Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

14. United Nations/FAO World Food Programme (C 81/LIM/10; C 81/LIM/22)
14. Programme alimentaire mondial ONU/FAO (C 81/LIM/10; C 81/LIM/22)
14. Programa Mundial de Allmentos Naciones Unidas/FAO (C 81/LIM/10; C 81/LIM/22)

CHAIRMAN: I now move on to the next item on the agenda, the World Food Programme. The documents relating to it are C 81/LIM/10 and C 81/LIM/22. Before I open the debate I would like to invite the Executive Director of the UN/FAO World Food Programme to give us the benefit of his introduction.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (WFP): Twenty years ago the United Nations General Assembly and the FAO Conference decided to establish the UN/FAO World Food Programme, exactly twenty years ago: we are in our twentieth anniversary of the decision to establish the World Food Programme. Since then, every two years the FAO Conference has been reviewing the activities of the Programme and determining the pledging targets for contributions to WFP. It is for me a great honour to present to you today the basic facts and trends which portray the current status of the Programme and indicate the direction in which we are moving. Such facts and trends should assist the Conference in deciding on the pledging target for contributions to the Programme’s regular resources for the biennium 1983-84 which is the main action you are requested to take under this item of your agenda.

Many things have happened in the past couple of years. Some progress has surely been made and I will report on it. The Conference is also aware, however, that since we last met the Programme has lost Gerry Vogel, our late Executive Director. We in the World Food Programme knew and admired him. He was a man of ideas and a man of vision. His legacy to us is one of idealism and creativity, guided by his unflagging dedication to the cause of development and justice and by his compassion for the millions of poor people of todayfs world. We value that legacy highly, as will undoubtedly be seen by the Conference in my report to you today.

Let me begin by establishing the order of magnitude of the Programme’s present operations which last year, beyond supplies channelled through WFP by bilateral donors, delivered close to 1.3 million tons of food, approximately 66 percent for development projects and about 34 percent for emergency operations. Of total deliveries, some 300 000 tons came from the International Emergency Food Reserve - the IEFR - while the balance close to 1 million tons, was supplied from the Programme’s own resources. This is, in real terms, an all time record. It may also be useful to indicate that, consistent with its policy of expanding development activities, mainly in support of food self-reliance, the Programme has been able to increase progressively the level of its commitments for development projects. In the current year, 1981, we are earmarking approximately $510 million for such projects and for 1982 we are planning to raise further the level of new commitments. These figures should give you, in quantitative terms, a clear picture of the Programme as an organization on the move, thanks to the generous support of donors and the effective cooperation of recipient countries.


More important still, however, is what WFP is trying to achieve with the resources at its disposal. I would like to make a few remarks in this respect.

As you know, all - I repeat, all - WFP assistance is provided under the project concept, either in the context of development projects, where the Programme’s commodities are used as an investment capital, or in the framework of emergency operations where WFP supplies help in alleviating human suffering after natural or man-made disasters. WFP assistance corresponds in value terms to approximately 20 percent of global food aid. I do not wish to minimize the importance of and need for Programme or bulk food aid, but I strongly feel that the experience of the past twenty years points out unequivocally the advantages of project food aid with clearly defined beneficiaries and clearly defined development objectives as well.

Much has happened in the past few years on the development scene. Concepts have been further refined to promote equity in the development process, and priorities have been further sharpened as a consequence of the progressively growing disparity between resource availability and development requirements. The world has also been witnessing a tragic multiplication of situations where large volumes of food aid are needed, not to assist in the process towards development and food self-reliance, but merely to ensure that lives and basic human conditions are preserved and sustained. All these trends have deeply affected the World Food Programme’s operations.

It is a well-known fact that the food import requirements, and especially the food aid requirements of the 68 or 70 countries usually classified in the low-income, food-deficit category, are increasing - and it is not yet clear when this trend can be reversed. By conservative estimates the food aid requirements of those countries have been calculated to be 13 million tons of grain for the crop year 1981/82. The dimensions of the challenge can readily be understood when it is recalled that food aid in cereals from all sources has not reached 9 million tons this year, and that project food aid delivered by WFP barely reached 1.3 million tons as I have earlier indicated. We have a long way to go to reach the 13 million tons estimated as the indispensable minimum for this crop year.

Under the guidance of the Committee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes our governing body - the World Food Programme has been responding to these realities through a gradual process of adjustment. First, a greater proportion of resources is being invested in support of projects directly or indirectly aimed at ensuring food self-sufficiency and food security. I am sure the Conference will be happy to note in this respect that, in the current year, a new record was set by earmarking for agricultural and rural development about 80 percent of total new commitments for development projects. Secondly, a larger proportion of resources is being channelled to assist the poorest of the poor. Here again we are setting a record in the current year by channelling to the priority group of low-income, food-deficit countries approximately 85 percent of total new commitments for development purposes. This is an all-time record for the United Nations system as far as I know.

In an effort to expand operations in food deficit areas which have recently been shown to be more vulnerable, WFP has considerably intensified its programming initiatives in Africa in the last 18 months. A sustained effort is being made to help African countries south of the Sahara to maximize their food production potential and thus contribute to a better balance between food supply and demand and improved levels of nutrition. Those countries have received in the current year a record level of about 45 percent of total new WFP commitments for development projects. This is a good measure of the results already attained in this endeavour to assist the African farmer to raise the productivity of his land, to expand cultivated areas and to promote rural development in the vast expanses of the African continent.

Similarly, in Asia, a major effort is currently underway to plan a new generation of projects with the same concern for innovation and adjustment of projects to new realities that has characterized our efforts in Africa. We in the WFP Secretariat view the Asian “challenge”, which should lead to a substantial increase in commitments in 1982 and 1983 and a streamlining in supply schemes, with enthusiasm and determination to assist the countries in the region to develop WFP-supported projects with even more relevance to their food production and rural development strategies. With a view to stimulating complementarities under the principle of collective self-reliance, every opportunity should be grasped - also in Asia - to give maximum support to the producer within the region while food aid helps to bridge the supply/demand gap. The Conference will be interested to know also that the planning and programming of WFP-assisted projects is following similar lines in the other developing regions, with strong emphasis on priorities and adjustment to new realities and new requirements.


With the resources at our disposal we are constantly trying to achieve greater development impact. We are engaged in a continuous search for new project designs, improved delivery systems and more accurate monitoring and evaluation arrangements. We are applying, in full measure, our past encouraging experience in the search for innovative ways to increase efficiency in the use of resources. We are concentrating on increasing food production in the poorest rural areas. We are striving to increase food production in areas of monocultural cash crop patterns, to increase the local availability of food. Particularly in areas of chronic food shortages, we are giving an incentive by providing food aid in support of food security schemes linked to improved pricing and production policies.

My previous comments on WFP activities in Africa and in Asia point out another important trend: the regional approach. We in the Programme are progressively planning WFP assistance within a regional framework, with a view to giving every possible support to producers within the same area, thus fostering complementary schemes to accelerate the development process. In this context, we are increasing our purchases in developing countries, to stimulate production where such purchases are made, to encourage cooperation among developing countries, and to save on transportation costs. WFP purchases of Zimbabwean maize is a case in point which proves that, despite long supply lines, it is already feasible to take, within a vast geographical area and on strictly competitive terms, concrete and decisive steps towards a policy of self-reliance. Every ship which moors in an African port with a cargo of the Zimbabwean maize that WFP is moving through Mozambique proves that Africans can feed Africans and that this is already a reality.

By diversifying our project designs and by devising more rational - and less costly - supply systems, we aim at ensuring greater compatibility with the specific conditions of the countries and regions where the Programme operates., In these various ways, we are making strong efforts to ensure that WFP food aid for development responds to the requirements of today’s world.

The experience of the Programme has clearly demonstrated the development potential of food aid, and in particular the impact that project food aid can have in improving conditions in the most depressed rural area.s. We in the Programme are equally a,ware, however, that food aid is not a panacea, and that the best utilization of food aid calls for its close association with other types of assistance wherever possible, and particularly where a multiplier effect is anticipated. In practical terms this has meant a constant and diligent effort at joint programming. FAO is our natural partner, and the Conference will surely appreciate that our cooperation has always been close and excellent. In most of the WFP-assisted projects., however, other UN a,gencies are also involved and a fruitful interaction is assured with bilateral programmes of assistance as well. In all cases, the Programme takes particular ca,re to ensure ttцt the activities it supports are clearly in line with national priorities and are clearly inserted in the nдtional development plans.

I very much hope that my comments hдve provided to the Conference a basis for a broad assessment of the current status of the Programme on the “development front”. On the “emergency front”, as I have already indicated, the requirements for food aid are fast increasing and, with the multiplication of critical situations in many parts of the world, no abatement is in sight. With the same zeal for qualitative improvement in our deliviries, the Committee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes and the WFP Secretariat, in cooperation with recipient and donor countries, are currently engaged in a painstaking and meticulous process to remove short-comings and further improve the emergency food assistance which the Programme delivers under the authority of the Director-General of FAO. While in a number of instances shortcomings might be unavoidable because of circumstances inherent to the very nature of the emergency situation for which food aid is being provided, I am confident that improvements will ordinarily be possible with the cooperation of all parties concerned.

The general picture I have tried to give you of the Programme’s activities has the dual purpose of providing the Conference with an updated, albeit summarized, view of project food aid of the type provided by WFP in the early eighties, and of setting the proper framework for the decision the Conference is called upon to take, upon recommendation of the FAO Council, on the pledging target for contributions for the World Food Programme in the biennium 1983-84. A draft resolution approving a target of $ 1.2 billion for that biennium has been submitted, as you know, by the Council to the Conference. This pledging target, which I very much hope the Conference will approve - similar action is being requested according to our Rules from the UN General Assembly - has been successively endorsed, by consensus, by the Committee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes, the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, and the FAO Council.


Before commenting further on the proposed pledging target, I should perhaps explain that the resources of the Programme come to us in three different ways: the regular resources, for which a Pledging Conference is convened roughly one year before the beginning of the biennium; additional contributions in the form of grain pledged under the Food Aid Convention and channelled through the World Food Programme; and IEFR resources, placed at the Programme’s disposal for emergency operations. The pledging target the Conference is expected to decide upon refers only to the first category, the regular resources. The three categories of resources, to which I have just made reference, have behaved differently in the past few years. The growth rates in FAC grain channelled through the Programme and in the IEFR have been higher than that for the regular resources, which have tended to level off in real terms. While this does not change the total supplies actually available - and this total has been increasing in real terms - I must stress the importance of the regular resources of the Programme since they alone provide the basic and most sure element for planning commitments due to their pluri-annual nature.

The Conference might be interested to know that, by the end of October 1981, contributions reached approximately 75 percent of the target of $1 billion set for the current biennium of 1981-82. More resources are expected to come in, however, since we are still not half way through the biennium. Substantial new contributions have been made in recent months by a number of donors and in particular by the OPEC Fund for International Development, which has thus started a most promising association with the World Food Programme, to the benefit of both development activities and IEFR-financed emergency operations. This is a historical and most welcome development, of particular importance when the Programme is endeavouring to raise the level of purchases of food supplies as explained earlier. We have made progress, but we surely need additional resources at this point.

I could give the Conference many facts which would substantiate the fast increasing requirements for project food aid which the Programme must meet, and many figures which would confirm why - given WFP’s resource position - it is critically important that the proposed target of contributions of $ 1.2 billion for the biennium 1983-84 be approved and actually reached if those requirements, which relate to the most basic and urgent needs of some of the poorest people of the world, are to be met. Suffice it to say, however, that the proposed target represents the absolute minimum needed, if current levels of WFP food deliveries and projects are to be maintained after 1983. In all frankness I must also say that the proposed target represents at the same time the maximum which could reasonably be considered in the hard reality of present economic circumstances. I firmly believe, therefore, that the new target of $1.2 billion is essentially a balanced one. It has been carefully determined with regard to the needs of those the Programme is expected to assist, and with regard also to the need to be realistic in our pledging goal.

Having in mind those millions of poor people whose lives will be improved - if not saved - if WFP-supported activities can be carried out, I strongly urge this Conference to endorse the proposed pledging target of $1.2 billion for the biennium 1983-84. I must equally strongly urge all those countries in a position to do so to join forces, in a gesture of human solidarity, so that this target, which represents so many hopes to so many people in the hundreds of projects the Programme assists, is not only approved but also fully attained - and if possible surpassed - when contributions are announced early next year. I am confident that you will lend the authority and prestige of this Conference to the successful launching of a pledging target which is so closely related to the fundamental objectives which your Organization pursues.

J. MOORE (United States of America): The delegation of the United States has closely studied the draft Resolution on the WFP target for the 1983-84 biennium and we wish to give our support to the Resolution as it appears before us.

The United States Government has been one of the major supporters of WFP from its very inception: indeed the United States was one of the midwives, so to speak, at the birth of the programme. Over the years as the programme’s operations have increased United States support has also increased and the United States continues to believe that the World Food Programme constitutes one of the major success stories of multilateral aid agencies and that it is without question one of the major conduits of effective food aid to needy countries. It is our view that the United States, in spite of the many competing demands on its food aid which is available under Public Law 480, will continue to be a major contributor to the programme.

However, we wish to note our concern in connexion with the target of $1 200 million, particularly in view of the recent history of WFP targets in relation to the actual pledges to the programme. In the previous biennium, 1979-80, the programme achieved about 85 percent of its target of $950 million. As the Executive Director ad interim mentioned a few moments ago, during the present biennium, 1981-82, with a target of $1 000 million, we are, as of October 31, 1981, at approximately 74 percent of the target.


The United States is also pleased to observe, as Mr. Brito has mentioned, that there have been recent increased contributions to the programme for this biennium, and there will surely be additional contributions during 1982.

In this connexion, we also wish to note particularly the recent contribution from the OPEC Special Fund of $25 million as well as the increased contributions of several other donors. Nevertheless, we cannot realistically assume that the present target will be achieved. In fact, there may be a serious shortfall.

In addition to the problems of shortages of the regular resources of WFP, due also in part to the steadily increasing costs of transportation, we are all aware of the increasing demands of emergency food needs, both from natural and man-made causes. The requirements of refugee programmes in Africa and Pakistan, of the food shortages in Kampuchea, to mention only a few, place demands on donor nations which compete with resources which might otherwise be available to the WFP for development projects. At this point we would like to mention the discussion during the recent Committee on Food Aid where a more active participation by Member Countries was proposed in connexion wijth emergency programmes, and we look forward to follow-up on this proposal.

In summary, we wish to record our high regard for the World Food Programme and its activity. Nevertheless, we believe that WFP Management will indeed be challenged by the need to preserve its base and even augment its resources during a time of international economic difficulty. The US is for its part giving careful consideration to the size of the US pledge for the Organization’s 1983-84 biennium.

J. DOORENBOS (Netherlands): My government, being a large donor but also a strong supporter of WFP, has taken good notice of the report before us, and we have listened very carefully to the introductory speech by Mr. Brito. In the CFA twice a year a thorough discussion is held of policy, administrative and operational matters. We always highly value these meetings whereby in a spirit of openness but also sometimes with direct confrontations of opinion, thus far a consensus has always been reached. The decisions taken by CFA are clearly reflected in WFP’s policies and operational activities. I refer, for instance, to the discussion which we had on the definition of emergency. I do not want to make a long intervention, for which actually the CFA is the appropriate forum. Some selected aspects are of relevance here, particularly as regards the functioning of WFP, and may I restrict my comments to three points: firstly, the development-oriented activities; secondly, planning and logistics support; and thirdly, coordination of activities.

As regards the first one, much stress is laid on the development task of WFP. New demands must continuously be met, new ways must be found and new dimensions must be developed. This requires careful evaluation of the programme in execution. The measure of success or even failure, is, however, difficult to determine. However, the programme must continue to attempt to improve the weaker parts of its activities and, I may say, be free from the negative effects that for instance the Report of the European Court of Account could have on the Common Market Food Aid Programme, both inside the Organization as. well as outside, and by that I mean public opinion.

Returning now for a moment to the measure of effect, we strongly support in words and in deeds WFP’s intention to evaluate the nutritional impact of food aid.

As regards planning and logistic support, a few remarks: with the growing quantity of the programmes that the programme has to cope with, care must be taken to balance commitments and disbursements so as to avoid great imbalances between those two. In addition, logistics form an inseparable part of food aid planning. We are happy to note the great attention which is given by WFP in this field. We strongly support this. WFP has provided to The Netherlands direct support in the execution of its bilateral programme, and I may suggest that other donors may also follow these examples. On the other hand, in the field of logistics, we have had very close cooperation with WFP, and I may mention in this respect the programme which was executed in Uganda, Another example in this respect is that WFP is heavily involved in keeping the maize train rolling in Zimbabwe.

This brings me to the coordination role which WFP can also play firstly by being the focal point in adjusting and balancing food aid shipments directed towards a specific target area by different donors. A clear case in fact is some of the operations presently undertaken in African countries,and secondly, WFP’s coordination role in meeting unforeseen and extensive food shortages such as presently occur in Kampuchea and Somalia due to the refugee problem. Viewing the extent of such operations, we feel that it is imperative that WFP must be adequately equipped and must have sufficient highly qualified manpower for this purpose.


We do wonder at this moment whether in certain areas of Africa the planning and execution apparatus within WFP may need some adjustments. We feel that the benefits would be much greater than the small cost involved.

Finally, we would support the target as set by WFP and as asked for by the Executive Director ad interim, and we express with him the hope that this target may also be met in the very near future.

C. KELLER SARMIENTO (Argentina): En primer lugar, señor Presidente, vaya nuestra palabra de agradecimiento y de ulterior aliento a las actividades del Programa Mundial de Alimentos que cumple hoy 20 años como acaba de expresar muy brillantemente en su introducción al debate el Director General Interino, señor B. de A. Brito.

Entendemos que el objetivo propuesto para el bienio de 1983-84 de 1 200 millones de dólares de promesas de coћtribuciones es necesario para incentivar al máximo la cooperación por parte de los países que estén en condiciones de orientar esfuerzos a través del Programa. En 1980 el PMA ha proporcionado aproximadamente 1 millón de toneladas de alimentos de sus propios recursos y contribuciones al Convenio de Ayuda Alimentaria además de las 3 000 toneladas de las reservas internacionales alimentarias de emergencia. Entendemos que la producción mantenida por el PMA en la adjudicación de proyectos, 66 por ciento para desarrollo y 34 por ciento para operaciones de urgencia, nos parece adecuada, sobre todo, por el efecto multiplicador que tienen los proyectos de desarrollo. No obstante ello, y si fuera posible, entendemos que la tendencia a incrementar los proyectos de desarrollo producirîa efectos saludables en la economía de los países a los cuales va dirigido.

En cuanto a los recursos prometidos para 1981-82 estimamos que la recaudación del 75 por ciento en este momento del total de 1 000 millones de dólares fijados como objetivo para ese bienio, es auspiciosa, sobre todo, teniendo en cuenta la eficiencia e importancia de las labores del PMA y, sobre todo, la brillante condición que tiene en este momento con el Director Ejecutivo Adjunto señor Brito. La rapidez de acción, al enfrentar las situaciones de emergencia de que ha dado muestras el PMA, es un motivo de orgullo para las Naciones Unidas y la consolidación de los principios mas auténticos de solidaridad y cooperación internacionales.

Dentro del contexto y el marco de cooperación económica entre países en desarrollo y cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo, y continuando con su tradición histórica de aportar los mayores esfuerzos en actos positivos de solidaridad y ayuda internacionales, la Republica Argentina ha canalizado parte de su ayuda alimentaria por intermedio del Programa Mundial de Alimentos.

Entendemos que esta decision es un reconocimiento a la labor del PMA y a sus eficientes administradores ejecutivos, conducidos por el Director General, el señor El Midani y el señor Sintobin, con los cuales hemos tenido fructíferas conversaciones sobre modalidades de estos acuerdos que esperamos, en el futuro, poder ampliar y, sobre todo, que sirvan de estîmulo a la intensificación de actividades del CEPD dentro del marco del PMA.

Señor Presidente, hemos tratado sucintamente de destacar el apoyo a las labores del PMA. Por ello apoyamos el proyecto de resolución contenido en el Documento C 81/LIM/22 referido al objetivo de promesas para el período 1983-84.

Por último, una consideración hacia la orientación de proyectos de desarrollo del PMA en el futuro. Dentro de este concepto y dentro de este marco, que tanto nos interesa y que implica las nuevas dimen-siones de actividades de la FAO, la cooperación económica entre países en desarrollo, el PMA, podría ampliar sus actividades al proyecto de desarrollo hacia países que dispongan de condiciones competitivas ventajosas para la producción de alimentos a costos reducidos.

Un enfoque nuevo y ambicioso de esta problemática sería, sin duda, una contribución importante al incre-mento de la capacidad de recursos del PMA y produciría un efecto estimulante en aquellos países que corrélativamente están en condiciones de incrementar dramáticamente su producción de alimentos. Muchas gracias señor Presidente.

G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La declaración lúcida, clara y completa que acaba de hacernos el señor Bernardo de Azevedo Brito, Director Ejecutivo interino del PMA, confirma con las excelentes cualidades que le distinguen y la eficacia y la inteligencia con que él está dirigiendo este importante Programa, en todo lo cual le acompaña el más pleno apoyo del gobierno de Colombia.


La reunión del Consejo inmediatamente anterior a la Conferencia apoyó ya las prioridades y objetivos del Programa y también recomendó unánimemente el objetivo de promesa de 1 200 millones de dólares que ahora aparece en el documento C 81/LIM/22. Naturalmente en esta Comisión aquí, y luego en la Plenaria, cumpliremos el rito tradicional periódico de apoyar igualmente esa meta, como ya lo ha hecho el Consejo y esperamos que lo haga próximamente la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas.

Vamos a cumplir este acto con simpatía, con sinceridad y con esperanza e igualmente con cierto desa-liento, con algunas preocupaciones porque todos sabemos que para el período 1979-80 solamente se logró el 85 por ciento del objetivo que habíamos previsto, y para el bienio en curso, aunque si todavía estamos a la mitad del camino, sólo se ha obteñido el 75 por ciento, Podríamos preguntarnos entonces si va a seguir esa tendencia regresiva y cüândo en realidad se va a lograr los 1 200 millones de dólares que vamos a recomendar.

Nuestra inquietud sobre este particular ha sido fortalecida por la intervención del primer orador sobre este tema, quien ademas representa a uno de los mas notables contribuyentes al Programa y que tiene una intervencion objetiva y seríana él expuestas las dificultades presentes. Nosotros esperamos que los paises que están en condiciones de contribuir al Programa superen esas dificultades que reconocemos. Por eso creemos que esta Comisión debe apoyar la solicitud del llamado que ya hizo el Consejo en su espíritu de solidaridad internacional, no solo para alcanzar el objetivo, sino para superarlo.

Podríamos contribuir a este propósito si destacamos el apoyo constructivo, por ejemplo del fondo de la OPEP, que ha contribuido con 20 millones de dólares, lo cual es un ejemplo. Este dinero de la OPEP va a reforzar las reservas de emergencia y también al proyecto de desarrollo urgente, lo cual consideramos muy adecuado.

Igualmente, deberemos reconocer los aportes recientes de países como Argentina, España, Australia, Austria e Italia bien al presupuesto ordinario del PMA o a la Reserva de Urgencia. También Francia es un país que, según nos ha manifestado, va a duplicar su contribución al Programa ordinario del PMA el año próximo y también entendemos que a la Reserva de Emergencia.

Es igualmente satisfactorio el anuncio de la Comunidad Económica Europea que va a contribuir con 100 000 toneladas mas de cereales para la Ayuda Alimentaria. Pero igualmente deberíamos hacer constar, en nuestro informe que se expresa, que todas esas contribuciones se hagan sin condiciones, que sean canalizadas multilateralmente a través del Programa Mundial de Alimentos, como se especifica en las reglas vlgentes. Y decimos esto porque es lamentable que cerca del 50 por ciento de las contribuciones que en 1981 se han hecho a la RAIE han sido destinadas por los donantes a proyectos concretos. Este procedimiento de condicionar las ayudas, de desvirtuar el carácter multilateral de la ayuda tiende a perpetuar la asistencia bilateral que ciertamente no corresponde a las caracterîsticas del PMA.

Creemos que el PMA sigue teniendo un espíritu válido para el desarrollo; apoyamos en general el enfoque que presentó nuestro colega y amigo argentino de nuevos campos para explotar y particularmente, como hizo el Consejo, estamos de acuerdo en que se haga compra de alimentos en los paises en desarrollo eficientemente productores, porque asî, como lo dijo el Consejo, se fomenta el desarrollo, se promueve la cooperación entre esos países y se ahorran costos de transporte.

Finalmente, señor Presidente, reiteramos nuestro apoyo al Proyecto de resolución que seguramente sera acogido unánimemente por la Conferencia.

R. HIGHAM (Canada): Canada has from the outset of the World Food Programme been a strong supporter. We are today the second largest donor: we channel about half of our total food aid through this facility. Needless to say, we are very pleased with the Programme’s record of achievements in using food aid as a development tool and for its ability to respond to emergency situations around the world.

We believe that the success of the World Food Programme as a development assistance and emergency food aid organization is due to two important features of its operations.

One is the voluntary nature of the pledging process which offers the Programme’s managers a regular challenge to prove their effectiveness and to justify the sound arguments for using multilateral channels for food aid.

The second reason we credit to the Programme’s success is the unusual degree of member participation in the resource allocation process in setting guidelines and policies for the Programme’s managers, and in the approving, monitoring, and evaluating of projects.


We find great encouragement from the level of participation of the members of the CFA - the Committee of Food Aid - Policies and Programmes in this process and in the dialogue amongst us members which enables the Committee to operate on a consensus basis.

We also put great stock on the development bias of the Programme’s projects, the emphasis on members of the least developed category of recipients, and also the emphasis on those countries which are themselves exhibiting frontline priority to developing their own agricultural sectors.

We would like to comment on the innovative and imaginative work being carried out by WFP Secretariat at present, in some cases on an experimental basis. These are attempts to find ways to stretch resources and reduce spending from the chronically short cash reserves. If these experiments prove successful, some of these ideas could go a long way towards addressing the problem of cash-to-resources balance. I am referring, of course, to the permission recently requested by the Secretariat to sell some commodities to recipient countries in order to assist them with internal transport costs. We are watching these innovations with interest and recognize the administrative and logistical challenge they represent for the Secretariat.

We are also concerned about the need to ensure such procedures do not upset internal markets or established external trading patterns.

On this question of cash-to-commodities balance, Canada is particularly gratified by the contribution to all World Food Aid programme resources by countries who even while experiencing food production deficits of their own,are in the fortunate position of being able to pledge in cash. Their role as donors is doubly important because of the contributions they make towards maximizing the flexibility of the Programme.

Of particular note in this connexion is the growing practice of the so-called triangular transactions. Here the Programme’s cash resources can make important contributions towards increasing what I call effective demand in regional markets; purchases, for example, for Zimbabwe, for delivery to neighbouring countries is the best known current example of this.

Canada was able to participate in the consensus which endorsed the food pledging target at the CFA and at Council. In declaring our own intention to do our best to respond to these new demands, we call one more time on new and established World Food Programme donors to join us and share the pride we all have in the World Food Programme’s continuing success.

On the question of emergencies, that is food for emergency use, as we all know there are two sources through the FAO/World Food Programme system, the resources which come from the Programme itself - I think $45 million is tagged for emergency use - and also resources pledged for the International Emergency Food Reserve.

We are pleased progress has been made in recent months towards improving and stabilizing the level of resources available for emergencies. We are particularly pleased that members of the CFA recommend maintenance of the voluntary nature of the IEFR pledging while inviting longer term commitments from donors. Possibly this can be done by a process which will combine WFP and IEFR pledging into a single conference.

As is the case with the World Food Programme itself, we think that an emergency food aid operation should be developed which attracts donors because of its effectiveness and its utility rather than trying to create an obligatory pledging process or a binding convention.

Again, in parallel with the World Food Programme and its pledging and resource allocation cycle, we see merit in “fine-tuning” the allocation process for emergency food resources in a way which provides for active member participation. That is why we and some other members of the CFA have proposed some ideas for consideration for the next session for further improvements in this direction.

We are all aware of the limited resources available for emergency use and of the many competing demands on them for distribution. We are also aware of the dangers inherent in hastily planned food aid and the damage it can cause to recipient country agricultural sectors if it is not carefully distributed. We are convinced that this process of evolution of both sides of the emergency food aid activity of the World Food Programme and of the FAO, that is the pledging and the resource allocation process, is a healthy one and we look forward to giving it our full support along with fellow CFA members and observers.


Mme. G. ROSSI PEROTTI (Italie): Permettez-moi de remercier tout d’abord M. Brito pour son excellente et ponctuelle introduction à nos debats. L’exposé récapitulatif du Sommet de Cancún se réfère à l’aide alimentaire. Je cite la phrase en question: “L’aide alimentaire devrait être cönsidérée comme un moyen temporaire à utiliser dans les situations d’urgence. De telles situations pourraient certes continuer d’apparaître au cours des prochaines années, et malheureusement pourraient peut-être même se multiplier. Cependant, l’aide alimentaire ne saurait se substituer en permanence au développement de la production alimentaire qui est nécessaire dans les pays en développement eux-mêmes”.

Ce concept est totalement partagé par l’Italie. C’est pourquoi, comme nous l’avions déjà mis en relief au cours des travaux de la dernière session de la FAO, nous avons déployé des efforts particuliers en faveur du Programme alimentaire mondial dont la tâche principale doit rester celle de fournir l’aide au développement aux pays prioritaires et aux projets prioritaires.

Dans cette optique, ma délégation se rallie aux orateurs qui l’ont précédée et donne son adhésion tout entière à l’objectif du Programme alimentaire mondial pour la période 1983/84, avec l’espoir que cet objectif sera non seulement atteint, mais dépassé.

H. REDL (Austria) (original language: German): First I wish to thank Mr. de Brito for his excellent introduction to this theme. May I however to begin with concentrate on a problem which, in the light of the most recent discussions and introductory comments, is of particular importance? This also has an impact on the world food situation and we shall all probably find a recession of resources of the UNDP funds. In view of this situation we shall have to look at the question of how we are going to carry on from there and what must be done.

A constructive solution, we feel, would be for the Conference to launch an appeal to the UNDP donor countries to review their decision in order that the question of resources for FAO does not become too unbearable, particularly in a period of worldwide economic problems and crisis. The situation of the developing countries becomes increasingly acute, therefore the resources of FAO should be enhanced and not decreased.

May I now particularly say something about the World Food Programme? The Austrian Delegation studied with great interest the papers and discussions of this Conference with respect to the organization of the work and activities of the World Food Programme. We would like to state the following. The Programme should strive to avoid various counterproductive effects on agricultural production and the trade of the recipient countries and above all we should look at the impact of food aid on local production. The Third World will still depend for many years on imported food stocks from abroad; three forms of import come into consideration: one, commercial imports at market prices; two, imports at concessional conditions, subsidized deliveries, soft loans, etc.; and three, free food aid. These three kinds of food supplies are all intertwined in a complex manner and have their impact on the organization of self-sufficiency in developing countries. Aid deliveries can disturb the domestic production and markets. Low-priced imports may further hamstring any farming incentive producer priced policy and commercial supplies may also strain the payment capacity of such countries. We need not repeat here that the world food problem cannot be coped with only by way of trade or aid.

A decisive key to the solution lies in the economic and agricultural policy of the developing countries themselves. The strategic slogan should be “self-reliance’’. The strategic national food plan of self-reliance however should never be equated with self-sufficiency, in other words autarchy. It should be interpreted as a condition in which an economy can feed its own population, either by producing what it needs or by being solvent enough to pay for food imports.

In conclusion, may I point out that as was already stated in the Plenary by the Austrian Head of Delegation, Austria will continue, as in the past, in a constructive manner to contribute to the objectives of the World Food Programme and is prepared to support developing countries in their own efforts. Austria therefore supports the resolution before us concerning the pledging target for 1983/84.

J. GLISTRUP (Denmark): I would like to start by thanking Mr. de Brito for the very elaborate introduction he gave to the subject before us today. The Danish Government has been supporting the World Food Programme since its start and I would like to take this opportunity to compliment the Programme on the excellent work it is carrying out. Only a few weeks ago we participated in the 12th CFA where major decisions were reached and important steps were taken towards solving important issues on the agenda of the Committee.


I would therefore like to touch only upon a few points which we find important.

The resource situation of the Programme with a target of $1 billion for 1981/82 has not been reached. This is a source of concern to us; nevertheless, my Government is supporting a resolution for the new pledging target of $1.2 billion for the period 1983/84. In doing so we are of the opinion that the new target will not be reached unless new donors join the Programme and we are following recent developments in this field with interest. My Government is convinced that it would lead to a better utilisation of food aid if this were to a greater extent channeled through the World Food Programme. It would be of importance if increased quantities of grain from the Food Aid Convention were to be placed at the disposal of the Programme.

At this point I would like to reconfirm my government’s willingness to continue our support for the Programme and to inform you that in order to stretch our resources even further we, together with Danish industry and the World Food Programme, have been working on the development of a new canned meat product of high nutritional value. This product is presently, being tested in the field and the results so far have been very promising. By introducing this new product we shall be able to increase our deliveries to the Programme for the same amount of funds.

During the 12th CFA we also spent spme time discussing the Programme’s work in emergency situations. My Government is of the opinion that the Programme should place priority on supporting development activities. However, a series of unfortunate events has led to the situation that in 1980 almost 30 per cent of the total resources available to the Programme were utilised in emergencies.

We are pleased to note that the discussion regarding the Programme’s involvement in emergencies will continue and I would like to reconfirm the Danish Government’s preparedness to participate actively in this debate.

Finally, we note with satisfaction that the target for the International Emergency Food Reserve of 500,000 tons of grain has been reached this year. My Government is supporting a proposal for pledging conferences every two years in order to assure an increasing and more stabilised contribution to IEFR.

S.P. MUKHERJEE (India): India has always been a very ardent supporter of the WFP and also the spirit which animates the WFP and its staff and its programme. As we see it, the WFP can be said to have been born out of the collective conscience of all the countries to save the poorest of the poor from starvation and from man-made and natural disasters. We feel that in the WFP, in Churchillian language, so much is being done with so little resources for so many people having so little. I feel that no world body in the United Nations Organization or outside has so much of the life ameliorating and life saving content as the WFP.

I have been associated with the CFA for the last five or six years and I have always advocated there that the WFP’s food aid should be addressed so as to reduce the need for food aid for that country, I, am very happy to note that the WFP programme and policy is directed not to make people live on charity but to make them more and more self-reliant by giving food grains for such work as would create a durable asset for increasing agricultural production in those countries.

As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, in developing countries it is not so much the famine of food that bedevils them but it is the famine of work and of income and of employment that dogs them. The WFP by their food aid programmes have tried to generate employment in the rural areas in backward sections of the rural population, by taking up such work as irrigation, road building, and so on, which will give them income on the one hand and on the other the community will be enriched by the assets which will help them in increasing food production. In that way I feel that the value of this programme is doubly blessed: it is blessed for mercy and it is blessed for development. I feel this is a unique example of marrying programmes of development with programmes of mercy so that the people ultimately become the beneficiaries, become self-reliant and self-sufficient.

My delegation wishes to congratulate Mr. Brito for enabling WFP to reach certain record levels. Nothing less would be expected from a person like Mr. Brito with his dynamism, his mercurial personality and human sympathies. The record of 1.3 million tons of food shipment, the record of 85 percent of World Food Programme going to the low income countries, the record of 80 percent going for agricultural programmes and the record of 45 percent to be given to the very deprived area in Africa south of the Sahara, is something of which any organization and any person can be proud.

The Indian delegation fully supports the draft resolution.


I have carried with me from India an issue of Time Magazine dated October 26, 1981 because it contains a lot of information about the present situation of supplying of arms and arsenals to the various countries. In this magazine it is indicated that last year there was $1 200 billion worth of arms transferred in the world in one year; $1 200 billion! As against that, this target of $1.2 million for the World Food Programme is hardly one percent of the total value of arms transferred which took place last year. Surely, I feel, that the will to survive and the will to save mankind is more than one percent of the will to destroy and the will to die. In that context I feel that $1.2 billion target which is one percent of the total value of arms transferred last year in the world, is not something which is beyond the reach of mankind and the people. The capacity of reaching $1.2 billion of target for WFP is within our easy reach. What we need is the collective will, the collective compassion for the poor and the collective instinct to survive.

India thanks the World Food Programme and specially all those countries, major and minor, who have been contributing very liberally and generously to this world Organization and keeping the WFP and its Programmes alive so that man may live tomorrow.

The meeting rose at 13.15 hours
La séance est levée à 13 h 15
Se levanta la sesión a las 13.15 horas

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page