia. Estoy seguro, pues, de que tenemos elementos más que suficientes como para iniciar la discusión de este tema.
L. ENE SE (Hungary): The Hungarian delegation has studied attentively the analysis called for by the Eighteenth Session of the Conference to assess progress in the achievement of the agreed objectives of international agricultural adjustment. We can acknowledge with satisfaction that this work has good results. We have criticized this work several times, but nevertheless we have also made our contribution to it.
Now the first important steps have been taken to establish and operate the system designed to monitor the implementation of 11 guidelines for international agricultural strategy.
The major agricultural and food problems, their developments and the related international and national policies are reviewed in the report in such a way as to enable governments to be adequately informed to formulate their own agricultural and food policies in conformity with the real international situation. This informative analytical activity of FAO substantially contributes to evaluating the areas and extent of common interest between various countries and indicates problems where further efforts should be made in order to reach better understanding and convergence of interests.
My delegation considers, therefore, it is desirable to continue and improve FAO work in the field of international agricultural adjustment in line with paragraph 21 of Chapter 2.1 of the Programme of Work and Budget, where it is stated that the international agricultural adjustment could help to bring about a better balanced world agriculture.
In our view, this report is a highly purpose-oriented, scientific-level work and, in accordance with the adopted guidelines, it deals properly with agriculture and food problems of developing countries. We note, however, that agricultural adjustment in developed countries is also important and must not
be neglected because it is frequently related to problems of farm development and food in developing countries on the one hand, and because a maladjustment of agriculture in developed countries adversely affects their international economic ties. The Hungarian government is very anxious to see a further improvement and development of these relations, and fully supports the efforts designed to serve this end.
Furthermore, agricultural development in developing countries is inseparable from the growth' of their national economy as a whole, and this point is not covered in either the guidelines or the analysis to the extent required by its importance. The same may be noted about the agrarian structure, the modification of which seems to be an all-important condition for agricultural development in many cases.
These issues will undoubtedly arise in the periodical reviews of the guidelines, and they will have to be adjusted as required to the changing situation. But the monitoring and review of international adjustment is a permanent task and it should be carried out and improved accordingly.
A. ANDERSON (Sweden): The Swedish delegation has studied the document C 77/20 "Progress of International Agricultural Adjustment'' with great interest. It has been prepared in response to the request of the last Conference and is the first analysis and monitoring of progress in achievement of the agreed policies and goals of international agricultural adjustment. The exercise has - as is said in the introduction - to a large extent been a pilot effort. With this background my delegation would like to congratulate the Secretariat on having succeeded in preparing a very clear and concise document. It must have been a very difficult task to find the relevant data.
My government has for several years followed with great attention the endeavours in FAO to formulate a policy for international agricultural adjustment. At the lastConference we gave our approval to the proposed strategy and its eleven guidelines. We have been looking foreward to this first assessment of the progress made with the understanding that a troubled beginning may be unavoidable before reaching a long-term result. The ambitions and preferences in the world are in many respects different. Interna tional agricultural adjustment is everywhere a slow process. Promotion of agricultural adjustment normally also must be handled with great care by the politicians and this in itself contributes to the slowness. In the market economies it is also dependent on final decisions by very many individual farmers.
In the light of these considerations my delegation can agree with the report in the beginning of its broad introductory assessment: progress has been made towards the achievement of the objectives of inter national agricultural adjustment during the period since the World Food Conference 1974. This progress has, however, as we all know, fallen short of what had been hoped for.
After these general remarks my delegation wants to make some comments on the monitoring of performance in relation to the guidelines.
The quantitative targets set in the strategy are very few or in effect primarily only one, concerning the increase of production in developing countries. We understand this approach, even though it makes the strategy look rather vague. Much of this data, that would have been relevant has hot been available so the proceedings at this stage must of course include an element of trial and error, which we regard as normal with respect to the nature of the difficulties involved.
Among some countries in the Nordic Group - Finland, Denmark and Sweden - we have discussed the possi-biìities to get a more concrete and measurable basis for the systematic monitoring and analysis of the progress with respect to the policy goals. One way can be - as we see it - to divide the main statis tical material on agricultural production into two main groups. One group should concern the resources involved in the production for self-support, i.e, for direct consumption at the farmj the other group should concern the resources set aside for production for sale, i.e. for consumption outside the primary production units on the farms.
We fully understand that such a grouping can be difficult in some countries. Anyway we hope that the Secretariat will try the method in some pilot areas to begin with. FAO has just finished the "Produc tion Yeatbook 1976" and is starting to prepare a new set of questionnaires for the next yearbook. It may be the right moment to introduce a new system which - if possible to carry out in practice - must be of direct benefit for the analysis of the progress in agricultural adjustment and also can make the FAO statistics more operational in general. We should highly appreciate a reaction to this idea from the Secretariat.
Finally, we have understood the indicators for monitoring the progress of the adjustment as being tentative ones to be further explored by trial and error exercises. We trust that the Secretariat will carry out the following-up in a practical and pragmatic way using all the common sense accumulated during many years.
RAM SARAN (India): As we agreed, I will discuss the first two sections relating to Food and Agricultural Production and Food Consumption and Nutrition together. Guideline we have already discussed to some extent under the subject of State of Food and Agriculture. Now an attempt has been made to analyze the position since the World Food Conference was held and this has been compared with the preceding and earlier periods. Such a comparison, it has been pointed out in the document, becomes difficult and not valid because the weather situations are not the same in different periods. Therefore for the purpose of monitoring this guideline what is necessary is to compare like with like. It is very difficult to find likes at the same time because the weather in no two periods can be the same or even similar. Therefore I would suggest for our future approach and purpose that in the last three years since the World Food Conference was held we may select the year of best production. We assume that that is a year with very favourable weather also, although other matters may have contributed to the level of higher production in that year, and then compare that year with the highest production preceding this in the last triennium.
To illustrate the point, supposing 1977 is the year of best production in the current triennium, and in the previous period I found in some cases 1970 or 1971 was the year of best or highest output. We should compare the two and work out the annual rate of growth whether| near or below the 4 percent rate of growth as we say in the guideline. Our feeling is if we do the exercise this way perhaps the rate of growth comes to be less than what was apparent form the analysis just now made.
Guideline 2: an attempt has been made under this guideline to monitor the progress in various ways, one of which is of course investment. Here the paucity of data became a problem, but certain other indica tions have been used such as land use and irrigation, average yields, the growth of the agricultural labour force, fertilizer and fertilizer consumption, as also the high yielding varieties.
Here I might say that as the Assistant Director-General pointed out there has been some progress in a large number of countries with regard to the aumentation of financial resources or investments. If we look to the other indicators, I was quite surprised, we did not expect but it has come out in Table 5 on page 13 that in the developing market economies the rate of growth of an area has come down in the last column of 1973-75 compared to the previous triennium. This needs to be analyzed as to why this has happened despite the increase in investment. It it has happened there must be sume reason.
I have a feeling that we have stopped this analysis with the year 1975. If we had analyzed the sub sequent years perhaps the situation would improve because I know in my own country in the latter two years the rate of increase of the irrigated area of 2 million hectares is rather more than that. Therefore I have a feeling that this situation will considerably improve as we include later years in the analysis.
The same would be true if we take the fertilizer consumption indicator. Here we have gone up to 1975/76. These figures are very interesting.They show .9 millions tons increase in 1975/76 compared with the earlier year. I found that in the subsequent year 1976/77 in my own country fertilizer consumption increased .5 million tons and in 1977/68 we expect to increase it by .8 million tons. This is the conclusion from what has been brought out in the document. Again we are stuck with the paucity of data for subsequent years.
There is an analysis made with reference to average yields. My suggestion would be that the analysis of average yields should be made on the same basis as suggested for the agricultural food production as a whole.
With regard to tractors there is an indicator and this has been considered with reference to developing countries. I have no quarrel with that except to say in many or in some countries tractors are now being manufactured within the country also, and a better way would be to take the overall supply in the developing countries. This overall supply will include domestic production. Coming to guideline 3 here the question of incentives to the farmers has been examined with regard to the developing countries and the maximum importance has been given to the incentive in the form of suitable prices offered to the farmers. This is quite all right but I would have thought that this guideline could be monitored with reference to other incentives too, for example, in many countries' subsidies are given on certain inputs. Inputs are organized in certain local or interior areas. Credit is given on a larger scale. Marketing facilities are created in the different regions where they were not before. An integrated view of these incentives needs to be taken to determine whether in the developing countries the incentives are being given in adequate measure for achieving higher rate. of growth. This guideline also refers to the
Promotion of social equality and fuller integration of the rural population in the national economy. I think this guideline also needs to be analyzed mòre fully than has been done so far. What is being done for small farmers or marginal farmers, and agricultural labourers with regard to the programmes for integrated rural development and similar programmes which may be taken up in the developing world, all have implications with regard to this part of the guideline.
This guideline has an implication for both developing and developed countries. I have discussed developing countries. With regard to the developed countries the position is summed up in paragraph 86 on page 27. As we read the details in the papers we realize that progress is not adequate in the interests of developing countries. For example, I am referring to paragraph 86 (ii) " Maintenance of production potential and establishment of arrangements for adequate food stocks in order to safeguard world food security." We are aware that so far not much has been achieved beyond laying down the objectives. We are also aware that things are being discussed in different national fora but this is a guideline which has brought out that a lot more needs to be done to achieve the objective of safeguarding world food security, which is one of the main aims of these guidelines.
Similarly when one goes into the details of item (iii) and item (iv) again it appears that they have not been implemented or not implemented in relation to : the long-term interests of the developing countries.
Coming to guideline 4, this guideline refers to the implementation of the "integrated nutritional policies aiming at the improvement of food consumption patterns in all countries..." The explanation of the material given under this guideline indicates that one has to feel concern over the use of food commodities for non-food purposes and the use of fertilizers for non-agricultural purposes. This is a qualitative statement which is good by itself but an attempt may have to be made in future analysis to quantify these phenomena. We would like to understand" how much food, for example, is used for non-food purposes and if it were not used for non-food purposes or if it were used in a lesser measure for non-food purposes, what would be its implications for larger consumption or better nutrition for the developing countries.
With regard to guideline 5, I am quite satisfied with the analysis given under this item.
Under the item guideline 6, I have some comments. This guideline reads "Developing countries with persistently weak balance of payments should favour wherever possible and appropriate the consumption of food which can be feasibly produced locally or regionally." An indication of monitoring the guideline is the development of self-sufficiency trends in cereals. This is all right but I would have thought that in this case we have to consider other foods also because we have to consider what are the items of food products which can be feasibly produced locally or regionally. Here, for example, I would have thought of potato as one of the crops or tapioca as another crop which could be considered as alternatives to cereal consumption in a situation of shortage. In a situation of surplus some other food products could be considered.
These are my comments on guidelines 1 to 6. I will make comments on the remaining guidelines in the afternoon as you asked.
KIM KWANG-HEE(Korea, Rep. of): On behalf of our delegation I would like to express many thanks to the FAO Secretariat for the preparation of the document which gives us a comprehensive view of progress in the achievement of the agreed objectives and policies of international agriculture, adjustment for the last few years, particularly since the. scope of agricultural adjustment has been broadened from the interest mainly on market access of agricultural products of developing countries to all relevant areas, not only affecting trade of agricultural products but also production, structural questions, consumption and nutrition.
I would like to make a few observations on this subject on the basis of the document before us, hoping that my observations could make some contribution not only to this kind of analysis but also to the future meaningful work for agricultural adjustment.I do not know whether my way of proceeding in this discussion is in compliance with the procedure agreed upon by the Chairman at the outset of the discussion.
First, as a general observation, in the introductory part of the document we can see that the purpose of the document is to monitor the progress and performance of the national governments and international organizations in compliance with the agreed objectives and policies and the 11 policy, guidelines of the Adjustment Strategy, so as to facilitate discussion by the Conference of action needed to ensure as full an achievement as possible of the desired objectives of agricultural adjustment. In this connexion my delegation would like to see that the nature of the FAO work on this subject not only assesses progress in this field but also the FAO work on this subject could develop into action-oriented
programmes and also I would like to see this type of work reflect the above programmes in its work and budget in the future, since the scope of agricultural adjustment covers all related areas for food and agriculture.
Second, as observations on each section of the guidelines, I would like to refer to Table 3 on page 10. The first column of this table shows various commodities and commodity groups.I wonder whether cereals include rice.If not we would like to see a separate entry for rice in the future work.
Concerning Table 5 on page 13 on Land Use and Irrigation in Developing Countries, it might be instrumental to put a separate entry for showing land needed to be irrigated or irrigable land mainly for comparison between irrigated land and totally irrigable land.
Concerning Table 6 on page 14, Agricultural Labour Force, it might be worthwhile adding a separate sentence to show total work force by the same token for comparison.
Concering Table 7 on page 16, we would like to see not only fertilizer consumption but also an indication of production capacity in the future
With regard to the national policies of developed countries under guideline 3, it is noted in the document that a tendency re-emerged towards producer protection in these countries, resulting in the consequent irrational use of resources in the international concept. Producer subsidies of developed countries at a time of over-supply and a persistent tendency towards a higher degree of food self-sufficinecy in these countries are matters of increasing concern among the international community.
We agree that this issue of guideline 3 is of critical importance to both developed and developing countries. Therefore more attention may well be given to the issue because it has wide and far reaching implications for location of food production as well as world trade in agricultural commodities.
I would also like to refer to paragraph 80 which deals with the most conflicting nature between the developed and developing countries on the subject of international agricultural adjustment, that is between the efforts being made towards self-sufficiency, now adopted by nearly all developing countries, and the surplus of many agricultural products faced by many developed countries. We all know that how to harmonize this problem of the conflicting nature between developed and developing countries is the hard core of the international agricultural harmonization and adjustment.In this connexion we would like to suggest that the FAO Secretariat should look into the possibility of making a study which shows the competitiveness of agricultural production by country, and by crop in terms of production cost so that it could be instrumental for the countries concerned in introducing new crops and in trying to achieve a higher degree of self-sufficiency of any agricultural products before they make a final decision on this point.
Of course this subject is comprehensively dealt with in the last part of this document, but my concern is that developing countries need the guidance of the quantitative nature of the analysis from the international community in formulating their own food production programmes.
Secondly concerning the second section of guidelines, relating to food consumption and nutrition, FAO has made valuable contributions towards improving the nutritional standards of many developing countries through helping them draw up a comprehensive and interdisciplinary plan and helping them to carry it out effectively from the top level to the bottom level.' We note that past experience shows that an applied nutrition plan being sponsored by FAO in some cases did not bring about as good a result as expected because of poor coordination among various governments and voluntary organizations involved in the process, either in the course of planning at the national level or in the course of implementation of the project at the district level.In this connection we should like to see some successful case study in this field disseminated to many developing countries, which are in need of improvements ; in applied nutrition projects as widely as possible.
Under these guidelines there is one more point which I should like to mention and that is the ever-decreasing self-sufficiency ratios for all food commodities and for cereals in developing countries as shown in Table 16.In spite of efforts so far made to increase agricultural production in developing countries, the state of food and agriculture in developing countries has even beenaggravated.Of course this subject has been dealth with at length in the past few days in this Commission.
Thirdly, another area where there has been virtually no progress in regard to the agreed policy objectives is the area of world trade in agricultural commodities and agro-based projects under guidelines 7, 8 and 9. This aspect is a direct consequence of the agricultural protection policies of some of the developed countries. In spite of a steady upward trend in the volume of world trade in agricultural commodities, developing countries have accounted for a larger portion of the imports and
a smaller portion of the exports since 1970. This shift in the balance of trade against developing countries may have many reasons. However, we should note with deep concern the recent tendency for strong protection policies in some developed countries.
If we look at another aspect of this subject under guidelines 7, 8 and 9, many important works affecting agricultural trade, world food security, integrated programmes for commodities and various commodity negotiations are now being dealt with outside the FAO framework. Since FAO is the most responsible and competent international body for food, and agriculture, we would like to see FAO work more closely with those international bodies and organizations which are dealing with the above- mentioned subjects.
We must also note that at a time of favourable food supplies there has been no substantial progress in international cooperation towards the eradication of hunger and malnutrition. This is confirmed by the fact that both development assistance and food aid to developing countries fell short of the targets set forth in guidelines 10 and li, We'would like here to express our hope that the international community will take more effective steps to transfer the needed resources and technology to developing countries and to expand food aid as a useful contribution to increased nutritional levels for a large segment of the world population.
In conclusion I should again like to express appreciation of the pioneering work of FAO in assessing progressin world agriculture. It is our hope that this work will be undertaken on a regular basis, with continued refinement of the methodology, that the scope of the work can be developed into more action-orientated programmes as I stated at the outset and that FAO member countries will render fuller cooperation to these international undertakings.
N. HINTIKKA (Finland): The report before us contains very interesting information about developments in the field of agriculture. The Secretariat has been faced with a difficult task, but its efforts have resulted in a good document which earns our warm thanks.
The subject under consideration, national agricultural adjustment, is as complicated as it is ambitious, so that an evaluation of its progress is an exceptionally difficult task for various kinds of judgements. Such difficulties are accentuated by the lack of sufficient and reliable statistical data. However, a considerable obstacle in making this kind of evaluation is that out of the 11 guidelines relating to the concept of international agricultural adjustment only three are expressed in quantitative terms. My comment does not mean that we envisage the reformulation of the guidelines on a more quantitative basis, but I just stress the importance of careful interpretation of whether the aims included in the guidelines have been reached or not.
The strategy of international agricultural adjustment was adopted two years ago by the Eighteenth Session of the FAO Conference. Certainly much more time is needed in order to test the guidelines in practice and to find out ways and means of following them. This first report to the Conference, however, indicates that with regard to some guidelines such development as was desired has happened to a larger or smaller extent. In this connection I would refer to the first guideline, the 4 percent increase in food production in developing countries, which has come through to a large extent. This was of course partly due to favourable weather conditions rather than the result of purposeful policies.
The analysis presented in document C 77/20 reveals clearly that the development in favour of or against the guidelines may be extremely different in various parts of the world. This holds true especially for the growth rate of food production, which in several countries and regions continues to be far below a target while in some countries it is altogether the reverse. Perhaps some small steps towards more balanced development have been achieved. However, a vast task is still left.
In trying to avoid a too lengthy discussion, I do not wish to go into a more detailed examination of the progress of international agricultural adjustment. Various speakers before me have already covered the important points which merit being taken into account when future action in this field is decided. Ì Especially I would like to confirm our support for what the delegate of Sweden has said in the name of some Nordic countries.
Having said that, there is still one point to which I should like to draw attention. Small farmers have always had special problems to solve, whether they live in developing or developed countries. Unfortunately, in too many cases they have not been successful in finding appropriate solutions. Too many of them suffer from inadequate income, heavy work load andinconvenient living conditions, to mention just some points which characterize their situation. Very much has been done in order to help small farmers and to increase awareness of the subject. In this connection, i would refer only to the excellent work of the FAO Committee on Agriculture. However, the small farmer's special problems still exist and this fact also has an impact on the implementation of international agricultural adjustment. In relation to guideline 3, which is considered to be one of the most important guidelines, it is stated in paragraph 73 of document C 77/20:
"The area in which little progress has yet been made is in improving the conditions and prospects for small farmers. This has a direct bearing on incentives and their purposes as set out in the guidelines. Much of the new technology, institutional credit, marketing arrangements, support prices and other aspects all favour the larger farm."
Similar findings are presented also in some other paragraphs of the document. This confirms the importance and complexity of the problem, so there seems to be no danger of overestimatingthe efforts still needed in order to overcome the small farmer's dilemma.
H. CALLES LOPEZ NEGRETE (Mexico): Hemos estudiado detenidamente el documento relacionado con los Pro-gresos Realizados en el Reajuste Agrícola Internacional, y en virtud de que ya varios delegados han hecho muy interesantes observaciones y dado muy buenos puntos de vista, unicamente quisiéramos referir nos en términos generales a las orientaciones 4 y 5, relativas al Consumo de Alimentos y la Nutrición, y explicar que es lo que hemos efectuado en nuestro país.
Tal como lo expuso nuestro Secretario de Agricultura y Recursos Hidráulicos, Jefe de esta delegación, en la Sesión Plenaria número 3, nuestro Gobierno ha realizado cambios estructurales y administrativos que han inferido grandemente en la producción de alimentos básicos y en la alimentación y nutrición ge nerales de sus habitantes, principalmente los de las áreas marginadas y en la incorporación de la mujer en el medio rural.
Se están haciendo progresos dentro de la agricultura y no cabe duda que el objetivo central del programa de FAO es el aumento de la producción agrícola, especialmente de alimentos básicos de los países en desarrollo; para lo cual es necesario tomar en cuenta que este aumento deberá tener diversos objetivos tales como mejoría en la nutrición, seguridad alimentaria, creación de reservas, mayores ingresos a los agricultores, aumento y distribución de la renta, y mayores ingresos por exportaciones.
Es necesario adaptar en los diversos países algunas tecnologías de países desarrollados y crear sus propias tecnologías de acuerdo con la situación de cada uno de ellos.
Es necesario reducir las perdidas, aumentar la productividad de los cultivos, capacitar al personal y hacer que el desarrollo rural y agrícola mejore las condiciones económicas y sociales de la población rural. Es necesario también fijar precios de garantía para los productos vendidos por los agricultores para lograr que estos tengan mayores ingresos y mayor poder adquisitivo. Será necesario, y FAO tiene, el programa para un uso racional de fertilizantes. Es necesario realizar cursos de actualización para el personal de extensionismo y hacer una campaña nacional y general para el uso correcto de estos fertilizantes.
Para lograr en forma indirecta la autosuficiencia y aumentar la producción de elementos básicos, noso tros estamos iniciando un programa para determinar las pérdidas existentes post-cosecha, que incluyen el manejo, almacenaje y comercialización de productos básicos, así como de infestaciones, pérdidas por roedores y algunas otras, ya que éstas ascienden hasta un 25 6 30 por ciento de la producción total.
Dentro de los programas de alimentación al medio rural ya las zonas marginadas, México ha visto que las deficiencias nutricionales de su población en estas tonas, se acentúan de manera aguda en las po blaciones de las zonas marginadas de nuestro país, especialmente en las comunidades indígenas. Por esto, se consideró conveniente desarrollar programas para abastecer a dichas zonas de productos alimen ticios a precios adecuados y enriquecidos con elementos nutritivos. Al respecto, en abril de 1977 se inició un programa para llevar alimentos populares fortificados a todo el país. Este programa tiene por objeto mejorar la dieta alimentaria de los habitantes de esas zonas con alimentos de alto poder nu tritivo ya precios al alcance de las clases económicamente menos favorecidas.
Para seleccionar los productos alimenticios que forman parte de este programa, se tomaron en cuenta cri terios referentes a la dieta habitual de cada zona marginada y se eligieron de acuerdo con estudios nu-triológicos, a la harina de maíz, harina de frijol instantánea, galletas y pastas para sopas. Para hacer llegar estos productos a todas las zonas marginadas del país, se han utilizado los canales de distribución del sistema que el Gobierno tiene, a través de las Compañías Nacionales de Subsistencias Populares.
Se han implantado cursos de adiestramiento para preparar a las promotoras de las instituciones participantes en el programa en cuanto a la forma del manejo y use de dichos alimentos, para posteriormente poder ir evaluando los resultados en cada zona.
Con relación al párrafo 105 de la pagina 41 dal documento. Mexico está realizando proyectos para la-fabricación de aminoácidos y levaduras alimenticias a partir de mieles incristalizables de las fabri-caciones de azucar, y en algunos casos, derivados de petróleo.
Los sectores marginados de países en desarrollo, incluyendo el nuestro, especialmente los niños lactan-tes y las mujeres gestantes, no tienen en su alimentación los niveles de proteínas y aminoácidos esen-ciales recomendados internacionalmente; por lo que nuestro país está muy interesado en la fabricación de licina, metionina, triptófano y levaduras alimenticias para ser adicionadas a los alimentos que se mencionaron antes.
Hemos hecho algunos otros programas, no de productos agrícolas, sino sobre pesca y productos pecuarios. Uno de los problemas en los que más interés tenemos es la aplicación correcta y adecuada del Codex Alimentarius, ya que hasta la fecha no ha sido posible dicha aplicación en la gran mayoría de los países, por lo que será necesario, en colaboración con los diversos Departamentos de Agricultura y Sanidad de los Países Miembros de FAO, se intensifique la elaboración de normas alimentarias internacionales para productos alimenticios que puedan garantizar la calidad y pureza de los mismos.
G.K. MBURATHI (Kenya): My Chairman, my delegation does not intend to make a second intervention this afternoon. Therefore I hope you will bear with us if we do not accurately comply with your suggestions earlier on. My comments also will be of a general nature and we will not attempt to go into a detailed analysis, which has already been done by the Secretariat. We entrust this to the massive good will that has been acquired in FAO through all these years.
Turning directly to the document, I must say from the outset that the document we are considering meets the request made by the Member Governments during the Eighteenth Session of the Conference that the Director-General should prepare an assessment of the progress in the achievement of the agreed objectives and the policies of International Agricultural Adjustment. The Member Governments had also requested that the report be made very brief and that it be limited to the important aspects of thé situation. As a result, as I said earlier, my comments will touch on salient features which we -thought deemed our comments at this particular time.
In this regard the Secretariat has done a very good job in the light of the limitations that were placed upon it by the Conference. Although some of the 11 guidelines debated and approved by the last Conference to be continuously monitored and evaluated are implicit in nature and lacking quantifiable goals, we do not think this is a very good reason for the Secretariat not to have a more rounded-un evaluation and thereby coming up with specific conclusions on how Member Government could accelerate the adjustment. However, we do hope that this final effort in systematic monitoring of the progress of the adjustments, given specific guidelines, will be expanded in other operations of the Organization and particularly those closely related to the individual countries.
I must say from the outset that it is disappointing that the progress made at the international level has been markedly slow.
The more this is happening, is it not the fact that an international system of grain stocks has not yet been established? This, as many of us may recall, was a subject intensively discussed during the last Conference, and indeed during the World Foood Conference in 1974 here in Rome. I need not repeat the real need for such a system in obviating human suffering during the food crisis similar to the one there was in 1973.
This has been debated over and over again. Suffice it to say that the good will and commitment from every Member Nation is required if the exercise is to yield the expected results.
My delegation has also been disappointed to realize that despite all the statements made during the World Food Conference by respective nations, the assitance in real terms to agriculture in developing countries is still below the target set by the World Food Conference, and also re-affirmed by the adjustment guidelines we are now considering. Yet the international community expects the rate of food production to increase.
My delegation, however, notes that in some countries the target rate set for food production has been achieved for 1974-76. This was specifically outlined in guideline 1 of the adjustment we are now considering. However, as correctly stated in the document, this has been tempered in one way or another by problems of internal marketing and distribution which are, we believe, part and parcel of any strategy aimed at eliminating hunger and malnutrition.
In its efforts to improve the monitoring of the progress of adjustments in FAO we hope it will pay particular attention to this problem of distribution in evaluating guideline 1.
We in Kenya have initiated measures to tackle this problem with our increased output of basic food items. We have also taken various measures to increase the total flow of financial resources to the agricultural sector through various farm credit operations and projects. We believe this to be one of the most efficient and objective ways of raising the standard of living of our rural population.
Side by side with credit we have already increased, and are continuing to increase, the complementary services to the farm sector. This we are attempting to do through what we are calling our integrated agricultural development programme. We are confident that these services, and particularly marketing services, will go a long way in improving incentives for producers to expand output, as called for by guideline 3.
Furthermore, our head of the delegation, the Minister of Agriculture, in his statement in the Plenary, has already indicated that our development expenditure on agriculture and water has been very much increased by 25 percent and 105 percent respectively. We hope that by doing this the complementary services to the agricultural sector will be more adequately catered for.
My delegation supported the 10 million ton target of grains for food aid, established by the World Food Conference and incorporated in guideline 11. We would like to see the Organization undertake in future a monitoring and evaluation exercise of the progress achieved in the guideline 11 contained in the adjustment, and an evaluation of the complementary role which food aid plays in assisting those who receive it to increase their own food production. We believe that food aid should be complementary to the individual countries' efforts to increase their own food production. As I mentioned earlier, we would like to see the next progress report pointing out concretely where individual countries or groups of countries are failing to implement the respective guidelines for international agricultural adjustment. In all cases the action required should always be related to the goals and ideals of the new international economic order as endorsed by the United Nations.
My delegation would also futher request the Secretariat to make the netprogress report as brief as possible and include only the salient features of the guidelines. In this aspect, and particularly in connection with the flow of capital to the agricultural sector, we would like to see an indication of the way to tackle the competitive nature of the sector within urban and rural areas as regards investments within a particular nation. I think this will give a guideline to the respective nations on the kind of undertaking they may require to correct the existing anomalies.
Mr. Shiva B. Nepali, Vic e-Chairman, took the chair
M. Shiva B. Nepali, Vice-President, assume la présidence
El Sr. Shiva B. Nepali, Vicepresidente, asume la presidencia
WU TIEN HSI (China) (interpretation from Chinese): We have noted that document C 77/20 has provided much information on the progress made by the developing countries in increasing food production by diversifying agriculture and improving trade terms. Progress is mainly due to the priority given by numerous Third World countries to food production as well as the concerted and unremitting efforts made by many Third World countries producing agricultural primary products.
The facts show that the Third World countries' endeavours to develop agriculture, increase production, diversify agriculture and improve trade terms, are inseparably linked with the current struggle to establish a new international economic order. After analyzing the changes in international agricultural relationships brought about by implementing international agricultural adjustment, document C 77/20 states that the basic issue is whether they represent progress towards the establishment of a new international economic order, or rather towards the maintenance of the old. We think this is indeed an issue that merits full attention.
The international agricultural relationships which form an important component part of the overall inter national relationships should abide by and never deviate from the fundamental principle of establishing a new international economic order. The necessary measures must be taken to change the old international agricultural relationships which are unequal and unfair. In implementing international agricultural adjustment, this is a guiding principle of primary importance about which there must be no ambiguity whatsoever.
The third guideline for international agricultural adjustment involves some important policy questions. We hold that in implementing international agricultural adjustment, state sovereignty should be respected. The Third World countries have every right to formulate their own development policies in accordance with their specific conditions and on the basis of independence and self reliance, so as to promote the development of their agriculture and safeguard their trade interests in agricultural products. Under no circumstances should the super-powers be allowed to exploit, plunder and control Thrid World countries.
It is mentioned in the second section of the third guideline that the developed countries should take into account the special needs and interests of the developing countries. This is a reasonable and necessary requirement. It must be pointed out, however, that with the old international economic relationships prevailing at present the super-powers take advantage of their powerful position to bully the small and undermine the development of agriculture in developing countries through cut-throat competition, monopoly of markets and various other means. The facts have shown that the super-powers are trying desperately to uphold the old international economic order. We think, therefore, that the Third World countries must strengthen their unity; oppose exploitation, plunder and control by the super-powers; fight resolutely to change the unjustified old international economic relationships; and adhere to the policy of independence and self reliance. Only in this way will it be possible to attain international agricultural relationships based on equality and mutual benefit in the sphere of food and agriculture.
M. LIMAN (Nigeria): Coming after many delegations have commented extensively on document C 77/20, the comments of the Nigerian delegation will necessarily be brief.
We appreciate the tremendous efforts made by the Secretariat to assess the progress made so far with international agricultural adjustment. We also appreciate the difficulties inherent in such an exercise, given its enormous scope and complexity. In order not to take too much time commenting on the numerous issues covered by the paper, I will limit my comments on some specific issues. Some, like food production, have already been discussed under the document on World Food and Agriculture, but first I should like to make a general comment.
The first general comment I should like to make is on the difficulty of analyzing the progress made in international agricultural adjustment. As the paper pointed out, in a number of cases there are conceptual difficulties which must be overcome before a meaningful analysis can be undertaken. One typical example given by the document is the difficulty of interpreting the rational use of resources by developed countries. That is in guideline 3.
We accept also that there are guidelines which are not easily amenable to quantitative analysis, and thay can only be subjectively determined: for example, guideline 4 on nutritional policies. Fortunately, a number of guidelines can be monitored with a fair degree of accuracy. Guideline 7 on access to markets and guideline 10 on resources transfers, amongst others, are cases in point. Therefore, our view is that despite the difficulties which are inherent in monitoring progress in international agricultural adjustment it is a worthwhile exercise and should be undertaken on a regular basis. Indeed, such an exercise should be extended to all major decisions taken by the Conference. This is the only way we can keep track of progress being made by the FAO in various fields.
My only advice is that the Secretariat should make an effort to improve the methods of selection and interpretation, and to cover those countries now left out of the exercise. Statistics can lie, if indeed we want them to lie, depending on how they are collected or presented, and while figures are not available or are deficient the document should faithfully say so. Of course, this is in no way a reflection on the integrity of the authors of this document.
Now I come to a few specific comments. This is where I depart slightly from the procedure. The document proposes that only marginal progress was made by the developing countries to gain access to markets in developed countries. Again, although the terms of trade on average may have improved, this general statement hides the glaring disparities that exist between individual commodities. This point was under lined earlier yesterday by the delegate of Argentina. Again, prices of agricultural commodities also continue to exhibit serious fluctuations, with serious implications for the export earnings of developing countries. These are serious issues which cannot be glossed over. My delegation is anxious to see progress made in these areas.
The second specific comment I should like to make refers to guideline 3, with particular reference to the rational use of resources of developed countries for agricultural production. As I mentioned earlier, I appreciate the conceptual difficulty of interpreting this guideline, and I trust that no country will exploit to their advantage this apparent ambiguity. This guideline is quite clear to my delegation. What we understand by it is that developed countries should not, by their policies, stifle efforts being made by developing countries to increase agricultural production and consumption. Paragraph 89 of this document expressed this in a succinct manner when it said:
"An equitable sharing of the burden of supply/demand adjustments between developed and developing countries requires the former to avoid taking measures which so insulate consumers from food price rises at a time of shortages that countries unable to afford such consumer protection must make an undue part of the international adjustment either through checking consumption or paying higher prices."
I do not intend to flog the issue further except to say that my delegation attaches a great deal of importance to this aspect of agricultural adjustment since it hinges directly upon the ability of developing countries to raise their production and indeed the level of trade and consumption. My delegation accepts.the conclusion reached at page 73 of the document, namely, that international agricultural adjustment by its very nature must come about slowly. Nonetheless we believe that with greater political will on all sides progress can be much faster than it has been. It is our hope that the next Conference will have more positive progress to report.
B. SUSSMILCH(European Economic Community): Mr Chairman, with your permission I would like to make a statement on behalf of the European Economic Community on the subject of international agricultural adjustment, in the name of the member states of the European Community.
The document C 70/20 presented by the FAO Secretariat deals with the question whether and to which extent progress has been made in the field of International Agricultural Adjustment (IAA) since the Eighteenth Session.oT the FAO Conference.
From the 11 guidelines approved by this session, the following Chapters are of special interest to developed countries, particularly for the European Community.
- Chapter A: Food and other agricultural production (guidelines 1-3).
- Chapter C: Trade in agricultural commodities and production requisites (guidelines 7-9).
- Chapter D: International assistance to developing countries as regards agriculture (guidelines 10-11).
We have read document C 70/20 with great interest, although there are several points for which we have a different interpretation. In our view, thè main objective of the IAA should be to help to assure food security and we think that this objective should be maintained also in the future. There is, however, a continuing dichotomy between the demand on the one hand, for the developed countries, including the Community, to limit production and expecting, on the other hand, these countries to have the capability to ensure stocks for meeting emergency situations.
Within the Community itself progress has been made in the implementation of guidelines 1-3 of the Chapter A on food and other agricultural production, in particular with reference to the results achieved in the area of improving farming structures. In this very area the Community has already carried out comprehensive and coherent measures which are already being applied effectively in the Member States.
In this context important are measures related to:
(a) agriculture in naturally less-favoured areas (hill farming)
(b) land use.These two issues hsve been very extensively dealt with the internationa level, e.g. in the deliberations of the Nineteenth Regional Conference of FAO in Bucharest (September 1975) and they have been accept asguidelinse for other European countries.
These issues will continue to feature prominently in the work of the Agricultural Committe of the EEC and in variousbodies of the FAO. They are also on thefollow-up CSCE Conference to Helsinki in Belgrade.
Other structural measures are:
- to inform the farming population of genuine solutions to the problems which they face and to offer them training facilities enabling them to arrive at such solutions either within agriculture or in other occupations (Directive 72/161/EEC);
- to induce, by means of financialincentives, farmers who decide to leave agriculture either through early retirement or to take up another activity,to make thier land available to other farmers, thereby enabling the latter to make progress towards development (Directive 72/160/EEC);
- to help those who are professionally capable and willing to undertake farm development, by offering tçhem a selective system of finacial aid for investments needed to achieve an income per labour unit comparable to that available to non-farm workers in their region through the implementation of a farm development programme extending over a 6-year period (Directive 72/159/EEC);
- to provide financial aid for marketing and processing projects which are part of approved regional, national or Community programmes (Regulation EEC/355/77).
As regards progress in the implementation of guidelines on trade in agricultural commodities and production requisites affecting developing countries (guidelines 7-9) the Community has set anexample by its activity which has been implemented in two instruments, first, the conclusion of the far reaching Lomé Convention and, second, by the introduction and expansion of the System of General Preferences (G.S.P.).
Concerning the Lome Convention the following additional remarks are worth mentioning:
Concluded for a period of five years with 46, soon enlarged to 52, African, Caribbean and Pacific States, this Convention provides unilaterally for free entry for all products, including most agricultural and processed products to the Community market. In the case of those few farming and processed products which do not benefit from free entry preferential entry is provided for. This trade system has had a positive effect on imports into the Community of agricultural products from ACP. States. Since the entry into force of the Convention, imports have increased considerably in 1976 (from 3.312 to 4.34 million u.a).
To this mays be added the advantages accruing from the Stabex system, the object of which is to guarantee stability of earnings from the export of a series of products to the Community and on which the economies of the A.C .P. States in question depend. Out of the total amount of 375 million u.a. allocated to the system, 72 million were the subject of transfers to A.C .P. States for fluctuations of prices and/or quantities of the products covered by this system which came into force in 1975.
Transfers for the 1976 financial year are of the order of 40 million u.a.
The Generalized System of Preferences (G.S.P.) which the Community had introduced already in 1973 was further improved in 1976. The quota for non-associated countries was raised to almost 1 000 million of u.a.
Another, offer for tropical products related to the multilateral GATT negotiations has again improved these arrangements since 1 January 1977 and brought the value of the products concerned to 1 250 million u.a.
Since the last Conference the Community has followed its policy of achieving closed relations with Mediterranean countries by concluding agreements with several of them. These aim at establishing â large measure of cooperation designed to contribute both to the social and economic development of the countries concerned and to a general strengthening of good relations between them and the Community.
In addition, the Community contributed to the progress made in the stabilization of the market and prices of raw materials (guideline 8) . This in particular by the participation of the Community in all negotiations on international raw materials agreement, in accordance with UNCTAD Resolution 93 IV of Nairobi within the framework of the "Integrated Programme". This applies both to the preparatory phase in negotiations in the FAO Commodity Committees and in UNCTAD.It applies, furthermore, to the positive attitude of the Community and its MemberStates; towards the World Food Council (W.F.C.) which was particularly manifested at its third session.
The same is true also for the implementation of guideline 9 to which the Community has made a positive contribution in questions regarding the diversification and transfer of resources both in UNCTAD and in the North-South Dialogue.
The Community is also taking a leading part in the further International assistance to the developing countries as regards agriculture (guidelines 10 and 11).
In this context through the Food Aid Convention (F.A.C.), the EEC is the second largest contributor after the United States. For its part, the Community supplies all its food aid on an outright grant basis and nothing on a long term credit sales basis.
As regards butter oil, the Community is virtually the only donor of food aid.
In the case of skimmed milk powder aid, the average of the annual quantity delivered during the years 1971 to 1975 from all sources was 112 000 tonnes, of which more than 50 percent was supplied by the Community and Member States (57 300 t).
In addition to food aid, the Community assists the developing countries to develop their own agricultural and food production by financial and technical assistance to projects within the framework of the European Development Fund and Stabex, the Special Aid to Sahel, the United Nations Emergency Fund for Most Seriously Affected Countries, aid to non-associated countries and through non-governmental organizations.
As it was decided from the Chair to speak in more detail later to the chapters and paragraphs of this document C 77/20, we would like to come back to several points of this document later on in the discussion.
F.MONCAYO (Ecuador): Quiero en primer lugar felici-tar a la Secretaría por la presentación de tan valioso documento y al respecto deseo solamente hacer una breve consideración. Por nuestra experien cia en este tipo de trabajos, conocemos que normalmente en nuestros países la base estadística que sirve para la realización de los estudios adolece de deficiencias, que hacen que éstos no tengan la información necesaria que permita tornar decisiones adecuadas.Siendo esto una deficiencia que consi dero general para nuestros países, debería insistirse ante la FAO a fin de que dé un apoyo más signifi cativo a los mismos para poder mejorar los estudios estadísticos y darles una mayor flexibilidad.
Paso inmediatamente a referirme a dos aspectos que considero de mucha importancia para nuestro país.
En cuanto a las orientaciones relativas a la producción de alimentos y producción agrícola, debo decir que es más fácil dar orientaciones que poder aplicarlas, y que evidentemente estas orientaciones los países deben asumirlas en forma coordinada, tanto los desarrollados como aquéllos en desarrollo, porque sería la única forma de que nuestros Gobiernos puedan aplicarlas.
En cuanto a la orientación que se refiere a aumentar los recursos financieros y de otro tipo para la producción agropecuaria, es conveniente que se informe que nuestros Gobiernos, pese a realizar todos los esfuerzos para cumplir ésta, que más que una orientación sería una aspiración nuestra, deben estar siempre supeditados a la difícil forma de conseguir esos recursos. El recurso tierra en países como el nuestro, que está disponible en una gran extensión para la labor agrícola, difícilmente puede ser integrado, por la dificultad de realización de obras de infraestructura, corno las de viabilidad, que permitieran la incoporación de grandes áreas a las labores agrícolas, satisfaciendo de esta manera y ayudando asimismo al esfuerzo internacional de la lucha contra el hambre. Bel mismo modo, la situa ción laboral, que después de decenas de anos de postergación, está empezando a capacitarse, no está muchas veces en condiciones de colaborar con los esfuerzos de desarrollo, si es que previamente no se realiza un esfuerzo muy grande de capacitación, respecto a lo cual también la FAO y los países que tienen recursos disponibles al efecto deberían dar mayor énfasis en su apoyo a los países en condicio nes de desarrollo.
Se anotan también en este punto los fertilizantes, de los que tantas veces se ha hablado en esta reu-nión. Constituye un aspecto de primordial importancia para nuestra producción agropecuaria, pero estarnos muy lejos todavía de aplicarla, dado los precios crecientes que tienen estos productos en el mercado internacional. Sería conveniente, sin embargo, este tipo de tecnología a nivel subregional en los países del subdesarrollo, en sus diferentes regiones.
En cuanto a investigación, pese a los esfuerzos inmensoque se han realizado para lograr una tecno-logía nacional adecuada a las condiciones de desarrollo de cada uno de los países, es necesario que se haga un esfuerzo de apoyo mayor por parte de la FAO y de los países desarrollados, a fin de evitar que nuestros países deban las más de las veces tener regresos sustantivos en pago a consultoras privadas, que no solamente no satisfacen nuestras necesidades y nuestros requerimientos, sino que constituyen algo que realmente no da resultado para la agricultura.
En cuanto a los incentivos para los agricultores, también es un aspecto que se vuelve sumamente difí-cil, porque la rentabilidad de la inversión en campo agrícola es sumamente baja en comparación con los sectores del comercio y de la industria; de tal forma que, dar mayor incentivo a los productores, muchas veces se contrapone con la necesidad de mantener precios adecuados de los productos agrícolas que están al alcance de las grandes masas, que no tienen capacidad en cambio para ingresar en el mercado los productos industrializados.
En el aspecto del crédito, el crédito de los organismos particulares hacia ese sector es casi nulo, debiendo asumir el Estado todo el esfuerzo de crédito para el área agropecuaria.Sin embargo, como el Estado muchas veces actúa como intermediario de otros organismos internacionales de crédito y como éstos mantienen políticas discriminatorias para aquellos países que debido a su esfuerzo han logrado un nivel un poco mejor de desarrollo y tienen ingresos per capita menores que otros países, el crédito de esos organismos se traslada a los productores del sector agropecuario a través de los Gobiernos, se vuelve sumamente difícil de manejar, porque las tasas de interés son altas.
Estos aspectos hacen que las orientaciones que son presentadas no puedan aplicarse en los países que se encuentran en desarrollo, mientras no haya un apoyo sustantivo de los países desarrollados y mien-tras los productos de exportación de origen agropecuario no tengan un trato adecuado en el mercado.
En cuanto al consumo de alimentos, es realmente imposible o muy difícil por lo menos, pensar en una ampliación del trabajo en el campo agrícola para satisfacer el mercado nacional, si nuestros países deben hacer cada vez mayores esfuerzos para enviar la producción agrícola al mercado, puesto que siguen recibiendo cada vez menores cantidades de dinero por él
Estos asuntos los he puesto a consideración de usted, señor Presidente, y de los señores Miembros, porque son aspectos concretos de la realidad de nuestros países, que debenser considerados en este tipo de reuniones.
I.A. IKTIAZI (Pakistan): Since our general approach on this subject was outlined in my general Statement to the Plenary on 16 November, which approach is in fullsupport of the new international economic order, I wish to comment only on the need and measures necessary for improving nutritional standards in the developing countries and that it is why I intervene at this stage.
The nutrition problem, in order to be effectively tackled, requires an interdisciplinary approach and multidimensionaleffort both at the national and international levels. I do not have much to say al this stage with regard to action at the national level since every nation must devise a strategy appropriate and suited to its own peculiar conditions.However, I raust say that such action must of necessity cover inter alia not only arrangements for increased food production but also those for fair distribution through fair and stable return to the producer, and reasonablepricing for the consumer and for the creation and expansion of gainful employment opportunies, particularly in the relatively neglected segments of society, for example the rural poor, for overall rural development with emphasis on improvement in living conditions, for nutrition intervention and nutrition educa tion, particularly amongst the relatively more vulnerable groups such as lactating women and children .
For action at the international level we have the following points to make :
1. International Assistance must focus on establishing, improving and developing in the less developed countries agricultural research activities with emphasis on (a) high-yield, high-protein leguminous food crops, (b) food storage, including cold storage, (c) food and vegetable preservation and processing facilities,(d) fisheries development through the application of modern technology and (e) the provision of superior genetic strains of livestock,
2. The second area, that is other than research, of external assistance to developing countries could be training of agriculturalists,nutritionists and scientists.
3. The third area of possible assistance could be nutrition education and nutrition planning through appropriatelydesigned and conducted household surveys to identify household expenditure and food consumption patterns amongst different groups and amongst different sub-groups within such groups.
J.A. DOS SANTOS VÁRELA (Portugal):En ce qui concerne les sujets qui sont traités ce matin, je voudrais tout d'abord, de la part de ma délégation, adresser au Secrétariat nos félicitations pour son document sur les progrès de l'ajustement agricole international.
Il s'agit d'une excellente vue d'ensemble de la situation et d'un utile essai d'évaluation. A notre avis, je crois que des progrès ont déjà été accomplis en vue d'atteindre des objectifs concrets. Ma délégation approuve de façon globale les textes de ce Rapport bien que nous reconnaissions tous que les progrès déjà accomplis sont encore loin du souhaitable et du possible.
En outre, et en ce qui concerne les deux en trois sections qui font l'objet des appréciations ce matin, notamment la section A traitant de la production de denrées alimentaires et la section B, traitant de la consommation alimentaire et nutritionnelle, je voudrais présenter un commentaire assez limité.
Pour ce qui est du critère de régionalisation, qui a été suivi par une analyseet qui nous est présenté dans le tableau I, il est évident que les différents groupements de pays considérés ne sont pas très homogènes, ainsi que nous le savons tous. Cette situation empêche de voir plus clairement la réalité et, par suite, empêche l'efficacité de jugement et des mesures à prendre. Evidemment, je ne peux pas présenter une dissertation sur ce point mais je me borne, et ce également pour une question de limita tion de temps, aux sujets que mon pays peut présenter dans ce domaine.
Bien que situé en Europe occidentale, le Portugal comme vous le savez, se situe également au point de vue du développement économique, social et politique, dans le groupe des pays en voie de développement à économie de marché. Nous voyons dans le tableau I que l'analyse se limite, en ce qui concerne ce groupement de pays en termes géographiques, à l'Afrique, l'Asie, l'Amérique latine, le Proche-Orient etc. En ce qui concerne cet ensemble de situations nous trouvons des implications, par exemple, pour ce qui est de l'état des chiffres des indicateurs généraux d'augmentation de la production, tels que la ligne d'orientation que l'on nous présente, et aussi des implications à différents degrés, de la satisfaction donnée à la demande alimentaire.
En effet, comme le taux moyen de l'accroissement démographique est beaucoup plus faible en général en Europe occidentale, et en particulier dans mon pays, que dans la presque majorité des pays en voie de développement à économie de marché, en Afrique, Asie etc.tel que l'analyse du tableau I nous le montre, il en résulte que le taux annuel de l'augmentation de la production prévue dans la ligne I mérite aussi à notre avis un certain ajustement,c'est-à-dire une certaine régionalisation.
En ce qui concerne le Portugal, j'aimerais ajouter que notre plan de développement à moyen terme, couvrant la période 1978/80, donne un état particulièrement objectif de l'augmentation de la production et de l'accroissement de la productivité. En effet, un effort intensif sera fait dans le sens de l'augmentation de la consommation par les agriculteurs, par exemple des engrais, semences et plantes améliorées, etc. Le taux annuel de l'augmentation de la production ne va pas au-delà de 2,5 pour cent, compte tenu des possibilités du pays et du taux annuel de croissance de la population, lequel plafonne autour de un pour cent. Comme vous voyez, c'est un exemple concret de l'augmentation de la production bien qu'en restant sensiblement en deçà des 4 pour cent. Nous pensons que cela nous permettra de réaliser des progrès sensibles, bien que modestes encore, en ce qui concerne le besoin de réduire le décalage actuellement existant entre la production et la demande interne des denrées alimentaires, notamment des céréales et des produits d'origine animale.
Pour en terminer, il m'est très agréable de souligner dans ce cadre de notre plan, que des études importantes de projets avec la FAO sont en cours de réalisation, notamment le relèvement de la produc tion et aussi l'amélioration des standards nutritionnels de la population. Je voudrais souligner le projet de développement de la production agricole et de l'élevage dans la zone de la réforme agraire et les projets d'éducation nutritionnelle et d'assistance nutritionnelle à la population scolaire et à la population en général.
M. ISHAQUE (Bangladesh): On behalf of the delegation from Bangladesh I take my hat off to the Secretariat for the job done in presenting this document to us which is an overall report of what is happening all over the world in respect of the guidelines laid down by the Eighteenth Session of the Conference. As the report says, this is a pilot report and a first attempt. The report also says that not very many statistical reports are available, and this is so. The delegate of Ecuador, I think it was, mentioned that statistics are not readily available in many developing countries and because of that the supporting agencies of FAO or the United Nations system will be doing a good job in providing statistical data so that future reports will be more accurate, or more comprehensive. I am quite sure that future reports will give us greater detail and greater information.
As we go through the report we find that there are shortfalls in achievement relating to almost all the guidelines. The report does not, however, try to see why such shortfalls exist. There must have been reasons for them and the developing countries are trying to work according to the guidelines, because it is to their benefit to improve food and other production.
As far as my country is concerned, we have been very much in the thick and thin of improving the nutrition of our people. As a result of the guidelines or otherwise, we in Bangladesh have established a new sector called the Horticultural Development Board with the sole objective of improving the production of such nutritional crops as are needed in the country, but we have some constraints, and I am quite sure many other countries have similar constraints, therefore we have not been able to do as we ourselves wanted to do.
When we are in the process of assessing and analyzing, with the ultimate objective of reaching the goal, doing something and taking action, perhaps it will be better - and this is my suggestion - if a chapter is added to such reports giving the reasons for the countries' shortfall in not achieving the goals. This would help in getting the conclusions andfocusingon those priority countries which have greater constraints.
Finally, I again congratulate the Secretariat on presenting this review report as a pilot report, which is very good.
The meeting rose at 12.25 hours
La seance est levee à 12 h 25
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.25 horas
