The actual effect of the reform, therefore, will depend largely on actual appropriations agreed by Congress and how the resources are deployed by the USAID, the USDA, and their partners and the uncertain conjuncture of markets and policy. The outcome can be positive, as in , or highly unfavourable, especially when global prices hike with low stocks intensifying food insecurity, particularly in low-income countries such as those in sub-Saharan Africa.
In contrast, the House appropriations sub-committee has left out of the agriculture budget bill all the funding for LRP.
Does US Food Aid Have to Pit the Philippines Against Syria?
There is even a proposal to increase the minimum tonnage requirement from 50 per cent to 75 per cent in the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of currently before Congress. This could make emergency responses more inflexible, especially within a broadly constant budgetary envelope, thereby reducing the real value of the transfer to recipient countries and people.
The outcome of the debate on these proposals will be a test of the impetus for reform.
- Hunger pains: U.S. food program struggles to move forward?
- Assessing the Impact of U.S. Food Assistance Delivery Policies on Child Mortality in Northern Kenya.
- Company Taxation in the Asia-Pacific Region, India, and Russia.
- Where We Going, Daddy?: Life with Two Sons Unlike Any Other.
Experience suggests that dramatic changes that pinch domestic interests are unlikely in a mid-term election year. If this is the case, recent practice offers the most likely picture of what to expect in the near term. Final appropriations for all US food aid programmes were about USD 2 billion, broadly similar to the levels of the past decade. The relative growth in such financial aid for humanitarian assistance and decline in food aid, which currently stands at about half of average annual levels in the s, not only from the US but also other OECD donors, increases the flexibility of international responses to disasters and the ability to manage protracted humanitarian crises.
This is why the importance of food aid, a declining and uncertain resource, should not be overstated. In , SSA received some 3.
i) Mechanisms for global governance of food aid
The sourcing of food aid highlights the sharply contrasting tying and untying practices of different donors: while 93 per cent of US assistance was directly transferred or shipped from the US, other donors provided only 20 per cent of 1, million tonnes as tied aid half of that Japanese rice ; 39 per cent was local purchases, and 53 per cent represented triangular transactions, acquired in third countries.
In , 70 per cent of food aid was provided as emergency aid, 27 per cent as projected development aid with food security and nutritional improvement as declared objectives, and just 3 per cent was bilateral programme aid. From a food security perspective, emergency food aid as categorised by the World Food Programme WFP can be broadly seen as intended to address acute food insecurity associated with humanitarian crises and natural disasters, causing vulnerability predominantly in SSA.
Again, there are widely divergent donor practices in sourcing: while the US provided approximately half of international emergency assistance to SSA largely as tied aid 94 per cent , other donors sourced only 6 per cent of their assistance directly, 39 per cent as local purchases, and 56 per cent from third countries.
The US contributed to emergency operations in 23 countries in , with 51 per cent directed to 3 large-scale protracted humanitarian crises in 5 countries: Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and Sudan. Other donors channel most of their humanitarian assistance through the World Food Programme WFP , which is then responsible for ensuring timely and complementary assistance, combining local and international procurement with shipments from the US.
Some donors are also increasingly providing humanitarian assistance as cash, inputs, and tokens through the WFP and other NGOs.
Rajiv Shah: Farm bill to bring more flexibility, greater impact for USAID | Devex
The US administration is acknowledging through its repeated proposals for more flexibility that tied aid with additional shipping and processing restrictions is on balance less likely to allow effective responses in times of disaster or humanitarian crises. However, recipient countries, relief agencies, and other donors, compelled by humanitarian moral imperatives, must deliver emergency assistance around the domestically created inflexibilities in the US food aid industry.
Department of Agriculture has begun implementation of the pilot LRP program established in the farm bill P. Separately, the U.
- Nolos Guide to California Law.
- Policy Resources - World Food Program USA;
- How does the US Farm Bill affect food security in Sub-Saharan Africa??
In addition, P. Proposed legislation, S. The FY Agriculture appropriations bill P. Local and regional procurement LRP of food aid refers to the purchase of commodities for emergency food aid by donors in countries with food needs or in another country within the region. Food aid budget submissions in FY through FY included a proposal with suggested legislative language to authorize the Administrator of the U. Further, savings achieved in transportation and distribution costs could be made available for additional commodity purchases, thereby increasing the overall level of the U.
House and Senate agriculture appropriators did not include this proposal in the annual funding bills. Congressional and other critics of the local purchase proposal maintain that allowing non-U. This proposal also was not adopted. Instead, the farm bill P. The fiscal budget proposal for P. Almost all U. Most recent analyses of U. This statutory authority has been used by the U. While the United States is the world's largest food aid provider, other food aid donors, including the European Union EU and EU member countries, Canada, and Australia, among others, also provide food aid.
The United States has continued to provide its food aid in the form of commodities, while other donors have moved to cash-based systems of providing food aid.
The EU, the world's second-largest supplier of food aid, supplies almost all of its food aid in the form of cash. Individual EU member countries retain relatively small percentages of domestically procured food aid, but most of them also provide most of their food aid to the WFP also some to PVOs in the form of cash grants.
In contrast to the United States, which has provided about a third of its commodity food aid for nonemergency or development projects, the EU has ceased to provide commodities to support development projects. Instead, the EU provides food security aid in the form of cash financing of food security projects. Canada, which is an important bilateral donor of food aid, provides all of its aid on a cash basis.
WFP's procurement policy is "to procure food in a manner that is cost-effective, timely and appropriate to beneficiary needs, encouraging procurement from developing countries to the extent possible. WFP also depends heavily on U. The impact of LRP on development has been much less researched. For example, in the case of Sub-Saharan Africa, delivery time for U. Prepositioning of U. These include a lack of reliable suppliers, poor infrastructure and logistical capacity, weak legal systems, timing and restrictions on donor funding, and quality considerations.
According to GAO, WFP has encountered problems in identifying reliable suppliers of food aid commodities; limited infrastructure ports and transport can delay delivery; weak legal systems could limit buyers' ability to enforce contracts and impose penalties; and late or inadequate donor funding can limit the ability of WFP to purchase food when and where needed.
Some of these factors would apply as well to in-kind food aid donations. GAO also notes that food quality could be a problem and provided some examples. According to GAO, however, WFP has not analyzed whether quality issues are more severe for food procured locally or regionally versus food procured internationally.hukusyuu.com/profile/2020-02-22/iphone-diebstahl-ortung.php
Global factors shaping food aid
This would be the case when LRP increases demand for food and drives up prices for consumers. Examples from are price hikes that occurred in Ethiopia and Uganda when WFP purchased local commodities for food aid. The antidote to adverse market impacts, GAO says, is improved intelligence on market prices, production levels and trade patterns. In order to maintain a requirement that 15 percent of funding flow through monetized food aid, the agency will probably maintain a program in Bangladesh, which — the source pointed out — uses monetization more efficiently than many projects that will now be funded in cash.
While many aid experts and implementers have for years defended a gradual phaseout of monetization, another group of NGOs, agriculture producers, and shipping companies has lobbied to support the current model, claiming that U. The Alliance for Global Food Security however issued a statement in support of the reform measures included in the current farm bill, suggesting this round of food aid reform will likely sail through with little opposition.
Read more on U. A glimmer of hope for US food aid reform.
Supporters rally for small change on US food aid legislative battle. Toggle navigation. Devex is the media platform for the global development community.
The International Food Aid Provisions of the 2014 Farm Bill
Join us. Sign in. Funding Find funding Funding overview Find partners Get funding access.