Food security and the state: responsibility and partnership
Prepared by the FAO Rural Development Division
THE PRIMARY IMPORTANCE of the state and
government in bringing about food security cannot be underestimated.
The state is able to utilise a wide range of mechanisms for
intervention and can operate in multiple areas. Stated simply, there
are perhaps four principle means through which the state is able to
act:
- direct support and assistance
- formalisation of "rules of the
game"
- the creation of appropriate enabling
environments
- definition of long-term goals and
objectives.
There are however, no universally-valid
prescriptions determining the precise form and content of state
action. Instead, the substantive nature of state involvement is
conditioned by the interplay of local, national and international
factors. What is certain however, is that in the final instance, it
is the state that must define the spatial, temporal and sectoral
vectors of its intervention. In order to do this, it must first
identify goals and objectives and then assess the most effective
national and sub-national strategies for attaining them. And in
determining the limits of its intervention, the state must also
ensure that other sectors and groups are able to act where required.
There is then, no standard model. A country with a highly developed
and efficient private sector will demand very different forms of
state intervention than a country with a small, dysfunctional and/or
under-developed private sector. Similarly, a state in a country with
an organised and participatory civil society will be required to
intervene differently from one in a country where civil society is
perhaps unwilling or unable to participate in decision-making
processes. It must then, be national and local conditions that shape
that shape final solutions.
One of the biggest challenges facing the
state therefore, is to determine the extent and nature of its
intervention in the food security process. There are certain
guidelines that can assist the state in deciding the most effective
form of involvement. Included within this list are the facts
that:
- to be effective, food security
initiatives must be sustainable
- higher levels of participation invariably yield more
context-sensitive solutions
- alliances and participation
can only occur when suitable institutional spaces exist
- information is one of the
most vital ingredients for effective decision-making
- science and technology must be mobilized in the struggle for food security
- development must be
gender-equal
The role of the state in a
changing world
The growing consensus regarding the benefits
of political and economic decentralisation and privatisation
introduce new considerations into the food security equation. It is
now recognised that certain functions can be performed more
efficiently and effectively by local and/or non-state groups. There
is however, no consensus regarding precisely which roles and which
activities. Nor should there be. Once again, there are no universally
valid formulae. Instead, the demarcation of public/private and
central/local roles depends on national and local capacities,
institutions and cultures. Nonetheless, every context has an optimal
arrangement between these two sets of competing choices. The
challenge facing decision and policy-makers concerns the
identification and implementation of that context's most appropriate
solution.
There is increasing advocacy for the notion
that a function should be performed at the
lowest level within a system at which it can still be performed
effectively. The decision regarding who, where and how a given function is performed should be based on the capacity and
willingness of different sectors to assume new roles, functions and
responsibilities.
Similarly, processes and functions should
not necessarily be viewed as fixed and self-contained unities. In
many instances, processes and decisions can be subdivided, or
decomposed, into their constituent components.
Decomposing the elements of
action
There are then, many difficult and complex
decisions to be made by the state. And it must ensure that all
strategies and initiatives are sustainable. They must therefore, be
suited to national and local capacities and must be able to continue
without excessive future inputs or support.
It is therefore necessary to examine the
precise possibilities available to the state in more detail. We have
noted that the state has various options. It can for example, provide
direct assistance or it can construct necessary enabling
environments. The guidelines indicated above can help policy-makers
todetermine which of these, and other options, are the most
appropriate and promise the most benefit. Two points however are
clear:
- the historic dichotomies of
national / local and state / non-state are increasingly redundant.
Solutions should now be defined in terms of differing arrangements
along a single continuum. Processes can and should be undertaken by a
combination of national and local, and state and non-state factors
and groups.
- as a result, one must respect the
complementarity and multiplicity of state / non-state arrangements.
There is no longer a simple choice between one or the other. Instead
there are an infinite number of possible arrangements linking the
state with non-state sectors. Some arrangements however, are more
suited to specific conditions than others. The challenge facing
policy-makers is to identify the most appropriate option.
Two basic conclusions can now be
proposed:
- governments bear the greatest
responsibility for ensuring food security at the global, national
and local levels.
- the precise form, extent and function of
government involvement is determined by the combination of global
and exclusively local factors and conditions.
These points raise two further
questions:
- what are the goals and objectives that
governments should pursue in order to ensure food security
- who can help government
Defining goals and
objectives
There has never been a better time for the
definition of goals and objectives. The 1996 World Food Summit has
provided governments with a unique opportunity. The preparatory
phases has brought all sectors of the national and international
communities together in search of the objectives, perspectives and
commitments that should shape the world community's battle for food
security.
Partnerships
Governments are not alone in their struggle
for food security. Indeed, in many cases, they must not act alone.
Instead, they must incorporate partners and form alliances and
coalitions, where appropriate, in order to ensure the successful
accomplishment of these objectives. Partnerships engender many
benefits. They can lead to increased scale economies, they can
provide a wider resource base and augment the sum of information
available to decision-makers. They can also satisfy growing calls
for participation and can produce clear efficiency gains.
Potential partners span all sectors and
exist at all levels of the global system. They range from
inter-governmental organisations and international non-governmental
organisations and business enterprises to village groups attempting
to improve, for example, local irrigation management and even, a
community's oldest resident, wizened by age and a lifetime's labour,
yet the container for the experience and knowledge of this and former
generations.
There is one partner that is dedicated
exclusively to assisting governments in their individual and
collective struggles for food security. That is the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
