Often I catch myself pondering topics and subject matter that randomly arrest my attention. So much so that I will start researching the topic in an attempt to learn as much as I can about it and the divergent views that may exist on it. Once I am comfortable with the topic, I will start sharing with those closest to me all that I have learned. In an attempt to catalogue and share what I learn, this space will be the home for my many musings in order to always remember all that I have learned and seek to learn. I hope you will join me on this journey.
As an opening entry to this escapist space, I thought it important that the discussion commence by examining, what the World Food Programme (WFP), the food assistance arm of the United Nations and the world's largest humanitarian effort to address world hunger, classifies as the “single greatest solvable problem facing the world today”: hunger. Growing up in developing countries, this topic has always been on my mind: how can there be a shortage of food when the very idea of hunger being a "solvable problem" indicates that it is entirely plausible to feed every single human being on earth?
My father did not grow up with enough to eat and his mother often went hungry to feed her children. My father-in-law, forced out of East Africa under the rule of Idi Amin, arrived in Canada and here often subsisted on one small meal a day. These examples are by no means indicative of the extreme poverty that touches so many men, women, and children around the world, but for me, they serve to humanize a phenomenon that so many of us are fortunate enough never to have experienced. Unfortunately, approximately 870 million people in the world (as of 2012) are asking the question: 'Will we have anything to eat for dinner?' rather than the question many of us ask around supper time, 'What's for dinner?'
To provide a perspective of the world's hunger condition from the latest statistics, note the following points provided by the World Food Programme (WFP):
One in every eight people goes to bed hungry every night (FAO, 2012).
Although much progress has been made in reducing global hunger, this progress has slowed and levelled off as of 2007-8 (FAO, 2012), a time where world economics shifted towards a recession mindset.
Hunger kills more people every year than AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined; as such, it is number one on the list of the world's top 10 health risks today (UNAIDS, 2010; WHO, 2011).
As of 2010, 29 countries are suffering from "alarming levels" of hunger, with the majority of countries being in Sub-Saharan Africa, as noted by the Global Hunger Index (source: Economist.com).
If women in rural areas had the same access to land, technology, financial services, education, and markets as men, the number of hungry people could be reduced by 100-150 million (FAO, 2011).
By 2050, climate change and erratic weather patterns could have pushed another 24 million children into hunger, with almost half of them living in sub-Saharan Africa (IFPRI, 2009).
It is staggering to see the numbers, particularly the fact noted in number 3 - how is it that the mass media is not raising this issue as critical? How is it that politicians and world leaders are not engaged in an overtly active action plan on addressing this issue? Because, contrary to what we would hope, it is not simple, although entirely possible, for countries to embark on an action plan to eradicate world hunger.
The solution does not only equal the provision of food to everyone going without. There are political, economical, agricultural and social frameworks that must be considered when determining the best strategy to address this issue; these frameworks must then be considered within the context of the socio-political construction of individual countries and not just as the world as a collective population.
For instance, the goal of agriculture practices varies from country to country dependent upon the specific needs identified by social leaders and politicians. John Parker, in the article "The 9 billion-people question", notes that agriculture is required to produce other matter instead of simply food, such as biofuels, etc. ('Blood and Oil', The Economist, February 26, 2011, http://www.economist.com/node/18200618). Agriculture in itself is further utilized to alleviate situations that create hunger through poverty, such as the creation of jobs, etc. According to Parker, because the era of cheap food has come to an end, there is a cause of concern regarding the task of feeding the world's growing population. He identifies two groups that have dissimilar views on this matter. One group is concerned predominantly with feeding the global population, arguing that unstable food prices make it difficult for this concern to be met. They contend that "more needs to be done to boost supplies through the spread of modern farming, plant research and food processing in poor countries" (ibid). The other group however, views the modern food business as the antagonist, and focuses on issues more prevalent in richer countries of animal welfare, environmental degradation of food production, obesity, and lack of nutrition in food.
Given the multiple viewpoints that exist regarding hunger, it is easy to get lost in the semantics of the issue and forget the severity of the larger picture: millions of people continue to go hungry every night. Because factions in the debate often assume opposite ends of the spectrum, they are blind to the possibilities of working together to address the problem holistically and determining solutions that are cognizant of the bigger dilemma. This is not to say that a solution will encompass all elements of the issue; rather, it will generate perspectives and possibilities that are better suited to address specific elements of the debate.
Therefore, there needs to be an action plan that addresses the causes, effects and solutions to the global hunger problem simultaneously while being cognizant of country-specific conditions that must be taken into account. As we progress through this debate over the coming weeks, we will examine some of these action plans and their efficacy in aiding to alleviate global hunger.
As the WFP has noted, this is not a helpless situation: many countries are making significant strides in addressing this issue. For instance, over the last 10 years, Brazil has reduced the number of hungry people within its borders by approximately 33%. China and Russia, once on the receiving end of WFP food aid, are now contributing members to the WFP food stocks utilized for other countries.
Too often it is noted that it is simply too costly to end global hunger, however consider this: while nobody can argue the need for funds to address the current Syrian humanitarian crisis, in one afternoon the G8 countries were able to raise $1.5 billion for Syria, while the same amount promised by the G8 to the Global Agricultural and Food Security Programme has not yet been fulfilled. Although I refrain from ranking human need, it is still vital to consider why overcoming hunger and extreme poverty are not commanding the same call for aid as the Syrian crisis. Adrian Lovett, Europe Executive Director for ONE, says it perfectly in his remarks after the 2013 G8 summit: both crises are a "matter of life and death" (http://www.one.org/us/2013/06/18/what-we-learned-at-erne/).
In the hope of learning more about this critical matter and inspiring you to join the fight against global hunger, over the next few weeks, I will be exploring hunger globally, within specific countries, and in war-torn areas and refugee camps. I hope to cap this topic by exploring the work undertaken by organizations and individuals around the world fighting to end global hunger.
Thank you for joining me on this journey.
