Embargoed until: 00:01 GMT September 14th 2010

Who’s really
fighting hunger?
Why the world is going backwards on the UN goal to
halve hunger and what can be done

HungerFREE scorecard 2010

 03
Contents

04 Glossary 76 Section 3 - HungerFREE indicators

77 Information on indicators, methodology and sources
05 Executive summary
77 A: Monitoring developing countries
06 HungerFREE scorcard rankings 78 Indicator: Hunger
81 Indicator: Legal framework
10 Section 1 - Meeting MDG1 - Will we make it? 83 Indicator: Smallholder agriculture
11 Going backwards: The billion hungry 84 Indicator: Social protection
14 Which countries are doing well, which aren’t - and why? 86 Indicator: Gender equality
18 Farming: the path out of crisis
20 How the state can unleash farming’s poverty fighting powers 90 B: Monitoring Developed countries
23 Boosting rural poverty alleviation with social protection 90 Aid Indicator: Agriculture
25 The role of political will and the people 92 Aid Indicator: Social protection
26 Failure to unlock the potential of women farmers 93 Aid Indicator: Gender-targeted aid
27 A world in crisis: A challenge to halving hunger 95 Policy Indicator: Sustainable agriculture
27 The food fuel and financial crisis: Impacts on poor people and 96 Policy Indicator: Climate change
responses by governments
30 Hunger for resources is competing with food for the poor 99 End Notes
33 Conclusions and recommendations

35 Section 2 - HungerFREE country scorecards

36 - 63 Developing country scorecards
64 - 75 Developed country scorecards

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 04
Glossary

AA ActionAid LOSAN Brazil’s Federal Law on Food and Nutritional Security, 2006
AU African Union MALNUTRITION In this report we use the term malnutrition in its popular sense
BRIC Brazil, Russia, India and China to mean both insufficient dietary energy (undernourishment)
CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme and nutrient deficiency (malnutrition).
COP15 United Nations Climate Change Conference Copenhagen 2009 MDG Millennium Development Goal(s)
DAC OECD’s Development Assistance Committee NAPAs National Adaptation Programmes of Action
EC European Commission NREGA National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
EU European Union NREGS National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations NEPAD New Partnership for Africa's Development
GDP Gross Domestic Product ODA Overseas Development Assistance
GNI Gross National Income OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
GSFP Ghana School Feeding Programme PANPP Pan-African Non-Petroleum Producers Association
GSI Global Subsidies Initiative SAHRC South Africa’s Human Rights Commission
HEPR Hunger Eradication and Poverty Reduction SISAN Brazil’s System of Food and Nutrition Security
IAASTD International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, SOFI The State of Food Insecurity in the World
Science and Technology for Development UNDP United Nations Development Programme
ICDS India’s Integrated Child Development Services UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
IDA World Bank’s International Development Association UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
IMF International Monetary Fund USDA-ERS United States Department of Agriculture Economic
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development Research Service
IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute WB World Bank
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change WHO World Health Organization
LDCF Least Developed Countries Fund for Climate Change WHOSIS WHO Statistical Information System

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 05
Executive Summary

Going Backwards: The billion hungry agriculture, albeit from a very low base. Seven countries improved their score on
budgetary allocations to agriculture between last year and this year. The food and
This September, leaders are gathering in New York to assess progress on financial crises have also spurred some improvements to social assistance pro-
the UN’s Millennium Development Goals for halving extreme poverty and grammes, which often make the difference between vulnerability and destitution
hunger by 2015. On hunger, the MDGs commit leaders to reducing by half the when times get tough. Although such programmes are still tiny in most developing
proportion of people who are undernourished and the proportion of children countries, twelve countries (Burundi, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal,
who are underweight. These targets are, quite literally, a matter of life and death Sierra Leone, Uganda, China, Nepal, Pakistan, Guatemala and Haiti) improved
for the one billion people who struggle on a daily basis to avoid starvation. their score this year for social safety net coverage, while only a handful went down.

With only five years to go, how is the world doing? The bitter truth is that the world Counting the cost
is going backwards on hunger. If massive gains in China are excluded from the
picture, then global hunger has risen back to exactly the same level in 2009 as it Even before the food and financial crises pushed hunger to unprecedented highs,
was in 1990. This means that 500 million more people are chronically malnourished1 malnutrition was the underlying cause of nearly 4.5 million child deaths every year.
than if the UN goal had been achieved. An extra 1.2 million children could die unnecessarily between now and 2015,
partly as a result of setbacks on hunger.
The two regions which are home to the largest numbers of hungry people, South
Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, have lost the most ground in the wake of the food Large as it is, the loss of life caused by hunger is dwarfed by the invisible and
and financial crises. In South Asia, the prevalence of hunger surpassed the MDG permanent loss of human potential. Childhood hunger causes irreversible damage
1990 baseline levels last year, gripping more than one in five of the region’s people. to mental and physical capacity, cutting a person’s lifetime earnings by as much
Nearly half of South Asian children remain malnourished, a situation little changed as 20 percent and reducing overall economic output. ActionAid estimates that
from 1990 – indefensible considering the region’s per capita income has tripled in failure to meet the MDG goal of halving hunger is costing developing countries
the same period. over $450 billion per year in lost GDP – more than 10 times the amount the UN
estimates would be needed to achieve the MDG hunger targets.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, alarmingly, just under a third of the total population was
chronically hungry by 2009 – up by two percentage points, from 30 percent in 2006. The great hunger divide
Worst of all, food security is predicted to deteriorate further in Africa, to the point
that nearly 50 percent of Africans could be going without enough food by 2020. The country-by-country analysis on MDG1 hunger targets presented in the
HungerFree scorecard shows a great divide between countries that are more or
However, the news is not all bad. Governments are beginning to re-invest in less on track and those that are very far from it.2

1
Throughout this report, we use the term ‘malnutrition’ and ‘hunger’ in their popular senses to mean both insufficient calorie intake (undernutrition) as well as inadequate nutrient intake. The UN MDG hunger goal includes a target for reducing
childhood hunger (measured by low weight for age, or underweight) as well as one for reducing hunger in the general population (measured by calorie availability).
2
Note: this country-by-country analysis is based on the latest available data from the UN FAO, which predates the food and financial crisis and is almost certainly an underestimate of the impacts, in some countries.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 06
Table 1: Indicator: HungerFREE scorecard rankings: developing countries

Country and rank Hunger outcomes Smallholder Social Legal Gender equality Overall
and trend agriculture protection framework rank

Weight 40% 30% 15% 10% 5% 100%

Brazil 4 26 1 1 1 1
China 2 1 7 25 2 2
Vietnam 3 3 12 28 13 3
Malawi 11 2 12 4 7 4
Ghana 1 21 12 16 5 5
Bangladesh 10 5 7 11 10 6
Mozambique 7 13 12 8 9 7
Uganda 8 15 23 3 8 8
Guatemala 9 28 4 2 6 9
Ethiopia 17 4 19 14 4 10
Rwanda 12 7 23 8 20 11
Cambodia 5 19 19 21 12 12
Nigeria 6 24 23 15 3 13
Nepal 13 9 12 11 23 14
Tanzania 14 6 27 10 16 15
Kenya 15 14 5 11 22 16
Senegal 16 12 7 22 15 17
Liberia 20 22 7 16 18 18
Zambia 21 8 23 26 26 19
Haiti 23 11 6 7 27 20
India 24 20 3 5 11 21
South Africa 26 16 2 6 21 22
Lesotho 18 22 7 26 27 23
Gambia 19 17 12 22 24 24
Pakistan 22 25 12 13 19 25
Sierra Leone 25 10 19 16 17 26
Burundi 28 18 19 22 14 27
Democratic Repubiic of Congo 27 27 27 20 25 28

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 07
Table 2: HungerFREE scorecard rankings - developed countries (aid) Table 3: HungerFREE scorecard rankings - developed countries (policy)

Country Rank for aid to Rank for aid to Rank for gender Overall rank Rank for biofuels and Rank for climate Overall rank
agriculture social p[rotection for aid IAASTD change for policy

Weight 60% 30% 10% 100% Weight 40% 60% 100%

Luxembourg 1 1 13 1 Korea* 4 4 1

France 2 9 16 2 Denmark 2 13 2

UK 5 6 3
Spain 5 3 10 3
Norway 14 2 4
Sweden 9 4 1 4
Finland 10 3 5
Canada 6 12 4 5
Netherlands 9 11 6
Germany 3 14 8 6
Australia 1 22 7
UK 4 10 11 7
Switzerland 8 14 8
Australia 7 16 7 8
Japan 3 20 9
Norway 10 6 6 9 Italy 12 10 10
Ireland 12 2 15 10 Germany 21 5 11

USA 8 18 23 11 France 20 7 12

Netherlands 11 7 12 12 Greece 14 8 13

Belgium 14 5 9 13 Belgium 14 9 15

Ireland 6 18 14
Denmark 13 8 14 14
Luxembourg 14 12 16
Finland 15 11 3 15
Sweden 10 16 17
Switzerland 16 22 21 16
Austria 14 15 18
Japan 17 20 17 17
New Zealand 7 21 19
Italy 18 19 20 18
Spain 14 17 20
Austria 19 15 22 19
Canada 12 23 21
New Zealand 21 21 5 20 Portugal 23 4 22

Greece 22 17 2 21 USA 22 19 23

*It was not possible to score Korea on climate due to the fact it is not an Annex 1 country under the Kyoto Protocol
Korea 20 23 19 22

Portugal 23 13 18 23 and therefore does not need to adopt emissions reductions targets. Korea’s score on the negative impacts on hunger
is therefore based on its biofuels score only.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 08
Of the 28 developing countries measured, only 8 are on track to meet both the The evidence we present in this report should be reason to spur greater action.
hunger targets, 20 countries are off track to meet one or both of the MDG targets. The 2010 HungerFREE scorecard shows that there are some simple steps that
Of these, 12 are actually moving backwards not forward on one or both of the would make it both possible and affordable to halve hunger by 2015.
MDG targets: i.e. an increasing proportion of the population is hungry. The Demo-
cratic Republic of Congo is the worst performer, with a staggering 76 percent of The scorecard assesses developing countries on four areas of public action: legal
their population hungry representing a fourfold increase since 1990 - the worst commitment to food as a right, investment in agriculture and social protection, and
hunger record in the world. Pakistan, another country backsliding, has seen the gender equality.
proportion of hungry rise from one in four to an estimated one in two during the
same period. What is striking in this analysis is the overlap between those countries which have
made huge progress on hunger and the high scorers on their policy actions. On
And it isn’t just the poorest, the war-torn and disaster-struck countries of the world the flipside, there is a conspicuous correlation between countries that are low
that are not doing well. Some of the world’s ‘wealthier’ countries are shockingly deliverers on policy actions and have high hunger numbers.
off track. In India, one the world’s emerging recent global economic ‘successes’,
1 in 5 of the population are hungry, and close to 50 percent of all children are By investing more in local agriculture, governments can feed their people and also
malnourished. regenerate rural economies. Recent research has pointed to the vital role that
agriculture played in China’s initial take-off. Agriculture was estimated to have
20 countries have been moving forward far too slowly to meet the 2015 deadline; contributed to poverty reduction four times more than growth in manufacturing or
for instance, according to Action Aid’s projections, Kenya and Senegal won’t meet service sectors. As China’s story demonstrates, the biggest impact on reducing
the hunger reduction target until 2124 and 2060, respectively. hunger and poverty is achieved when governments focus on supporting the
small-scale farmers who grow the majority of staple foods consumed locally.
On the other side of the divide, 13 of the 28 HungerFREE countries in this study There are particularly massive gains to be reaped from investing in women farmers,
have shown what is possible and are on track to meet one or both of the goals – who currently receive hardly any credit or extension advice and seldom enjoy
demonstrating that the goals are more than achievable. secure rights over land.

Brazil, China, Ghana, Malawi and Vietnam are among those that have slashed The HungerFREE scorecard also shows that well-designed social assistance
hunger rates – and are the top five performers on the HungerFREE scorecard. programmes, such as public works employment, cash transfers, food rations, and
Brazil has more than halved the prevalence of underweight children in less than 10 free school meals, are an important hunger-fighting weapon.
years. China has also made impressive progress and met their MDG1 obligations
well ahead of time. Ghana cut hunger levels by 75 percent between 1990 and Recent country level evidence analysed by ActionAid shows significant increases
2004. In Vietnam, the rate of underweight children has plummeted from close to 45 in the most serious form of child hunger (wasting, or short term weight loss) since
percent in the early 1990s to fewer than 20 percent today. Similarly Malawi has the food crisis struck in 2007/8. This demonstrates exactly how vulnerable children
also put a decisive end to years of recurring famine, reducing the number of people are to reduced food intake in times of distress, and therefore how important it is
requiring food aid from over 4.5 million in 2004 to less than 150,000 in 2009. to put basic safety nets in place.

What needs to happen? Safety nets are also important to help small farmers keep planting and harvesting
through tough times, avoiding the distress sales of livestock and land that so
How have some governments, including some in very poor countries of the world, often push vulnerable families over the brink into chronic hunger and destitution.
managed to tackle hunger and poverty so effectively, whereas others have failed?
And why are some governments and the world not doing more? Brazil, our overall chart topper for the second time in a row, has expanded welfare

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 09
coverage dramatically in recent years. Increases in the minimum wage and a resources in the North, combined with the looming impacts of climate change
national cash transfer programme have been introduced alongside subsidised and decades of neglect of impoverished small farmers in the developing world,
credit and procurement programmes that support smallholder farmers. Taken could lead to an explosion of food shortages and hunger in decades to come.
together, these measures are widely recognised as having a phenomenal impact We need bold plans to build vibrant and sustainable farming economies in poor
on reducing Brazil’s once infamous inequalities - with child hunger rates slashed countries: so that hunger becomes yesterday’s news, not tomorrow’s headline.
by over 50 per cent in little over 10 years.
To meet the MDG1 goal of halving hunger, world leaders meeting in New York this
Legal commitment to food as a basic human right can help to create political September must:
pressure on governments to make hunger a priority. Alongside this, strong rural
institutions that give the poorest some influence over government actions are 1.Invest in farmers
indispensable.
• Agree national plans that are sufficiently bold and ambitious to halve hunger by
Rich countries also have a critical part to play. They need to change policies that 2015, backed by costed, time-bound actions and firm financing commitments
aggravate hunger in the developing world, such as targets and subsidies that by both governments and donors.
promote the use of biofuels made from food crops. European targets for biofuels • The UN estimates that at least US$40 billion in additional funding will be required
expansion could push prices of grains and food oils 15 percent higher by 2017, annually to halve hunger by 2015; donors should set out a timetable and
according to the OECD. mechanism to meet their part of the need and guarantee that no country with a
good plan for achieving the hunger goal is thwarted for lack of resources.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that global • National plans should focus on supporting poor farmers, particularly women, in
warming could put 50 million extra people at risk of hunger by 2020, rising to an order to maximize poverty and hunger reduction impacts.
additional 266 million by 2080. Rich countries need to cut their greenhouse gas • National plans should expand social protection programmes to ensure that
emissions, and provide the minimum US $200 billion needed annually to enable households don’t fall into hunger when prices rise or harvests fail.
poor countries to fight climate change.
2.Act on climate change
Finally, rich countries need to live up to their many promises to increase financing
for agriculture in the developing world. Almost all donors are starting from a very
• Commit to a reduction of at least 40 percent of developed country emissions
low base of severe underinvestment in agriculture. But the HungerFREE Scorecard
by 2020 in order to keep temperatures below the danger zone of a 1.5 degrees
gives credit to those countries that have pledged money to agriculture since the
Celsius increase in temperatures.
food crisis. The 2009 G8 pledge of US $22 billion, over 3 years, to support devel-
• Increase their climate financing pledges to cover the minimum US$200 billion
oping country farmers and fight hunger is a critical step forward, as is the recognition
needed annually in developing countries, ensure their funding is new money
that the key to solving the food crisis lies in investing in smallholder farmers.
(that is, doesn’t reduce other aid), and specify a source.
However, according to ActionAid’s calculation, only around USUS$6 billion of this
is new money rather than re-cycled pledges - and it is still not clear how or when
the money will be spent. 3.Change course on biofuels

Moving forward towards a HungerFREE world • The European Union and United States must eliminate targets and subsidies
for biofuel production, which directly undermine food security and have little or
As global populations grow, the fight is on over how to solve the global crisis in no environmental benefit.
resources. The massive overconsumption of energy and other environmental

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 10

Section 1 - Meeting MDG1: Will we make it?

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 11
1.1 Going backwards: The billion hungry

World leaders gather in New York this September to assess progress on the crucial increasing,7 and African countries were importing almost a third of their food supply.8
United Nations goals to cut global poverty and hunger to halve their 1990 levels.
The bitter truth, however, is that 20 percent more people – over one billion of us - The UN’s hunger goals will remain a distant dream unless leaders meeting in New
are undernourished now than in 1990 and an additional 600,000 children under York reverse the failed policies that led to such catastrophes. On the other hand,
five, most of them girls, could die from the underlying cause of hunger by 2015.1 this report shows that investing in a vibrant smallholder farming sector could
provide poor countries with a way out of crisis into durable prosperity.
ActionAid’s research shows that the world is going backwards on the UN Millennium
Development Goal (MDG) on hunger. While progress was always too slow to In the meantime, however, the food crisis rages on in many countries around the
achieve the goal on time, since 2007 there has been a dramatic reversal: the world (see Table 4). Many developing countries continued to experience high and
prevalence of hunger has actually increased instead of dropping. The UN’s estimate rising food prices in 2009-2010, at the same time as employment and incomes
of 1.02 billion hungry in 20092 represents 15 percent of the world’s population. are being squeezed by the global recession.9 Reeling under a 60 percent increase
However, if China is excluded, then the proportion of undernourished people in in the cost of staple foods, Mozambique saw the prevalence of hunger increase
the world’s population now actually exceeds its 1990 level of 16 percent.3 That almost 10 percent in 2009 alone, according to the World Bank.10 The real extent of
translates into nearly half a billion people who would not be hungry if leaders had hunger in Uganda may have been almost 33 percent of the population in 2009,
fulfilled their MDG promises. The majority of them are women and girls.4 say World Bank researchers – more than double the rate reported by the FAO for
2006.11 Even before the recent floods, hunger in Pakistan may have risen to twice
The two regions home to the largest numbers of hungry people, South Asia and its pre-crisis level.12
Sub-Saharan Africa, have lost the most ground in recent years. In Sub-Saharan
Africa, alarmingly, just under a third of the total population was chronically hungry Although these estimates of increasing undernutrition are statistical projections
by 2009 – up by two percentage points, from 30 percent in 2006.5 In South Asia, based on income and food price trends, they seem to be borne out by actual
the prevalence of hunger surpassed 1990 levels last year, gripping more than one physical measurements of children done since the food crisis started. Wasting, or
in five of the region’s people. A shocking 46 percent of South Asian children remain low weight for height, is strongly associated with child death and is an early warning
underweight, a situation little changed from the 51 percent it was two decades ago sign of nutritional distress (pounds fall off fast when calories are lacking, while it
– even though the region’s per capita income has more than tripled in this period.6 takes time for growth in feet and inches to slow down).13 And in almost all of
countries where anthropometric data for 2007, 2008 or 2009 can be compared to
The food and financial crises are to be blamed for the latest upward spiral of hunger pre-crisis data, wasting is on the increase.14
- yet these crises did not come out of nowhere. Free market doctrines dictated
that food was just a commodity like any other, and should be grown for export on In Ghana, the proportion of children wasted rose by 17 percent between a survey
the basis of ‘comparative advantage’. Smallholder farmers were left high and dry conducted in 2003 and the latest one done in 2008. In Nigeria, the prevalence of
without government support or trade protection. Such policies progressively wasting increased by a third over the same period, while in Bangladesh it was
undermined food security in developing countries, and planted the seeds for the almost 20 percent higher in 2007 than in 2004.15 In a survey done in Kenya in
2008/9 collapse. Already, before the crises hit, long-term child malnutrition was 2008/9, all indicators of child malnutrition – wasting, stunting and underweight –

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 12
Table 4: Estimates of post-crisis hunger increases won’t hunger eventually be beaten too? Indeed, the US government’s agricultural
research service (USDA-ERS) predicted in February 2010 that as economic recovery
Country Additional hungry Increase over Source takes hold, the recent dizzying increases in hunger would halt this year.18
people (millions) previous prevalence
levels (2004-6 unless
otherwise noted)
The first part of the answer is that the story on poverty is not so good after all.
While China has lifted over 600 million people out of poverty in the past 30 years,
Pakistan, 2008 481 132% UNICEF levels of extreme poverty prior to the financial crisis had hardly budged in the rest
of the world, falling only 4 percentage points (from 32.5 percent in 1990 to 28
Nepal, 2008 2.22
52% UNICEF
percent in 2005).19 What’s more, the financial crisis has erased some of that
Uganda, 2008 1.3 29% World Bank progress: an additional 114 million people may be beneath the US$1.25-a-day
Peru, 2008 .92 25% National statistics poverty line.20 If the poverty line is set at a more realistic US$2 per day, then the
agency prospects of achieving the UN target for halving poverty levels disappear. Even on
Afghanistan, 2008 1.3 20%3 UNICEF a relatively optimistic scenario for post-crisis economic recovery, 2 billion people
will remain below the US$2/day line by 2015, more than half of the 1990 level.21
UNICEF (low estimate);
Bangladesh, 2008 7.5 to 12.5 19-31% Centre for Bangladesh
Policy (high estimate) Second, hunger is predicted to remain at extremely high levels. Even the optimistic
US scenario for a short-term easing of hunger pressures would do no more than
Mozambique, 2009 .76 8%4 World Bank
return global undernutrition to its pre-crisis level of close to 900 million. Moreover,
India, 2007/8 20.5 8% World Food Programme the US government researchers say that without major investments in agriculture
Kenya, 2009 .45 5%5 World Bank and rural infrastructure, hunger is likely to stagnate at this unacceptably high level
for the next decade, declining only 1 percent globally by 2020. In Africa, however,
Tanzania, 2009 .46 4% World Bank
fully 50 percent of the population could be going without enough food by 2020.22
Without concerted action, the MDG target of halving hunger will still be far, far
away a full decade from now.
had increased or stagnated compared to the levels recorded in 2003. WHO data,
also based on physical measurement, show an increase in levels of wasting in
Global warming and biofuels expansion will darken the picture further. Harsher,
Cambodia in 2008 as compared to 2006. In most countries, the increase has been
more frequent droughts and shorter growing seasons will reduce crop yields.
sharper among the poorest households; for example in Bangladesh, levels of
Although some regions may benefit from warmer weather, crop yields are likely to
wasting increased 28 percent among the poorest quintile, while in Nigeria the
fall by 10 to 20 percent in developing countries in the next two decades, and by
same income group saw a staggering 57 percent rise in rates of wasting.
up to 50 percent in some African countries.23 The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that climate change could put 50 million extra
Other survey-based results ring alarms in other countries. Stunting rose in Sri Lanka
people at risk of hunger by 2020, rising to an additional 266 million by 2080.24 US
from 2007 to 2009, particularly in rural areas where stunting jumped from 16 to 20
and European targets for biofuels expansion could push prices of grains and food
percent, according to the WHO.16 South Africa’s General Household Survey recorded
oils 15 percent higher by 2017, according to the OECD.25
a sharp increase in the number of children experiencing hunger, up from 15 per cent
to 18 per cent in only one year.17
The most compelling argument for taking urgent action to reduce hunger, however,
is the very high cost of doing nothing – which ActionAid estimates at over US$450
But since the UN is reporting overall progress on poverty reduction, it can be asked
billion per year, or more than ten times the UN’s estimate of the sums needed to
why the increase in hunger is a worry to anyone. As long as poverty is still falling,
halve hunger by 2015.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 13
Undernutrition does serious long term damage, undermining health, education,
and productivity. One in three of the world’s children (and nearly one in two in Figure 1: Countries’ progress on the MDG target to reduce the
least developed countries) is growing up chronically malnourished.26 As a result, proportion of hungry:
many will die before the age of five. Those who survive are likely to suffer irreversible
cognitive and physical damage. They will complete fewer years of school, and Bangladesh
earn less as adults. Their immune systems permanently impaired, they are 12 times
more likely to die from easily preventable and treatable diseases.27 Improving Pakistan
nutrition status is therefore an absolute requirement if the UN’s health and education
Millennium Goals (MDGs) are to be met.28 India

Malnutrition cripples societies as well as individuals. Children underweight in Central Gambia

America, although at much lower levels than in Africa and Asia, still cost countries
between 2 and 12 percent of GDP every year, according to UN and WFP re- Liberia 2015 Target
search.29 Lost productivity accounts for over 90 percent of these costs; the other 2004-6
10 percent is due to higher health system costs from additional cases of disease, Sierra Leone 1990-92
and from extra grades of school repeated.30 Extrapolating from this estimate, the
costs of hunger could be over US$450 billion annually in Sub-Saharan Africa and Tanzania
developing Asia alone – more than ten times the amount required to achieve the
MDG hunger goals.31 Since a recent study by Harvard and Brandeis researchers Kenya
puts the health and productivity costs of malnutrition at US$75bn per year for the
United States alone, these estimates are likely to be conservative.32 Burundi

Another way to count the cost of hunger is to estimate the years of healthy, DR Congo
productive life it consumes. Globally, hunger is an underlying cause of roughly half
of the 8.8 million child deaths that take place each year,33 but beyond this it is
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
responsible for a total loss of 91 million years of healthy, productive life (disability-
adjusted life years) annually.34 1990 baseline year (blue) current progress (red)
necessary progress to reach the 2015 goal (green).

Hunger not only holds back growth; it also makes societies more unequal. The
damage done by malnutrition begins in the womb, condemning the children of
undernourished mothers to a lifetime of ill health and low earnings even before they Amidst the gloom of a world going backwards on hunger, there are some bright
are born. Those from poor, rural households are disproportionately affected by spots. Despite the intense fiscal pressures of the global recession, the top five best-
hunger, and being hungry in the first years of life makes them even poorer when scoring developing countries on the 2010 HungerFREE scorecard all maintained or
they grow up, resulting in the loss of up to 20 percent of lifetime earnings.35 IFPRI increased their agriculture and social protection commitments in 2009-10, ensuring
researchers found that children who had been properly fed earned 46 percent a continuation of the strong record of progress that they established before the
food and financial crises began. While some donor countries have made new
more as adults than a control group.36 In South Asia, home to the largest share of
pledges to support developing country farmers in 2009; with some significant new
the world’s stunted and underweight children, malnutrition magnifies gender
pledges from the US government.
inequality, with girls far more likely to be poorly fed than boys.37

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 14
1.2 Which countries are doing well, which aren’t - and why?

As part of our 2010 HungerFREE Scorecard, ActionAid has taken an in-depth look In at least eight more countries (Guatemala, Tanzania, Pakistan, Zambia, Liberia,
at progress across the two MDG 1 hunger targets for the countries analysed. South Africa, Nepal and The Gambia) hunger is again on the increase against one
of the targets. For instance, in Pakistan from 1990 to 2006 the proportion of people
Based on trend data, we have produced our projections for when countries will hungry rose from one in four to almost one in three, and jumped again to almost
meet the two MDG hunger targets.38 one in two in 2009, according to World Food Programme reports.40

Kenya, India, Haiti and Senegal are so far off track that they are unlikely to halve
Box 1: The Millennium Development Goal 1: Eradicate extreme undernourishment until after 2050. All four are simultaneously miserably off track
hunger and poverty to meet the child underweight target too. For instance, in India, from 1990 to 2006
the numbers of hungry grew by 40 million and UNICEF predicts that a further 20
Target 1: Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a million were added to this grim total by 2008. There are now more than 270 million
dollar a day chronically hungry people living in India, while close to 50 percent of all children are
• Proportion of population below US$1 (PPP) per day malnourished.41
• Poverty gap ratio
• Share of poorest quintile in national consumption Other countries have been making slow progress in reducing the prevalence of
undernourishment and underweight, but not enough to meet the targets on time.
Target 2: Reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
• 1.8 Prevalence of underweight children under-five years of age On the other side of the divide, 13 countries have shown what is possible and are
• 1.9 Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy on track to meet one or both of the goals – demonstrating that the goals are more
consumption than achievable.

Brazil, China, Ghana, Malawi and Vietnam are among those that have slashed
hunger rates. For example, in Vietnam the rate of underweight children has plum-
Our analysis shows a great divide between countries that are more or less on meted from close to 45 percent in the early 1990s to fewer than 20 percent today.42
track to meet the MDG 1 hunger targets, and those that are very far from it. Those Meanwhile, Vietnam halved the number of undernourished in the general population
going backwards are Burundi, Lesotho, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) between 1990 and 2004.43 Poverty reduction rates have been equally impressive:
and Sierra Leone which show increasing hunger and children underweight since falling from around 60 percent in the early 1990s44 to a predicted 10 percent this
1990. This means we cannot predict when they will meet the targets. With over year.45 This accounts for a 75 percent reduction in poverty in just over 15 years.
76 percent of its population chronically hungry, the DRC has the worst hunger Vietnam has also seen improvements in under-five mortality, primary school enrol-
statistics in the world. What is tragic is that far from reducing hunger, the numbers ment, maternal mortality, and access to clean water and sanitation, and has now
of hungry quadrupled between 1990 and 2006.39 achieved nearly all the MDGs – showing just what is possible, even in a very poor
country.46

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 15
Brazil has more than halved the prevalence of underweight amongst children in
less than a decade.47 At the same time, it has made good progress in reducing
Figure 2: Expected year for halving underweight rates for
inequality and extreme poverty. Between 2001 and 2006, the incomes of the poorest
children under 5 years from 1990 levels
70 percent grew faster than the rest of the population.48 This has helped to slash
extreme poverty from 21 million people in 2003 to 9 million in 2008.49
South Africa
China has also made impressive progress. It has met both the MDG hunger targets Lesotho
show
well ahead of the 2015 deadline. This has been coupled with extraordinary levels Burundi
increasing
of poverty reduction: a four-fold reduction between 1980 and 2005, from 835 million Sierra Leone rates
to 208 million,50 equal to a drop from 84 to 15 percent.51 Nepal
DR Congo
In Sub-Saharan Africa, a few top achievers are punching way above their weight – Senegal 2042
demonstrating just what is possible with strong and sustained political will and Uganda 2039
action, despite very limited resources. For instance, Ghana is the only African Ethiopia 2029
country which is set to meet all the MDG 1 targets on poverty and hunger. It had Kenya 2028
already halved the hungry proportion of its population 10 years ago. Ghana cut Liberia 2028
hunger levels by 75 percent between 1990 and 2004.52 Malawi has also put a
Zambia 2027
decisive end to years of recurring famine, reducing the number of people requiring
Nigeria 2025
food aid from over 4.5 million in 2004 to less than 150,000 in 2009.53 As a result
Haiti 2018
they met their MDG 1 target to halve hunger in 2009 and will meet the target to
India 2017
reduce children underweight within the next few years – and well ahead of the
Gambia 2016
2015 target.
Rwanda 2016
Malawi 2013
How have some governments, including some in very poor countries, managed to
tackle hunger and poverty so effectively, whereas others have failed? The next Mozambique 2012

section of this report analyses this question. It does this with a strong focus on Ghana 2012

how to achieve equitable, pro-poor growth. Evidence from countries that have Tanzania 2011
made great strides forward shows that the goals have been achieved when Pakistan 2011
governments provide strong support to smallholder farmers, and protect the most Cambodia 2010
vulnerable through public works employment, cash transfers or other welfare Bangladesh 2009
programmes. Food scarcity is as much about politics and power as overall supply. Viet Nam 2007
Political and legal commitment to food as a basic human right helps to ensure Guatemala 2004
that governments address the needs of the poorest and support the vulnerable. China 2002
Alongside this, strong rural institutions that give the poorest some influence over Brazil 2001
government actions are indispensable.
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

The evidence we present in the rest of this report is reason to spur greater action. Sources: National survey data, as reported by WHO, supplemented by the WHO master database where
It is possible and affordable to cut extreme poverty and hunger in half by 2015. more comprehensive data was available, and individual studies. Projections are based on linear regressions
based on available national surveys from 1986-present (see methodology section for more details).
Not to do so is costly, dangerous and morally unacceptable.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 16
How have some governments, including some in very poor countries, managed to
Figure 3: Expected year for halving the proportion of tackle hunger and poverty so effectively, whereas others have failed? The next
undernourished in population from 1990 levels section of this report analyses this question. It does this with a strong focus on
how to achieve equitable, pro-poor growth. Evidence from countries that have
made great strides forward shows that the goals have been achieved when
governments provide strong support to smallholder farmers, and protect the most
Lesotho
vulnerable through public works employment, cash transfers or other welfare
Sierra Leone
programmes. Food scarcity is as much about politics and power as overall supply.
Guatemala Political and legal commitment to food as a basic human right helps to ensure
Tanzania show that governments address the needs of the poorest and support the vulnerable.
Pakistan increasing
Alongside this, strong rural institutions that give the poorest some influence over
rates
Zambia government actions are indispensable.
Liberia
Gambia The evidence we present in the rest of this report is reason to spur greater action.
Burundi It is possible and affordable to cut extreme poverty and hunger in half by 2015.
DR Congo Not to do so is costly, dangerous and morally unacceptable.
Kenya 2124
India 2081
Haiti 2064
Senegal 2060 Box 2: How do we know the number of hungry people?
Rwanda 2030
Uganda 2018 As civil society attempts to hold governments accountable for taking
Nepal 2016 action to reduce hunger, conflicting claims may arise about exactly
Bangladesh 2015 how many people are hungry. It is therefore important to be clear
Brazil 2012 about what exactly is meant by hunger, and to know how we can
Cambodia 2010 measure hunger.
China 2010
Mozambique 2009 There are different types of hunger. Long-term ‘chronic’ hunger can be
Ethiopia 2009 visible in the ‘stunted’ growth of children, and is different from short-
Malawi 2009 term ‘acute’ hunger, which may be visible in thin ‘wasted’ children.
Nigeria 2006 The MDG indicator for child hunger is low weight for age (underweight)
Vietnam 2004 which captures aspects of both stunting and wasting. Also important is
Ghana 1999 having good quality food that is rich in essential proteins, vitamins and
minerals. A diet of ‘cheap calories’ based on starchy foods like corn or
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 cassava can lead to malnutrition.

Sources: UN FAO SOFI Statistics 1990-2006. South Africa is missing due to lack of FAO data. There are four main ways of measuring hunger. One can ask a person if

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 17

they feel hungry. One can ask a person how much they have eaten. One
can take physical measurements and compare them to standards of
healthy people. These three methods usually make use of surveys of
representative samples of people. However, because surveys are
expensive to carry out, most countries do them infrequently, making
comparisons across time or across countries quite difficult. A fourth
way to measure hunger is to calculate the total food available and what
proportion of a population that amount can feed based on existing
distribution patterns. However, sometimes these statistics are rough
estimates (for example, Nigeria’s large imports of food are easier to
count than Mozambique’s dispersed peasants, perhaps giving a false
indication of greater food availability).

These different methods may lead to different estimates of the number

of hungry. For example, FAO calculations show that 16 percent of
Nepal’s population was undernourished in 2006, but actual on-the-
ground surveys using Nepal’s minimum food-intake standards show
the rate to be closer to 41percent. In addition, countries may show
different rates for different types of hunger, as illustrated by comparing
the two above graphs. Guatemala’s trends show it halving child under-
weight rates by 2004, while overall under-nutrition rates of the popu-
lation in general have increased since 1990.

The opposite of hunger – food security - is conventionally defined as

having four components: food availability, food access, food utilization,
and stability of all these.

The HungerFREE Scorecard has evaluated countries on the basis of

the MDG 1 hunger targets. For the sources used in the HungerFREE
Scorecard please refer to the indicators, methodology and sources
section.
Sources: Millennium Development Indicators: The official United Nations Site for the MDG Indicators
http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Metadata.aspx?IndicatorId=0&SeriesId=640

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 18
2 Farming: the path out of crisis

“I am happy now my family and I have enough to eat. Previously, we could not
afford three meals a day. We have no problem in obtaining quality vegetable seeds Box 3: Small farms help create more wealth, more equally spread.
as we get these from our respective farmers’ alliances and return our own seeds
Walter Goldschmidt’s classic study of agriculture in California’s San
and vegetables later.” Joaquin Valley compared areas dominated by large corporate farms to
- Uzzala Rani, 25, smallholder farmer, Kurigram district, Bangladesh areas still dominated by smallholder farmers. In towns surrounded by
family farms the wealth generated in agriculture circulated among
Global poverty is predominately rural. Three quarters of the world’s poor and 70 local businesses and there was higher overall employment and more
percent of hungry people live in rural communities.54 Children living in rural areas vibrant community life. In communities near large, mechanised farms,
small towns died off. In these corporate farm towns, agricultural
are nearly twice as likely to be underweight than children living in cities and wealth was siphoned off to larger cities.
towns.55 But if one takes a look at the rural landscape, the potential for change is
astounding.56 Investment in smallholder agriculture is not only the way to beat The wealth extraction that Goldschmidt described can also work in
hunger, but the best path to economic recovery and resilience for crisis-hit reverse. Revitalising local food systems and smallholder farming
recreates wealth in rural communities, forming the basis for sustainable
developing countries.
livelihoods.

Agriculture still provides the main source of livelihood for 80 to 90 percent of the For instance, the Landless Workers Movement of Brazil (MST) is a
population in many countries. Increasing their incomes will bring rural economies grassroots organisation that helps landless labourers to occupy and
back to life and generate more jobs for other poor people and increase demand settle idle land under a clause in the Brazilian constitution that states
land must serve a social function. According to researcher Peter Rosset,
for domestically produced goods and services. Greater numbers of rural jobs and “When the movement began in the mid-1980s, the mostly conservative
increased incomes generally lead to improved nutrition, better health, and increased mayors of rural towns were violently opposed to MST land occupations
investment in education, while increased revenues allow local governments to in surrounding areas. In recent times, their attitude has changed. Most
respond to demands for better infrastructure, such as roads.57 of their towns are very depressed economically, and occupations can
give local economies a much needed boost.
Agriculture has driven broad-based economic growth from countries as diverse as Typical occupations consist of 1,000 to 3,000 families, who turn idle
18th century England, to 19th century Japan, to 20th century China.58 Pointing to land into productive farms. They sell their produce in the market-
the “special powers” of agriculture in reducing poverty, the World Bank has places of the local towns and buy their supplies from local merchants.
demonstrated that GDP growth originating in agriculture is at least twice as effective Not surprisingly those towns with nearby MST settlements are better
off economically than other similar towns, and many mayors now
in reducing poverty as in other sectors.59 In China, growth in smallholder agriculture actually petition the MST to carry out occupations near their towns.
had four times the impact on poverty alleviation as growth in the manufacturing or
service sectors.60 In Uganda, a 3 percent increase in public spending on agriculture Sources: Goldschmidt, Walter, 1978, As You Sow: Three Studies of Social Consequences of Agribusiness,
can generate a 1 percent increase in agricultural output, and a 1 percent rise in New York: Allenheld, Osmun; Rosset, Peter, 2009, “Food Sovereignty and Redistributive Land Reform”,
Monthly Review 61(3):114-128.
agricultural output cuts the poverty rate by as much as 1.38 percent.61

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 19
But for too many years, the rural poor have not been adequately supported by
governments. At the behest of the World Bank and IMF, from the late 1980s onwards
the state was systematically extracted from agriculture, with the market left to ‘fill’
these roles. However, the private sector often didn’t step in when services were
dismantled, leaving millions of poor small farmers to deal with the devastating
impact this has on their livelihoods. As Joseph Stiglitz remarked, the “invisible
hand” of the market was often invisible because it just wasn’t there.62

India provides a striking example. From the 1990s onwards, the Indian government
cut public investment, plummeting from a high of 13 percent to only 6 percent in
1999. Ironically, as investment in agriculture stagnated, government expenditure
on food subsidies rocketed.63 Meanwhile, as public support dwindled, smallholders
found it increasingly hard to cope without the support previously given by the
state. For instance, smallholder farmers’ debt doubled in the first decade of the
neoliberal economic reforms in agriculture.64 Unable to make ends meet, nearly
200,000 farmers committed suicide and 8 million quit farming between 1991 and
2001.65 A final ironic twist to the tail is that, while Indian farmers are committing
suicide because they can no longer make their lands productive, the Indian
government, concerned about future food insecurity, is seeking to purchase land
for to grow food in countries such as Ethiopia and Sudan.66

However, the tide may be beginning to turn, in India and in many other countries.
India’s government is among many that have boosted agriculture budgets in the
past few years. Albeit somewhat belatedly, the World Bank has acknowledged
that greater investment in agriculture is needed to lift millions out of hunger:
“…the international goal of halving extreme poverty and hunger by 2015 will not
be reached unless neglect and underinvestment in the agricultural and rural
sectors over the past 20 years is reversed.”67

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 20
2.1 How the state can unleash farming’s poverty fighting powers

How the world invests in agriculture in the coming decades will have a major
impact on global poverty, inequality and the environment. On the one hand, strong than Sub-Saharan Africa’s. By 1993, Chinese GDP per capita had sur-
state support to sustainable smallholder farming could guarantee sustainable passed Africa’s, while China had decreased poverty from 84 percent of
recovery from the global recession and re-ignite poverty reduction, while safe- the population in 1981 to 16 percent in 2005. During the same period
guarding the environment and empowering women. On the other, continuing neglect poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa had remained deeply entrenched – sitting
of this sector could exacerbate economic and gender inequality and environmental at 50 percent of the population, while the actual number of poor people
degradation. had almost doubled.

There’s no one-size-fits-all model but there are discernable trends in countries So what explains these hugely different records? Recent research has
that have effectively tackled hunger and poverty in recent years. The top scorers pointed to the vital role that agriculture played in China’s initial take-off.
in the HungerFREE Scorecard demonstrate that there is a broad package of policies China’s strong initial emphasis on agricultural growth was essential in
which have a profound impact on reducing hunger. But first and foremost, these reducing poverty. Agriculture was estimated to have contributed to
governments who have made progress have shown a high degree of political poverty reduction four times more than growth in manufacturing or
commitment, or have encountered strong pressure from voters and organised service sectors , thus creating astonishingly egalitarian and poverty
interest groups to tackle rural poverty and hunger. This has translated into strong alleviating growth through a high proportion of public investment
state actions for pro-poor policies. towards the rural areas, during the early periods.

Interestingly, our top-performing countries have, to a greater or lesser extent, According to a recent report by IFPRI, Chinese agricultural policy reform
tended to eschew the dominant development model during the free-market era "was driven by strong political will and relied on a gradual but consis-
and retained (or sometimes later reclaimed) a central role for the state in supporting tent trial-and-error process". In contrast to Africa, where agricultural
agriculture and guaranteeing food security. One of our top performing countries – policy-making was based on foreign paradigms, in China it was based
Malawi – was actually penalised for non-compliance with World Bank and IMF "on evidence much more than on theory or ideology”.
policy prescriptions in agriculture. Some analysts have claimed that Vietnam’s
spectacular development success was because it prioritised food security before The authors concluded that to sustain high levels of agricultural growth
opening up to further market-based reforms – directly opposing the World Bank in Africa, reforms need to be designed to increase productivity by
orthodoxy. providing smallholders with incentives, such as securing land rights
and strengthening markets for inputs and outputs. In addition, invest-
ments in rural infrastructure, such as rural transport and irrigation,
Box 4: China vs. Africa: The role of agriculture in poverty alleviation need to be scaled up, and investments in agricultural research need to
and growth be not only increased but also tailored to Africa’s specific conditions,
such as predominant rain-fed agriculture.
An analysis of the divergent growth patterns of China and the continent
of Africa as a whole makes for interesting reading. Sources: Fan, Shenggen, Nestorova, Bella and Olofinbiyi, Tolulope, 2010, “China’s Agricultural and
Rural Development: Implications for Africa”, IFPRI; Godoy, Julio, 2010, “Africa Should Take Lessons
from China”, IPS News http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=51590
In 1980 the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of China was slightly lower

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 21
State support for small farmers can partly be gauged by the portion of the budget achieved small overall increases in GDP from 2008 to 2009, while Ghana held
spent on agriculture. In the HungerFREE Scorecard we have measured how much steady.
budget governments allocate to agriculture, using a figure of 10 percent (endorsed
by the African Union in 2003 as a continent-wide target) as a measure of an ade- Unfortunately, many of the worst performing countries are still spending far too
quate allocation to agriculture. The scorecard also judges donor countries efforts little to tackle hunger. For instance, while Pakistan has in fact doubled its budget
to support developing countries’ agricultural efforts (see page 91 for results and since 2008, this is still only to a paltry 1.6 percent – a disgrace, given that nearly
more details). two-thirds of the population, and 80 percent of the country’s poor people, live in
rural parts of the country and most of these rely on agriculture for their livelihoods.
There is a mix of good and bad news on agriculture budgets. Governments are
beginning to re-invest in agriculture, albeit from a very low base. Seven countries
(Tanzania, Uganda, Senegal, Nepal, Pakistan, Vietnam and Haiti) improved their
Box 5: An African grown initiative on agriculture: The CAADP 10%
score on budgetary allocations to agriculture between last year and this year.
budget target
Malawi already spends way over its 10 percent target and has seen impressive
African countries have made important commitments to agriculture
results. Between 2005 and 2007, Malawi went from a food deficit of 43 percent to
and food security, notably through the Comprehensive Africa Agricul-
a food surplus of 57 percent as productivity increased two-fold. Maize production
ture Development Plan (CAADP). CAADP is an African initiative which
nearly trebled and food prices for the urban poor dropped, while the incomes of
is based on country-owned ‘compacts’ for agriculture. The initiative
small farmers also rose because of increased productivity. Malawi’s economy has
commits signatory countries to setting out a plan for the agricultural
expanded at an average rate of 6.6 percent a year since 2004, largely as a result
sector and donors to give support to this. It sets targets to increase
of agriculture.68
spending on agriculture to 10 percent of overall budget and reaching
an agriculture growth rate of 6 percent.
Rwanda has also massively increased its budget in recent years, through strong
government commitment to agriculture and new social protection schemes. As a
Before the food crisis very few countries had signed compacts, but as
result, they are turning around hunger and poverty in the country. For example,
of July 2010, 18 countries had signed a CAADP compact and many
Rwanda is set to meet the MDG target to halve child malnutrition just one year
more are moving towards implementation.
after the 2015 deadline - way ahead of many ‘wealthier’ nations.69
Source: Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development targets. http://www.caadp.net/blog/
Rwanda’s recent gains are largely as a result of strong investment in agriculture.
This progress was made possible by a new government policy which supports
smallholders, with key tools and seeds, while expanding irrigation,70 placing ceilings Half of the African countries analysed in this scorecard allocated less than 5 percent
on land ownership, and supporting environmentally sustainable production to of their budgets to agriculture. This is despite African governments’ commitment
tackle the endemic problems of soil erosion in Rwanda. This has led to a 15 percent to spend 10 percent of their budgets on agriculture.
rise in agricultural production in 2008 and 2009,71 and a doubling of maize yields.72
The kinds of services which governments provide with this budget can also be an
Thanks in part to resilient rural economies and farmers well supported to respond indicator of the role that government spending will play in supporting poverty and
to price increases by planting more, all of these countries weathered the food and hunger eradication. For too long agricultural policies have tended to focus on
financial crises with relative ease, as strong agricultural output helped to mitigate large-scale, commercial and export agriculture that is resource intensive. The
for big losses in manufacturing and mining. Vietnam, Rwanda, and Malawi actually emerging consensus is that more support should be directed towards smallholders.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 22
Nonetheless, in reality, state programmes have not yet shifted to reflect a focus on
the kinds of services most needed by smallholder - and especially women – farmers.

These include ‘extension services’, which provide a vital lifeline for poor rural and
often remote farmers by giving specialised advice and training from ‘extension
workers’ in rural areas, to help support their farming and improve their productivity
(see page 83 - 84 for our indicators). Our scorecard also looks at the access that
farmers have to these extension services. While precise statistics on access to
agricultural extension are difficult to come by, our analysis shows that DRC and
Burundi have very low rates of access, with Pakistan, The Gambia, Zambia, India,
Lesotho and Liberia offering only slightly better access. Chinese and Vietnamese
farmers have high levels of access to extension services - in the case of Vietnam,
a strong system having been set up from central to communal level.

Growth in smallholder agriculture seems to be particularly effective in tackling

hunger in countries with relatively fair distributions of land. Most of the rural poor
depend on farm income, yet usually control little farmland. Women in particular
suffer massive inequalities in accessing, owning and controlling the land they
work, and women need therefore to be amongst the primary beneficiaries of land
reform or distribution process. Existing laws and policies must also be implemented
to ensure that women have equal access to land. Once smallholder farmers have
acquired land, strong state support is required to assist them in developing their
farms.

For instance, much of Vietnam’s success can be traced back to the Doi Moi reform
process started in 1986, and the huge strides made in agriculture. Through equitable
land redistribution to smallholders and huge government support channelled
towards the smallholders who were allocated land, it brought income and food to
some three-quarters of the population. Similarly, China brought in relatively equitable
redistribution of land, followed by heavy investment in supporting poor farmers.
As a result, it reduced the number of hungry by 58 million between 1990 and 2001.73

Unequal land distribution can also be a major contributing factor to hunger. For
instance, in Cambodia, three out of five rural families are either landless or do not
own enough land to meet their food needs.74

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 23
2.2 Boosting rural poverty alleviation with social protection

Productive support, via extension services, credit, land reform, and research and Box 6: Brazilian Food Procurement Programme: fighting hunger
development, is only one part of the story. The other critical element is a comple- and strengthening smallholders farmers
mentary investment in social protection measures - for instance, food ration
systems, pensions, child support, free school meals, employment guarantees - Anchored in the Zero Hunger Programme launched in 2003, the Food
that reach the rural poor. As was amply demonstrated during the 2008-9 food and Procurement Programme (PAA) in Brazil aims to guarantee access to
financial crises (see box 7), social protection schemes help cushion rural incomes quality food for food insecure populations, while promoting socia
in times of distress, minimising the reductions in calorie intake that would otherwise inclusion in rural areas through the acquisition of products from
be unavoidable. It is not surprising, therefore, that such schemes have consistently smallholder farmers.
produced significant improvements in both adult and child nutrition.75
The purchase of food is guaranteed at a baseline figure in order to mitigate
Some programmes, such as guaranteed state procurement of a certain amount of losses from market fluctuations. Currently, the PAA is paying up to 30
smallholders’ output, subsidised credit, or seed and fertiliser subsidies, marry the percent more than the current market value for agroecological products
two objectives (stabilising rural incomes and boosting production) in a single – a form of sustainable agricultural methods - from smallholder farmers.
programme; the Overseas Development Institute, for instance, considers Malawi’s
input subsidy programme as a form of social protection. The programme is a joint action of six ministries and includes actions
such as direct purchase from smallholder farmer’s food for distribution
Over the longer term, social protection has multiple benefits. It can enhance the or building of food stocks and encouragement of production and
capabilities of the rural poor by promoting better education outcomes, which in consumption of milk and the food acquisition for school meals’ supply.
turn boosts farmers’ productivity and thereby increases the effectiveness of
investment in areas such as agricultural research, extension and credit. Noting During the periods of 2003 and 2007 purchases from smallholder
that in Zambia social transfers are mostly spent on locally produced goods, Samson farmers have benefited over 15 million people in food or nutritional
argues that “the transfer of purchasing power to remote rural areas holds the insecurity. Also between 2003 and 2007, the number of family farmers
potential to revitalise local economies”.76 When social protection becomes statutory who benefited from the programme more than doubled from 40 million
and universal, it acts as a redistributive mechanism, a way of permanently reducing to over 100 million.
inequality and poverty. In South Africa, for example, social transfers reduce the
poverty gap by 47 percent.77 The PAA is considered to be a groundbreaking programme and has
been strongly shaped by the experiences of social movements and
We have measured developing and developed countries on the level of coverage CONSEA (National Council on Food and Nutritional Security).Concerns
achieved on key dimensions of social protection. Unfortunately, far too few countries remain that the policy could be disbanded with a new federal govern-
are prioritising their spending on these programmes (for more information see ment. Brazilian Civil Society Organisations, including ActionAid, are
page 85 and 93). And although programmes are still tiny in most developing coun- defending the PAA as a policy which must be retained.
tries, twelve countries (Burundi, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal,
Sierra Leone, Uganda, China, Nepal, Pakistan, Guatemala and Haiti) improved Sources: Ordinary law 10696, July 3rd, 2003, Art. 19 – www.senadofederal.gov.br. Regulated by Decree
their score this year for social safety net coverage, while only a handful went down. 4772, July 2nd, 2003 and by Decree 6.447, May 7th, 2008.
www.inesc.org.br/biblioteca/textos/baixa-execucao-orcamentaria-do-paa-preocupa-agricultura-
familiar/?searchterm=PAA
Brazil, our overall chart topper, has expanded welfare coverage dramatically in
recent years. Increases in the minimum wage and a national cash transfer pro-
gramme have been introduced alongside subsidised credit and procurement are widely recognised as having a positive impact on reducing extreme hunger
programmes that support smallholder farmers.78 Taken together, these measures and reducing inequalities.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 24
Box 7: Weathering the storm: Why and how some countries have that contributed to keeping food prices and poverty levels in check
lessened the impact of the food and financial crises included the increase of the minimum wage; providing greater access to
jobs; and introducing a public food-stock system where produce was
The reasons why some countries were able to come through the global bought from family farms.
food and financial crises relatively unscathed – and others not - are
complex and multifaceted. However, the countries which have made Sources: Chhibber, A., Ghosh, J. and Palanivel, T., 2009, “The Global Financial Crisis and the Asia-Pa-
cific region - A Synthesis Study Incorporating Evidence from Country Case Studies”, The Global
huge gains in reducing poverty and hunger are often also the ones that Economic Crisis and Developing Countries: Impact and Response, Oxfam International.
have best-managed the impact of these crises on their populations. This
appears to be through a combination of introducing policies to limit the
initial impact of either the food or economic crises, or the expansion of Historically, Brazil has huge inequalities, which has led to poverty levels inconsistent
pre-existing policies to better protect the poor. with the size of the economy. In order to tackle extreme hunger and poverty, the
government put in place their ‘Zero Hunger’ programme in 2003, which aims to
China was largely unaffected by the global food price increase. Domestic wipe out hunger in Brazil. It entails a comprehensive strategy with a total of 53
food self-sufficiency allowed China to insulate its population from the initiatives – such as child support grants, school meals and subsidized food – to
effects, while it simultaneously ensured public distribution of essential support the vulnerable in accessing food and enhancing their food security. The
food items and limited domestic speculation in food prices. At the same Bolsa Familia programme, which provides cash transfers conditional on families
time it increased financial support for agriculture, allowing it to improve meeting certain requirements such as school attendance, is benefiting 12.4 million
domestic food supplies despite global market volatility. As the economic families in poverty.79
crisis hit, China introduced a financial rescue package of a whopping 12
to13 percent of GDP over two years and channelled much of that into Alongside this, the government has also increased support to smallholder farming
various pro-poor policies. Along with other initiatives, this seems to in an attempt to tackle the huge inequalities which exist in agriculture. The Brazilian
have succeeded in increasing both demand for domestic produce and government’s policies to support the sector include the National Programme to
more general economic activity in China. Strengthen Family Agriculture (PRONAF), which has granted 1.9 million cheap
loans to smallholders. They have also supported farmers by committing to purchase
Vietnam has also weathered the global financial crisis surprisingly well their products. For instance, at least 30 percent of school meals across the country
due to the introduction of a stimulus package which accounted for 8.3 must be sourced from smallholder farmers (see Box 6).80 Other incentives include
percent of GDP, and which was channelled towards supporting the poor insurance against climate-related damages and a Price Guarantee Programme for
to survive the storm. But historically strong government support for Family Agriculture, which compensates farmers when prices fall below the cost of
agriculture has also provided an important bulwark against the crisis. production.81
The high level of national food self-sufficiency has boosted resilience to
high global food prices. Some urban migrants who lost their jobs have These programmes have succeeded in making a big dent in rural poverty and
also returned home: having land and being able to grow food has enabled improving the lives of smallholders. From 2002 to 2008 there has been a 37 percent
them to find alternative sources of income to survive the economic crisis. reduction in poverty among smallholder farmers and an average income growth of
30 percent. Meanwhile, the farming middle class grew by 29 percent. And in spite
In Brazil, social protection policies such as Bolsa Familia provided an of only owning small amounts of agricultural land - around 25 percent –smallholders
invaluable safety net for a quarter of Brazil’s population, providing basic are playing a vital role in producing food for the nation, producing around 70 percent
income support at a cost equivalent to 0.4 percent of the country’s GDP. of all the country’s food and accounting for around 10 percent of total GDP.82
The Brazilian government – like other Latin American countries suffering
from the global economic slowdown – expanded the programme to include But despite these successes, more radical reforms will be necessary to further
an additional 1.3 million families. One very positive aspect of Bolsa Familia and deepen progress towards a more equal society. For instance, while the land
– and other cash transfer programmes like it – is that, while rescuing reform process has also helped large numbers of poor people to access land, to
millions of people from extreme poverty, it also turns them into con- date this has done little to substantially address a stubborn concentration of land
sumers and helps stimulate local and regional economies. Other measures in the hands of a few, with 1 percent of rural communities still owning 43 percent
of the land.83

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 25
2.3 The role of political will and the people

A lack of state support to agriculture in many countries can be attributed not only change. In some cases, the ideologies, priorities and sympathies of political elites
to donor austerity measures and lack of government funding, but also to the weak drive pro-poor change, as seen in Malawi’s or Rwanda’s focus on smallholder
political power of smallholder farmers to negotiate support needs. Organised citizens farmers. Brazil is an interesting case of where both strong political will and civil
are vital for demanding a redistribution of power. Nowhere is this truer than in society pressure have played a role in pro-poor change. The recent inclusion of the
farming, where smallholder farmers tend to face numerous challenges to organi- right to food into the Brazilian Federal Constitution – ensuring the legal guarantee,
sation, such as conflict, lack of funds, and age and gender discrimination. Many at the highest level, that no Brazilian should go hungry85 – was the result of a
of the poorest farmers are unable to ‘demand’ services adequately, and are not combination of strong commitment from President Lula, and many years of ardent
organised in farmer groups. The cooperatives and producer organisations that campaigning and activism from within Brazilian civil society.
used to give small farmers some organised voice in policy-making either no
longer exist or have been much weakened in most countries, while the more A basic prerequisite for citizens’ capacity to hold their governments to account is
organised and powerful voices representing commercial farming interests have accurate information: knowing the obligations and promises for which the govern-
tended to dominate discourse and policy-making. ment is liable, what it is doing – or not doing – to meet its commitments, and how
effective these actions are. This is why, in this year’s scorecard, we have included
A 2008 report by the Global Donor Platform for Rural Development on agricultural the status of right to information as an indicator.
sector experiences in implementing the Paris Declaration, notes bluntly that
“farmers and rural communities have been largely excluded from agricultural policy At global level, an important step towards greater accountability for hunger was
processes”, such as PRSPs, sector-wide approaches and donor joint assistance taken last year when the reformed UN Committee on Food Security was launched,
strategies.84 with the aim of “coordinating global efforts to end hunger” and ensuring that “all
relevant voices are heard in the policy debate on food and agriculture”. The CFS
The decline of producer organisations for poor farmers coupled with the privatisation could become a key element in a genuinely representative global food governance
or abolition of key public institutions (such as marketing boards, agricultural banks, system, but at the moment it is too much of a talking shop. It lacks sufficient
and extension services) has left them with little bargaining power to negotiate the powers to hold individual UN member states (or groups of states) accountable for
market. As the state withdrew, global seed and fertiliser giants began to provide actions undermining the right to food, and although its mandate includes “coordi-
small-scale farmers with inputs, finance and extension services. The result? A nating global efforts,” it has no means to coordinate global financing. For the CFS
vast concentration of seed and fertiliser companies made record profits, while to succeed, it needs to be connected to a genuinely multilateral mechanism for
poor farmers became increasingly dependent on expensive services, leading to reviewing national and regional anti-hunger plans and ensuring that the international
heavy indebtedness and further marginalisation. At the same time, poor farmers’ community provides them with sufficient funds.
insufficient organisation has left them squeezed on both ends. Unable to grow
without expensive private sector ‘support’, they are also unable to negotiate a fair
deal in the market for their produce.

Yet civil society organisations are not always the only representatives of pro-poor

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 26
2.4 Failure to unlock the potential of women farmers

“I desperately needed to grow more food and raise extra money as my children
were sent home from school because we couldn’t pay the school fees. It’s better Box 8: One size certainly doesn’t fit all
working with others as we encourage each other and have more of an impact.”
The HungerFREE Scorecard includes a new sub-indicator measuring
- Liccy Nhkoma, 46, smallholder farmer, Rumphi district, Malawi governments’ performance on collecting sex-disaggregated data, in
this case in relation to key agriculture resources and services. We
Across most areas highlighted in this HungerFREE Scorecard, governments and examined whether governments collect sex-disaggregated data on
donors are failing to meet the specific needs of women. Women farmers must be ownership of land; on the recipients of extension services; and on access
helped to increase their productivity so that they can boost their families’ food to credit. The results were disappointing - even if not surprising - with
only Guatemala, Brazil, Ethiopia and Nigeria collecting disaggregated
security and produce a surplus to sell in local food markets. But gender inequities
data in all three of the areas.
in the agriculture and land sectors are shockingly stark.
Statistics on women’s yields, women’s technology adoption rates and
Women own only 1 percent of the land for which title exists. In the DRC, Zambia, women’s use of inputs are rarely reported, and there is invariably a
South Africa, Rwanda and Sierra Leone, women’s ability to gain access and control lack of sex-disaggregated data. This increases the invisibility of
over land is particularly limited. For example, even in South Africa where the women in the agriculture sector, despite the fact they constitute the
majority of farmers in most countries. Lack of data perpetuates the
constitution guarantees equal rights to men and women, ‘customary law’ is often
prejudice - entirely unfounded in empirical fact - that women farmers
invoked in rural South Africa to restrict land-ownership rights. Women may access are less efficient than men. Focusing agricultural policies on women
land through their husbands, while single women are excluded because land is means overcoming discrimination in access to existing resources, but
reserved for couples. also introducing new services and technologies that respond to the
specific needs of women farmers. Whilst some of the constraints facing
In most of the countries listed in the scorecard, even if women are able to secure women are gender-specific and require separate interventions, much
of what women farmers need is the same as what men need, and the
land, they are often excluded from – or last in the line for - the assistance that
policy challenge is simply designing and targeting these goods and
would help them develop it, such as extension services, credit and subsidised services in ways that enable women to benefit equally. Through tools
inputs. Women farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa only benefit from 7 percent of farm such as gender budgeting and collection, and monitoring of sex-disag-
extension services, and less than 10 percent of credit provided to farmers.86 gregated data, governments can make a big difference to the gender
impact of their policies.
Given that women farmers make up the vast majority of poor farmers, it is imperative Sources: ActionAid International, 2010, “Fertile Ground: How Governments and Donors can halve
that they be empowered and enabled to articulate their specific needs and that hunger by supporting small farmers”.
governments and donors begin to respond. Millions of poor women farmers would
then be able to begin to raise themselves out of poverty, as well as challenging
deeply entrenched gender inequities. gender, which enables some analysis of the institutional root causes of the exclusion
of women from development (see page 88). Brazil, Cambodia, and Vietnam come
We have included in this year’s report a new measure of social institutions and score best in this area, while Sierra Leone, India, and Pakistan score the worst.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 27
3 A world in crisis: A challenge to halving hunger

“Everyone in this community perceives that the climate is changing – it is a critical displaced from their lands. So far, however, the only international response is a
issue for us as our lives are rain dependent. I am producing 50 per cent less than 5 relatively anodyne set of ‘guidelines’ drafted by the World Bank, which have been
years ago, mostly due to the erratic weather and lack of soil fertility.” roundly condemned by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier
- Tesfa Garadew, 57, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia de Schutter for failing to offer any real protection to the poor.

3.1 The food fuel and financial crisis: Impacts on poor people In addition, the crisis led many to pose a new set of questions about the future:
and responses by governments what is the appropriate role of governments in economic management? How and
by whom should food prices be regulated? What steps have to be taken to ensure
The international food and fuel price crises, followed by the global financial crisis, global food security in the medium term? Particular attention focused on the role
have had profound effects on the poor in developing countries. This era of worldwide of rampant speculation in food commodities, following on from the deregulation of
turmoil has also served as a rude wake-up call to leaders – with both negative and much of the financial sector, including commodity trading, in the 1990s. Consensus
positive consequences. has grown that speculation helped to bid up prices during the 2008 food crisis.
The US legislature recently enacted widely applauded measures to re-introduce
A significant number of developing-country governments were prompted to review basic limits on commodity trading, but the European Union has so far done nothing.
their food policies and to acknowledge that the dismantling of public support to Talk of establishing virtual or real grain reserves at regional or global level to help
agriculture through market reforms was a mistake. After a decades-long decline, buffer prices has proved similarly inconclusive.
both governments and donors are starting to reinvest in agriculture. Even before
the food crisis, investments were on the up, with spending on agriculture by The food crisis also helped to highlight the severe shortcomings of the current
African governments actually doubling between 2000 and 2005. The food crisis global food trading system. However, despite many earnest pledges by world
also highlighted exactly how unreliable and costly imports can be, prompting leaders to get trade negotiations back on track, the OECD reports that subsidies
countries such as Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Bangladesh and India to develop for agriculture in industrialized countries grew in 2009, benefiting the largest
new plans to become more food-secure, rather than relying on imports to feed the companies and land owners.87 The dumping of these artificially cheap ‘food
nation. Sadly, it took a food crisis, which had a devastating impact on poor people, mountains’ in developing country markets continued apace during and after the
to spur this action. crisis; when an oversupply of milk in the EU pushed prices down last year, dairy
companies got subsidies from the EU instead of cutting production, and sold the
A far more negative result of the food crisis is that interest grew amongst both resulting excess milk in African countries at prices that substantially undercut
international governments and private investors in acquiring land in developing local producers. Meanwhile, through vehicles such as the EU’s Economic Partner-
countries. In the case of governments, the intention has been use the land to ship Agreements, rich countries continued to put pressure on their poor neighbours
grow staple food for their own populations; while investors use the land to grow to cut their own tariffs and subsidies even further, leaving poor farmers completely
agricultural commodities – such as biofuels - for export. This has lead to a spate vulnerable to the artificially cheap imports.
of UN reports outlining fears of a new ‘land grab’ and of poor rural people being

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 28
in investing in smallholder farmers. However, according to ActionAid’s calculation,
Box 9: Land grabbing: A worrying phenomenon for a hunger-free only around US$6 billion of this is new money rather than re-cycled pledges – and
future it is still not clear how or when the money will be spent. In the midst of continued
economic uncertainty – and with some donor countries slashing or at least freezing
Governments and private investors alike are brokering deals for the their budgets – there are serious concerns that the promised sums won’t be
use and ownership of large swathes of fertile land, sometimes in exchange forthcoming at all.
for promises of investment, other times for paltry sums of money.
These deals are spurred by governments’ concerns over food security Most worryingly, ActionAid has been unable to find proof of any overall increase in
and growing populations, as well as the expanding market for biofuels. donor funds to the agricultural sector as a result of the L’Aquila G8 food security
The trend intensified following the food crisis when large food-importing initiative, where commitments worth US$22 billion were announced. Even the
countries experienced food shortages and riots. Concerned about future overall, small absolute increase of US$6 billion (that is, not recycled pledges) is
food security, China, India, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Kuwait, United mainly made up of a plethora of other food-related spending – not funds earmarked
Arab Emirates and Qatar embraced a global land and water acquisition exclusively for the agricultural sector. In addition, new money committed to
plan. They intend to buy land and water in other countries from which agriculture by some countries is being offset by reductions in spending from other
to sustain their own populations. countries. For example, the US has made significant new pledges in aid to
agriculture, but decreases by others - such as Japan and the EU - are pulling
It is impossible to ascertain just how many land acquisition agreements down the overall G8 record.
have been signed globally, or which countries are most affected. A
leaked draft version of a World Bank report shows that investors in The US has made significant new pledges through the 2009 L’Aquila Food Security
farmland are targeting countries with weak laws, buying arable land Initiative. Under the leadership of Barack Obama, the US commitment could see
on the cheap and failing to deliver on promises of jobs and investments. its aid to agriculture rising by an impressive 74 percent, along with a simultaneous
“Investor interest is focused on countries with weak land governance,” tripling of support to nutritional programmes in the developing world. Obama has
the draft report states. It goes on to say that, “rarely if ever” were ef- also sent good signals in terms of how the US intends to spend this money, with
forts made to link land investments to “countries’ broader development the US putting money behind country-led plans for agriculture.
strategy”....“Consultations with local communities were often weak,” it
adds. Although deals involved promises jobs and infrastructure, Italy, at the other end of the spectrum, made a tiny pledge in line with its overall
“investors failed to follow through on their investments plans, in some performance as one of the EU´s worst performers in terms of ODA levels -
cases after inflicting serious damage on the local resource base”. contributing just 0.16 percent of its GNI in 2009.88 And ActionAid’s calculations
show that there is little evidence of additional funds from Italy at all, but rather a
Sources: Alex Evans. World Bank land grabs report leaked. July 28, 2010. Javier Blas, 2010,
cut of funds to the tune of US$14.4m.
Financial Times World Bank warns on ‘farmland grab’
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/62890172-99a8-11df-a852-00144feab49a.html
Hot on the heels of the food crisis, the world financial crisis struck. Although
developing countries didn't make this crisis happen, it has become all too clear
that they are suffering its worst effects. Whilst banks in rich countries are back
If little was done on the systemic causes of growing hunger, more notable were recording record-level profits again in 2010, the World Bank and IMF estimate that
the funding responses. In 2009 G8 and G20 nations pledged a total of US $22 114 million people in poor countries have been thrown into absolute poverty by
billion, over 3 years, to support developing country farmers and fight hunger. Very the economic slowdown.89
welcome in this step was the recognition that the key to solving the food crisis lies

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 29
Moreover, the effects of the crisis are likely to persist in the developing world for
Box 10: Country plans need external funding: The example of years to come: poverty rates will be higher in 2015, and even beyond - to 2020 -
Rwanda than they would have been had the world economy grown steadily at its pre-crises
pace.90
The endorsement of the CAADP process (see Box 5) by the G8 L’Aquila
Summit has marked a shift in donor approach towards greater support Against this backdrop, many key donor countries, including Italy, Japan, UK and
for country-led plans. The launch of the Global Agriculture and Food Ireland are either cutting overall aid budgets or dropping important pledges to the
Security Programme (GAFSP) in 2009 by Spain, Canada and the US poor. In fact, in their 2010 Summit, G8 countries actually took a step backwards
also holds the potential to be a catalyst for a more effective approach
by failing to recommit to their 2005 aid commitments to increase aid.
based on country plans.

In 2010, GAFSP allocated new money for country-devised and – led

agricultural development plans in five countries - one of which was
Rwanda. Despite making strong commitments towards their agricul-
tural sector and being one of the first countries to sign a CAADP compact,
Rwanda has been struggling to fill the ‘financing gap’ in their plans
and are desperately in need of donor support.

With 82 percent of households relying on agriculture for the majority

of their income being poor, this will help Rwanda to continue economic
growth and poverty reduction. Rwanda has made leaps forward in just
a few short years, through strong government commitment to agri-
culture. As a result, they are turning around hunger and poverty in
the country. This led to a 15 percent rise in agricultural production in
2008 and 2009, and a doubling of maize yields. This, in turn, has led
to a sharp decrease in food insecurity and strong economic growth.

Not only is this new money significant as representing increased

funding, but also for how this funding is being spent. Fortunately for
Rwanda, some of these funds will be supporting its pre-existing plans.
For instance, the US is due to give more support to Rwanda’s plans to
tackle soil erosion and irrigation, among other things, and will be
massively increasing funding to back up Rwanda’s existing plans.

Sources: Robert Zoellick, 2009, “Africa’s lot not hopeless; it just requires more help”, Daily Nation
www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/646332/-/4n7j56/-/; World Bank, 2010, “Global Fund
Enlists Support of Civil Society and Producer Organizations to Advance Country-led Agriculture and
Food Security Programs”, 15 July; Sam Ruburika, 2009, “Rwanda: Country Weathers Economic
Crisis Despite Challenges Lying Ahead”, All Africa, http://allafrica.com/stories/200908060430.html.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 30
3.2 Hunger for resources is competing with food for the poor

“I don’t have a farm and I don’t have a garden because the only land that I have
has been destroyed by a bio fuels company. We are suffering from hunger but I am have signed some 30 land deals in different parts of the world. Whilst
giving up because even if I managed to find some other land to farm, I am certain some argue that China has not secured land leases as aggressively as
that they would just destroy it.” it could the policy of land-leasing is attracting fear from those worried
- Elisa Alimone Mongue, 42, Mozambique either that this is a form of ‘neo-colonialism’, or that the food security
of host nationals will be jeopardised through deals that are vague and
As discussed above, the massive overconsumption of energy and other environ- lacking in clear guarantees of benefits. There is also concern that
China’s heavy investment in biotechnology over the last 2 decades
mental resources in the North is becoming a major cause of hunger in the devel-
will lead to the spread of a technology that is not the most appropriate
oping world. It is for this reason that ActionAid chose to rank developed countries
for its millions of smallholders.
on their records on climate change and biofuels, as well as through their support
to agriculture and social protection measures in the developing world. We are thus Brazil’s influence is also expanding but in a different way, as evidenced
judging which countries are ‘giving with one hand, while taking away with another’. by President Lula da Silva’s July tour of six African nations in which
he expressly declared Brazil’s commitment to help Africa build a future
As our scorecard indicators on climate change (see page 97) and biofuels (see of stability and development. Brazilian aid is focused not only in infra-
page 95) illustrate, developed countries are failing spectacularly to curb their excess structure, but also on social programmes and agriculture.
appetites for resources.
The Brazilian Co-operation Agency (ABC) has a small budget of 52m
reais (US$30 million) but it is estimated that Brazilian development
Box 11: Tackling hunger in a globalising world: The emergence of aid broadly defined could reach US$4 billion a year - less than China,
the BRICs but similar to generous donors such as Sweden and Canada.

China’s food security is under threat: it has an ever-growing population; One clear objective of Brazil’s involvement in foreign countries is to
will have to manage the effects of climate change; and has only 7 percent develop the global biodiesel industry and market. Given the problems
of the world’s arable land, over a million hectares of which is lost associated with biofuels production (see pg 95), African countries
annually to pollution and desertification. Whilst China’s response to should consider adopting Brazil’s biofuels’ blueprint with caution. On
look overseas for its food production is one obvious solution, this move the more positive side, it is exciting to see Brazil exporting its successful
is causing much unease about the negative impact it could have on hunger reduction conditional cash transfer systems, such as Bolsa
host countries. China has begun to put down substantial agricultural Familia, such as has happened in Mozambique.
roots in Africa. It has pledged US$800 million to modernise agriculture
in Mozambique’s agricultural infrastructure, and it is estimated there Sources: Carl Rubinstein, 2009, “China's eye on African agriculture”, 2 October,
are over 1 million Chinese farm labourers across the continent. It has www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/KJ02Cb01.html; FAO, 2009,” Towards eliminating hunger:
responses to the food crisis”, The Economist, 2010, “Speak softly and carry a blank cheque. In search
an agricultural policy on outsourcing food production and is said to of soft power”, 15 July, http://www.economist.com/node/16592455?story_id=16592455

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 31
Climate change is set to have a devastating impact on agricultural productivity –
meaning that the livelihoods of rural populations will become increasingly chal- working with women and building on local and traditional knowledge. It
lenging. Climate-driven water scarcity and increases in the severity of droughts recognizes that achieving food security and sustainable livelihoods for
and floods are already affecting food production, especially in subsistence sectors. people now in chronic poverty requires ensuring access to and control
In the last few months alone, floods have hit Pakistan leading to severe national of resources by small-scale farmers. And, it emphasizes that fair trading
food shortages; while droughts across Russia have led to a global spike in food regimes are imperative to changing the status quo.
prices.91 These events are in line with climate change predictions – a clear warning
of the tragic impacts it could have on hunger. Agriculture, as practiced today, accounts for nearly 14 percent of
greenhouse gas emissions annually and land use change (including
deforestation to develop agricultural land) contributes another 19 percent
Smallholders, pastoralists and artisanal fisher folk will suffer complex and localised
of global emissions. In this scorecard we have given countries recognition
effects of climate change. In the developing world the impacts could be colossal:
for signing up to the IAASTD. However, signing is not enough: govern-
yields from rain-fed farming in some African countries could fall by up to 50 percent ments must outline how and by when they will implement the IAASTD’s
by 2020, and by up to 30 percent in some central and South Asian countries by recommendations.
2050, according to the IPPC.92 Agriculture therefore has the potential to be part of
the solution or part of the problem. So, what can be done and what are rich Sources: Pretty, J. et al. ‘Resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries’.
countries doing about it? Environmental Science and Technology 2006, 40(4)1114-1119. International Assessment of
Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, 2009, Agriculture at a Crossroads:
Synthesis Report

Box 12: IAASTD and sustainable agriculture

Preventing the most dangerous climate impacts will require rich countries to reduce
Numerous studies show that sustainable and smallholder agriculture
can increase yields significantly. It uses relatively low levels of agro- their emissions of greenhouse gasses by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by
chemical inputs, which cost farmers less, and protects and enhances the 2020. Our scorecard (see page 96) shows that only the UK, with a pledged 34
environment. For both poor farmers and the environment, this is a win- percent cut, and Norway (30 percent) come close to this. The countries at the
win situation. Many farmers’ organisations have been championing this bottom have targets so low they’re almost farcical, with the US, Australia and
approach for some time: often their voice is drowned out by those with Canada setting targets which range from 3 to4 percent, while Japan doesn’t have
market interests. But better-organised smallholders, more able to any targets.
negotiate in the market and to demand supportive services, could be
key to building much-needed, more sustainable alternatives. We have also considered developed countries’ actual emissions since 1990. Only
Finland has reduced emissions sufficiently, although Norway, the UK, Portugal,
The IAASTD — the result of four years of research and consultations France and Germany are close. Going backwards – fast – is Ireland.
involving 400 experts and civil society – has now been endorsed by 58
countries. The report calls on policy-makers to acknowledge the negative Rich countries have also amassed an enormous ‘climate debt’ through their
environmental externalities of conventional agriculture, to learn from historical greenhouse gas emissions, which will now prevent poor countries using
existing agro-ecological initiatives and to look at integrated solutions for cheap, fossil-fuel intensive pathways out of poverty if the climate crisis is to be
agriculture that include social rather than expensive and heavily- contained. Developing countries, which are often on the front-line in the battle
patented technologies. It argues for a massive push to develop and scale against global warming, will require large amounts of external public finance to
up low-input and organic farming methods - with a particular focus on adapt to climate change, combat deforestation and move to low-carbon pathways
out of poverty.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 32
No global estimate can ever be 100 percent precise. However calculations by the such as palm oil, soy and grapeseed. Rapidly rising demand for biofuels during
UNDP on adaptation and by researchers at the European Commission on mitigation 2007-8 was a major factor driving food prices higher, and affecting what and how
conservatively suggest that developing countries will need at least US$182 billion much people ate in developing countries. As oil prices start rising again, biofuel
a year of public finance by 2020 in addition to existing aid commitments.93 demand could again place significant pressure on food prices – accounting for as
much as a 15 percent increase in the price of staples by 2020, according to the
Rich countries that have largely caused the climate crisis are so far doing little to OECD.
pay for the true costs of their pollution. Our scorecard shows that so far not a
single country has managed to fund more than 5 percent of their fair share of the The biofuels boom also contributed to ‘land grabbing’ (see Box 8) through a
US $200 billion needed. The US, Greece, Japan, South Korea, Austria and Belgium mushrooming of dubious biofuel projects across the developing world. In just five
are the worst offenders. Given climate change’s serious impact on food security, African countries, 1.1 million hectares have been given over to industrial biofuels –
countries such as the US, which are emerging as champions in the fight against an area the size of Belgium.95 All of the biofuel produced on this land is for export.
global hunger, need to match the level of ambition shown in the L’Aquila pledges EU companies have already acquired or requested at least 5 million hectares of
to passing legislation with a binding emissions target and committing extra funds land for industrial biofuels in developing countries – an area greater than the size
to meeting the adaptation and mitigation needs of developing countries. of Denmark.96

Agriculture is now also recognised as contributing to climate change. Farming ActionAid estimates that, to meet the transport element of recently agreed EU
accounts for as much as 32 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.94 Previous Renewable Energy Directive (much of which will be filled by biofuels), some 30 to
strategies to intensify production have relied on fossil fuels, irrigation, chemical 40 million hectares of crop land would be required by 2020 to meet this demand -
fertilisers and pesticides. The cost is counted in exhausted and eroded topsoils, half of which would be in developing countries.97
scarce water, irrigation-induced salinisation, water systems polluted by pesticide
and fertiliser run-off, and reduced biodiversity. In this new era of climate change In the scorecard we have measured the biofuels blending targets that developed
and resource scarcity, efforts to increase agricultural production must go hand in countries have set themselves, which are policies to achieve an increase in ethanol
hand with environmental sustainability. In particular, there is a need to massively and biodiesel consumption in transport fuels. These targets are invariably set
scale up research, development and farmer support programmes promoting low- against a timetable; for example the UK currently has a blending target of 5 percent
input, climate resilient farming methods such as agro-ecology and organic farming. biofuel by 2013/2014.
To date, sustainable agriculture has received relatively little backing from
governments. The HungerFREE Scorecard also judges developed countries on Portugal has the highest blending target of 10 percent, followed by the US (8.25
their support to IAASTD (the International Assessment for Agricultural Knowledge, percent), Germany (6.25 percent) and France (7 percent). Australia and Denmark
Science and Technology for Development), the result of four years of research and perform particularly well with low targets of 0.4 percent and 0.75 percent respectively.
consultations involving 400 experts and civil society which has now been endorsed
by 58 countries (see Box 12) and its emphasis on shifting towards more sustainable The evidence now shows that industrial biofuels are having negative impacts on
agriculture. people, farmers and workers, as well as on hunger. In addition, although some-
times promoted as ‘green’ alternatives, many biofuels cause more greenhouse
To make matters even worse, in their quest to reduce oil dependence without gas emissions than the fossil fuels they are designed to replace, thus adding to
having to cut energy consumption, the rich world is supporting ambitious plans to the problem of climate change.98 Clearly, as the main plank of a policy to substi-
scale up biofuel consumption. The US and EU have established ambitious targets tute transport fuel, biofuels are failing in the fight against climate change, and will
for increased biofuel consumption, and are supporting biofuel producers with compound hunger and poverty for the poor in the future.
generous subsidies and tax breaks. This puts pressure on food prices as well as
land use. To stop this trend, rich countries must place a moratorium on the further expansion
of industrial biofuel production and end targets and financial incentives for industrial
Industrial biofuels are currently made from maize, wheat, sugar cane and oil seeds biofuels.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 33
Conclusions and recommendations

With the hunger MDG threatening progress in other areas of poverty reduction, in many countries yet is central to enable small farms to flourish.
now more than ever we need bold and ambitious plans to tackle hunger. Small – Expanding programmes that encourage and support climate-resilient, low-cost
farms must be absolutely central to this battle against hunger and poverty, while farming such as community seed banks, water harvesting, soil conservation,
also putting in place social protection measures to meet the needs of the most land reform, organic fertilizer, and research and development focused on
vulnerable. low-input methods.
• Expand social protection programmes to regenerate rural economies and ensure
To meet the MDG1 goal of halving hunger, developing countries and developed that households don’t fall into hunger when prices rise or harvests fail.
countries must:
In addition, the international community must provide a firm guarantee that no
1.Massively scale-up spending on sustainable agriculture and social good national plan for achieving the MDG hunger targets will fail for lack of
protection to halve hunger by 2015 financing. Donors must urgently announce a timetable for the disbursement of the
full US$7bn per year pledged for food security at the 2009 G8. More importantly,
As part of the MDG review process developing countries and their donor partners those currently falling short of their fair share must announce plans for increasing
need to agree national MDG 1 ‘rescue plans’, backed by costed, time-bound their contributions, in order to bring total donor funding for agriculture and food
actions and firm financing commitments by both governments and donors. Rescue security to the minimum US$20bn per year required. A global partnership between
plans should be based on pre-existing national agriculture and food security plans, developed and developing countries should be established to ensure that all
but must expand and scale up these plans to the level of ambition and financing sound national plans receive the full amount of external funding required, in a
needed to achieve the UN hunger goals. Globally, at least US$40 billion per year timely and coordinated manner.
in additional resources is needed to achieve the necessary scaling up of national
action, of which at least US$20 billion (or about three times the amounts pledged 2.The international community must tackle the above-national causes of
for food security at the 2009 G8 summit) must come from donors. hunger

It is particularly important that governments and donors scale up national action to: • Developed countries must commit to a reduction of at least 40 percent of
emissions by 2020 in order to keep temperatures below the danger zone of a
• Support poor people to farm their way out of poverty. New research by 1.5 degree increase in temperatures.
ActionAid and our experience through field work99 has pointed to specific areas • Rich countries need to increase their climate financing pledges to cover the
which governments and donors should focus on: minimum US$200 billion needed annually in developing countries, ensure their
– Meeting the unmet needs of women farmers, and improving women’s control funding is new money (that is, doesn’t reduce other aid), and specify a source.
over land and other agricultural resources. • The European Union and United States must eliminate targets and subsidies for
– Reversing the decline in extension services, which are vital for providing biofuel production, which directly undermine food security.
information and support to smallholders. • All signatories to the IAASTD report should develop timebound plans for
– Providing affordable credit to small farmers. Public credit is almost non-existent implementation of its recommendations, particularly through the re-orientation

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 34
of national and international research and development spending.
• All UN member states should enact binding regulations on cross-border land
deals that threaten food security. (please look up exact language used in AAI
position)
• The international community should further strengthen and empower the FAO’s
Committee on Food Security, enabling it to hold individual countries or groups
of countries accountable for actions that undermine food security, and linking it
to a bigger global partnership that reviews and assesses national anti-hunger
efforts and matches them to adequate international funding.
• The European Union should follow the United States by introducing measures
to regulate trading in food commodities in order to curb excess speculation.
• Rich countries must end the dumping of over-subsidised agricultural commodities
on developing country markets, and must review and revise trade agreements
to allow developing countries to protect staple crops.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 35

Section 2 - HungerFREE scorecards: Developing countries

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 36

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Bangladesh Remarks:

Bangladesh is on track to meet the MDG1 hunger targets and ranks sixth in this
Leader: Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed
year’s HungerFREE Scorecard. Bangladesh’s high ranking reflects the progress
Overall Score: 44/100 it has made in reducing hunger amongst its population from 36 percent to 26
Overall Grade: C percent since 1990. However, the impact of the food and financial crises (not
Overall Rank: 6/28 factored into the projections) may mean that Bangladesh could be knocked off
track to meet the MDG1 hunger targets.

Indicator Grade Comment Bangladesh’s impressive reduction in hunger levels is however relative – the country
Hunger C High hunger levels
started from very high rates of hunger and malnutrition.100 Today around 65.3 million
Bangladeshis still do not have sufficient food to eat.101 This is around half of all
Legal framework D No right to food legislation Bangladeshis.102 In addition to this, the child underweight rate is highest in South Asia
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture
and one of the highest in the world.

Social protection E Low social protection Although Bangladesh has reached near self-sufficiency in food production,103 rice
Gender equality C Medium gender equality
production in Bangladesh will fall by about 3.9 percent each year due to climatic
change.104

Land is a critical issue in Bangladesh: about 60 percent of farmers are functionally

landless and farm sizes are too small to support a family. One percent of arable land
ASIA
is being lost each year due to climate change and urbanization.105 Women’s rights to
land are particularly constrained.106 Wide scale introduction of sustainable agriculture
and land reform is therefore urgently needed.

Bangladesh
The government responded to the food crisis with a large stimulus package for
agriculture, and a large scaling up of its social safety net programmes,107 accounting for
12.58 percent of the national budget in 2009/10.108 Employment generation programmes
will now need to be significantly expanded as part of the government’s forthcoming
Food Security Investment Plan.109

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 37

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Brazil Remarks:

Brazil tops the HungerFREE scorecard for the second year running for the
Leader: President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva remarkable progress made in tackling hunger. Brazil has more than halved the
Overall Score: 58/100 number of underweight children in less than 10 years110 and is on track to halve
Overall Grade: C hunger levels before the 2015 deadline.
Overall Rank: 1/28 Brazil, under the leadership of the Lula Government and through concerted pressure
by civil society organisations, has enacted a number of progressive pro-poor policies
in recent years. The cornerstone of this is the ‘Zero Hunger’ programme,111 designed
Indicator Grade Comment to wipe out hunger in Brazil through a comprehensive strategy - involving 53 initiatives
- to enhance food security.
Hunger B Low hunger levels

Legal framework A Right to food legislation enacted One of these is the Bolsa Familia programme, which benefits 12 million families in
extreme poverty through an income transfer, helping them to access education,
Smallholder agriculture E Very low budget to agriculture healthcare and social protection.
Social protection B High social protection In early 2010 the Brazilian Congress inserted the right to food into the Federal Consti-
Gender equality A High gender equality
tution as a fundamental right, ensuring the legal guarantee that no Brazilian should go
hungry.112 This is a victory for those who campaigned hard for its inclusion.
LATIN AMERICA
The government has also begun investing much more in smallholder agriculture.113
However, there is still a long way to go to end hunger and to address huge historical
inequalities between smallholders and large scale farming. For example, Brazil has
tended to focus on investment in agribusiness, which has contributed to a concentration
of land in a small number of hands. Only 1 percent of all rural establishments own 43
percent of the land.114
Brazil
However, the current policies are beginning to reduce inequality overall.115 Brazil has
reduced the number of people living in extreme poverty from 21 million in 2003 to 8.9
million in 2008.116

The Brazilian government however must avoid promoting biofuels at the expense of
food security, with biofuels expansion pushing up land prices and converting crops to
fuel.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 38

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Burundi Remarks:

A shocking 63 percent of Burundians are hungry.117 Despite some recently

Leader: President Pierre Nkurunziza
reported improvements, over the long-term proportions of hungry people and
Overall Score: 16/100 the number of children underweight have steadily increased.118 There is currently
Overall Grade: E no sign of Burundi reaching its MDG 1 targets. As a result, Burundi languishes
Overall Rank: 27/28 near the bottom of the scorecard report, with only the Democratic Republic of
Congo scoring lower.

Indicator Grade Comment Many of the causes of hunger reported in 2009 persist: fragile political stability, poor
Hunger E Very high hunger levels. Hunger increasing
governance and the legacies of 13 years of civil war, which destroyed communications
and social infrastructure, health facilities and homes – and damaged livelihoods. Burundi
Legal framework E No right to food legislation has the second-highest population density in Africa, with a high rate of population
Smallholder agriculture D Low budget to agriculture
growth and stagnant agricultural production.119 This continual state of crisis is being
compounded by the return en mass of refugees to the country.
Social protection E Negligible social protection

Gender equality C Medium gender equality

In addition, 2009 increases in the prices of potatoes and beans have made things
worse still: 75 percent of families report consuming smaller meal portions and reduced
meal frequency than in the previous year.120
AFRICA
Promisingly, in 2009 the government signed the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural
Development Programme (CAADP) agreement to invest 10 percent of its budget in
agriculture. However, this budget has remained static at 4.9 percent, with no apparent
improvements in extension services, access to credit or irrigation schemes.
Burundi
State social protection measures are largely absent. There is currently no state minimum
employment or living standards guarantees, little maternal nutritional entitlement, and
nothing in the way of food rations or cash transfer schemes. The patchy school feeding
programme covers about 15 percent of enrolled primary students. Scaling up social
protection measures is vital for tackling malnutrition, as is investment to achieve
agriculture-led development.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 39

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Cambodia Remarks:

Cambodia rises to 12th place in this year’s HungerFREE Scorecard due to its
Leader: Prime Minister Hun Sen progress towards the MDG1 goal of halving hunger. Emerging from decades of
Overall Score: 38/100 civil conflict and economic stagnation, Cambodia has over the past 10 years
Overall Grade: D managed to reduce both the proportion of underweight children and undernour-
Overall Rank: 12/28 ished people in its population.

However, uneven wealth creation in recent years has left as many as 2.6 million
(mostly rural) people living in extreme poverty, a situation worsened by climate shocks
Indicator Grade Comment
and consequent poor harvests, as well as food price rises and the global economic
Hunger B High hunger levels downturn.121 Consequently, hunger remains high, with recent estimates categorizing
40 percent of its children as chronically malnourished, among the highest rates in Asia.122
Legal framework E No right to food legislation

Smallholder agriculture D Low budget to agriculture The government is failing to support the worst hit rural communities. To ensure that
Cambodia builds on its progress on hunger reduction so far, it must give increased
Social protection E Low social protection support to poor rural communities and address inequalities. Farmers urgently need
extension, credit and input supports to grow their way out of poverty. The rising
Gender equality C Medium gender equality
phenomena of rural debt must be addressed before it becomes a crisis.123

Smallholder farmers also urgently require secure property rights. Three out of five
ASIA
families in rural Cambodia are either landless or do not own enough land to meet their
food needs; land-grabbing and forced evictions are worsening the situation.124 Around
3 million hectares are claimed to have been allocated as Economic Land Concessions
by the government,125 some at very low concession rates126 and without adequate
compensation.127
Cambodia Between 2007 and 2008 the price of rice rose a 100 percent.128 The financial crisis hit
Cambodia’s tourism, garment and construction industries hard – and women have
been worst affected. The limited government response saw no intensification of formal
social safety net provisions: under 1 percent of Cambodia’s GDP is estimated to go
towards funding a social safety net.129 A comprehensive social safety net system is
urgently required to replace the current fragmented and uncoordinated interventions.129

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 40

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: China Remarks:

China comes in 2nd place on our HungerFREE scorecard, with an impressive

Leader: President Hu Jintao
poverty and hunger-tackling record. It has managed to meet both the MDG
Overall Score: 57/100 hunger targets, halving its hunger and child malnutrition rates ahead of the 2015
Overall Grade: C deadline.
Overall Rank: 2/28
This has been coupled with extraordinary successes in reducing poverty with a four-fold
reduction between 1980 and 2005, from 835 million to 208 million people.131 Poverty
Indicator Grade Comment levels among the Chinese have thus been slashed from 84 percent to 15 percent.132
Hunger B Low hunger levels
The agricultural sector has played a central role in these achievements. Research
Legal framework E No right to food legislation suggests that investment in smallholder agriculture has had four times more impact
Smallholder agriculture B Medium budget to agriculture
on poverty alleviation in China than the growth in manufacturing or service sectors.
From the 1980s, the government invested heavily to support smallholders and poor
Social protection E Low social protection farmers, as well as undertaking a relatively equitable redistribution of land. As a result,
Gender equality B Medium gender equality
the number of hungry fell by 58 million between 1990 and 2001.134

China has weathered the world food and financial crises remarkably well. Domestic
food self-sufficiency, along with increased financial support for agriculture, has left it
largely unaffected by the global food price increases.135 In addition, the government
has introduced various pro-poor policies, providing support to urban migrants and
increasing the existing pension and unemployment benefits.136

China However, there are potential threats to China’s current successes. Some predict that
China will no longer be self-sufficient in food production as early as 2030 because of
climate change.137 The Chinese government has responded to such predictions with a
number of new measures, some of which are themselves potential causes for future
concern – such as its research into the viability of introducing GMOs,138 and China’s
policy of buying arable land in hunger-vulnerable countries.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 41

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Democratic Republic Remarks:

of Congo The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) scores woefully low in almost all
Leader: President Joseph Kabila categories on the HungerFREE Scorecard and is rated as the worst-performing
Overall Score: 11/100 country. With over 76 percent of its population chronically hungry, the DRC has
Overall Grade: E the worst hunger statistics in the world and is nowhere near meeting its hunger
Overall Rank: 28/28 MDGs.139 In fact, its hunger levels are increasing rather than diminishing, having
more than doubled since 1990. Acute malnutrition is endemic in some parts of
the country.140
Indicator Grade Comment

Hunger E Very high hunger levels. Hunger increasing While conflict in the DRC has officially ceased, violence - especially against women -
continues to plague the east of the country,141 where living conditions are exception-
Legal framework E No right to food legislation
ally poor. Agriculture and food security cannot thrive in such precarious conditions.
Smallholder agriculture E Very low budget to agriculture Despite abundant arable land suitable for farming, it is estimated that only 1-2 percent
Social protection E Negligible social protection has so far been cultivated.142 If this desperate situation is going to be turned around,
the government must make agriculture a priority, allocating it an adequate share of the
Gender equality D Low gender equality budget. Further, it must ensure that women have secure access to resources such as
land, credit, water, transport and markets.

AFRICA
More direct government intervention to protect its people from hunger is needed.
Food prices remain high and volatile in many areas, particularly as up to 95 percent of
food is imported,143 whilst Congo’s resource-based currency has slumped. Government
must invest more of its revenue gained from the mining sector to support small
farmers, and help to diversify the economy. While there is much land available to
Democratic Repubic of Congo cultivate, the DRC also has vast rainforests that must be sustained and protected
from threats, such as foreign investors who lease the land from the government, using
it to grow biofuels or disruptive export crops.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 42

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Ethiopia Remarks:

Ethiopia has already met the target of halving the proportion of hungry people
Leader: President Meles Zenawi
in the country from a massive 71 percent in 1990 to 44 percent in 2005, putting
Overall Score: 40/100 it at 10th place in the scorecard this year.
Overall Grade: D
Overall Rank: 10/28 However, undernourishment (around 40 percent), stunting (46.9 percent)144 and child-
underweight levels remain stubbornly high, resulting in Ethiopia being unlikely to meet
both of the 2015 MDG1 hunger goals.
Indicator Grade Comment
About 85 percent of Ethiopia’s population of approximately 80 million works in agricul-
Hunger C Very high hunger levels. ture145 and its economy is largely dependent on agricultural product exports and
Legal framework D No right to food legislation foreign aid (25 percent of the budget). The government allocates a significant portion
of its budget to agriculture, especially if the amount allocated locally is included.146
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture The increased expenditure in this sector over the past few years is beginning to pay
Social protection E Negligible social protection
off in increased production.

Gender equality B Medium gender equality The government responded to the food crisis and a drought with safety nets (its
Productive Safety Nets Program), subsidized food imports, and fertilizer imports.147
Launched in 2005, the PSNP provides subsidies for food and fertilizer imports, and
provides 7 million Ethiopians with food or cash.148 Yet 5.2 million Ethiopians will still
AFRICA require relief food assistance in 2010, despite these recent efforts to inject investment
in agriculture and collaborate with donors to provide social protection.149 Food price
inflation also remains too high.150 While the PSNP has staved off further hunger and
impoverishment, improvements in living standards have been too slow, and further
support is needed.151 The government must continue to boost its spending on
Ethiopia
agriculture.152

Gender equity remains a problem in the agricultural sector, with five times more men
than women owning land. Further, men’s plots are on average 56 percent larger than
women’s.153 The country’s legal framework protecting food rights also continues to be
inadequate.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 43

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: The Gambia Remarks:

The Gambia is way off track for meeting the MDG1 hunger goal; in fact it is
Leader: President Yahya Jammeh
going backwards at a worrying rate. Hunger in The Gambia has risen by
Overall Score: 28/100
almost 50 percent from 1990 – 2005, with 29 percent of the population now
Overall Grade: D
undernourished according to the FAO.164
Overall Rank: 24/28
With good weather conditions replacing the droughts of the last few years, 2009/10
cereal production was 51 percent higher than the previous five years.165 However,
Indicator Grade Comment
the country’s high import dependency (approximately 50 percent166) continues to
Hunger D High hunger levels. Hunger increasing hamper The Gambia’s food security, especially at times when the Dalasi is low.167
The reduction of budget allocation to agriculture to 3.4 percent in 2010 is disap-
Legal framework E No right to food legislation
pointing, particularly given the signing of The Gambia’s CAADP compact in late
Smallholder agriculture D Low budget to agriculture 2009 and The Gambia’s commitment to raise agricultural spending to ten percent.168
Social protection E Low social protection
It is hoped that the launch of The Gambia National Agricultural Investment Plan will
Gender equality D Medium gender equality give a boost to agriculture.169 Whilst The Gambia is keen to invite foreign investment
to its agriculture sector170 it must not forget to support its own small farmers who
make up 70-80 percent of the workforce in The Gambia, especially its women
farmers. 171 The investment plan also cannot substitute for an overarching and
operational agriculture strategy and policy, which is desperately needed to get the
AFRICA agriculture sector on its feet.

The Gambian government also needs to strengthen constitutional rights to food,

Gambia
and given its high rates of hunger, develop a much needed social protection policy
for the country.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 44

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Ghana Remarks:

Ghana has shown the possibilities for dramatic progress in tackling hunger
Leader: President John Atta Mills
and poverty. As far back as 1999, Ghana met the target for halving hunger; it is
Overall Score: 46/100
also the only country in Africa to halve poverty levels, meaning they have met
Overall Grade: C
all their MDG1 commitments way ahead of the 2015 deadline.172 Hunger levels
Overall Rank: 5/28 have dramatically reduced from over 30 percent of the population in 1990 to
only around 9 percent of the population.173

Indicator Grade Comment

Consistent agricultural growth and long term investment in agriculture, with a focus on
Hunger B Low hunger levels smallholder agriculture, have played an important role in the fight against hunger in
Ghana. So too have initiatives such as the school feeding programme.174 The country
Legal framework E No right to food legislation
is now committed to expanding the school feeding programme to cover over one
Smallholder agriculture D Low budget to agriculture million pupils by the end of 2010, while ensuring that local procurement for school
Social protection E Low social protection meals supports local farming communities.175 However, there are concerns that they
will miss the 2010 target.
Gender equality B Medium gender equality

In spite of this enviable progress, Ghana must not become complacent. There is the
need to support smallholder farmers in areas such as adaptation to climate change,
while increasing overall spending on smallholder agriculture.176 And pockets of hunger
AFRICA still exist, especially in the poorer northern regions.

Meanwhile, biofuel companies are grabbing up land in Ghana and threatening food
security, mainly in the poorer northern areas, where the greatest hunger already exists.
The government must tackle the issue of land to protect the rights of small holder
Ghana
farmers.177

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 45

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Guatemala Remarks:

Guatemala’s recent establishment of social protection schemes, along with its

Leader: President Álvaro Colom Caballeros
early introduction of right to food laws, has resulted in a relatively high scorecard
Overall Score: 42/100 ranking in 2009; ninth place. Their achievement of part of MDG 1 goal in halving
Overall Grade: C the number of underweight children154 by 2004 further boosts their score this year.
Overall Rank: 9/28
However, in recent years the hunger situation in Guatemala has got worse. Sixteen
percent of the population were hungry in 2006, up on the 1990 figure of 14 percent.
Indicator Grade Comment According to a recent survey155 the percentage of children under 5 years of age with
Hunger C Medium hunger levels. Hunger increasing
chronic malnutrition is 43.4 percent of whom 16.1 percent had acute malnutrition. The
years 2009 and 2010 have been particularly painful with drought causing famine in the
Legal framework A Right to food legislation enacted country’s ‘dry corridor’156 and leaving 350,000 families on the brink;157 whilst Hurricane
Smallholder agriculture E Very low budget to agriculture
Agatha, in May 2010, caused further widespread crop devastation.158 Guatemala still
has the fourth highest rate of chronic malnutrition in the world and the highest in Latin
Social protection D Low medium social protection America and the Caribbean.159
Gender equality B Medium gender equality
Hunger in Guatemala tends to be chronic, young, rural and indigenous160 with women
often bearing the brunt.161 Progressive social protection schemes like ‘Mi Familia
Progresa’, a cash transfer scheme for poor families, and the national school feeding
programme, currently reaching about 70 percent of schools, are going some of the
way to addressing historical inequalities. However, these need to be seriously scaled-
up to reach the most vulnerable indigenous communities.162 The possibility of scaling-
up social protection will require the implementation of redistributive tax policies.163
Guatemala
Guatemala needs a comprehensive rural development strategy, land reform and
investment in small-scale agriculture. Historical inequalities of land ownership remain,
leaving the rural, indigenous poor to struggle for access to productive resources
whilst labouring on low wages. Biofuel expansion and land-grabs further threaten
LATIN AMERICA availability of arable land for those who most need it.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 46

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Haiti Remarks:

In addition to the massive loss of life, the devastating earthquake that hit Haiti in
Leader: President René Préval
January 2010 further compounded the food insecurity crisis in the country.
Overall Score: 30/100
Approximately 69 percent of families living in large camps set up after the natural
Overall Grade: D
disaster suffer from food insecurity,178 along with around 58 percent of the rest of
Overall Rank: 20/28 the population.179 It is little wonder that Haiti languishes in 20th place on the
HungerFREE Scorecard and is not expected to meet the MDG deadlines. At current
rates, Haiti won’t halve hunger levels until 2064.
Indicator Grade Comment

Hunger D Very high hunger levels The worst of the high food prices crisis seems to have passed.180 However, rice, wheat
and beans are still predominantly imported, leaving Haiti’s food security vulnerable to
Legal framework D No right to food legislation
international price fluctuations and exchange rates.181
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture

Social protection D Low social protection The displacement of over 600,000 people from earthquake-affected areas has increased
the strain on rural households182, and affected the sustainability of agricultural prac-
Gender equality - No data tices183 already compromised by decades of neglect. Urgent steps must be taken to
get agriculture working again - such as land redistribution, and improved irrigation and
seed security - to support the 75 percent of the population who rely on agriculture for
their living.184 Sadly, the agriculture section of the Humanitarian Appeal is currently
only 40 percent funded,185 but the government’s increased budget allocation to
agriculture should represent some relief.
Haiti
The provision of food to nutritionally vulnerable people needs to be rapidly scaled up
through nutrition programmes, the expansion of food and cash-for-work activities,
and school feeding programmes.

LATIN AMERICA

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 47

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: India Remarks:

Around one quarter of the world’s population who are deprived of food live in
Leader: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
India.188 With the number of hungry people having increased between 1990 and
Overall Score: 30/100
2005 by about 53 million, it is predicted that India will not have halved hunger
Overall Grade: D
until 2083 - nearly 70 years after the MDG target date. The government estimates
Overall Rank: 21/28 that 43 percent of children under the age of five are malnourished.189 It is not sur-
prising, therefore, that India remains in 21st place on the HungerFREE Scorecard.

Indicator Grade Comment

The resurrection of the National Advisory Council (NAC) to design and implement
Hunger D High hunger levels the proposed National Food Security Act (NFSA) has provided fresh impetus in the
battle to combat this agrarian and malnutrition crisis. However, urgent reform of the
Legal framework C Right to food legislation in progress
Public Distribution System is needed190 to ensure food grains are equitably distributed
Smallholder agriculture D Very low budget to agriculture throughout the country. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, plagued by
Social protection C Medium social protection payment delays and penalties,191 also needs to be improved to ensure that those
supposed to benefit from it have better access to food.
Gender equality C Medium gender equality

Food prices have remained high in India and continue to rise192 due to constrained
supplies after last year's poor rains, the lowest in almost four decades.193 The
agricultural sector's growth is expected to continue to be negative in 2009-10.194
The budget allocation of 2.3 percent to agriculture is simply too low to revitalize the
agricultural sector.195 Massive long-term public investment is needed, particularly in
agricultural research, extension services196 and irrigation. Land reform would likewise
help to reduce hunger, since small and marginal farmers operating on less than 2
India hectares each constitute 84 percent of all farmers in the country.197 The government
must also stop promoting corporate ‘land grabs’, which are dispossessing traditional
resource-dependent communities from their livelihoods.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 48

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Kenya Remarks:

In recent years Kenya has suffered a series of severe food crises caused by a
Leader: President Mwai Kibaki
combination of drought, food price hikes and conflict. Despite recent minor
Overall Score: 37/100 reductions in overall hunger figures - due to rains returning late in 2009 - the
Overall Grade: D country remains miserably off track to meet its MDG 1 targets. For example, on
Overall Rank: 16/28 current trends it will not halve hunger until after 2124. In addition, nearly 4 million
Kenyans were still in need of food assistance in early 2010.

Indicator Grade Comment To sustain the recent drop in hunger, the government of Kenya urgently needs to
Hunger C High hunger levels
implement effective hunger policies198 and to address underlying problems, including a
lack of investment in agriculture, and a fragmented and contradictory legislative and
Legal framework D No right to food legislation policy framework.199 The draft National Food and Nutrition Policy must urgently be
Smallholder agriculture D Low budget to agriculture
finalised and approved by the cabinet.

Social protection D Low social protection More promisingly, a National Land Policy has been passed guaranteeing women
Gender equality D Medium gender equality
stronger land ownership rights and protecting community land interests.200 The new
constitution has also been successfully amended to strengthen women’s rights,201
including land rights and the right to food.202
AFRICA
Kenya is now signed up to the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Pro-
gramme (CAADP) agreement and aims to achieve 7 percent growth in the agricultural
sector over the next five years.203 But while the government claims to have doubled its
investment in agriculture in 2008 (to 8 percent of the national budget), there remain big
questions as to whether the budget is focusing on sustainable agriculture,204 and
Kenya concerning the divergent ministerial agendas which were included in the 8 percent
figure.205 The actual budget allocation to agriculture is estimated to be nearer to 3.6
percent.206 Increased funding to the ministry of water and irrigation will also not solely be
directed at agriculture, as it includes spending on urban and rural household water
supply systems.207

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 49

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Lesotho Remarks:

Ranking at a low 23rd in the scorecard, Lesotho’s food security situation has
Leader: Prime Minister Pakalitha Mosisili
worsened over the past years. The number of undernourished children under the
Overall Score: 28/100
age of five is on the rise (17 percent) and between 400,000 and 450,000 people
Overall Grade: D were estimated to require food aid at the beginning of 2010 – around a quarter of
Overall Rank: 23/28 the country’s population.212 Lesotho is not on track to meet its MDG commitments
on hunger.

Indicator Grade Comment

Food production in Lesotho has been shrinking for years due to erratic weather caus-
Hunger D Medium hunger levels. Hunger increasing ing prolonged dry spells, soil erosion and the expense of inputs for farmers; while HIV
has weakened farming communities in a country with one of the highest rates of
Legal framework E No right to food legislation
infection in the world (estimated at 22 percent).213 Falling maize production has resulted
Smallholder agriculture D Very low budget to agriculture in arable land remaining fallow: the FAO estimates half of the country's arable farmland
is lying idle.214 Reduced maize growing is exacerbating hunger as poor families are
Social protection E Low social protection
forced to purchase even more of their food needs – at a time when food prices are
Gender equality D Low gender equality also high and household income is falling.215 The country imports around 70 percent
of its food, making it particularly vulnerable to food and fuel price hikes.216

AFRICA With the majority of its 1.8 million people depending on farming, the country needs a
serious shake-up of food and agricultural policy. This year’s establishment of a cross-
departmental government taskforce to develop an investment programme for the agri-
culture sector, in collaboration with the World Bank, IFAD and FAO, promises to mobilise
resources to ensure long-term hunger eradication. However budget allocation to
agriculture remains exceptionally low at 2.2 percent.

Lesotho In 2010 the government reiterated its commitment to social protection for older people
and orphaned and vulnerable children, but overall social protection still remains very
modest in a country increasingly affected by hunger.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 50

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Liberia Remarks:

Liberia’s government is making serious efforts to combat long-term hunger

Leader: President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf
and poverty, reflected in its slightly higher ranking, 18th place, this year.
Overall Score: 30/100
Overall Grade: D With 70 percent of Liberians relying upon agriculture for their livelihoods, it is positive
Overall Rank: 18/28 that agricultural development is at the heart of the country’s Poverty Reduction Strategy.
Government pledges to raise agricultural production have already increased rice
production from 85,000 metric tons in 2006 to over 200,000 in 2009, leading to the
Indicator Grade Comment World Food Programme for the first time purchasing local rice for its school feeding
program.208 However given the country’s fertile lands more is possible and the
Hunger D Very high hunger levels. Hunger increasing
government must increase budget allocations to agriculture, currently at just 2.2 percent,
Legal framework D No right to food legislation to achieve further impact.
Smallholder agriculture D Very low budget to agriculture
A zero-tolerance policy on corruption, restarting of industry and increased inward
Social protection E Low social protection investment are also greatly welcomed, as are land reforms which give Liberians
greater confidence to plant and invest in previously disputed lands. But although
Gender equality C Medium gender equality
legislation grants equal ownership rights to men and women, implementation has
been slow and discrimination persists.209

AFRICA Liberia remains one of the world’s poorest countries.210 The protracted civil war
destroyed agricultural systems and livelihoods. Today high unemployment prevails
and although the proportion of people facing hunger has dipped slightly to 38 percent,
at current rates it will be 2028 before Liberia can halve the number of underweight
children under the age of five.211 The government must ensure that exploitation of natural
Liberia resources and agricultural development benefits all Liberians, not only investors.

ActionAid especially hopes to see increased support to smallholder farmers to improve

their access to resources, reliable markets, processing facilities and marketing struc-
tures. Social protection programmes to prevent malnutrition and further emergency
safety net distributions are also needed.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 51

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Malawi Remarks:

Malawi has been repeatedly heralded as a success story for its remarkable
Leader: President Bingu wa Mutharika
progress in tackling hunger. It met the MDG target of halving hunger in 2009217
Overall Score: 47/100
and is on track to halve child malnutrition by 2013. For a country working its way
Overall Grade: C
out of crippling hunger and poverty, this is a remarkable record and sees Malawi
Overall Rank: 4/28 ranked at number four in this year’s HungerFREE Scorecard.

The number of people requiring food aid has been reduced from over 4.5 million in
Indicator Grade Comment
2004 to less than 150,000 in 2009.218 This progress has been made possible through
Hunger C Very high hunger levels strong political will and effective strategies for tackling hunger.
Legal framework C Right to food legislation in progress
The government allocated 11 percent of its 2010-2011 budget to agriculture, bettering
Smallholder agriculture B High budget to agriculture the 10 percent target set by the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development
Social protection E Low social protection Programme (CAADP).219 It has developed further plans to build sustainable farming
practices in the 2010 budget, with provision made to irrigate up to one million
Gender equality C Medium gender equality hectares along Malawi’s rivers and lakes.220

AFRICA Malawi has also been developing a Right to Food Bill, which is now ready to go to
cabinet for adoption. However, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security needs to
champion this critical bill more forcefully to ensure that it is swiftly approved by cabinet,
so that the right to food is guaranteed for future generations.

Sadly, amidst all these successes, localised food shortages have been experienced
Malawi this year. While the government has well-stocked grain reserves thanks to surplus
production, it still faces challenges in distribution.221

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 52

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Mozambique Remarks:

Mozambique has been doing consistently well for years in tackling hunger and
Leader: President Armando Guebuza
poverty. According to FAO estimates, it met the MDG target to halve hunger in
Overall Score: 42/100 2009. However, reducing child malnutrition is proving more difficult: it is not
Overall Grade: C expected to reach the MDG target until 2029.222
Overall Rank: 7/28
In response to rapidly rising prices during the food crisis, the government introduced
a plan to increase agricultural production between 2008 and 2011 to reduce Mozam-
Indicator Grade Comment
bique’s future vulnerability. It has increased investment to fund this vision, this year
Hunger C Very high hunger levels committing 10 percent of the budget to agriculture (in line with the Comprehensive
Africa Agriculture Development Programme’s (CAADP) target).223
Legal framework D Right to food legislation in progress

Smallholder agriculture D Medium budget to agriculture Food production grew by about 11 percent in 2009224 and 2010225. Given the importance
of the agricultural sector in Mozambique, this has been a major driver for overall
Social protection E Low social protection
economic growth.226
Gender equality C Medium gender equality
Investment in irrigation still needs to be improved, however: only one percent of the
country’s arable land is irrigated.227
AFRICA
Meanwhile, the social protection strategy is being expanded to reach more than the
current 150,000 people – a vital step, with over half of its 22 million people living below
the poverty line.228

A draft bill on the Right to Adequate Food is due to be submitted to the government
Mozambique for approval by the end of 2010. The right to food has also been placed at the centre
of the National Food and Nutrition Security Strategy for 2008-2015.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 53

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Nepal Remarks:

Although it is one of the poorest countries in the world, Nepal has made some
Leader: Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal
progress since 1990 in reducing the proportion of its population who are under-
Overall Score: 38/100
nourished - resulting in its promotion to 14th place in this year’s HungerFREE
Overall Grade: D
Scorecard. However, it is still not on track to meet all the MDGs: it is not expected
Overall Rank: 14/28
to halve the number of underweight children until 2051.

Indicator Grade Comment In 2006, Nepal emerged from a decade of armed conflict. Ongoing political insecurity
affects every sector of Nepali society, including agriculture.229 Moreover, changing
Hunger C Medium hunger levels
weather patterns230 - expected to cause more frequent droughts - are leaving farmers
Legal framework D No right to food legislation with reduced yields, increased debt and an inability to properly feed themselves.231
Hunger is concentrated in the Far and Mid-Western Hill and Mountain Regions.232
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture

Social protection E Low social protection Investment in agriculture must be boosted and small-scale farmers need to be
Gender equality D Medium gender equality supported with subsidized inputs and extension services, for example. The constitution
- once it is finalized - is likely to affirm the human right to food and livelihoods.

Inequalities of caste and gender need to be reversed. Women’s ownership of land,

necessary for family food security, currently stands at a dismal 10.8 percent.233 The
announcement of an ‘Employment Guarantee Programme’ to address the needs of the
ASIA
poor is a progressive step – but legislation has been stalled. The old-age allowance
programme, although universal in principle, needs to expand its reach in practice.
Nepal

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 54

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Nigeria Remarks:

Nigeria ranks 13th on HungerFREE’s developing country scorecard - but for a

Leader: President Goodluck Jonathan
country endowed with such rich and fertile soils and Africa's largest oil reserves,
Overall Score: 38/100
it should be doing much better. It continues to struggle to feed its 140 million
Overall Grade: D
people,234 while 26 percent of its children are malnourished. Shockingly, Nigeria is
Overall Rank: 13/28 not expected to meet the MDG target to halve child malnutrition until 2025.

Nigeria’s investment in agriculture has been low for decades. But the food crisis
Indicator Grade Comment
acted as an impetus for the government to commit to reinvesting in agriculture and
Hunger C Low hunger levels meeting the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme’s (CAADP)
target of 10 percent of national budgets going to the agricultural sector.235 However,
Legal framework D No right to food legislation
after raising the agriculture budget last year, the government slashed spending on
Smallholder agriculture D Low budget to agriculture agriculture in the 2010 budget, reducing it to a paltry 3.6 percent of the total.236
Social protection E Negligible social protection
What little money is going to agriculture remains poorly targeted, with only 13 percent
Gender equality B Medium gender equality of all land irrigated and very few extension services available. Nigeria has boundless
agricultural potential, with more than half the country's arable land lying fallow.237
The irony is that Nigeria imports large amounts of its basic food needs, while it could
potentially grow enough to be self-sufficient.
AFRICA
Nigeria must also take steps towards tackling child malnutrition levels by introducing
more social protection schemes. At present it has a small cash transfer scheme
which could go much further to cushion the worst impacts of the global economic
Nigeria
crisis.238

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 55

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Pakistan Remarks:

Widespread food deficits and sharply rising prices have seen an estimated 17 million
Leader: Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani
more people join the ranks of the 60 million Pakistanis who are already food insecure
Overall Score: 26/100
– adding up to almost half of the country’s population.239 With national food prices
Overall Grade: D
still significantly higher than the pre-2008 food-crisis levels, and with the recent
Overall Rank: 25/28 catastrophic floods destroying millions of hectares of crops, Pakistan’s food situation
continues to look desperate. It sits in 25th place on the HungerFREE Scorecard.

Indicator Grade Comment

Unequal land distribution is a major contributing factor to hunger in Pakistan,240 with only
Hunger D High hunger levels. Hunger increasing 50 percent of farmers owning their farms.241 Initiatives such as the Sindh Province’s com-
mitment to distribute land to 80,000 poor and landless peasants242 - especially women -
Legal framework D No right to food legislation
represent a major step in the right direction. However, such programmes must be scaled
Smallholder agriculture E Very low budget to agriculture up and replicated in other provinces. Civil society has had to fight the government’s
Social protection E Low social protection corporate agriculture farming policy, which could have seen 9.14 million hectares of land
going to corporations instead of the landless who need it most.
Gender equality D Medium gender equality

The government allocates a miniscule 1.6 percent of its budget to agriculture, despite most
of the rural population relying on it for their livelihoods.243 Farmers can only hope that the
Task Force on Agricultural Reforms, set up in June 2010, will take the country closer to an
agricultural policy that will enhance future food security for Pakistan’s hungry.244

The country is desperately in need of a comprehensive system of social protection. With

the exception of the Benazir Income Support Programme - whose budget was doubled for
Pakistan 2009-2010 with the aim of reaching 5.5 million families245 - Pakistan’s social security system
is piecemeal and comprises of small pilot initiatives.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 56

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Rwanda Remarks:

Through strong government commitment to agriculture and new social protection

Leader: President Paul Kagame
schemes, Rwanda has made impressive progress in a short space of time in
Overall Score: 39/100
reducing levels of hunger and poverty. For example, it is set to meet the MDG
Overall Grade: D
target to halve child malnutrition just one year after the 2015 deadline - way
Overall Rank: 11/28 ahead of many ‘wealthier’ nations.

The green shoots of agricultural recovery are thanks to increased investment in agri-
Indicator Grade Comment
culture, which rose by 30 percent between 2007 and 2009.246 Consequently, the country
Hunger C Very high hunger levels has seen a 15 percent rise in agricultural production in 2008 and 2009,247 with yields
doubling in maize.248 This has led to sharp decreases in food insecurity and strong
Legal framework D Right to food legislation in progress
economic growth – even amidst the economic crisis hitting other sectors, such as
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture mining.249
Social protection E Negligible social protection
This progress was made possible by a new government policy which supports
Gender equality D Medium gender equality smallholders with crucial farming tools and seeds, while expanding irrigation250 and
supporting environmentally sustainable production methods to tackle the endemic
problems of soil erosion in the country.
AFRICA
As one of the world's most densely populated landlocked countries, and with the vast
majority of agriculture taking place on eroding hillside soil, these steps have been vital
to Rwandan progress. It is this progress which has seen Rwanda climb-up Hunger-
FREE’s scorecard rankings this year to 11th place. However, there’s still a long way to
Rwanda
go for this country emerging from civil war and desperate poverty levels, and even
greater levels of investment will be necessary to build on these gains.251

Meanwhile, a new pension scheme and public works programme are set to reduce
poverty even further. The public works programme will offer those living in poverty
guaranteed employment of 100 days annually.252

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 57

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Senegal Remarks:

The reduction in the proportion of hungry people in Senegal is nowhere near

Leader: President Abdoulaye Wade
what is needed to meet the 2015 halving hunger target, with current projections
Overall Score: 36/100
indicating Senegal won’t meet the goal until 2060.
Overall Grade: D
Overall Rank: 17/28 Senegal was one of the countries hardest hit by the food prices crisis in 2008 (experi-
encing a 112 percent price surge), due to the fact that it imported nearly 80 percent of
its rice.253 President Wade responded by announcing price controls on grains and
Indicator Grade Comment
subsidies for staple food. He also launched an ambitious agricultural plan: the Great
Hunger C High hunger levels Offensive for Food and Abundance (GOANA). It aims to make Senegal self-sufficient in
rice and other staples by 2015 through irrigating and cultivating unused land near the
Legal framework E No right to food legislation
Senegal River,254 and by heavily subsidising the cost of fertiliser, seeds and pesticides.
Smallholder agriculture C Low budget to agriculture

Social protection E Low social protection This, along with favourable weather conditions, has contributed to an increase in
production for two consecutive years.255 Although this is a move in the right direction,
Gender equality C Medium gender equality only 5 percent of budget is allocated to agriculture; much more could be done if this
was increased. The GOANA project has also been criticised for primarily benefiting
companies.

Access to land is also a major concern for smaller farmers, with some 350,000 hectares
AFRICA
having been assigned for the production of biofuels256 and the prospect of overseas
investment companies buying huge swathes of land, in order to produce crops for their
Senegal domestic markets.257

A lack of social protection measures and legal protection for the right to food are areas
which Senegal must also now tackle if it is to turn around its desperate hunger situation
and lift itself above eighteenth place in the HungerFREE Scorecard.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 58

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Sierra Leone Remarks:

Still recovering from its 10-year civil war, about 29 percent of the population in
Leader: President Ernest Bai Koroma
Sierra Leone remains hungry.258 The rate of underweight children (under 5 years
Overall Score: 25/100 old) is 31 percent and rising.259 With overall hunger rising too, it is slipping further
Overall Grade: D and further away from the MDG1 Hunger target. Sierra Leone this year moves
Overall Rank: 26/28 even further down the HungerFREE Scorecard to 26th place.

Sierra Leone is still a net rice importer,260 with imports accounting for around 40 percent
Indicator Grade Comment of food needs.261 However, prospects for farmers are looking up. Sierra Leone has
signed its Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP)
Hunger E Very high hunger levels. Hunger increasing
compact and launched the National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan
Legal framework E No right to food legislation (NSADP), which aims to eradicate poverty and increase economic growth through
agriculture-based development.262 A Presidential Task Force has also been formed to
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture
supervise the implementation of CAADP in Sierra Leone.263
Social protection E Low social protection
The government has allocated 9.9 percent of its budget to agriculture for 2010.
Gender equality C Medium gender equality
However, as not all of this was spent on agricultural programmes, others suggest that
around 7.1 percent was spent on ‘core’ agricultural activities.264 Additional contributions
from international donors and the Global Agriculture and Food Security Programme
should help to transform rural communities and to support small-scale farmers.265
AFRICA
The government’s review of its land policy is a welcome step.266 With around 1.5 million
hectares of land currently being negotiated in various parts of the country for lease to
foreign investors,267 it is critical that the review process is not delayed.
Sierra Leone
Ongoing weaknesses include the lack of extension services for small farmers.268 Sierra
Leone also has little in the way of welfare schemes to assist those going hungry. Social
protection is limited to small or pilot programmes (such as the Social Safety Net
Programme), and it must urgently complete its draft policy for social protection.269

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 59

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: South Africa Remarks:

Far from meeting MDG targets to halve hunger by 2015, hunger levels are
Leader: President Jacob Zuma
increasing in South Africa. National surveys show that up to 18 percent of South
Overall Score: 29/100
African children live in households where hunger is reported.270 This is simply
Overall Grade: D
unacceptable in a country of such relative wealth. The country ranks 22nd in the
Overall Rank: 22/28 HungerFREE Scorecard.

South Africa’s package of social welfare policies – including pensions and child support
Indicator Grade Comment
grants – needs to be complemented with greater support for agriculture. Some
Hunger E Low hunger levels tentative steps have recently been taken.271 In the last two years, the government has
begun to increase spending in rural economies and has shifted the agricultural policy’s
Legal framework D No right to food legislation
focus to the needs of poor smallholders.
Smallholder agriculture D Very low budget to agriculture

Social protection C Medium social protection Additional funding has been committed to some of the areas with the highest concen-
tration of poverty - mostly in the former apartheid ‘homelands’, where 60 percent of
Gender equality D Medium gender equality today’s rural population live. This is a significant step towards tackling poverty and
hunger in rural areas.272

However, there is still a long way to go before budget support to smallholder farmers
can be described as adequate. Also extremes of land distribution inequality continue
AFRICA
to perpetuate extreme levels of poverty. This issue needs to be addressed.

With the country still feeling the pinch from the global financial crisis and with food
prices rising sharply in 2010,273 South Africa must urgently take stock of its agricultural
policies and place the sector as a central pillar in the fight against poverty and hunger.
South Africa

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 60

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Tanzania Remarks:

With 44 percent of its population undernourished Tanzania is wildly off track to

Leader: President Jakaya Kikwete
meet the MDG goal of halving hunger, putting the country in 15th place in the
Overall Score: 37/100
HungerFREE Scorecard. Nearly one in four children under five is underweight.
Overall Grade: D
Overall Rank: 15/28 In August 2009 the government introduced the Kilimo Kwanza (Agriculture First)
policy that outlines strategies for the transformation of the country’s agricultural
production into a modern and commercial sector by 2015. Its ambition is to enhance
Indicator Grade Comment
agricultural production in order to increase household incomes and food security
Hunger C Very high hunger levels. Hunger increasing for the 80 percent of the population which depend on agriculture for their livelihood.274
The government needs to ensure that the policy and legal environment remain
Legal framework E No right to food legislation
supportive of Kilimo Kwanza regardless of the outcome of the elections in October
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture 2010.
Social protection E Negligible social protection
It is critical that strategies which are being introduced to enhance agricultural
Gender equality C Medium gender equality production and commercialize the sector do not undermine the effective implemen-
tation of other policies such as the Village Land Act of 1999, aimed at ensuring that
AFRICA poor rural communities have secure ownership to land.

The promotion of biofuel production has attracted a large number of investors who
have acquired large tracts of land suitable for production of food crops. The Tanzania
investment centre has identified about 2.5 million hectares of land as ‘suitable’ for
investment projects and by 2009 almost 640,000 hectares had been allocated for
Tanzania
biofuel production.275 But these investments must be judged on their food security
and human rights merits. Tanzania needs to put in place a policy and legal framework
to regulate these investments to protect the interests of the people who currently
depend on earmarked lands for their livelihoods.276

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 61

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Uganda Remarks:

Uganda ranks eighth in the HungerFREE Scorecard, in recognition of the fact

Leader: President Yoweri Museveni
that Uganda has come some way to reducing hunger since the MDGs baseline
Overall Score: 42/100 year of 1990. However, progress has not been enough and despite rapid
Overall Grade: C economic growth many Ugandans are yet to see the benefits. In 2009 37 percent
Overall Rank: 8/28 of households surveyed were not able to provide enough food for themselves
at some point in the year,277 with government figures estimating that 17.7 million
were food insecure in 2007, up from 12 million in 2002.278 Women are especially
Indicator Grade Comment affected – a massive 69 percent of female-headed households are hungry.279
Hunger C Medium hunger levels Child stunting has declined, but still affects over a quarter of all children under
five.280 Climate change, conflict and a lack of agricultural support have left
Legal framework C Right to food legislation in progress areas in the North and North-East of the country severely food insecure.281
Smallholder agriculture D Medium budget to agriculture Uganda’s developing but still very weak social protection programmes need to
be scaled-up to address these emergencies.
Social protection E Negligible social protection

Gender equality C Medium gender equality Whilst agriculture employs 73 percent282 of the population283 (83 percent women) agri-
cultural budgets have remained low for decades and growth in agricultural output has
declined from 7.9 percent in 2000/01 to 0.7 percent in 2007/08.284 Despite the govern-
ment’s commitment to allocating 10 percent of the national budget to agriculture, and
AFRICA its growing recognition of agriculture’s role in poverty reduction recently agreed five-
year expenditure plans allocate only between 4.6 - 6.6 percent to the sector. Yet if
Uganda was to achieve the 6 percent growth in target set by CAADP, an additional 2.9
million people would be lifted above the poverty line by 2015. But to do so, Uganda
needs to nearly triple its present agricultural growth rate.
Uganda
Agricultural programmes must also reach smallholder and subsistence farmers and
avoid perpetuating the discrimination of these groups, especially given the ongoing
climate change challenges facing these farmers. Uganda must also ensure that
revenues from its emerging oil production are invested in food and agriculture programs,
and that regional mineral trade and conflict does not destabilize the region.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 62

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Vietnam Remarks:

Vietnam claims a well-earned 3rd place on the HungerFREE Scorecard, having

Leader: Prime Minister Nguyễn Tấn Dũng
progressed in leaps and bounds in tackling hunger and poverty. It met the
Overall Score: 51/100
MDG target of halving hunger in 2004 and halved the number of underweight
Overall Grade: C
children in 2007 – years ahead of the global 2015 target. Progress on tackling
Overall Rank: 3/28
underweight in children has been particularly remarkable, with rates plummeting
from close to 45 percent in the early 1990s to fewer than 20 percent today.286
Indicator Grade Comment
Poverty reduction rates have been equally impressive, falling from around 60 percent
Hunger B Medium hunger levels
in the early 1990s287 to a predicted 10 percent this year.288 This represents more than a
Legal framework E No right to food legislation three-quarter drop in poverty levels in just over 15 years.
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture
Much of Vietnam’s economic success has been driven by a flourishing smallholder
Social protection E Low social protection rural sector, whose origins can be traced back to the ‘Doi Moi’ reform process started
Gender equality C Medium gender equality in 1986. Through equitable land redistribution and huge government support for
smallholder farmers, it has made a significant impact on overall poverty reduction
levels.289 The government has rolled out a number of schemes that focus on extreme
ASIA poverty in poor households, while introducing favourable credit schemes for farmers
and establishing a strong system of extension services.290

Vietnam has weathered the global financial crisis surprisingly well, through a mix of
pre-existing policies and a ‘pro-poor’ stimulus package. New measures introduced
Vietnam include cash transfers to low income households, increased unemployment coverage
and the protection of migrant workers who have lost their jobs, as well as ongoing
support to agriculture.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 63

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Zambia Remarks:

The number of hungry people in Zambia is on the increase, and it is impossible

Leader: President Rupiah Banda
to say when the country will reach the MDG 1 target of halving extreme hunger.
Overall Score: 30/100
Nor is Zambia scheduled to meet the target to halve the number of underweight
Overall Grade: D
children until 2027. Zambia therefore takes a disappointing 19th place in the
Overall Rank: 19/28
HungerFREE Scorecard.

Indicator Grade Comment The Zambian government needs to put in place a number of new policies in order to
tackle this growing hunger. First and foremost, they must detail a long term plan to
Hunger D Very high hunger levels. Hunger increasing
increase budgets to meet their CAADP commitment, which they signed this year, and
Legal framework E No right to food legislation focus investment on smallholders. Zambia has very low extension coverage to support
smallholder farmers and needs to move beyond subsidies towards a package of support
Smallholder agriculture C Medium budget to agriculture
to enable them to grow more. With 70 percent of population involved in smallholder
Social protection E Negligible social protection farming, this investment could boost the economy as well as reverse hunger trends.291
Gender equality D Low gender equality
The Zambian government also needs to put in place more social protection measures.
Coverage of social protection is very low, especially for a country with such high levels
AFRICA
of hunger.

A comprehensive, national hunger eradication strategy is also needed to create

coherent initiatives across all ministries responsible for nutritional support, social
protection and agriculture. Meanwhile, the rejection of the inclusion of the right to
Zambia food in its new constitution needs to be re-thought – a move which would have
guaranteed greater political will and policies to deliver on hunger eradication. Zambia
could do well to look to their neighbours in Malawi, who mustered the political will –
even with a low-resource base – to drastically reduce hunger.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 64

Section 2 - HungerFREE scorecards: Developed countries

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 65

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Australia Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister Julia Gillard
Australia continues to lag behind in the fight to end global poverty and hunger.
Overall Score (Aid): 46/100
Despite a commitment to raise aid levels to 0.5 percent of Gross National
Overall Grade (Aid): C
Income by 2015-16, the government has failed to set a clear timeline to reach
Overall Rank (Aid): 8 / 23
the internationally agreed 0.7 percent target.
Overall Score (policy): 42/100
Overall Grade (policy): C
Australia is also struggling to develop a credible climate policy and remains one of the
Overall Rank (policy): 7/23
world’s worst carbon polluters per head of population. The government’s commitment
to a binding target of 4 percent reduction of carbon emissions by 2020 against 1990
Indicator Grade Comment levels falls far short of the targets of comparable developed countries and will do little
Aid to agriculture B Low but new money pledged to halt dangerous climate change that will severely undermine food security in the
world’s poorest communities. Australia must commit to cutting carbon emissions by
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection
40 percent by 2020 against 1990 levels. The country must also pay its fair share of
Gender-targeted aid C Low-medium gender-targeting climate adaptation in developing countries, estimated at $5.7 billion by 2020 - over
Sustainable agriculture A Low biofuels target and above existing aid commitments.

Climate change E Bad climate performer

To its credit, Australia was one of a small number of countries to commit additional
funds to agriculture to help address the global food crisis as part of the L’Aquila food
security initiative. It is hoped that this is a sign of Australia committing to raise its
agricultural aid from its currently low fair share levels.

Australia’s resistance to the so-called Robin Hood Tax is highly regrettable. The tiny
tax on global financial market transactions could provide billions towards additional
Australia overseas aid and climate change adaptation programs. Australia’s delegation at the
most recent G8/G20 meeting in Toronto played a key role in removing the tax from the
meeting’s agenda.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 66

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Denmark Remarks:

Leader: Lars Løkke Rasmussen For years Denmark has helped set international standards on aid giving by
Overall Score (Aid): 37/100 contributing more than 0.7 percent of its GNI in aid. Disappointingly, this year
Overall Grade (Aid): D the Danish government froze aid levels leading to a projected drop from 0.88
Overall Rank (Aid): 14/23 percent in 2009 to 0.76 percent in 2013, undermining the previous political
Overall Score (policy): 53/100 consensus to maintain aid levels above 0.8 percent.
Overall Grade (policy): C
Overall Rank (policy): 2/23 Denmark is at a crossroads in terms of its efforts to fight hunger. The country is not a
signatory to the 2009 L’Aquila initiative to fund agriculture and does not have a specific
Indicator Grade Comment strategy on the role of food security in development. There is an opportunity for the
government to make agriculture a key focus for its emerging strategies on private
Aid to agriculture C High but no new money pledged
sector growth and employment in poor countries, but it remains to be seen whether
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection the result will favour big agri-business and export-oriented initiatives rather than
smallholder farmers, local food security initiatives and sustainable agriculture practices.
Gender-targeted aid D Low gender-targeting

Sustainable agriculture A Low biofuels target Initially it appeared that Denmark might lead the way on finding other renewable energy
Climate change D Bad climate performer sources other than biofuels, as a source of clean energy. However it now seems that
Denmark may be going for high biofuel targets in the transport sector.

Failure to reach a binding agreement at COP15 has caused Denmark to lay low on
climate change policies in 2010. However, in late September the Danish climate
Denmark commission will provide input to a new climate change strategy. Denmark continues
to count climate adaptation funds within Overseas Development Aid - ignoring the
necessity for new and additional funds to tackle the climate challenge.

Denmark could also use its leadership in fighting for gender equality (including their
high profile global campaign running up to the MDG summit) to bring attention to the
need for investment to overcome persistent economic discrimination against women
farmers.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 67

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: France Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister Bruno Le Maire The French government scores relatively well on the HungerFREE Scorecard,
Overall Score (Aid): 50/100 reflecting the attention that it has given to food and agriculture during, and in
Overall Grade (Aid): C the wake of, the food crisis. Having championed a new global governance for
Overall Rank (Aid): 2/23 food and agriculture, and promoted ambitious reform of the FAO Committee
Overall Score (policy): 37/100 for Food Security, President Sarkozy has since been calling for the regulation
Overall Grade (policy): D of investment in agriculture to prevent land grabbing. The French presidency
Overall Rank (policy): 12/23 of the G20 and G8 will be an occasion for France to push for global regulation
of food commodity markets, but it is still to be seen how much President
Sarkozy will show leadership on food and hunger - and in particular if it will
Indicator Grade Comment use the opportunity to push for the delivery of the L’Aquila $20 billion.
Aid to agriculture B Medium and new money pledged
France scores highly on the ODA ranking. It is giving 44 percent of its fair share of
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection ODA to agriculture – but still needs to double this to be giving what the UN estimates
Gender-targeted aid D Low gender-targeting
is needed. France has also given new money to agriculture through L’Aquila, a welcome
commitment to tackling agriculture and food security in poor countries, however
Sustainable agriculture D High biofuels target France’s contribution could be much more substantial. France must do a lot more to
target its aid at women.
Climate change C Not doing enough on climate

France’s record in terms of policies that exacerbate hunger is not so great. France
scores well on climate because it is making some progress towards reducing emissions
in comparison to others. However, all donors in reality score poorly on climate change
– and more action and finance is needed across the board. France’s policy on land
grabs also shows contradictions. Whilst Agriculture Minister Bruno Mayor denounces
the ‘predatory’ actions of land grabbers in the South, the French government is
France
aggressively supporting high biofuels consumption in Europe, which is leading to vast
tracts of land being bought up in the South.

President Sarkozy is also defending in particular the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy
which destabilizes agricultural production in developing countries. Hungry women and
men famers in the South can’t eat on France’s fine words: they require real and concrete
changes in its agricultural and food policies.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 68

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Greece Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister George Papandreou
Greece is currently immersed in a deep economic and financial crisis and the
Overall Score (Aid): 13/100
unfortunate consequence of the political discourse being highly focused on
Overall Grade (Aid): E
domestic fiscal and social issues is that global hunger and poverty are being
Overall Rank (Aid): 21/23
even further de-prioritised. Aid figures have been severely cut and Greece is
Overall Score (policy): 37/100
going backwards in terms of its ODA targets. Aid in constant terms in 2009
Overall Grade (policy): D
decreased by 12 percent compared to 2008 due to the contraction of the
Overall Rank (policy): 13/23
national economy and now sits at a very low 0.19 percent of GDP in 2009.

Indicator Grade Comment

Despite the government’s commitments to make aid more efficient and effective,
Aid to agriculture E Negligible and no new money pledged there haven’t been any changes yet to Greek development practices. Greece only
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection gives 13 percent of its fair share of aid to agriculture and food security and is not
coordinating with other donors in this area, hence its very poor score in this area.
Gender-targeted aid B Medium gender-targeting

Sustainable agriculture D High biofuels target In 2010, a committee was established to consider how Greece will meet its EU 2020
Climate change D Bad climate performer renewable energy targets. Unfortunately, Greece has set higher biofuels targets than
hoped: the use of biofuels in transport is expected to rise from 1.4 percent in 2007 to
5.75 percent in 2010. With slow emissions reductions- and a zero fair share contribution
to the finance needed for developing countries to adapt to climate change – Greece
has a long way to go to become a serious stakeholder in the global efforts to resolve
climate change and its devastating impacts.

Greece urgently needs to revise its development policies and establish transparent
Greece
mechanisms to ensure that even its reduced contribution supports the poorest people
in the poorest countries. It is more urgent than ever to re-evaluate the allocation of
funds so as to keep its commitment in the fight against hunger.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 69

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Ireland Remarks:

Leader: Taoiseach Brian Cowen Ireland remains a vocal champion of hunger eradication driven by its prioritization
Overall Score (Aid): 41/100 of the issue nationally. Ireland’s political commitment to the issue of food and
Overall Grade (Aid): C hunger has helped steer the global response in the wake of the food price crisis.
Overall Rank (Aid): 10/23
Overall Score (policy): 36/100 In the wake of the financial crisis which hit Ireland badly, the country has decreased
its aid in 2009 to €718, down from €921 in 2008. This means that Ireland now gives
Overall Grade (policy): D
0.54% of its gross national income (GNI) as overseas development assistance (ODA).
Overall Rank (policy): 15/23 Ireland has also pushed back its deadline for meeting its 0.7% ODA commitment from
2012 to 2015.
Indicator Grade Comment
Ireland gives around half of its fair share contribution to the global amount needed to
Aid to agriculture C Medium and no new money pledged fund agriculture and food security in poor countries, but has not given new money to
agriculture via the L’Aquila Initiative launched in 2009. Ireland is the second highest
Aid to social protection D Low aid to social protection
donor to social protection – an area that is seriously underfunded by other donors –
Gender-targeted aid D Low gender-targeting but this is still a low amount of around 25 percent of its fair share. Ireland is committed
to using the OECD DAC gender marker for its ODA allocations, however this reveals
Sustainable agriculture B Medium biofuels target that only a very small proportion of aid is targeted towards women and gender priorities.
Climate change D Bad climate performer
Ireland scores less well on the areas that are having negative impacts on hunger. It
has now set a target to increase biofuel consumption in transport to 4% despite
warnings of its effects on global hunger.

In 2009, Ireland’s carbon emissions were down by around 15%, however this was
mainly due to the financial and economic crises and emissions will go up again once
Ireland economic activity picks up. Indeed, Ireland is performing very poorly on reducing
emissions against the 40 percent emissions reductions needed to tackle climate
change. Ireland likewise needs to take a more proactive role globally and contribute
more financially towards climate mitigation. A report published by the Irish Department
of Energy and Climate Change in 2010 also called on the European Union to recognise
carbon dioxide absorbed by forests as part of the climate change emission reduction
directive. This would lessen the pressure of EU member states to seriously tackle their
carbon emissions.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 70

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Italy Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi The problem of Italy’s persistently low aid levels is well known. In 2009 Italy
Overall Score (Aid): 19/100 occupies the penultimate position among donors, falling to 0.16 percent of
Overall Grade (Aid): E GNI given as ODA, while in 2008 it was at 0.22 percent. Hence, although the
Overall Rank (Aid): 18/23 Government reports that in 2009 the best funded MDG was MDG 1 with 25
Overall Score (policy): 29/100 percent of its total aid, this is almost irrelevant in terms of absolute value.
Overall Grade (policy): D
Overall Rank (policy): 10/23 In April 2010 the Government produced draft guidelines for the implementation of
MDG 1, focusing mainly on the fight against poverty in general rather than specifically
Indicator Grade Comment on hunger. It was very colloquial on the definition of poverty, parameters, etc. and
failed to fix clear objectives and targets in terms of reducing hunger and malnutrition.
Aid to agriculture D Negligible and no new money pledged

Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection Last year Italy hosted the G8 summit at L’Aquila where a major commitment in terms
of fighting hunger was made: with the Aquila Food Initiative donors pledged US$22
Gender-targeted aid E Negligible gender-targeting
billion in the next 3 years for food security. Nevertheless despite the strong declara-
Sustainable agriculture C High biofuels target tion of intents of its Prime Minister, Italy responded with only US$428 million for the
Climate change D Bad climate performer next three years out of which only US$180 million was new money. This is actually
less than what is usually budgeted for food security initiatives.

Italy is also hosting the UN food agencies; it therefore should play an important role in
addressing the issue of hunger and in defining the new global architecture around
food, including with financial contributions.

Italy has established its National Plan in accordance with the European Renewable
Italy Energy Directive (RED). The targets set by the plan will slightly increase the minimum
use of biofuels in the transport sector to 3.5 percent by 2010, and 4 percent 2011 and
4.5 percent by 2012. The National Plan does not include sustainability criteria nor any
reference to the inclusion of Indirect Land Use Change in impact assessments.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 71

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Netherlands Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende
The Netherlands, a generous donor which gives 0.8 percent of Dutch GNI in
Overall Score (Aid): 40/100 aid, sits in the top half of the HungerFREE Scorecard on ODA. The Netherlands
Overall Grade (Aid): D invests an average of 7.7 percent of its ODA budget to agriculture - more than
Overall Rank (Aid): 12/ 23 the average in the EU – but this can be further increased to bring The Nether-
Overall Score (policy): 42/100 lands up to its fair share of the global need for aid to agriculture.
Overall Grade (policy): C
Overall Rank (policy): 6/23 Currently much of Dutch assistance to agriculture goes towards supporting national
frameworks and market development. However, poor farmers will only benefit from
Indicator Grade Comment this if access to institutions and markets is also improved and farmer organisations
are strengthened. Small-scale farmers, especially women farmers, therefore deserve
Aid to agriculture C Medium but new money pledged
more attention.
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection

Gender-targeted aid D Low gender-targeting

Whilst The Netherlands is to be congratulated on leading the way in gender coding its
ODA, in fact only a small percentage of its ODA is focused on women.
Sustainable agriculture C Medium biofuels target

Climate change D Bad climate performer Policy coherence is a priority for the Dutch government, at a national level and between
national and EU policies. The Netherlands scores well in this area but there is still
much room for improvement. In the EU it has been one of the more progressive countries
on the issue of climate change and adaptation funding to developing countries; but
finance levels amongst all donors, The Netherlands included, are still shamefully low.

Netherlands The Dutch government invests in projects promoting sustainability in biofuels production
chains, and would like land rights and food security to be included in the sustainability
criteria of the EU. This is an important role for the government to continue to push,
especially given that the Dutch target for biofuels used in the transport sector is
planned to increase by 2014.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 72

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Spain Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero
Budget cuts announced in May this year mean that Spain will not achieve its
Overall Score (Aid): 50/100
own stated aid targets, neither the target to reach 0.51 percent of GNI by 2010,
Overall Grade (Aid): C
nor 0.7 percent by 2012. This is hugely disappointing given recent efforts to
Overall Rank (Aid): 3/23
raise ODA levels and given Spain’s pivotal role as European Union president in
Overall Score (policy): 35/100
the run up to the MDG Summit. Spain’s fiscal crisis must not be fought at the
Overall Grade (policy): D
expense of those in most need, and a binding timetable for reaching the 0.7
Overall Rank (policy): 20/23
percent target is needed.

Indicator Grade Comment The HungerFREE Scorecard gives Spain credit for prioritising the fight against hunger
Aid to agriculture B Low but new money pledged in its ODA programme and for the new aid to agriculture given through L’Aquila.
Spain is also meeting its own target that 10 percent of ODA should go to agriculture,
Aid to social protection E Low aid to social protection
rural development and fighting hunger. However, low overall ODA levels mean it has
Gender-targeted aid D Low gender-targeting some way further to go before it is giving its fair share to this underfunded sector.
Sustainable agriculture D High biofuels target Spain’s relatively good record on social protection is achieved against a background
of very poor overall performance by all donors in this area.
Climate change D Bad climate performer

Commendably, during its EU Presidency in 2010 Spain put effort into launching the
EU’s Gender Action Plan and the EC Communication on gender equity. However,
Spain needs to ensure it works with the OECD Development Assistance Committee to
improve on its gender reporting and gender targeted ODA.

Spain Spain falls behind other donors in terms of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions
and its 2020 climate emissions reduction targets are very low. This follows a general
pattern of incoherence between Spain’s international commitments, and its highly
under-ambitious national positions on sustainability and climate change.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 73

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: Sweden Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt Sweden has a long-standing reputation as a generous donor, with the country
Overall Score (Aid): 50/100 spending 1.12 percent of GNI on ODA in 2009. Its ODA to agriculture is also
Overall Grade (Aid): C the second highest of the donors. Sweden also has a good track record of
Overall Rank (Aid): 4/23 focusing its aid on women.
Overall Score (policy): 35/100
Overall Grade (policy): D In 2009 the Swedish government announced a €400m allocation for climate financing
Overall Rank (policy): 17/23 over the period 2009-2012. However, all of this money is due to come from the aid
budget rather than being additional money. Climate finance is desperately needed to
Indicator Grade Comment
help developing countries adapt to the disastrous consequences of climate change;
taking it from aid budgets not only goes against international climate agreements but
Aid to agriculture C High but no new money pledged also ends up penalizing the poor.
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection
The Swedish Minister of Development Cooperation, Gunilla Carlsson, aims to
Gender-targeted aid A HIgh gender-targeting
strengthen the role of the private sector in development cooperation with the hope of
Sustainable agriculture C High biofuels target increasing tax revenues in poor countries. However, the fact that developing countries
lose an estimated $160 billion to tax evasion by multinational companies every year
Climate change D Bad climate performer
has been given very little attention. This amounts to more than all aid combined and
enough extra money to make the Millennium Development Goals a reality. The Swedish
government needs to develop a coherent approach to capital flight and tax matters
from a development perspective.
Sweden
Sweden has been at the forefront of the percentage of green cars sold, and in con-
sumption of biofuels in the transport sector, in large part due to green cars being
heavily subsidized. Most of the biofuel used in Sweden is imported ethanol from
Brazil. According to a forecast from the Swedish Energy Agency, most of Sweden’s
EU target for 10 percent renewable energy in transport will be filled with imported
biofuels. The government has to take greater responsibility for ensuring that Swedish
policies and subsidies do not have a negative effect on food security and land rights
in developing countries.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 74

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: United Kingdom Remarks:

Leader: Prime Minister David Cameron
The UK is getting two important things right in the fight against global hunger:
Overall Score (Aid): 48/100 it is committed to giving 0.7 percent of its GDP in overseas aid and it has
Overall Grade (Aid): C pledged to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 34 percent of its 1990 emissions
Overall Rank (Aid): 7/23 by 2020 as part of the Europe burden sharing agreement to cut emissions by
Overall Score (policy): 49/100 20 percent. Unfortunately, these impressive achievements have not come
Overall Grade (policy): C because the UK has prioritised ending hunger. Instead they are by-products of
Overall Rank (policy): 3/23 other important policy goals. When it comes to taking deliberate action to
tackle hunger, the UK’s response is much less impressive.
Indicator Grade Comment
Despite its strong commitment to aid, the UK is failing to invest in agriculture. It is only
Aid to agriculture B Low but new money pledged
paying just over a third of its fair share of farming aid needed to halve hunger. Similarly,
Aid to social protection E Negligible aid to social protection the UK is giving only a fraction of what is needed to social protection in developing
Gender-targeted aid D Low gender-targeting
countries. Women farmers are particularly neglected and are basically invisible in
DFID’s policy towards agriculture. In 2009, only 1 project out of 45 DFID agriculture
Sustainable agriculture B Medium biofuels target projects had gender equality as its principle objective.
Climate change C Not doing enough on climate
At present, the UK gets a good score for its comparatively low use of biofuels. However,
this policy is currently under review and the UK government may well decide to set
new targets tripling its use of biofuels in the transport sector by 2020. Increasing
biofuel use will not only make hunger worse but will also make it harder for the UK to
meet its emission reduction targets.
United Kingdom
In order to not fall further behind in the fight against global hunger, the UK must
recognise hunger as priority issue and take steps to demonstrate that it is serious
about ending hunger by improving its performance on aid to agriculture, ensuring that
biofuel targets to do not increase, and taking effective action to meet its commitments
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 75

HungerFREE Scorecard

Country: United States of America Remarks:

Leader: President Barack Obama The US has risen significantly in the 2010 HungerFREE Scorecard rankings on
Overall Score (Aid): 40/100 ODA, due to the Obama administration’s strong leadership on issues of global
Overall Grade (Aid): hunger and food security. In May, the administration unveiled a detailed new
strategy on global food security, the Feed the Future program. This initiative
Overall Rank (Aid): 11/23 provides the strategic guidance and implementation plan for the US’ 2009
Overall Score (policy): 16/100 L’Aquila promise of US $3.5bn over 3 years for food security.
Overall Grade (policy): E
Overall Rank (policy): 23/23 The Feed the Future program represents a dramatic shift in US policy towards
agricultural development. It aims to support country plans and includes a strong focus
on policies to reach smallholder farmers, stressing the importance of supporting
Indicator Grade Comment women farmers. The US has also made a significant pledge to the Global Agriculture
and Food Security Program (GAFSP), housed at the World Bank.
Aid to agriculture B Showing strong leadership

Aid to social protection E New commitments launched Overall, the US’ Official Development Assistance was US$28.665 billion in 2009, still
below the 0.7 percent target but moving in the right direction, rising US$1.8 billion
Gender-targeted aid E New strategy promising from the year before.
Sustainable agriculture E Very high biofuels target Better coherence is, however, needed in US policies that affect hunger and food security.
Climate change E Stronger leadership needed
While the US has become a global leader on ODA for agriculture, changes in US policy
are needed on biofuels and climate change.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) in the US requires that 9 billion gallons of biofuels
be blended into transportation fuels – the second highest target amongst the countries
ranked. It is predicted that between 2006 and 2012 the US will have paid out some
US$76-93 billion to biofuels producers. Recent analysis by ActionAid and official
development agencies including the World Bank has found a direct link between
increased production of biofuels in Africa and Latin America and rises in food prices.
USA
Given the serious impact of climate change food security, the US government’s policies
on this issue have not matched the level of ambition of agriculture policies. The US
Congress has yet to pass legislation with a binding emissions target and has yet to
make a significant enough financial commitment to meet the adaptation and
mitigation needs of developing countries.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 76

Section 3 - HungerFREE indicators

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 77
Information on indicators, methodology and sources

HungerFREE is a global ActionAid campaign pressuring governments of the North This second HungerFREE Scorecard has added a new gender equality indicator
and South to fulfil their MDG 1 pledge to halve hunger by 2015. This HungerFREE due to the importance of supporting women farmers in the fight against hunger.
report analyses the degree to which both rich and poor nations are acting on that This indicator is based on the Social Institutions and Gender Index; women’s
pledge. While other international rankings focus on the scale and magnitude of rights to land; and the availability of sex-disaggregated data.
hunger, this report is unique in that it also assesses the concrete steps that
governments are taking towards its elimination. As well as actions, developing countries are judged on the outcomes of their actions
in terms of tackling hunger. By measuring outcomes, we are able to assess simi-
This HungerFREE Scorecard aims to evaluate two sets of countries on progress in larities and differences in the policies and actions adopted by countries making
fulfilling their commitments to end global hunger: strong progress on hunger.We set a tougher outcomes standard for wealthier
developing countries, such as South Africa, Brazil, China and India, than for
A. The 28 developing countries which participate in the ActionAid low-income countries.
HungerFREE campaign.
The HungerFREE scorecard also ranks developed countries’ policies and whether
B. The 23 rich nations which are members of the OECD’s Development they are supporting or undermining efforts to tackle global hunger. Developed
Assistance Committee. countries have been ranked on two sets of indicators:

Our indicators for developing countries are based on the actions that the UN has 1) On their aid to agriculture and aid to social protection measures (their ‘aid
identified as most critical to reverse growing global hunger, most recently in its indicators’). This is to assess the level of the support they are giving to the
2008 Comprehensive Framework for Action on the Global Food Crisis, but also in areas that they themselves, in the Comprehensive Framework for Action and
other UN agreements and guidelines. the L’Aquila Food Security Initiative, have singled out as crucial to reduce
hunger. As with developing countries, the 2010 HungerFREE Scorecard has a
Not all countries started from an equal footing in 2000 when the world first adopted new donor indicator on gender equality, looking at how much ODA is targeted
the UN goal for halving hunger. Some were emerging from civil wars, while others on relevant projects.
were dealing with a rampant AIDS pandemic. Some, with historically severe levels 2) Donors have also been assessed on the extent to which their domestic policies
of poverty and food insecurity, simply had further to travel, and fewer resources to (their ‘policy coherence’ indicators) contribute to current and future hunger in
fund the journey. Hence, we have designed our scorecard to give credit for effort developing countries, especially through incentives for biofuels use (which are
and progress, not just outcomes. contributing to food price volatility) and carbon emissions (which will cause
dramatic reductions in crop yields in many developing countries).
Developing countries have been graded on five indicators: their legal commitment
to the right to food; their investment in agriculture and social protection; their Below is more information on each indicator and the sources and methodology
commitment to gender equality and women’s rights; and their performance on employed to calculate scores.
hunger and child nutrition.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 78
A: Monitoring developing countries undertake towards the elimination of hunger, but also on the trend, scale and
intensity of undernourishment.
The 28 developing countries chosen for the scorecard are those which participate • To estimate the scale of hunger among national populations as a whole, there
in the ActionAid HungerFREE campaign because ActionAid staff in these countries were two alternative data source options available. The first is FAO’s most recent
and our partners on the ground are able to supply us with first-hand information country-by-country estimates of undernourishment as a percentage of the
about the policies and programmes of their governments towards ending hunger. population (reflecting the share of the population with insufficient dietary energy
Another important consideration in the choice of countries was the availability of intake covering a three-year period from 2004–06 - they predate the food price
relatively reliable comparative data across various indicators. crisis).
• The second option was the USDA’s more recent Food Security Assessment
Due to paucity of data in some instances, we had to make a number of assumptions 2008-9 projections, which are derived from the FAO database and World Bank
in the methodology for the calculations, grading and ranking used in this report. data, but on slightly different models (see http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/
This section describes the data gaps, assumptions and calculations in detail to globalfoodsecurity/questions.htm#fao). However, since the USDA’s projections
provide full transparency. suffered from a number of data gaps when estimating the proportion of the
hungry in key countries such as China and Brazil, we did not use them.
The grading scale for all the indicators is the same: • According to the FAO, undernourishment refers to the condition of people
whose dietary energy consumption is continuously below a minimum dietary
A: 81% – 100% energy requirement for maintaining a healthy life and carrying out light physical
B: 61% - 80% activity with an acceptable minimum body-weight for attained-height.
C: 41% - 60% • At the national level, governments, academic organisations and civil society
D: 21% - 40% bodies also set their own minimum dietary thresholds (often differentially for
E: 0 % - 20% urban and rural areas), but these are not comparable across countries.
• The second set of estimates used to evaluate the extent of hunger is the
Technical and methodological explanation of the indicators prevalence in countries of underweight children under the age of five according
to the WHO’s Child Growth Standards. These indicate the proportion of children
Indicator: Hunger suffering from weight loss (wasting) and/or reduced growth (stunting).
• We have chosen not to use the mortality rate of children under the age of five
We measure countries according to the two MDG 1 hunger targets: the prevalence as it offers only a partial reflection of the fatal synergy between inadequate
of underweight in children under 5 years, and the proportion of the population that dietary intake and unhealthy environments.
are chronically undernourished, the former being a measure of more short-term • While this might imply an element of double-counting, we have chosen to find
distress. Both are taken against a 1990 year baseline. In order to demonstrate an average of the two sets of data for a number of reasons:
where countries are progressing – or not – the 2010 scorecard includes projections 1. The FAO data is an average over the period 2004-2006; while the WHO data
for when these goals are likely to be met according to data trends. The intensity of on children is not an average, but for the latest available year in the period
hunger (the food deficit) is also included as this is a key indicator of severity of the 2001-2008;
hunger situation. We have set a tougher standard for wealthier developing countries, 2. The FAO data is based on macro estimates of population projections, food
such as South Africa, Brazil, China and India, than for low-income countries. availability and inequality in food distribution benchmarked against varying
hunger thresholds which are unique for each year and country in the world,
General assumptions: while the WHO data is based on extensive national primary surveys; and
• This scorecard evaluates countries not only on the initiatives that governments 3. Since children are the most vulnerable to undernourishment with potentially

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 79
Table 5: Indicator: Hunger

Prevalence of Proportion of Projected MDG Projected MDG Food deficit of Grade for Overall country
under-weight in under-nourished achievement year for achievement year for under-nourished hunger rank for hunger
children under in total under-5 underweight halving proportion population
5 years (%) population (%) under-nourished

Year various 2004-6 2004-6

Weight 38% 38% 25%
Ghana 14 8 2012 1999 Moderate B 1
China 5 10 2002 2010 High B 2
Vietnam 20 13 2007 2004 High B 3
Brazil 2 6 2001 2012 High B 4
Cambodia 29 25 2010 2010 High B 5
Nigeria 27 8 2025 2005 Moderate C 6
Mozambique 21 37 2012 2009 High C 7
Uganda 16 15 2039 2020 Moderate C 8
Guatemala 6 16 2004 Rate increasing High C 9
Bangladesh 41 26 2009 2015 High C 10
Malawi 16 29 2013 2009 High C 11
Rwanda 18 40 2016 2031 Intense C 12
Nepal 39 16 2093 2021 Moderate C 13
Tanzania 17 35 2011 Rate increasing High C 14
Kenya 16 30 2028 2071 High C 15
Senegal 15 25 2042 2091 Moderate C 16
Ethiopia 35 44 2029 2009 Intense C 17
Lesotho 17 15 Rate increasing Rate increasing Moderate D 18
Gambia 16 29 2016 Rate increasing High D 19
Liberia 20 38 2028 Rate increasing Intense D 20
Zambia 15 45 2027 Rate increasing Intense D 21
Pakistan 31 23 2011 Rate increasing High D 22
Haiti 19 58 2018 2053 Acute D 23
India 44 22 2017 2083 High D 24
Sierra Leone 28 46 Rate increasing Rate increasing Intense E 25
South Africa 8 5 Rate flat na High E 26
Democratic Republic of Congo 28 75 2060 Rate increasing High E 27
Burundi 39 63 Rate increasing Rate increasing Intense E 28

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 80
irreversible life-long impacts, the measure of child undernourishment, in If the scale of hunger is less than the respective average of each set of countries,
conjunction with that of the entire population, ensures their vulnerability is then the formula used to assign a percentage score between 50-100 is:
not subsumed in population averages.
• To ensure that countries with a higher income are benchmarked based on the 100 – [(Country – Minimum) x 50]
greater efforts expected from them to eradicate hunger, we have classified the Average – Minimum
selected countries into three different sets, based on the latest data available
from the World Bank country classification for July 2009 of GNI per capita, and However, in all cases, it is assumed that a country which has achieved zero
individually determined scores for each set of countries. These are low-income, hunger will be awarded 100 marks. Therefore, since the minimum in all cases is
lower-middle income and upper-middle income. World Bank country classification assumed to be zero, the formula can also be written as:
methodology analytically divides economies according to 2009 GNI per capita,
calculated using the World Bank Atlas method. The groups are: low income, US 100 – [(Country – 0) x 50]
$995 or less; lower middle income, $996 - $3,945; upper middle income,
Average – 0
$3,946 - $12,195; and high income, $12,196 or more.
• The sub-indicator scale of hunger has a weight of 75 percent on the scorecard, • Hence, although South Africa has similar hunger levels as China, South Africa,
while the intensity of hunger has a weight of 25 percent. The former describes as a middle income country, will receive a substantially lower percentage
the entire population (with an added emphasis on children who are the most scores than China, which is a lower-middle income country. Also, Vietnam, as a
vulnerable), while the later analyses the intensity of hunger amongst those who
low-income country, receives a higher percentage score than Guatemala, a
are already undernourished or food-deprived.
lower middle income country with similar levels of achievement.

Sub-indicator: Scale of hunger

Sub-indicator: Trend of hunger
• First, to score countries based on the scale of hunger, we have chosen to take
• To analyze the trend of hunger, calculations were based on a projected year at
a simple average of two sources of data: most recent estimate of
which each country would achieve the MDG 1 of halving 1990 rates of hunger.
undernourishment as a percentage of the population (FAO) and the most recent
prevalence of underweight children under the age of five (WHO). These calculations are based on a linear regression to estimate 1990 levels,
• Then we divided the selected countries into three categories – low income, and to estimate the year at which one half of the 1990 levels would be achieved.
lower-middle income and upper middle income - based on the World Bank • Estimates of trends of national undernourishment used FAO’s three-year
classification, and calculated the average, minimum and maximum for each averages for the periods 1990-1992, 1995-1997, 2000-2002, 2003-2005, and
sets of countries. 2004-2006, using as single years 1991, 1996, 2001, 2004 and 2005.
• Then, a two-pronged formula has been used to determine scores based on the • Estimates of trends of child underweight rates used WHO data, which are
standard bell curve methodology of normal distribution to evaluate each set of based on revisions by the WHO on 27 April 2006 to its child growth standards
countries based on their deviation from their respective average. (see http://www.who.int/childgrowth/en/). Not all other sources of child
If the scale of hunger is more than the respective average (the more the hunger underweight rates have been adjusted to these new standards, so there may
the lower the score) of each set of countries, then the formula used to assign a be some slight discrepancies (usually plus or minus 2-3 percentage points).
percentage score between 0 – 50 is: Estimates for regression lines were based on all years from 1990-2009, and,
where data before 1995 was not available, also on years 1986-1989. Where the
50 – (Country – Average x 50) WHO’s figures were not available for more than two separate years, or where
Maximum - Average pre-1997 WHO data was unavailable, then data from the UN’s MDG Database
were used exclusively (for the DRC, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Lesotho, Mozambique,

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 81
Senegal, South Africa and Vietnam). Not all of the UN MDG database data has percent for the average of rates of 2004-6 proportion undernourished and most
been revised according to the new WHO child growth standards. For Liberia, recent child underweight rates; 18.75 percent each for the score for the trend of
WHO data was used as only 2 data points were also available from the UN proportion undernourished and for the trend of underweight children under five
MDG database. years of age; and 25 percent for the intensity of hunger.
• Using a 100-point scale, with a maximum year of 2050 considered, scores for
projected MDG 1 achievement years for undernourishment prevalence and Data Sources:
child underweight prevalence were calculated based on the following formula • Scale of Hunger: Average data for the proportion of undernourished in total
(with the one exception of Ghana’s 1999 year rounded to a 100 score): population has been obtained from the FAO: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/te
mplates/ess/documents/food_security_statistics/PrevalenceUndernourishmen
2 x [2050 – projected MDG1 achievement year] t_en.xls
• The estimates of the prevalence of underweight children under the age of five
• The trend score has not been adjusted relative to income group as with the first
have been obtained from WHO Statistical Information System (WHOSIS)
sub-indicator above. The trend score aims to capture progress against a set
http://www.who.int/whosis/en/
benchmark (1990 levels), and the first sub-indicator already appreciated
differences in this benchmark between country income groups. • Supplementary estimates of the child underweight prevalence have been taken
from the studies reported in the UN’s MDG statistics site:
Sub-indicator: Intensity of hunger http://unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/Data.aspx
• The intensity of food deprivation measured by the FAO indicates how much • The latest World Bank income classifications have been used (July 2010
food-deprived people fall short of minimum food needs in terms of dietary energy. according to 2009 GNI per capita). See: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/
It is measured as the difference between the minimum dietary energy and the DATASTATISTICS/Resources/CLASS.XLS
average dietary energy intake of the undernourished population (food-deprived). • Intensity of hunger: Data for the year 2004-6 have been obtained from website
The intensity of food deprivation is low when it is less than 200 kilocalories per of the FAO statistics division:
person per day and high when it is higher than 300 kilocalories per person per fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ess/documents/food_security_statistics/Depth
day. The greater the food deficit, the greater the susceptibility for health risks _Hunger_en.xls
related to undernourishment.
• To classify countries based on the extent of the deprivation, the following Indicator: Legal framework
assumption have been used based on the extent of the food deficit of the
undernourished population (kcal/person/day)
The HungerFREE Scorecard evaluates each country’s right to food legal framework,
placing most value on legislation guaranteeing the right to food. The 2010 score-
Food deficit >400 = "Acute", >300 = "Intense", >200 = "High", <200 = "Moderate"
card also looks at legal protection of the right to information – a critical tool in
• Assuming that the maximum food deficit is 450 kcal/person/day, to compute holding governments to account on the right to food. Given that the measure only
scores for this indicator, the following formula has been used considers whether legislation is in place – rather than the quality of the legislation
– it only carries a small weight in the overall indicator.
100 – [Food deficit of the undernourished population (kcal/person/day) x 100]
Data analysis:
450
• In case of constitutional provisions, we have identified constitutions which
Total scores for hunger contain explicit provisions on right to food as a separate and stand-alone right
To compute total scores for this indicator, the following weights were used: 37.5 (regardless of whether or not these are justiciable).

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 82
Table 6: Indicator: Legal framework • Legal guarantees refer to national laws. We have not
examined which countries provide legal protection through
Constitutional Legislative Formalization Grade for Overall country the direct applicability of international human rights treaties.
guarantee of guarantee of of right to legal rank for legal
right to food right to food information framework framework
Sub-indicator: Constitutional guarantees
Year 2006 and after Latest 2005 and after • The methodology for the classification of countries is a
Weight 35% 60% 5% modified version based on the original created by Vidar,
Brazil High Yes Regulatory A 1 2006, ‘State Recognition of the Right to Food, at the
Guatemala Medium-high Yes Legal A 2 National Level’, Research Paper No. 2006/61, UNU-WIDER.
Uganda Medium-high In progress Legal C 3
High: Constitutions containing explicit provisions as a separate
Malawi Medium-high In progress Pending C 4
and stand-alone right.
India Medium-low In progress Legal C 5 Medium-high: Constitutions which make an explicit mention
South Africa High No Legal D 6 of the right to food, but not as a separate and stand-alone
Haiti High No None D 7 right.
Mozambique Low In progress Pending D 8 Medium-low: These constitutions protect the right to food
Rwanda Low In progress Pending D 8
implicitly, through broader provisions dealing with the right
to an adequate standard of living, as well as through
Kenya High No Legal D 10
provisions on either social security or worker’s rights, or
Bangladesh Medium-high No Legal D 11
both cumulatively, providing a high degree of protection of
Nepal Medium-high No Legal D 11 the right to food. The protection thus afforded may be in
Pakistan Medium-high No Regulatory D 13 one or several sections of the constitutions.
Ethiopia Medium-high No Pending D 14 Low: These constitutions either protect the right to adequate
Nigeria Medium-high No Pending D 14 standard of living, or social security and worker’s rights. It
also includes those which provide for direct applicability of
Ghana Medium-low No Pending E 16
the UN’s International Covenant on Economic and Social
Liberia Medium-low No Pending E 16
Rights.
Sierra Leone Medium-low No Pending E 16 Very low: These constitutions protect only the right to social
Tanzania Medium-low No Pending E 16 security or the right to minimum wage or other, less
DR Congo Medium-low No None E 20 important provisions, such as protection of the rights of the
Cambodia Low No Pending E 21 child, promotion of agriculture, food safety, etc.
Burundi Low No None E 22
• To compute the scores for this indicator (in percentage) the
Gambia Low No None E 22
formula used is
Senegal Low No None E 22
"High" = 100, "Medium-high" = 67, "Medium-low" = 50,
China Very low No Regulatory E 25 "Low" = 33, "Very low" = 17, "No data" = 0
Lesotho Very low No Pending E 26
Zambia Very low No Pending E 26 Sub-indicator: Legislative guarantees
Vietnam Very low No None E 28 • The classification of countries and their scores based on

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 83
the existence of legal framework to the right to food is simplistic i.e. either Indicator: Smallholder agriculture
"Yes" = 100, "No" = 0 or "In Progress" = 33.
As this report argues, investment in agriculture has the massive potential to unlock
Sub-indicator: Right to information poverty, especially in rural areas. It can also be a significant driver for economic
• To compute the scores for this indicator (in percentage), the formula use is growth. It is for this reason that we give the ‘sustainable smallholder agriculture’
“legal” = 100, “regulatory” = 67, “pending” = 33, and “none” = 0. The indicator indicator a significant weighting in the overall rankings.
describes the formalisation of the right to information, but says nothing about
content of legislation, regulations or implementation. The scorecard measures the percentage of the government budget that is spent
on agriculture as an indicator of the political commitment to reducing rural hunger.
Total scores for legal framework The scorecard also looks at the access that farmers have to extension services, a
• To compute total scores for this indicator, constitutional guarantee is given a service that is critical to smallholder farmers to help them improve their productivity.
weight of 30 percent, legislative guarantee 60 percent, and formalisation of Extension services provide advice and training to farmers and enable farmers to
right to information 10 percent. Data on the constitutional guarantee is not share information on problems and opportunities.
available for all countries and we believe that legislative guarantees provide a
more credible framework for defining and monitoring entitlements. Secondly, Ideally, we would have liked to track the amount spent on agricultural research
international experience suggests that the effort of adopting a special law to and development, as well as access to irrigation and to credit. However reliable
protect the right to food security is greater than for including the right in a comparative information was not available on any of these topics.
constitution.
Data analysis:
Data sources: Sub-indicator: Budget to agriculture
• Grading of constitutional guarantees was derived from the survey and evaluation • In 2001, African Union member states committed themselves to a new
of 57 countries conducted by Vidar, 2006, ‘State Recognition of the Right to programme to revitalise agriculture and reduce hunger – the Comprehensive
Food, at the National Level’, Research Paper No. 2006/61, UNU-WIDER, along Africa Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP). This included a
with updated data provided (personal communication with Margret Vidar 14 commitment to spend 10 percent of their national budgets on agriculture by
September 2009). This data was vetted and updated by ActionAid country 2008. Although there are technical arguments to favour the ratio of agriculture
programmes where possible. spending to GDP as a more appropriate benchmark, we have chosen to stick
• In the case of Nepal, the evaluation is based on the provisions in the country’s with the budgetary yardstick because it is backed by a political commitment.
interim constitution. Kenya’s recently approved constitutional provisions are We have extended this to evaluate countries in Asia and Latin America too.
included. • To rescale budget shares to agriculture (which range from 1.1 percent to 11.0
• The information on the status of legislative guarantees was largely derived from percent) to a 100-point scale (with an maximum target of 15 percent), scores
the FAO’s 2006 report, The Right to Food in Practice: Implementation at the were computed by the following formula:
National Level(Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations),
along with updates available from ActionAid country programmes, newspaper 6.7 * [100 * percent of budget to agriculture]
articles, research papers and government websites available in the public domain.
• Data on formalisation of the right to information is based on the map by David Sub-indicator: Access to extension
Banisar, available at: www.privacyinternational.org/foi/foi-laws.jpg, as well as • Figures were sought on the percent of farmers with access to extension.
various reports and news reports for several countries. • Where only farmer-to-extension agent ratios were available, access was
estimated on the following generous assumptions: one extension agent can

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 84
Table 7: Indicator: Smallholder agriculture reach two meetings per day, an effective meeting has about 30 people, and
each agent holds meetings four days a week and 50 weeks per year. Thus one
Percentage of Farmers’ access Grade for Overall country extension agent gives access to 12,000 people.
budget allocated to extension smallholder rank for • The number of extension agents was divided by the number of economically
to agriculture services agriculture smallholder
agriculture active people engaged in agriculture.
• Scores are based on the classification: Very low = 16.7 (0-10 percent coverage);
Weight 75% 25% Low = 33.3 (11-20 percent); Medium-low = 50 (21-30 percent); Medium = 66.7
China 8.0 high B 1 (31-60 percent); Medium-high = 83.4 (61-75 percent); High = 100 (>75 percent).
Malawi 11.0 low B 2
Vietnam 7.0 high C 3 Total scores for smallholder agriculture
Ethiopia 7.3 medium C 4
• To compute total scores for this indicator, this weighting was used: budget to
agriculture 75 percent; and access to extension 25 percent.
Bangladesh 6.6 medium C 5
Tanzania 8.1 low C 6
Data sources:
Rwanda 6.4 medium C 7 • Budget to agriculture: Where possible, budget figures have been based on
Zambia 6.8 medium-low C 8 official budget documents or declarations. In some cases, secondary sources
Nepal 7.2 low C 9 on budget figures have been used. We have also received updated information
Sierra Leone 7.1 low C 10 from ActionAid country offices for the 2010-11 budget cycle where available.
Haiti 6.0 medium-low C 11 • Where disaggregated spending figures were available, agriculture was
considered to include forestry, livestock, wildlife and environment, and fisheries
Senegal 5.0 medium C 12
- but not rural development, water or roads. For federal systems (such as
Mozambique 5.6 low D 13
Brazil, Ethiopia, India and Nigeria), only national level expenditure was used.
Kenya 3.9 medium D 14 • Access to extension is based on review of available documents and literature
Uganda 5.4 low D 15 (including World Bank reports, budgets and budget speeches).
South Africa 2.0 high D 16 • The number of economically active people engaged in agriculture was taken
Gambia 3.4 medium-low D 17 from the FAO database POPSTAT: http://faostat.fao.org/site/452/default.aspx
Burundi 4.9 very low D 18
Cambodia 4.0 low D 19
Indicator: Social protection
India 2.3 medium-low D 20
Social protection, guaranteed in Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Ghana 3.9 very low D 21 Rights, is the right of every man, woman and child. Social protection measures
Lesotho 2.2 medium-low D 22 are critical for ensuring that people can realise their right to food and, where good
Liberia 2.2 medium-low D 22 social protection policies and schemes have been set up with wide coverage, they
Nigeria 3.6 very low D 24 have had a huge impact on hunger reduction - Brazil and China being evidence of
Pakistan 1.6 medium-low E 25 this. Social protection can take the form of a range of specific entitlements - for
instance, pensions, child support, free school meals, employment guarantees.
Brazil 1.1 medium-low E 26
DR Congo 1.8 very low E 27
Guatemala 1.6 ... E 28

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 85
Table 8: Indicator: Social protection

Young child Free school Minimum Maternity Subsidised food Old age social Grade for Overall rank for
feeding / meals employment / living nutrition / rations / vouchers / pensions social social protection
nutrition standards guarantee entitlements community kitchens protection

Weight 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17%

Brazil Medium High High Medium High Low B 1
South Africa High High Low Low No Medium C 2
India Medium High Medium No Low Low C 3
Guatemala Low Medium Low Low Medium No D 4
Kenya Low Low Low Low Low Low D 5
Haiti No Medium Low Low Low No D 6
China No Low Low No No Medium E 7
Lesotho Low Low No No No Medium E 7
Liberia No High No No No Low E 7
Senegal Low Low Low No Low No E 7
Bangladesh Low No Low Low No Low E 7
Vietnam No No Low Low No Low E 12
Malawi No Low Medium No No No E 12
Gambia No Medium Low No No No E 12
Ghana Low Low No No Low No E 12
Mozambique Low No No Low No Low E 12
Nepal No No No No Low Medium E 12
Pakistan No No Low No Medium No E 12
Burundi No Medium No No No No E 19
Ethiopia No No Low No Low No E 19
Sierra Leone No Low No No No Low E 19
Cambodia No Low No No Low No E 19
Nigeria No No Low No No No E 23
Rwanda No Low No No No No E 23
Uganda No No No No Low No E 23
Zambia No No No Low No No E 23
Democratic Republic of Congo No No No No No No E 27
Tanzania No No No No No No E 27

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 86
Data analysis: poverty line rate and the portion of the population living on less than US $1.25
General assumptions: in Purchasing Power Parity terms (except for Liberia and Haiti, for which statistics
• While ideally we would have preferred to analyse budget contributions to social on national poverty line were unavailable).
protection in developing countries, due to the lack of comparative cross-country
database, and the cross-cutting nature of these investments across ministries Total scores for Social protection
and departments, it proved to be too difficult to aggregate the budgets and • To compute total scores for this indicator as a percentage, each of the six sub-
simultaneously ensure cross-country comparability. In future years, hopefully, indicators have been given an equal weighting of 16.7 percent
this information gap will be filled with the availability of international datasets. • To compute the scores for individual sub-indicators, we have assumed that
• Bearing in mind that 80 percent of countries lack comprehensive social High = 90; Medium = 60; Low = 30; and No/Negligible = 0. High has been
protection, we selected for this HungerFREE Scorecard the most universally pegged at 90 points as no country can realistically have entirely flawless social
relevant and easily measurable categories of social protection which would protection interventions.
have a direct or indirect bearing on food security. However, it is important to
note that we do not see these as stand-alone inputs or an exhaustive list; to Data source:
combat the inter-generational cycle of malnutrition, a wider package of social • The data for most of the indicators has been researched from individual data
assistance programmes may be needed. sources available in the public domain and then cross-verified with staff on the
• The six sub-indicators which comprise loose sub-categories of social ground in ActionAid country programmes. The data for school meals has been
protection are: Young Child Feeding and Nutrition; Free School Meals; Minimum largely sourced from William Lambers, 2009, Ending World Hunger: School
Employment/Living Standards Guarantee; Maternity Nutrition/Entitlements; Lunches for Kids Around the World, World Food Programme; while for social
Subsidised Food Rations/Vouchers/Community Kitchens; and Old Age Social pensions we relied on the HelpAge International(2009) database
Pensions. For more details on the attributes of each of these sub-indicators, helpage.org/Researchandpolicy/Socialprotection/PensionWatch/Coverage/mai
refer to Chapter 4 on Social Protection in the 2009 Scorecard. In all cases we n_content/PWTable.2.pdf. Data on employment and living standards guarantees
have counted only programmes whose benefits are “non-contributory”: this and food subsidies and rations was also taken from a search of Google, World
does not include employer-employee contributory pension schemes. Bank, and a Factiva search with terms “food for work, cash for work, cash
• To evaluate the performance on each of these sub-indicators based on extensive transfer, food voucher, food rations” and country name, for June 8 2009 –
research of resources in the public domain and cross-checks and inputs from June 9 2010.
ActionAid country programmes, we have used a non-proportionate four-point • Data on school enrolment was obtained from UNESCO databases:
grading scale: http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=
High = coverage of 75 percent and more of the eligible population 143&IF_Language=eng
Medium = coverage of 50 – 74 percent • Data on age-group populations was obtained from the UN Population division:
Low = coverage of 15 – 49 percent http://esa.un.org/unpp/index.asp?panel=2
No/Negligible = coverage of 0 – 14 percent • Data on poverty rates were obtained from the UN MDG statistical database:
However, the classification of individual countries is often subjective due to an http://unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/Data.aspx
acute paucity of data on the scale, reach and efficacy of these social protection
initiatives. Indicator: Gender equality
• Coverage rates for young children, school children, and elderly were calculated
based on UN statistics on age-group numbers and primary enrolment data. Women and girls make up a disproportionate share of the worlds hungry and take
Coverage rates for employment guarantees were estimated partly based on the most responsibility for feeding their families. The gender dimension of hunger
population figures for ages 15-59 multiplied by the average of the national therefore cannot be ignored, and the HungerFREE Scorecard has set out to start

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 87
comparing how countries are delivering on guaranteeing women’s rights and Sub-indicator: Women’s access to land
eliminating gender discrimination. Currently, despite women constituting the • The SIGI also contains a specific sub-indicator on women’s ability to own land,
majority of farmers in most countries, nearly all agricultural policies ignore the and this has been cross-checked with other research. Countries are classified
needs of women. Few governments have agriculture budget lines that support as low, medium or high, with respective scores of 0, 50 or 100. This simplified
women farmers specifically, and women are largely invisible in both government classification has been used because ability to own land is a complex issue,
and donor agriculture policies designed to improve productivity. and is only one part of women’s access to land.

The 2010 scorecard compares the institutions, relations and practices that perpet- Sub-indicator: Sex-disaggregated agricultural data
uate gender discrimination, with a heavy weighting on the Social Institutions and • Based on country programme information, a score of 100 for Yes and 0 for No
Gender Index. These unfair social institutions are reflected in outcomes such as has been given, based on whether the government collects sex-disaggregated
the restricted ability of women to own land, a denial of women’s equal rights, and data on agricultural credit, extension and land. An average of the three was
a major factor constricting women farmers’ ability to farm and increase the supply then taken.
of food.
Total scores for gender equality
One part of the difficulty of measuring and addressing gender equality is the lack The following weights have been used: SIGI (50 percent); access to land (25
of detailed data on gender inequities in the areas of food and agriculture. Based percent); and sex-disaggregated data (25 percent)
on in-country information, the Gender Equality indicator illustrates how in many
countries sex-disaggregated data is not available on important agricultural issues, Data sources:
such as who owns land, who receives credit and who receives extension services. • SIGI data was obtained from http://genderindex.org/ranking
Only Brazil, Ethiopia, Guatemala, and Nigeria collect disaggregated data in all • Women’s access to land ownership is based partly on a scale derived from
three sample areas. Lang, J., Enquête sur la Situation des Femmes dans le Monde, Paris: Assemblée
Nationale (1998). For updated data and cross-references we have consulted
Data analysis: Action Aid country programmes and accessed the individual country databases
General assumptions: available at http://www.wikigender.org/.
• Quantifying gender equality is a difficult and precarious task. The lack of data
on gender equality – which impedes policies and actions to promote gender
equality – is in itself a major problem, so we have given governments credit
for collecting sex-disaggregated data on agriculture.

Sub-indicator: Social institutions and gender

• This sub-indicator is based on the scores from the recently created Social
Institutions and Gender Index. In contrast to other indexes of female development
outcomes, the SIGI index focuses on institutional root causes of these outcomes.
The index includes 12 indicators in five broad categories (family code; physical
integrity; son preference; civil liberties; and ownership rights), which were
scored based upon individual country reviews.
• Scores were based on the following formula:

100 – [100 * SIGI score]

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 88
Table 9: Indicator: Gender equality

Social Institutions and Women's land Sex-disaggregated Sex-disaggregated Sex-disaggregated Grade for gender Overall country
gender index score ownership ability land data extension data credit data equality rank for gender equality

Weight 33% 33% 33%

Brazil 98.1 high yes yes yes A 1
China 78.2 high yes no yes B 2
Nigeria 78.0 medium yes yes yes B 3
Ethiopia 76.7 medium yes yes yes B 4
Ghana 88.7 medium yes no yes B 5
Guatemala 96.8 low yes yes yes B 6
Malawi 85.7 medium no no yes C 7
Uganda 81.3 medium no yes no C 8
Mozambique 80.0 medium no yes na C 9
Bangladesh 75.5 medium no no yes C 10
India 68.2 medium yes no no C 11
Cambodia 97.8 medium no no no C 12
Vietnam 97.0 medium no no no C 13
Burundi 89.3 medium no no no C 14
Senegal 89.0 medium no no no C 15
Tanzania 88.8 medium no no no C 16
Sierra Leone 65.8 low no yes yes C 17
Liberia 77.3 medium no no no C 18
Pakistan 71.7 medium no no no D 19
Rwanda 83.1 low no no yes D 20
South Africa 91.3 low no no no D 21
Kenya 86.3 low no no no D 22
Nepal 83.3 low no no no D 23
Gambia 82.2 low no no no D 24
Democratic Republic of Congo 79.6 low no no no D 25
Zambia 78.1 low no no no D 26
Lesotho … medium no no no D 27
Haiti … low no no no E 28

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 89
Total scores across indicators for developing
countries
To compute total scores across the indicators, we have assigned a 40 percent
weighting to hunger; 30 percent for sustainable agriculture; 15 percent for social
protection; 10 percent for legal framework; and 5 percent for gender. The logic is
that the reduction in the scale and intensity of hunger represents the most crucial
outcome indictor. The remaining process indicators represent policy interventions
that necessarily take some years to make an impact on hunger levels, and the
scale of impact will depend on the quality, coverage and effectiveness of these
initiatives. Nevertheless, the combined weighting for policy interventions is greater
than that for hunger outcomes because the former represent actions and decisions
that are within the power of states to implement, whereas hunger trends can be
driven by many factors partially or entirely outside of governments’ control (such
as conflicts, natural disasters, or the recent food and financial crises). A low
weighting is given to gender equality purely because of the difficulty of quantifying
it, but we hope to address these problems in future work.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 90
B: Monitoring developed countries as top-ups to emergency food aid. The ActionAid 2009 briefing paper ‘Let
Them Eat Promises: How the G8 are failing the billion hungry’ released before
The choice of developed countries for this HungerFREE scorecard was based on the G8 Summit in Italy in 2009 ambitiously assumes that developing countries
the constraint of data availability and therefore has been restricted to those 23 will be able to fund about a third of the increase needed. If developing countries
countries that belong to the DAC of the OECD. Countries have been ranked invest US$10 billion more over the next three years, that requires donors to
according to two overarching areas: aid and policy (see tables 2 and 3 on page 7). provide the shortfall of US$20 billion. Bilateral and multilateral donor spending
in these areas has been about US$8.4 billion per year, so the total donor funding
needed by 2012 is about US$28.4 billion per year. This HungerFREE Scorecard
The grading scale for all the indicators remains the same:
calculation reiterates the same assumptions.
• It is assumed also that funding promised as part of the L’Aquila Food Security
A: 81% – 100%
initiative should be additional to existing funding and pledges (see ActionAid
B: 61% - 80%
International, 2010. “The 20 Billion Dollar Question”).
C: 41% - 60%
• Increased funding must be properly channelled. Aid coordination, learning and
D: 21% - 40%
policy harmonization are key (see ActionAid International, 2009, “Fertile Ground:
E: 0 % - 20% How governments and donors can halve hunger by supporting small farmers”).
We have thus also considered whether countries are endorsers or supporters of
Aid indicator 1: Agriculture the L’Aquila Initiative and its comprehensive, coordinated approach, and if they
are members of the GDPRD. The GDPRD was formed in 2003 to promote sharing
There are various channels, direct and indirect, through which donors fund agri- of information, as well as to promote reference to the Paris Declaration on Aid
cultural development. The agriculture indicator evaluates whether donors are pro- Effectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action in the sector.
viding their fair shares (relative to their GDP) of the estimated total financing that • As a further indication of support for country and regional initiatives, the scorecard
the UN estimates is needed to halve hunger. includes whether donors support the African Union’s Comprehensive Africa
Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP).
The indicator also assesses commitment to a bigger and better coordinated assault
on hunger post-food crisis We give extra credit for those countries that have given Sub-indicator: Agricultural ODA fair share
new money specifically to agriculture via the L’Aquila Initiative, as a proxy signal • The fair shares are calculated based on the standard methodology of
given that the latest OECD DAC figures on aid to agriculture used in our fair share proportionate distribution of the total required amount based on the size of the
calculations reflect only 2006 levels. However, one year on, the details of the country’s GDP, relative to other OECD countries.
US$22 billion L’Aquila initiatives remain hard to analyse in full due to lack of data. The actual ODA contribution to agriculture is computed based on the latest
available three-year averages (2006-8) using the following CRC codes:
Technical and methodological explanation of the aid to 310: III.1. Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing
agriculture indicator 41030: Bio-diversity
43040: Rural development
Data analysis: 72040: Emergency food aid
General assumptions: • In addition, the amount of budget support ‘credited’ is based on a rough (and
• The first sub-indicator analyses the actual share of ODA for agriculture as a probably overgenerous) estimate that 5.5 percent of developing country
percent of fair share required in 2012. The UN FAO has called for an additional government budgets is spent on the relevant sectors. Also gross disbursements
US $30 billion per year investment in agriculture and rural infrastructure, as well channelled through multilateral agencies – in this case the World Bank’s

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 91
Table 10: Aid indicator 1: Agriculture

ODA to agriculture Direct financial Member of donor Supporter of Donors giving Grade for aid Overall country
and food security as supporter of global platform on L'Aquila food new money to to agriculture rank for aid to
percentage of the fair CAADP rural development security initiative agriculture via agriculture
share required in 2012 L'Aquila

Year 2006-2008 (average)

Weight 50% 8% 8% 8% 25%

Luxembourg 142 no yes no no B 1

France 44 yes yes yes yes B 2

Germany 37 yes yes yes yes B 3

United Kingdom 35 yes yes yes yes B 4

Spain 34 yes yes yes yes B 5

Canada 33 yes yes yes yes B 6

Australia 29 yes yes yes yes B 7

United States of America 23 yes yes yes yes B 8

Sweden 81 no yes yes no C 9

Norway 73 no yes yes no C 10

Netherlands 56 yes yes yes no C 11

Ireland 53 yes yes yes no C 12

Denmark 65 no yes yes no C 13

Belgium 57 no yes yes no C 14

Finland 54 no yes yes no C 15

Switzerland 53 no yes yes no C 16

Japan 35 yes no yes no D 17

Italy 17 no yes yes no D 18

Austria 30 no yes no no D 19

Korea 9 no no yes no E 20

New Zealand 21 no no no no E 21

Greece 13 no no no no E 22

Portugal 11 no no no no E 23

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 92
International Development Association, European Commission and the • L’Aquila country endorsements are available from the Joint Statement on Global
International Fund for Agricultural Development - has been imputed based on Food Security (http://www.g8italia2009.it/static/G8_Allegato/LAquila
their contributions respectively to agriculture. Because disbursement data from _Joint_Statement_on_ Global_Food_Security%5B1%5D,0.pdf) and supplemental
IFAD was unavailable, figures for commitments have been used instead. country supporters at ‘Partnering on Food Security’: http://www.pittsburgh
• The score for agricultural ODA fair share is the same as the percentage value of summit.gov/resources/129662.htm
the actual share of ODA as a percentage of fair share of the maximum estimate
of annual US$28.4 billion required for food security from donors. In the exceptional Aid indicator 2: Social Protection
case of Luxembourg, where its ODA contribution to agriculture is even greater
than its required fair share, 100 is assigned as the maximum score. In most developed countries, social protection lies at the heart of the social contract
of the state towards its citizens and are vital for ensuring food security. However,
Sub-indicators: Support for international agricultural initiatives most OECD countries give measly sums to help developing countries extend the
• A score of 100 for Yes and 0 for No has been given if donors are financial most basic protections in developing countries. We have therefore also measured
supporters of the CAADP; endorsers or supporters of the L’Aquila Food Security donor country support to developing countries social protection policies.
Initiative; members of the GDPRD; or if donors are giving new additional funds
to the L’Aquila Food Security Initiative. Technical and methodological explanation of the aid to social
protection indicator
Total scores for agriculture
• Weights for the sub-indicators are 50 percent for ODA agriculture fairshare; 25 Data analysis:
percent for new L’Aquila funds; and 8.3 percent each for financial support to General assumptions
CAADP, endorser/supporter of L’Aquila, and member of the GDPRD. • The indicator analyses the actual share of ODA for social protection as a
percentage of fair share.
Data sources: • Devereux et al (2008) estimate that a ‘minimum essential package’, which
• The value of the Current ODA (average of 2006-8) to Agriculture and Food consists of community-based management of acute malnutrition; employment
Security has been calculated as described above from the OECD Query Wizard guarantee programmes; social pensions; and child growth promotion, would
for International Development Statistics http://stats.oecd.org/qwids/ (last collectively cost a maximum of £48.52 billion (US$78.64 billion) annually.
checked by the author 26 July 2010). • Again, we assume that rich countries need to bear two-thirds of the financial
• New contributions to agriculture through the L’Aquila initiative are reported in: burden. This calculation reiterates the same assumption and expects developed
ActionAid International, 2010, “The 20 billion dollar question: Have the G8 countries to collectively invest US$52.4 billion each year for social protection in
delivered on their hunger pledge?”). developing countries.
• CAADP support is based on information from CAADP, ‘Outcomes from the 1st • The fair shares are calculated based on the standard methodology of
CAADP MDTF Partnership Committee (PC) Meeting,’ April 2010 proportionate distribution of the total required amount based on the size of the
(http://www.caadp.net/pdf/Agenda%209%20%20Outcomes%20from%20the country’s GDP, relative to other OECD countries.
%201st%20CAADP%20MDTF%20Partnership%20Committee%20(PC)%20 The actual ODA contribution to social protection is computed based on the latest
Meeting.pdf) and Donor Platform members’ support to CAADP available three-year averages (2006-8), using the following CRC codes:
(http://www.donorplatform.org/content/view/312/221/). 11230: Basic life skills for youth & adults
• Data on membership in the Donor Platform were obtained from 12240: Basic nutrition
http://www.donorplatform.org/content/view/429/2678/, which was last updated 16010: Social/welfare services
28 April 2010. 16020: Employment policy and administration management

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 93
Table11: Aid indicator 2: Social protection 16050: Multi-sector aid for basic social services
16064: Social mitigation of HIV/AIDS
Actual share of ODA Grade for aid to Overall country 52010: Food security programmes/Food aid
as percentage of the social protection rank for aid to
• As with agriculture, the gross disbursements channelled through multilateral
fair share required for social protection
social protection agencies – in this case the World Bank’s International Development Association,
the European Commission, the United Nations Development Programme and
Luxembourg 63.4 C 1 UNICEF - has been imputed based on their contribution respectively to social
Ireland 24.4 D 2 protection. In addition, the amount of budget support ‘credited’ is based on a
rough estimate that 5.5 percent of developing country government budgets are
Spain 19.7 E 3 spent on social protection.
Sweden 19.0 E 4
Total scores for Social Protection
Belgium 18.2 E 5
• This is the same as the percentage value of the actual share of ODA as a
Norway 17.8 E 6 percentage of fair share of the maximum estimate of annual US $52.4 billion
required for social protection from donors. Again, in the exceptional case of
Netherlands 15.4 E 7
Luxembourg, where its ODA contribution to social protection is even greater
Denmark 15.4 E 8 than its required fair share, 100 is assigned as the maximum score.
France 14.0 E 9
Data sources:
United Kingdom 13.5 E 10 • Devereux S, Vaitla B and S H Swan (2008), Seasons of Hunger: Fighting Cycles
Finland 13.4 E 11 of Quiet Starvation Among the World’s Rural Poor, Action Against Hunger,
London: Pluto Press
Canada 10.9 E 12
• OECD Query Wizard for International Development Statistics
Portugal 9.6 E 13 http://stats.oecd.org/qwids/
Germany 9.6 E 14
Aid indicator 3: Gender-targeted Aid
Austria 9.4 E 15
It is critical that donors – as well as developing countries – look at the gender
Australia 9.2 E 16
dimension of hunger, food and agriculture, and that they promote gender equality
Greece 7.6 E 17 and women’s rights in their policies and ODA spending. The HungerFREE Scorecard
United States 7.3 E 18 uses OECD figures on the extent to which donors code their ODA for gender and
how much of their coded aid is targeted at gender equality. If donors provide
Italy 7.2 E 19 significant funds for a program, such as budget support, that is not easily classifiable
Japan 6.8 E 20 as gender-related, this may skew results slightly, though the indicator only assumes
that donors spend a maximum of 60 percent of their aid on gender-related projects.
New Zealand 5.1 E 21

Switzerland 4.5 E 22 Technical and methodological explanation of the

Korea 1.0 E 23
gender-targeted aid indicator

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 94
Table 12: Aid indicator 3: Gender targeted aid
Data analysis:
Coded Gender-targeted Grade for Overall Sub-indicator: Amount of aid coded for gender
disbursements as disbursementsas gender country rank • Holding donors accountable for supporting gender equality requires information
percentage of total percentage of total for gender
on how much aid they are providing on this issue.
disbursements disbursements
• This sub-indicator is based on both primary and secondary gender scores in
weight 20% 80% the OECD’s CRS database. Disbursements are used to measure actual donor
action, rather than commitment. A benchmark of 100 percent of aid coded is
Sweden 83 61 A 1
used. An average was taken of the percentages each the years 2006, 2007, and
Greece 100 35 B 2 2008. Scores are therefore calculated as follows:
Finland 94 32 B 3
100 x three-year average percent of aid coded.
Canada 79 33 C 4

New Zealand 51 35 C 5 Sub-indicator: Amount of coded aid targeted for gender equality
Norway 100 24 C 6 • This sub-indicator is based on both primary and secondary gender scores in
the OECD’s CRS database. Disbursements are used to measure actual donor
Australia 64 26 C 7
action, rather than commitments. An average was taken of the percentages
Germany 56 26 C 8 each the years 2006, 2007, and 2008. A benchmark of providing 60 percent of
aid as gender-targeted is used. Scores are calculated as follows:
Belgium 45 24 D 9

Spain 85 16 D 10 100 x [three-year average % aid gender-targeted / 60%].

United Kingdom 82 16 D 11
Total score for gender-targeted aid
Netherlands 100 12 D 12
• The percentage of aid that each country had tracked was weighted 20 percent,
Luxembourg 47 19 D 13 and the actual proportion of disbursements coded as gender-targeted was
Denmark 65 14 D 14 weighted 80 percent.

Ireland 65 12 D 15
Data sources:
France 38 11 D 16 • The CRS database is available at:
Japan 64 6 E 17
http://stats.oecd.org/WBOS/Default.aspx?DatasetCode=CRSNEW

Portugal 100 1 E 18 Aid total:

South Korea 83 2 E 19
Weightings are: agriculture aid 60 percent; social protection aid 30 percent; and
Italy 36 9 E 20
gender-related aid 10 percent. The higher weight to agriculture ODA reflects the
Switzerland 41 7 E 21 priority of enabling farmers to produce enough to support themselves and their
families and provide plentiful, nutritious food for others. Social protection is still
Austria 26 6 E 22
essential, however. Gender-related aid is key to both of the above; the weight of
United States 4 4 E 23

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 95
10 percent reflects an acknowledgement of the difficulties in measuring aid, Table 13: Policy indicator 1: Sustainable agriculture
particularly where some countries provide large amounts to non-classifiable
activities (such as budget support). Biofuel Signatory of Grade for Overall country
blending IIASTD sustainable rank for sustainable
Sustainability - Biofuels & IAASTD targets agriculture agriculture

Weight 90% 10%

Donor countries still influence developing country food and agriculture policies in
Australia 0.4 No A 1
a way that undermines the developing country’s ability to follow the most appro-
priate agriculture framework for achieving food security, in particular, their policies Denmark 0.75 No A 2
on biofuels and climate are hunger aggravating, while they are failing to support
Japan 1.7 No B 3
sustainable agricultural methods. Therefore, we have measured developed countries
on a climate and a ‘sustainability’ indicator which measures biofuels and support Korea 2 No B 4
for IAASTD indicator.
United Kingdom 3.63 Yes B 5

Policy indicator 1: Sustainable agriculture Ireland 4 Yes B 6

New Zealand 3.4 No C 7

The aggressive promotion and subsidising of biofuels in donor countries was a
major cause of the 2008 food price crisis. The indicator looks, therefore, at biofuels Switzerland 5 Yes C 8

blending targets. Netherlands 4 No C 9

Finland 5.75 Yes C 10

The UN’s International Assessment of Agricultural Science, Knowledge and
Technology for Development (IAASTD) calls on policy-makers to acknowledge the Sweden 5.75 Yes C 10
negative environmental externalities of conventional agriculture, and to scale up
Canada 5 No C 12
low-input and organic farming methods, with a particular focus on working with
women and building on local and traditional knowledge. Italy 5 No C 12

Austria 5.75 No D 14
Technical and methodological explanation of the
sustainabile agriculture indicator Belgium 5.75 No D 14

Greece 5.75 No D 14
Data analysis:
Luxembourg 5.75 No D 14
Sub-indicator: Blending targets for biofuels
• Donor countries have begun to set targets for national biofuel usage as a Norway 5.75 No D 14
percentage of fuel use. These targets and accompanying policy measures and
Spain 5.83 No D 14
finances encourage use of agricultural or environmentally sensitive land for further
energy production (as opposed to conservation or efficiency measures). France 7 Yes D 20
• The score for ibofuels is based on the formula: Germany 6.25 No D 21

USA 8.25 No E 22
100 – (blending target % * 10)
Portugal 10 No E 23

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 96
Sub-indicator: Signatory of IAASTD Celsius above pre-industrial levels. In order to do this, rich countries must reduce
• The UN’s International Assessment of Agricultural Science, Technology and their greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
Knowledge for Development (IAASTD) - a three-year evaluation process We have therefore measured countries on their commitments to mitigation and
involving more than 400 scientists and experts from around the world - calls on climate financing.
policy-makers to acknowledge the negative environmental externalities of
conventional agriculture, and to look at integrated solutions to agriculture that Technical and methodological explanation of the climate
include social, rather than expensive and heavily patented, technologies. change indicator
Extensive efforts were made for countries to become signatories of this
assessment. Sub-indicator: Unconditional (unilateral) targets to reduce emissions by 40
• To compute scores out of 100 for signatories of IAASTD, the simple formula percent of 1990 levels by 2020
used is Yes = 100 and No/No data = 0 • The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment
-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-chapter13.pdf page 776), released in 2007, recommends
Total score for sustainable agriculture that rich countries adopt 2020 greenhouse gas emission reduction targets of 25
• Blending targets for biofuels have been given a weight of 75 percent, while to 40 percent against 1990 levels. Many scientists have since argued for
scores for signatories of IIASTD are weighted 25 percent. tougher targets and the Alliance of Small Island States calls for a rich country
2020 target of a 45 percent cut (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awg7/
Data sources: eng/misc07.pdf page 21).
• Jung, A., Dörrenberg, P., Rauch, A., & Thöne, M. (FiFo Institute of Public • ActionAid, based on the demands of developing countries, calls for 40 percent
Economics, University of Cologne), 2010, ‘Biofuels – At What Cost? Government reduction binding targets of 1990 levels by 2020 to reduce emissions.
support for ethanol and biodiesel in the European Union – 2010 Update’,
• This indicator is a proxy of the commitment of developed countries to climate
Switzerland: Global Subsidies Initiative (GSI) of the International Institute for
change mitigation. We have assumed commitments based on public
Sustainable Development (IISD). Non-EU country figures are based on the
pronouncements of governments which are available in the public domain
following references: USDA FAS reports for Australia, Canada, Japan, and
through the media, government websites, etc.
Korea; New Zealand (http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContent
• EU countries agreed on burden sharing of the overall agreed 20 percent
Server/WDSP/IB/2010/07/19/000158349_20100719162226/Rendered
reduction, therefore all EU countries have a 20 percent target for the purposes
/PDF/WPS5364.pdf), Norway (http://www.envm.unideb.hu/content_
of this scorecard. South Korea announced a 4 percent reduction on 2005
hu/aktualis/norway061002.html), Switzerland
emissions (also a 30 percent reduction against ‘business-as-usual emissions by
(http://globaltechforum.eiu.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=7347&
2020’- http://unfccc.int/home/items/5265.php), which has been calculated as
categoryid=&channelid=&search=petrol), and the USA
equivalent to a 115 percent increase on its 1990 emission levels. However, as a
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420f10007.htm).
• The list of IAASTD signatories is available at: www.agassessment-watch.org/ developing country under the Kyoto Protocol, Korea is not obliged to adopt
emissions targets so we have not scored Korea on this indicator.
Policy indicator 2: Climate Change • Any country which has announced a 40 percent target has been accorded the
full score, while the rest receive proportionate percentage scores based on the
Tackling hunger necessitates tackling climate change, which is disrupting farming following formula:
and playing havoc with weather patterns and require rich countries to finance
100 x Country Target
mitigation and adaptation in developing countries. To prevent dangerous climate
impacts in the future, average temperatures must be kept below 1.5 degrees 40

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 97
Table 14: Policy indicator 2: Climate change Sub-indicator: Greenhouse gas emissions
• This sub-indicator considers countries’ emissions in 2008
Unconditional Actual 2008 Contribution to Grade for Overall country relative to what is needed for a 40 percent reduction of 1990
targets to reduce emissions relative fair share for climate rank for emissions. All calculations are done including emissions from
emissions by 40 to 40 percent adaptation and change climate change
Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF).
percent of 1990 reductions of mitigation
levels by 2020 1990 levels • Because the EU burden-sharing levels were specified against
2005 emissions, emission targets for EU countries have been
Weight 33% 33% 33% recalculated based on 1990 levels, and compared with actual
Norway 30 109% 2.30% C 1 emissions 2008. Specifically, using the same relative
proportional reduction rates on 2005 levels specified by
Finland 20 87% 0.90% C 2
burden-sharing agreement, emission targets necessary for a
Portugal 20 114% 0.30% C 3 total 40 percent reduction on 1990 levels were calculated
Germany 20 115% 0.60% C 4
(assuming that the effective EU-15 cuts on 1990 levels totalling
16 percent should be doubled to 32 percent under a total EU
UK 20 122% 0.40% C 5 target cut of 40 percent on 1990 levels). This was then
France 20 128% 0.20% C 6 compared with actual 2008 rates. The calculation can be
expressed as:
Greece 20 141% 0.00% D 7

Belgium 20 150% 0.00% D 8 100 * {2008 emissions / (1990 emissions – [ ( { country

Italy 20 154% 0.10% D 9
burden sharing rate * 2005 country emissions } / total EU-15
reduction on 2005 emissions) * ( 0.68 * total EU-15 1990
Netherlands 20 163% 0.60% D 10 emissions) ] ) }
Luxembourg 20 174% 2.90% D 11
• Emissions scores are based on an equivalent normal curve
Denmark 20 176% 2.60% D 12
formula to that used for hunger rates (see above).
Switzerland 20 178% 0.60% D 13

Austria 20 199% 0.00% D 14

Sub-indicator: Actual finances as a percentage of fair share
of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Sweden 20 232% 0.50% D 15 • The benchmark for fair share is based on calculations by the
Spain 20 237% 0.10% D 16 UNDP on adaptation, and by researchers at the European
Commission on mitigation, who conservatively suggest that
Ireland 20 317% 1.20% D 17
developing countries will need at least US$200 billion a year
Japan … 168% 0.00% E 18 by 2020 in addition to existing aid commitments. (See
USA 3.4 191% 0.00% E 19
ActionAid International, 2009, “Who should pay to tackle
climate change in developing countries?”),
Australia 4 227% 0.10% E 20 http://www.actionaid.org/assets/pdf/Climate%20finance%20
New Zealand … 185% 0.60% E 21 briefing%20in%20template%20May%202009%20FINAL.pdf)
• ActionAid unequivocally endorses the need for an enhanced
Canada 3 223% 0.20% E 22

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 98
financial mechanism under the authority of, and accountable to, UNFCCC’s org/listing/least-developed-countries-fund and http://
Conference of Parties. Therefore, ActionAid’s core recommendation is that the www.climatefundsupdate.org/listing/special-climate-change-fund.
Conference of Parties must establish an enhanced financial mechanism under
the authority of the UNFCCC’s Conference of Parties, with an adaptation window. Total Scores for climate change
• To determine actual contributions to UNFCCC, we used the database at the • To compute total percentage scores for this indicator, each sub-indicator of
http://www.climatefundsupdate.org/. We also generously assumed that the emissions target, emissions, and funding has been given an equal weight of
figures available were annual contributions, rather than historical totals. 33.3 percent.
• Since ActionAid does not recognise the credibility of climate change funds that
are not managed by the UNFCCC (such as the World Bank Climate Investment Policy coherence total
Fund), we have not included them in our calculations and focus only on the Total scores for policy coherence
UNFCCC. • To compute total scores for the two policy coherence indicators, the weightings
• The fair shares benchmarks expected of each country have been calculated have been distributed as 60 percent for climate and 40 percent for sustainability
based on the Oxfam responsibility-capability index (RCI) (Raworth K, 2007, (biofuels and IAASTD). The climate change indicator incorporates slightly more
Adapting to climate change, Oxfam Briefing Paper, May 2007) based on the substantial data and is consequently weighted correspondingly more.
historical responsibility for CO2 emissions (emissions since 1992) and capability
(Human Development Index). We have assumed that RCI principle applies for
who should pay for both mitigation and adaptation in developing countries.
The RCI percentages have been translated into actual expected monies based
on the US$200 billion required annually by 2020.
• These expected fair shares are then compared with actual contributions based
on the simple formula to determine the percentage scores

(Finances made available to UNFCCC

x 100 Annual Fair share of the estimated US $200bn by 2020 required)

Data Sources:
• Emissions targets for 2020 are available at
http://unfccc.int/home/items/5264.php
• The EU Climate & Energy package http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/
climate_action.htm (last checked by the author 26 July 2010) gives collective
target of 20 percent. EU Burden-sharing rates are specified in EU Decision No
406/2009/EC: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:
140:0136:0148:EN:PDF
• Data on emission levels (including LULUCF) 1990-2008 are available from
UNFCCC: http://unfccc.int/files/ghg_emissions_data/application/x-zip
-compressed/ai_total_wlulucf.zip
• Finances made available for CC mitigation and adaptation through funds
accountable to the UNFCCC are available at http://www.climatefundsupdate.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 99
Endnotes

1
Based on IMF and World Bank projections of an additional 1.2 million under-five deaths by 2015, compared to 10
World Bank, 2010, “Food Price Watch February 2010”, Poverty Reduction and Equity Group, Poverty Reduction
pre-crisis trends; and World Health Organisation and UNICEF estimates that hunger is the cause of approximately and Economic Management Unit, World Bank.
half of all under-five deaths. International Monetary Fund and World Bank, 2010, Global Monitoring Report 2010: 11
Zaman, H. and Tiwari, S., 2010, “The Impact of Economic Shocks on Global Undernourishment”, Policy Research
The MDGs After the Crisis, April, http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTGLOBAL
Working Paper 5215, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit, World Bank. While some of the difference
MONITOR/EXTGLOMONREP2010/0,,contentMDK:22519784~pagePK:64168427~piPK:64168435~theSitePK
reflects the higher hunger baseline used by the World Bank, it also includes a significant crisis-related effect.
:6911226,00.html
12
UNICEF, 2009, A Matter of Magnitude, Regional Office South Asia (ROSA), http://www.unicef.org/rosa/Latest_
2
The 1.02 billion estimate is explained in United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 2009, “More
Matter_of_magnitude.pdf
people than ever are victims of hunger”, Background Note,
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/newsroom/docs/Press%20release%20june-en.pdf. 13
Wasting, or low weight for height, is the result of acute food shortages leading to severe weight loss, and is
strongly associated with child death, while stunting (low height for age) is a cumulative indicator of long-term food
3
The United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals Progress Report 2010 uses as a benchmark the developing
deprivation. See UNICEF, 2007, Stunting, Wasting and Overweight, Progress for Children,
country prevalence of hunger, which was 20 percent in 1990. On this basis it would still be possible to claim that
http://www.unicef.org/progressforchildren/2007n6/index_41505.htm. Deaton and Dreze explain: ”Stunting is a
some progress has been made in recent years. However, ActionAid rejects this calculation; we believe it is more
cumulative indicator of nutritional deprivation from birth (or rather, conception) onwards. It is relatively independent
accurate to take as the reference point for MDG1 the global prevalence of hunger, which was 16 percent in 1990.
of immediate circumstances, since height does not change much in the short term. Wasting, by contrast, is usually
According to recent FAO and World Bank estimates, hunger rose back to 15 percent in 2009 and exceeded 16
taken to be an indicator of short-term nutritional status. From the measurement point of view, one advantage of
percent in the world minus China – bringing it back to 1990 levels of hunger in the world excluding China. In order
wasting is that it does not require information on the age of the child, which is often hard to ascertain precisely.
to estimate the prevalence of global hunger without China, we simply attributed to China a share of the FAO’s 1.02
’Weight-for-age’ can be seen as a more comprehensive indicator, which captures stunting as well as wasting: both
billion global figure for 2009, based on its share of world hunger in the previous reporting period (2004-6). We also
stunted and wasted children are likely to fall in the “underweight” category” Deaton, A and Dreze, J, 2008,
checked that this attributed share was consistent with the regional breakdowns given by the FAO for its 2009
“Nutrition in India: Facts and Interpretations”, unpublished paper at
global estimate. This methodology is likely to slightly underestimate the prevalence of hunger in the rest of the
http://weblamp.princeton.edu/chw/papers/deaton_dreze_india_nutrition.pdf
world, since it is probable that China accounted for a lesser share of global undernutrition in 2009 than it did in 2004-6.
14
Based on Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data at http://www.measuredhs.com
4
Women make up a little over half of the world's population, but they account for over 60 percent of the world’s
hungry. United Nations Secretary-General., 1 June 2007, “Strengthening efforts to eradicate poverty and hunger, 15
DHS data for Nigeria show that wasting increased from 9.3% in 2003 to 12.5% in 2008, while in Bangladesh it was
including through the global partnership for development”, United Nations, Report E/2007/71, ECOSOC Annual 18% in 2007 as compared to 14.6% in 2004. www.measuredhs.com
Ministerial Review: Geneva. 16
Data for Sri Lanka from the World Health Organisation Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition at
5
FAO, 2009, op cit. http://www.who.int/nutgrowthdb/en/
6
United Nations, 2010, Millennium Development Goals Progress Report 2010, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals 17
Barry, L., Hall K. and Hendricks M., 2009, “Child health: Nutrition”, South African Child Gauge 2009/10, Children’s
/pdf/MDG%20Report%202010%20En%20r15%20-low%20res%2020100615%20-.pdf. Data on per capita Institute. http://www.ci.org.za/depts/ci/pubs/pdf/general/gauge2009-10/sa_child_gauge_09-
incomes in South Asia, 1990-2010, from IMF Data Mapper. In Purchasing Power Parity terms, per capita income 10_child_health_nutrition.pdf
more than tripled, from under US$850 per year in 1990 to almost US$3000 per year in 2010. 18
United States Department of Agriculture, July 2010, Food Security Assessment 2010-2020, Economic Research
http://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/index.php
Service (USDA-ERS), http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/GFA21/GFA21.pdf
7
UNICEF, 2010, State of the World’s Children, http://www.unicef.org/sowc10. While child underweight dropped 19
World Bank, n.d., Overview: Understanding, measuring and overcoming poverty, Poverty Reduction and Equity,
slightly from 2004 to 2008 (from 28 to 26 percent), levels of stunting increased from 31 to 34 percent.
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPA/0,,contentMDK:20153855~menu
8
FAO, 2006, “Food Outlook”, no 1, June, http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/J7927e/j7927e12.htm PK:435040~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:430367,00.html#goals_mdg
9
According to the World Bank’s Food Price Watch briefing for May 2010, wheat prices were up 24% over their 2009 20
World Bank and IMF, 2010, Global Monitoring Report; World Bank, 2009, Protecting progress: the challenge facing
levels in Lahore Pakistan and 14% in Mumbai, India by early 2010. “Rice prices rose by 27% in Bangladesh low income countries in the global recession, World Bank, Washington DC
between October 2009 and February 2010. In Burundi, the price of beans increased by 58 percent in the four 21
World Bank and IMF, 2010, Global Monitoring Report, Ibid
months leading up to February 2010. Sharp increases in the price of staples have also occurred in Zimbabwe,
Sudan, Chad, Haiti and Somalia over the past quarter and in Tanzania, Chad, Mali and Kenya over the past year.” 22
US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS), 2010, Food Security Assessment 2010-
World Bank, 2010, “Food Price Watch May 2010”, Poverty Reduction and Equity Group, Poverty Reduction and 2020, http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/GFA21/GFA21.pdf. USDA estimates need to be used with caution as
Economic Management Network. they are not strictly comparable to FAO’s, and are based on slightly different benchmarks for minimum dietary
energy needs. Nevertheless, they are more up to date than the latest available information from FAO and offer a

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 100
fairly strong indication of trends. 37
In Africa the pattern is reversed, with more boys stunted than girls. See Wamani, H. et al., 2007, Boys are more
stunted than girls in Sub-Saharan Africa: a meta-analysis of 16 demographic and health surveys, BMC Pediatrics
23
Hertel, T, Burke M, Lobell D, 2010, The Poverty Implications of Climate-Induced Crop Yield Changes by 2030,
2007, 7:17, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/7/17
GTAP, Stanford University,http://foodsecurity.stanford.edu/news/global_warming_could_hurt_some_poor_
populations_and_lift_others_from_poverty_fse_study_finds_20100224/ 38
The projections for meeting the child underweight target is based on a combination of National survey data, as
reported at WHO, supplemented by the Master database where more comprehensive data was available, and
24
Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.), 2007, Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, IPCC,
individual studies; projections based on linear regressions based on available national surveys from 1986-present.
Geneva, Switzerland
For halving the proportion of hungry in the population this is based on FAO statistics. For more details on both see
25
Tangermann, S., 22 July 2008, What’s causing global food price inflation, Vox EU, ] methodology section of the report.
http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/1437 39
FAO, 2009, State of Food Insecurity in the World, Technical Annex, Table 1.
26
UNICEF, 2010, State of the World’s Children 2010, Statistical Table 2: Nutrition. 40
Based on WFP data, UNICEF claims that the number of people with inadequate food consumption rose to 84
27
Black R. E., Morris, S. S., Bryce, J., 2003, Where and Why are 10 Million Children Dying Every Year?, The million by 2008, or half the population. This represents an increase of 12.2 million (or 17%) over WFP calculations
Lancet361:2226-2234; and Black RE, Allen LH, Bhutta, Z. A., et al. for the Maternal and Child Undernutrition Study for 2005-6, but an increase of 132% over FAO estimates of 36.5 million undernourished in 2004-6.
Group, 2008, Maternal and Child Undernutrition: Global and Regional Exposures and Health Consequences, The 41
World Food Programme, 2010, Overview India, http://www.wfp.org/countries/India/Overview
Lancet 371: 243-260; and FAO, 18-22 March 2002, Reducing Poverty and Hunger, the Critical Role of Financing
for Food, Agriculture, and Rural Development, paper prepared for the International Conference on Financing for 42
National Institute of Nutrition, 2006, 2006: Reduction in childhood malnutrition in Vietnam from
Development Monterrey, Mexico, Rome: FAO; and Bellagio Study Group on Child Survival, 2003, Knowledge into 1990 to 2004 Nguyen Cong Khan Hanoi School of Public Health, Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 2007;16 (2):274-278, Hanoi
Action for Child Survival, Lancet 362: 9380 323 - 27 Vietnam, http://apjcn.nhri.org.tw/server/APJCN/Volume16/vol16.2/Finished/NguyenCongKhan(274-278).pdf. See
also http://english.vietnamnet.vn/social/200912/SOCIAL-IN-BRIEF-24/12-885972/
28
ODI, May 2005, Opinions, http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/475.pdf
43
http://www.photius.com/rankings/global_hunger_index_1990_2008.html
29
The average child underweight rate in the countries studied was less than half the global average of 23 percent. In
Guatemala, with a child underweight rate very close to the global average, the economic costs were much higher, 44
United Nations, 1992, MDG progress report UNITED NATIONS COUNTRY TEAM: IDT/MDG Progress - Viet Nam,
estimated at 11 percent of GDP. This means an estimate of 6 percent of GDP is conservative. http://www.undg.org/archive_docs/133-Viet_Nam_MDG_Report_-_1st_Report__English.pdf
30
Martinez, R. and Fernando, A., 2008, The cost of hunger: Social and economic impact of child undernutrition in 45
2009 figures put this at 12 per cent the government expects this to be re-calculated at 10 per cent in 2010 see:
Central America and the Dominican Republic, Project Document, UN ECLAC and World Food Programme. http://www.gtz.de/en/weltweit/asien-pazifik/vietnam/18211.htm and
http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/liaison_offices/wfp175334.pdf 46
United Nations, Vietnam: Vietnam and the MDGs,
31
A recent UN and World Food Programme cross country analysis of the economic impact of child malnutrition in http://www.un.org.vn/index.php?Itemid=49&id=38&option=com_content&task=blogcategory
Central America, determined that the opportunity cost of child malnourishment amounted to between 2% - 12% 47
Government of Brazil, n.d., Fourth Monitoring Report on the Millennium Development Goals,
of GDP annually. Ninety per cent of this impact was loss of productivity due to early deaths and lower education
http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/100408_relatorioodm.pdf
levels caused by hunger. A further ten percent came from the cost of treating hunger-related diseases and from
more children repeating school grades. Projecting the lower end of this loss only for the regions with highest child 48
Beghin, N. 2008, “Notes on Inequality and Poverty in Brazil: Current Situation and Challenges”, Oxfam International
hunger levels (sub-Saharan Africa and developing Asia), a conservative 3.5% reduction in GDP due to child 49
Government of Brazil, op cit.
malnutrition could cost these regions as much as $462 billion a year. Rounded down, this is approximately $450 billion.
50
Fan, S., 2010, “China’s Agricultural and Rural Development: Implications for Africa”, Keynote address given by Di
32
The authors’ total estimate was US$90bn per year, including charitable donations to fight hunger, which we have
rector General of IFPRI at the China-DAC Study Group on Agriculture, Food Security and Rural Developmentb,
excluded from the total because this is not included in the Lancet, World Bank or FAO estimates of global costs. J.
Bamako. Available at http://www.ifpri.org/publication/chinas-agricultural-and-rural-development-implications-africa
Brown et al., 2007, The Economic Cost of Domestic Hunger: Estimated Annual Burden to the United States,
report commissioned by the Sodexho Foundation, http://www.sodexofoundation.org/hunger_us/Images/Cost 51
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2010, World Economic and Social Survey 2010: Re
%20of%20Domestic%20Hunger%20Report%20_tcm150-155150.pdf tooling Global Development, New York: United Nations
33
UNICEF, 2009, Tracking Progress on Child and Maternal Nutrition. New York: UNICEF. 52
Overseas Development Institute and UN Millennium Campaign, 2010, “Millennium Development Goals Report
Card: Learning from Progress”, London: ODI
34
Lancet, n. d., “The Lancet’s Series on Maternal and Child Undernutrition: Executive Summary”, http://www-tc.iaea.
org/tcweb/abouttc/tcseminar/Sem6-ExeSum.pdf. Assuming that each DALY saved gives an economic benefit of 53
Malawi Vulnerability Assessment Committee food security reports. Available at
two years’ per capita income, and using IMF forecasts of per capita income in emerging and developing countries, http://ochaonline.un.org/rosa/FoodSecurity/tabid/5034/language/en-US/Default.aspx
2010-2015, the loss of 91 million DALYs would represent an economic cost of approximately US$780 billion per
54
World Bank, 2007, World Development Report 2007: Agriculture for Development, Washington: World Bank
year between now and 2015.
55
United Nations, 2010, The Millennium Development Goals Report 2010, http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Resources
35
Grantham-McGregor, S. et al., 2007, “Developmental potential in the first 5 years for children in developing
/Static/Products/Progress2010/MDG_Report_2010_En.pdf
countries”, Lancet, 368, 60-70.
56
Altieri, M., 2009, Small farms as a planetary ecological asset: five key reasons why we should support the
36
Hoddinott, J., J.A. Maluccio, J.R. Behrman, R. Flores, and R. Martorell, 2008, “Effect of a nutrition intervention
revitalisation of small farms in the Global South, Penang: Third World Network
during early childhood on economic productivity in Guatemalan adults”, The Lancet 371 (610): 411-16.

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 101
57
Duncan G., 2008, From Poverty to Power: How Active Citizens and Effective States Can Change the World, Oxfam 78
Ravallion, M., 2009, “A comparative perspective on poverty reduction in Brazil, China and India”, World Bank.
International 80
Cassel, G., 2010, “Development Policies for Rural Brazil 2003-2009”, Presentation given at the International
58
Ibid. Conference on Dynamics of Rural Development in Emerging Economies, ,available on
http://www.ruraltransformation.in/PPT/Guilherme_Cassel.pdf
59
World Bank, 2007, op. cit.
81
Estrada, D., 24 April 2008, Can Rising Food Prices Help Small Family Farms?, http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?
60
IFPRI, China’s Agricultural and Rural Development: Implications for Africa, Ibid
idnews=42118
61
Government of Uganda, 2009, “Uganda: Long-term funding for agricultural growth, poverty reduction and food 82
Gueye, B. et al., 2007,” Opinion: Family Farming First”, http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/en/Magazine/articles/
and nutrition security”, MAAIF/CAADP .
Opinion-Family-farming-first
62
Duncan G., 2008, op cit. 83
De Schutter, O., 2009, Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food http://daccess-ods.un.org/
63
The Times of India,” Food bowled – India”, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Food-bowled/articleshow TMP/9692335.html
/6310002.cms#ixzz0wZdvAAn8 84
Global Donor Platform for Rural Development, 2008, “Agricultural sector experiences in implementing the Paris
64
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/58809 Declaration on Aid Effectiveness”, http://www.donorplatform.org
65
Times of India, op. cit. 85
De Schutter, O., 2010, “Countries tackling hunger with a right to food approach - Significant progress in
implementing the right to food at national scale in Africa, Latin America and South Asia”, Briefing Note 01, United
66
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/58809
Nations: New York
67
World Bank, 2008, “Press Release: 25”, 86
ActionAid International, 2010, “Fertile Ground: How Governments and Donors can halve hunger by supporting
http://www.worldbank.org.in/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/SOUTHASIAEXT/INDIAEXTN/0,,contentMDK
small farmers”.
:21651539~menuPK:50003
87
OECD, 2010, “Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries at a Glance 2010”, http://www.oecd.org/
68
ActionAid International, 2010, Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?, Johannesburg: ActionAid
document/27/0,3343,en_2649_33773_45538523_1_1_1_37401,00.html
69
Rwanda will meet by 2016 according to AAI’s calculations and are likely given performance on the last few years 88
OECD Development Assistance Committee, 2010, “Development aid rose in 2009 and most donors will meet 2010
to surpass this and meet this ahead of the MDG target
aid targets”, OECD Development Assistance Committee Press Release and Reference Tables, 14 April .
70
Ruburika, S., 2009, “Rwanda: Country weathers economic crisis despite challenges lying ahead”, 5 August, All 89
IMF and World Bank, 2010, Global Monitoring Report.
Africa, http://allafrica.com/stories/200908060430.html
90
United Nations, 2009, United Nations Millennium Development Goals Report
71
Burwell, S. M., 2010, “ Big action for small farmers”, Huffington Post, 25 June,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sylvia-mathews-burwell/big-action-for-small-farm_b_625754.html 91
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10900798
72
Oboodo, K., 2009, “Rwanda’s agriculture up despite global crisis”, The Independent, 10 November, 92
ActionAid, 2009, Who should pay to tackle climate change in developing countries?, Johannesburg: ActionAid,
http://www.independent.co.ug/index.php/news/regional-news/78-regional-news/2091-rwandas-agriculture http://www.actionaid.org.uk/doc_lib/updated_climate_debt_briefing_december_200.pdf
-up-despite-global-crisis 93
ActionAid, 2009, Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change, Johannesburg: ActionAid,
73
This is based on figures from the FAO’s State of Food Insecurity in the World (SOFI) report 2001 and 2008, respectively. http://www.actionaid.org/docs/agriculture%20and%20climate%20change%20in%20template%20may
%202009%20final.pdf
74
Win, T. L., 2010, “Cambodia faces land rights ‘crisis’ campaigners”, 8 July ,
http://www.alertnet.org/db/an_art/52132/2010/06/8-144121-1.htm 94
ActionAid, 2009, Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change, Ibid
75
Hoddinott, J. and Wiesmann, D., 2008, “The Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs on Food Consumption 95
Action Aid, 2010, Meals per Gallon: the impact on people and global hunger, Johannesburg: ActionAid
in Honduras, Mexico, and Nicaragua”, SSRN, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1269417; and A Case, 2001, “Does Money http://www.actionaid.org.uk/doc_lib/meals_per_gallon_final.pdf
Protect Health Status? Evidence from South African pensions”, NBER Working Paper 8495, Cambridge MA; 96
ActionAid, 2010, Meals per Gallon: the impact on people and global hunger, Ibid
Maluccio, J. and Flores, R., 2004, “Impact Evaluation of a Conditional Cash Transfer Program: The Nicaraguan
Red de Protección Social”, FCND Discussion Paper 184, Washington DC, International Food Policy Research 97
ActionAid, 2010, Meals per Gallon: the impact on people and global hunger, Ibid
Institute. 98
This is because they convert forests or other lands into growing biofuel crops, or take over pre-existing agricultural
76
Samson, M. et al., 2007, “The Social and Economic Impact of Cash Transfers”, project commissioned by the land and force farming to expand into lands that are important carbon sinks, such as forests and wetlands. This
UK Department for International Development (DFID) and produced by the Economic Policy Research Institute (EPRI), triggers the release of carbon from soil and vegetation that will take decades to repay.
77
Ibid. 99
IAASTD report, available on
http://www.agassessment.org/reports/IAASTD/EN/Agriculture%20at%20a%20Crossroads_Global%20
79
Santos, L. M. V. V., June 2010, “Bolsa Familia Programme: Economic and Social Impacts under the Perspective of Report%20(English).pdf
the Capabilities Approach”, 100
Rahman, M., Iqbal, A., Islam, T. & Dasgupta, S., January 2010, Global Financial Crisis Discussion Series Paper 12:
http://www.sinteseeventos.com.br/bien/pt/papers/LMVVS2010BolsaFamiliaSocialandEconomicImpacts.pdf
Bangladesh Phase 2, London: ODI

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger 2010?

 102
101
UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Food Programme (WFP), 28 August 2008, “FAO/WFP Crop 125
Thin Lei Win, 8 July 2010, “Cambodia faces land rights ‘crisis’ ”, AlertNet,
and Food Supply Assessment Mission to Bangladesh”, ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/ai472e/ai472e00.pdf http://www.alertnet.org/db/an_art/52132/2010/06/8-144121-1.htm.
102
Ibid. 126
Titthara, M., 5 July 2010, “Land concessions: $1/hectare”, Phnom Penh Post, ,http://www.phnompenhpost.com
/index.php/2010070540272/National-news/land-concessions-1hectare.html.
103
Financial Express, 2010, “Food Security Investment Plan”, 31 July, http://www.thefinancialexpress
-bd.com/more.php?news_id=101567. 127
Demeke, M., Pangrazio, G. and Maetz, M., 2009, “Country responses to the food security crisis: Nature and
preliminary implications of the policies pursued,” Initiative on Soaring Food Prices, FAO. http://www.fao.org/
104
IRIN, 22 July 2010, “Unemployment, food prices spur growing hunger”, http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?Re fileadmin/user_upload/ISFP/pdf_for_site_Country_Response_to_the_Food_Security.pdf.
portId=89920. 128
World Bank, 2008, Rising food prices: Policy options and World Bank response,
105
FAO/WFP, 28 August 2008, Ibid. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/NEWS/Resources/risingfoodprices_backgroundnote_apr08.pdf.
106
Parveen, S., 2008, “Access of Rural Women to Productive Resources in Bangladesh: A Pillar for Promoting their 129
Jalilian, H and Reyes, G., 2010, “Global Financial Crisis Discussion Series Paper 14: Cambodia”, Phase 21,
Empowerment”, International Journal of Rural Studies (IJRS). Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
107
Rahman, M., Iqbal, A., Islam, T. & Dasgupta, S., op. cit. 130
Ibid.
108
Ibid. 131
Chen, S., and Ravallion, M., 2008, “The developing world is poorer than we thought, but no less successful in the
fight against poverty”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4703.
109
Ibid.
132
United Nations, 2010, World Economic and Social Survey 2010: Retooling Global Development, New York,
110
Government of the Federal Republic of Brazil, 2010, “Fourth Monitoring Report on the Millennium Development
http://www.un.org/esa/policy/wess/wess2010files/overview_advancecopy.pdf
Goals”, http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/100408_relatorioodm.pdf
133
International Food Policy Research Institute, 2010, “China’s Agricultural and Rural Development: Implications for
111
These include nationwide programmes such as school meals and grants to poor families, as well as local initiatives,
Africa”, http://www.ifpri.org/publication/chinas-agricultural-and-rural-development-implications-africa
such as the food acquirement program and ‘people’s restaurants’ (which provide cheap subsidised food).
134
FAO, 2003, The State of Food Insecurity in the World, http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/j0083e/j0083e00.HTM; this
112
De Schutter, O., 2009, “Right to food and nutrition watch: Who controls the governance of the world food system”,
is based on figures from the FAO’s State of Food Insecurity in the World (SOFI) report 2001 and 2008, respectively.
http://www.fian.org/resources/documents/rtfn-watch/right-to-food-and-nutrition-watch-2009/pdf
135
FAO, 2009, “Country responses to the food security crisis: Nature and preliminary implications of the policies
113
Government of the Federal Republic of Brazil, op. cit.
pursued,” http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ISFP/pdf_for_site_Country_Response_to_the_Food_Security.pdf
114
De Schutter, O., 2009, “Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food”, http://www2.ohchr.org/ 136
Green, D., King, R., and Miller-Dawkins, M., 2010, “The Global Economic Crisis and Developing Countries: Impact
english/issues/food/index.htm
and Response”, Oxfam, http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/wp content/uploads/GEC_research_report_
115
Windfuhr, M., 2002, “Access to Land Is a Key Human Rights Issue in Development and Cooperation”, Agrarian consultation_draft_27Jan2010.pdf
Reform and Rural Development No. 2, March/April, http://www.inwent.org/E+Z/zeitschr/de202-5.htm. 137
Greenpeace, 2008, “Food for Thought: Climate Change and Food Security in China”,
116
Government of the Federal Republic of Brazil, 2010, op cit. http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/wp-content/uploads/GEC_research_report_consultation_draft_27Jan2010.pdf
117
United Nations, “Millennium Development Goal Indicators”, http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Data.aspx 138
Shuping, N., 10 July 2008, “China approves big budget for GMO amid food worries”, http://www.reuters.com/
article/idUSPEK11727520080710
118
Based on World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Global Hunger Index
figures, also quoted in United Nations Millennium Development Goal Indicators, loc. cit. 139
FAO, 2008, The State of Food Insecurity in the World, http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0291e/i0291e00.htm
119
WFP, 2010, “Burundi: Overview”, http://www.wfp.org/countries/burundi 140
World Food Programme, 2010, Congo, Democratic Republic, http://www.wfp.org/countries/congo-democratic-republic
120
WFP, 30 March 2010, “Global Update Food Security Monitoring, October 2009 – February 2010”, Issue 2, 141
African Economic Outlook, 2010, Congo, Democratic Republic, http://www.africaneconomicoutlook.org/en/
http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp217880.pdf countries/central-africa/congo-democratic-republic/
121
Chamres, C., 26 February 2008, “Food inflation hits Cambodia's poor, threatens hunger”, 142
Washington Post, “Food For Thought”, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-adv/specialsales/spotlight/
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Food_inflation_hits_Cambodias_poor_threatens_hunger_999.html congo/food.html
122
WFP, 2010, “Cambodia: Overview”, http://www.wfp.org/countries/cambodia 143
Sapa, 23 October 2009, “South Africans to farm in Congo”, Southafrica.info, http://www.southafrica.info/news/
business/8274.htm
123
Economic Development Policy Project Development Issues Programme, 2009, “The Impact of the Economic
Downturn on Households and Communities in Cambodia”, July, Phnom Penh: The NGO Forum on Cambodia, 144
Government of Ethiopia, 2008,“Dynamics of Growth and Poverty in Ethiopia”, DPRD - Ministry of Finance and
http://www.ngoforum.org.kh/eng/dip/dipdocs/ECOP_Brocher-English_upload.pdf. Economic Development,, http://www.mofed.gov.et/Uploaded/Publication/DynamicsOfGrowth-and-Poverty
-Final2009.pdf
124
Thin Lei Win, 8 July 2010, “FACTBOX: Land grabs and forced evictions in Cambodia”, AlertNet, http://www.alert
net.org/db/an_art/52132/2010/06/8-144738-1.htm. 145
World Bank, 2009, “Agriculture Growth Program”, PAD, http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external
/default/main?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&search

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?

 103
MenuPK=64187511&cid=3001&entityID=000020953_20091015134944, p.1 Gambia”, , http://www.au.int/?q=node/2286
146
Note that the budget for agriculture figure cited for Ethiopia in this report includes rural development spending, 169
Jallow, A., 19 July 2010, “National Agricultural Investment Plan Validated”, All Africa, http://allafrica.com/stories
which is not included in most other countries. It must be noted, however, that significant amounts not reflected /201007200686.html
here are also spent on agriculture through decentralized budgeting. 170
How We Made it in Africa, 15 June 2010, “Numerous Opportunities in the Gambia Agriculture Sector”,
147
2003 Budget Proclamation, http://www.mofed.gov.et/Uploaded/document/proclamations/2003-Budget http://www.howwemadeitinafrica.com/numerous-opportunities-in-the-gambias-agriculture-sector/1408/
-Proclamation(Part%20II).xls
148
Ethiopia, 2003, http://www.mofed.gov.et/Uploaded/document/proclamations/2003-Budget-Proclamation(Part%20II) 171
Economist Intelligence Unit, op cit.
.xls; UN High Level Task Force on the Global Food Crisis (HLTF), 2009, “Progress Report: April 2008-October 172
Omilola, B., Lambert, M., 2009, “Weathering the Storm: Agricultural Development, Investment, and Poverty in
2009”, http://un-foodsecurity.org/node/135, pp. 7-84; Perry, A., 6 August 2008, “Ethiopia: Pain amid Plenty”, Time,
Africa Following the Recent Food Price Crisis”, ReSAKSS, http://www.resakss.org/index.php?pdf=42774
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1829841,00.html
173
UN, 2010, “Millennium Development Goals: At a Glance”, http://www.wecanendpoverty.eu/DataBic2/Library/Files
149
Nwaozuzu, O., 23 February 2009, “A Closer Look at the Famine in Ethiopia 1984-1985”, Ezine @rticles,
/d250fbd69677006d7c525ea61b7deb5e_mdgsglancefactsheet.pdf
http://ezinearticles.com/?A-Closer-Look-at-the-Famine-in-Ethiopia-(1984-1985)&id=2028582
174
UN News Centre, 16 July 2010, Senior Un official urges Africa to focus on agriculture, jobs and social services,
150
FAO GIEWS, 2010, “Ethiopia”, August, http://www.fao.org/giews/countrybrief/country.jsp?code=ETH
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=35349&Cr=mdg&Cr1=
151
Perry, A., op cit. 175
Ghana Web, 30 may 2010, School feeding programme to cover one million pupils by the end year,
152
ActionAid International, 2009, “Five out of ten? Assessing progress towards the AU’s 10% budget target for agri http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=183093
culture”, http://www.actionaid.org/docs/five%20out%20of%20ten-%20assessing%20progress%20towards%20 176
Breisinger, C. et al., 2008, “Agriculture for Development in Ghana New Opportunities and Challenges”, IFPRI
the%20au%27s%2010%20per%20cent%20budget%20target%20for%20agriculture.pdf
Discussion Paper, http://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/784.html
153
World Bank, 2009, “Ethiopia: Unleashing the potential of Ethiopian women”, Washington DC: World Bank, 177
UNDP, 2010, “Haiti: 6 months on”, http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWFiles2010.nsf/FilesByRWDocUnidFilename/
http://www.ds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=
KHII-87R3KT-full_report.pdf/$File/full_report.pdf
523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679&entity
ID=000333038_20091004234302&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679, p. 42 179
FAO, 2010, “Haiti”, July, http://www.fao.org/countries/55528/en/hti/
154
ActionAid International, 2009, ”Guatemala,” Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?, 180
UN OCHA, 30 July 2010, “Haiti”, Humanitarian Bulletin, http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900sid/
http://www.actionaid.org/docs/hungerfree_scorecards.pdf MYAI-87W2R9/$File/full_repoert.pdf
155
Government of Guatemala, 2009, National Survey of Maternal and Child Health. 181
Ibid.
156
United Nations News, 11 September 2009, “Hunger crisis in Guatemala draws mounting concern from UN food 182
UNDP, July 2010, Haiti: 6 months on, loc cit.
agency”, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32027. 183
Ibid.
157
WFP, 2010, “Guatemala: Overview”, http://www.wfp.org/countries/guatemala 184
FAO, July 2010, Haiti, loc cit.
158
WFP, 9 June 2010, “Guatemala: Tropical Storm Agatha leaves trail of hunger”, 185
UNDP, July 2010, Haiti: 6 months on, loc cit.
http://www.wfp.org/stories/guatemala-tropical-storm-agatha-leaves-trail-hunger
186
Ibid.
159
WFP, 2010, “Guatemala: Overview”, loc cit.
187
Ibid.
160
Ibid.
188
WFP, 2010, “Overview: India”, http://www.wfp.org/countries/India/Overview
161
Menjívar, C., 2008, “Violence and Women’s Lives in Eastern Guatemala: A Conceptual Framework”, Latin American
Research Review, Vol.43, No. 3. 189
Ibid.
162
ActionAid International, 2009, Who’s Really Fighting Hunger, loc cit. 190
Financial Express, 8 June 2010, “Welfare schemes feeding India’s deficit”,
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/welfare-schemes-feeding-indias-deficit/631049/
163
As recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food and as agreed in the 1992 Peace Accords.
191
Prabhu,K. S., February 2010, “Budget 2010: Will Rural India Get a Fair Deal?”, Wall Street Journal,
164
World Food Programme, 16 April 2010, “The Gambia: Overview”, http://www.wfp.org/countries/gambia
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126699162823150769.html
165
FAO, 2010, “GIEWS Country Brief – Gambia”, http://www.fao.org/giews/countrybrief/country.jsp?code=GMB 192
Gangopadhyay, A., 22 July 2010, “India Food Prices on Boil Again”, Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/
166
Economist Intelligence Unit, 2010, “Country Report: The Gambia”, London: The Economist Intelligence Unit, article/SB10001424052748703467304575382562734887190.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.economist.com/countries/ 193
Gangopadhyay, A., 22 July 2010, India Food Prices on Boil Again, Ibid.
167
FAO, 2010, “GIEWS Country Brief – Gambia”, loc cit. 194
Prabhu, K. S., 2010, op cit.
168
African Union, 26 October 2009, “AU Commission signs CAADP Compact Agreement with the Republic of the

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?

 104
195
Ibid. http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/agriculture/pdfs/2010/FTF_2010_Implementation_Plan_Rwanda.pdf
196
Ibid. 221
USAID, 2010, “Southern Africa Food Security Outlook”, July, http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADS202.pdf
197
Prabhu, K. S., 5 June 2010, , op cit.; Times of India, “Government Promises Food Security Act”, http://timesof 222
This is based on AAI calculations from various sources.
india.indiatimes.com/india/Govt-promises-food-security-Act/articleshow/4618260.cms 223
Club of Mozambique, 10 March 2009. “Mozambique plans to increase its grain harvest by 13 percent in 2009 /
198
RAPDA and FIAN International, 2010, “Kenya’s hunger crisis – The result of right to food violations”, 2010”,http://www.clubofmozambique.com/solutions1/sectionnews.php?secao=mozambique&id=14405&tipo=one.
http://www.fian.org/resources/documents/others/kenyas-hunger-crisis-the-result-of-right-to-food-violations/pdf 224
Castel-Branco , C. and Ossemane, R., 2010, “ Mozambique Phase 2”, Paper 18, Global Financial Crisis Discussion
199
Ibid. Series, ODI.
200
ActionAid International Kenya, 2009, Annual Report, 225
AllAfica.com, 6 July 2010, “Mozambique: Strong growth of economy continues”, http://allafrica.com/stories
http://www.actionaid.org/micrositeAssets/kenya/assets/aaik%20annual%20report%20for%202009%20final.pdf /201007061193.html
201
ActionAid International Kenya, 6 August 2010, “A new beginning for Kenya,” 226
Making Finance Work for Africa, 2010, Mozambique: Financial Sector Profile, A World Bank/IMF hosted African
http://www.actionaid.org.uk/102581/a_new_beginning_for_kenya.html country Initiative, http://www.mfw4a.org/mozambique/mozambique-financial-sector-profile.html
202
Ibid. 227
World Bank, 2009, “IDA at Work: Mozambique: From Post-Conflict Recovery to High Growth”, http://
siteresources.worldbank.org/IDA/Resources/ida_Mozambique_10-02-09.pdf
203
COMESA, 24 August 2010, “Kenya signs for CAADP/ launches agricultural sector development strategy”,
http://www.comesa.int/lang-en/component/content/article/34-general-news/493--kenya-signs-caadp-launches 228
Green, D. et al. 28 May 2010, The Global Economic Crisis and Developing Countries, Oxfam Great Britain and
-agricultural-sector-development-strategy Oxfam Australia,
http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/global-economic-crisis-and-developing-countries-2010.pdf
204
RAPDA and FIAN International, op. cit.
229
Voice of America, 29 July 2010, “Nepal faces political crisis as parties fail to agree on new government,”
205
ActionAid International, 2009, “Kenya”, Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?, http://www.actionaid.org/docs/hunger
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Nepal-Faces-Political-Crisis-as-Parties-Fail-to-Agree-on-new-
free_scorecards.pdf
Government-99539229.html
206
Krafchik, W. N. D., “Can civil society add value to budget decision-making? A description of civil society budget 230
Von Bulow, M., 31 August 2009, “Millions in Nepal facing Hunger as Climate Changes”, COP 15 Copenhagen,
work”, http://www.mekonginfo.org/HDP/Lib.nsf/0/AB13F4D51C6A161647256D9E0033F014/$FILE/Q%203.4%
http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=1989
20-% 20IBP%20-%20civilsociety.pdf
231
Jolly, J., 30 August 2009, “Arduous Life in Nepal’s Parched Hills”, BBC,
207
Ibid.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8226049.stm
208
WFP Country reports, http://www.wfp.org/countries 232
WFP, 2009, “A sub-regional hunger index for Nepal”, WFP Nepal, http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/
209
Gender Equality in Liberia, http://www.wikigender.org/index.php/Liberia public/documents/ena/wfp215490.pdf
210
Liberia is ranked 176 out of 179 on the 2008 UNDP Human Development Index. 233
Ghale, Y., n.d., “Relations Between Land Rights and Women’s Empowerment”, NepalNews.com,
http://www.nepalnews.com/main/index.php/-guestcolumn/684-relations-between-land-rights-and-womens
211
UN MDG Indicators, http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Default.aspx
-empowerment.html
212
WFP, 2010, “Lesotho: Overview”, http://www.wfp.org/countries/lesotho 234
AllAfrica.com, 6 July 2009, “Nigeria: Food security”, http://allafrica.com/stories/200907060051.html
213
Foodsec, February 2010, “Price monitoring and analysis country brief”, 235
Ibid.
http://www.foodsec.org/countrybrief/Feb10/Lesotho_February%202010.pdf
236
Adedeji, C., 12 January 2010, “Nigeria: Nants faults N148 billion budget for agriculture in 2010”,
214
United Nations, 20 May 2010, “UN Agency Uses European Funding to Boost Food Production in Lesotho”,
http://allafrica.com/stories/201001130406.html.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=34746&Cr=fao&Cr1=
237
http://www.google.com.vn/search?q=hunger+nigeria&hl=en&source=lnms&tbs=nws:1&ei=BNp
215
WFP, 2010, op cit.
BTIDWLM-XceTkoY8L&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CBwQ_AU&prmdo=1?
216
Plus News, 3 February 2009, “Lesotho: ’We Need Food’ ”, http://www.plusnews.org/report.aspx?ReportId=82726 238
Zimmerman, J. M. and Moury, Y., 2009, “Savings-Linked Conditional Cash Transfers: A New Policy Approach to
217
FAO, 2009, Pathways to success, http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/newsroom/docs/pathways.pdf Global Poverty Reduction”, New America Foundation,
http://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/savings_linked_conditional_cash_transfers
218
ActionAid International, 2010, “Fertile Ground: How governments and donors can halve hunger by supporting
smallholders”, http://www.actionaid.org/assets/pdf%5Cfertilegroundreportwebfinal.pdf 239
WFP, 2010, “Pakistan - Food Security & Market Assessment in crisis areas of NWFP and FATA”,
home.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp221262.pdf; International Fund for Agricultural
219
Goverment of Malawi, 28 May 2010, “2010/11 Malawi National Budget”, http://www.malawi.gov.mw/Finance/ Development (IFAD), 2007, “Rural Poverty in Pakistan”,
budgetS2010.pdf http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/web/guest/country/home/tags/pakistan.
220
USAID, 2010, “The Feed the Future (FTF) Malawi Fiscal Year 2010 Implementation Plan”, 240
World Bank, 2002, “Poverty Assessment: Pakistan: Vulnerabilities, social gaps, and rural dynamics”,

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?

 105
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gG6WqjMEIaQJ:siteresources.worldbank.org/ 261
Economist Intelligence Unit, 2010, “Sierra Leone Country Report”, London: EIU,
EXTSAREGTOPPOVRED/Resources/493440-1102216396155/572861-1102219851701/PA http://www.alacrastore.com/country-snapshot/Sierra%20Leone
dissem_Lahore.ppt+Poverty+Assessment:+Pakistan+Vulnerabilities,+social+gaps,+and+rural+dynamics 262
Samba, A., 22 September 2010, “Sierra Leone signs CAADP Document”, Awareness Times, http://news.sl/dr
&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=za
website/exec/view.cgi?archive=1&num=13083
241
IFAD, 2007, op. cit. 263
Ibid.
242
Ebrahim, Z., 13 July 2010, “Pakistan: Slowly, women gain ground through land ownership”, IPS News, 264
Calculated from 2010 Government budget figures at
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52134
http://www.mofed.gov.sl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=28, Annex 2 and 3, if including
243
IFAD, 2007, op cit. budget to Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Forestry, Sierra Leone Agriculture Research Institute and
agriculture and food security transfers to local government.
244
The Daily Times, 11 July 2010, “Task force on agri reforms to improve crops”, http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/
default.asp?page=2010%5C07%5C11%5Cstory. 265
N.A., 2010, “US announces $224M In grants To Fight Hunger”, 23 June, Wall Street Journal,
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100623-706955.html,
245
Government of Pakistan, 2010, “Interim Report: Economic Stabilization with a Human Face”, Planning
Commission, April, http://www.planningcommission.gov.pk/usefull%20links/Economist/Title-Final-CorelFile1.pdf. 266
National Democratic Institute, 2009, “Town Hall Meetings on Land Reform in Sierra Leone draw wider reception”, 5
March, http://www.ndi.org/node/15155
246
Burwell, S. M., 25 June 2010, “Big action for small farmers”, Huffington Post,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sylvia-mathews-burwell/big-action-for-small-farm_b_625754.html 267
Mankind's Activities for Development Accreditation Movement, 2010, “Right to Food”, http://www.madam
-sl.org/?Projects:Right_to_Food
247
Zoellick, R. B., 27 August 2009, “Africa’s lot not hopeless; it just requires more help”, The Nation,
http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/646332/-/4n7j56/-/ 268
Economist Intelligence Unit, op cit.
248
Odoobo, K., 10 November 2009, “Rwanda’s agriculture up despite global crisis”, The Independent, 269
Donstance Koroma, D., 2 July 2010, “Social Protection in Sierra Leone: How far?”, Sierra Express Media,
http://www.independent.co.ug/index.php/news/regional-news/78-regional-news/2091-rwandas-agriculture http://www.sierraexpressmedia.com/archives/10813
-up-despite-global-crisis 270
Berry, L. Hall, K. and Hendricks, M., 2010, “Child health: Nutrition”, South African Child Gauge 2009/2010,
249
Reuters, 17 March 2010, “Rwanda forecasts 7pct economic growth”, http://www.ci.org.za/depts/ci/pubs/pdf/general/gauge2009-10/sa_child_gauge_09-10_child_health_nutrition.pdf
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7160:rwanda-forecasts 271
Groenewald Y., 12 February 2009, “Land, agriculture get budget boost”, Mail and Guardian,
-7-pct-economic-growth&catid=7:Industry&Itemid=116
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-02-12-land-agriculture-get-budget-boost
250
Ruburika, S., 5 August 2009, “Rwanda: Country weathers economic crisis despite challenges lying ahead”, All 272
The Good News, 2010, “R100 Million Boost to Emerging Farmers”, 14 April,
Africa, http://allafrica.com/stories/200908060430.html
http://www.sagoodnews.co.za/agriculture_land_reform/r100m_to_boost_emerging_farmers.html
251
Rwanda News Agency, 20 May 2010, “Spending on agriculture will remain on 7% despite regional agreement”, 273
Shacinda, S., 2010, “S.Africa food prices rise due to frost, input costs”, 13 July, http://af.reuters.com/article/top
http://www.rnanews.com/economy/3412-spending-on-agriculture-will-remain-on-7-despite-regional-agreement-
News/idAFJOE66C0FW20100713?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&sp=true
252
N.A., 2010, “Rwanda’s social protection sector”, http://kmcafee.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/rwandas-social 274
Economist Intelligence Unit, 2009, “Country Report: Tanzania”.
-protection-sector/
275
Cotula, L., Vermeulen, S., Leonard, R. and Keeley, J., 2009, “Land Grab or Development Opportunity: Agricultural
253
FAO, 2009, “Country responses to the world food crisis”, loc cit.
Investment and International Land Deals in Africa,” IIED/FAO/IFAD, London/Rome.
254
Reuters, May 2008, “Senegal Offers Investors Tax Breaks to Boost Farming”, 276
Ibid.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL11206798
277
WFP, April 2009, “Comprehensive food security and vulnerability analysis: Uganda”,
255
FAO GIEWS, 12 April 2010, “GIEWS Country Brief: Senegal”,
http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp103646.pdf, p.77
file:///C:/DOCUME~1/KimT/LOCALS~1/Temp/Rar$EX67.663781/countrydocs/Senegal/country.jsp.htm
278
Government of Uganda, 2009, “Animal Industry and Fisheries Development Strategy and Investment Plan
256
Avril, H., 2010, “Land Grabs Continue as Elites Resist Regulation”, IPS News, April,
(2009/10 - 2013/14)”, Ministry of Agriculture, http://www.finance.go.ug/docs/010%20Ministry%20of%20
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=51018
Agriculture%20Animal%20Industry%20and%20Fisheries.pdf, p.18
257
Vidal, J., 2010, “21st Century African Land Grab”, http://www.countercurrents.org/vidal080310.htm 279
WFP, April 2009, “Comprehensive food security and vulnerability analysis: Uganda”, p.58.
258
WFP, December 2009, “Sierra Leone Food Security Monitoring Bulletin”, http://home.wfp.org/stellent/groups/ 280
Government of Uganda, October 2009, “Uganda: Review of ongoing agricultural development efforts”,
public/documents/ena/wfp216284.pdf
MAAIF/CAADP, http://www.pma.go.ug/docs/CAADP-UG_Brochure2.pdf, p.2.
259
UNDP, 2010, “Sierra Leone: MDG Goal 1 – Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger2, 281
FAO/GIEWS, May 2010, Countries in Crisis requiring external assistance for food, http://www.fao.org/giews/
http://www.sl.undp.org/Goal1.htm
english/hotspots/index.htm#UGA
260
GIEWS, 2010, “Country Brief: Sierra Leone”, Rome: FAO, http://www.fao.org/giews/countrybrief/country.jsp?code=SLE 282
More women (83 percent) are employed in agriculture than men (71 percent).

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?

 106
283
Uganda Bureau of Statistics, March 2005, 2002 Population and Housing Census: Main Report.
284
Uganda Bureau of Statistics, 2008, Statistical Abstract,
http://www.ubos.org/onlinefiles/uploads/ubos/pdf%20documents/2009Statistical_%20Abstract.pdf
285
National Institute of Nutrition, 2006, “Reduction in childhood malnutrition in Vietnam from
1990 to 2004”, Nguyen Cong Khan Hanoi School of Public Health, Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2007;16
(2):274-278, http://apjcn.nhri.org.tw/server/APJCN/Volume16/vol16.2/Finished/NguyenCongKhan(274-278).pdf
286
Social in Brief, 24 December 2009, http://english.vietnamnet.vn/social/200912/SOCIAL-IN-BRIEF-24/12-885972/
287
United Nations, 1992, “IDT/MDG Progress - Viet Nam”, http://www.undg.org/archive_docs/133-
Viet_Nam_MDG_Report_-_1st_Report__English.pdf
288
2009 figures put this at 12 percent but the government expects it to be re-calculated at 10 per cent in 2010. See:
http://www.gtz.de/en/weltweit/asien-pazifik/vietnam/18211.htm
289
FAO, 2010, “FAO in Vietnam”, http://www.fao.org.vn/en-US/Home/default.aspx
290
Chhibber, A., Ghosh, J., and Palanivel, T., 21 September 2009, The Global Financial Crisis and the Asia-Pacific
region - A Synthesis Study Incorporating Evidence from Country Case Studies, UNDP Regional Centre in Asia and
the Pacific, http://zunia.org/post/the-global-financial-crisis-and-the-asia-pacific-region-a-synthesis-study
-incorporating-evidence-f/
291
Bishop-Sambrook, C., 2005, “Contribution of farm power to smallholder livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa”, FAO,
http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0229e/a0229e06.htm

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?

 107

Who’s Really Fighting Hunger?

Acknowledgments

This report was written by Jo Walker, with contributions from Kim Trathen, Aaron de Grassi,
Anne Jellema, Brendan O’Donnell, and Tom Sharman. The data used in the brief was researched,
collated and analysed by Aaron de Grassi with contributions from Mark Curtis, Kim Trathen,
Catherine Gatundu, and Aulo Re. Additional thanks to Shanaaz Nel and Leora Casey.

Design by www.nickpurser.com

ActionAid is an international anti-poverty agency

working in over 40 countries, taking sides with poor people to
end poverty and injustice together.
ActionAid
Postnet Suite 248
Private bag X31,
Saxonwold 2132 Johannesburg
South Africa

Telephone: +27 11 731 4500

Facsimile: +27 11 880 8082
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.actionaid.org

ActionAid International is incorporated in The Hague, The Netherlands. Registration number 2726419
ActionAid International is incorporated in South Africa under section 21A of the Companies Act 1973.
Registration number 2004/007117/10

ActionAid 2010