Approaching International Hunger

The concept of security is crucially central to the International Relations discipline. In contemporary society, one of the biggest threats to global security is perceived to be climate change, together with an increasing focus on the expanding population. Rising food prices, coupled with global economic downturn, have ignited political mobilisation and lead to food politics shifting to the forefront of the political agenda. This project attempts to intertwine traditional theoretical concepts with newer sociological ideas to try and understand how and why global hunger remains a widespread problem in the 21st century; it is an idea which is emerging as the success of international aid remains in doubt. The central argument is the realisation that hunger is much more than just a physical bodily condition, and therefore cannot be fully understood without a focus on its human aspects, such as relations, emotions and choices. Theories of food justice and insecurity are analysed through Malthusian questions over sustainability, utilitarian puzzles over inequality and within the debate surrounding the questionable success of international food aid. Food consumption in the form of its instrumental, hedonistic and symbolic value is recognised as being underrepresented in rights-based approaches and blueprinted targets, including the freedom from hunger and the Millennium Development Goals. Introduction Approaching International Hunger is a qualitative research project which aims to succinctly analyse the dominant ways in which we understand international hunger. It emerged as a response to a critical article entitledMore Than One Billion People are Hungry. But what if the Experts are Wrong? , by economists Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo (2011a). They argue that the dominant approaches to hunger are non-complete because they assume that human beings act solely as rational individuals. Within this assumption, the importance of social, cultural and anthropogenic factors such as choice, risk, stigma, motivation and pleasure, is largely underestimated. It is widely acknowledged that food study has always been a disparate discipline. Fine et al (1996) observe that the fragmentation of thought which is currently in place suggests there is an inadequate understanding of the importance of food and hunger in modern society. Nunn and Qian suggest that hunger, poverty and food aid are highly fungible, and it is this which makes recognising their causes, consequences and effects more difficult (2011). Ultimately, it is apparent that discrepancies between economic, sociological and political spheres have led to a void of understanding which does not sufficiently address the human effects of international hunger. Breaking down the available literature into distinct sections allowed for a simplification of the diverse topic. Initial theories had an ideological basis, concentrating on the basic human right to food. The dominant bulk of information contained material which had a pro-aid rhetoric, which included statements and policy from the World Health Organisation (WHO), World Food Programme (WFP) and advocates for neoliberal development policy such as Jeffery Sachs (2005). The third body formulated around the work of critical aid scholars, largely composed of rightwing political economists such as William Easterly (2006) and Dambisa Moyo (2010), who argue strongly for the elimination of aid and the protection of the free market to build independence. The final and most recent body of research proposes a shift away from the grand overarching ‘solutions’ to hunger that can be recognised within the dominant approaches, and argues instead for a deeper focus on the lives of the poor; qualitative surveying over E-International Relations ISSN 2053-8626 Page 1/22 Approaching International Hunger Written by Jennifer Panting quantitative economic supposition. The project follows this basic literary structure, adding detail and debate to carry the argument that each approach has different assumptions of human nature. The methodological research was conducted through desk-based analysis. The selection process began fairly randomly with a broad search on the University of the West of England library database for literature on ‘food insecurity,’ ‘food politics’ and ‘food aid. ’ It was not until the discovery of the Banerjee and Duflo article that the central idea shifted away from a typical empirical study to a focus on the significance of international human relations (2011a). Information was collected from a variety of secondary sources, particularly journals, books and research reports. Twitter presented links to current newspaper articles, which allowed relevant information to be sourced in a way that textbooks could not provide; this was useful for collating the latest available academic thought. The microblogging site was a useful source as it allowed for the dissemination of information, from the increased attention it has been receiving from academic scholars through to the updated policy of institutions such as the Food and Agriculture Organization. To understand how the dominant approaches to international hunger have developed, an outline of the traditional concepts of hunger, injustice and human rights must be laid out. The structure of the project sees Chapter One therefore focusing on ideological approaches towards hunger; attempting to simplify the vast selection of theories, concepts and ideas which have formulated as a response to its persistence throughout history. It is significant because it highlights a paradigm shift away from hunger as an issue of individual injustice, towards the recognition that hunger is an interconnected social problem. It aims to put in place the theoretical groundwork on which the following chapters will build upon. Chapter Two moves away from normative philosophical and economic arguments and focuses on food aid as a solution to international hunger. It distinguishes between three types of aid: emergency, project, and programme aid, although it notes that this distinction is not always so clear cut in practice. The main body of the chapter looks at the divide between the dominant neoliberal argument, as seen in the majority of the literature by aid advocates (Sachs, World Food Programme, Food for Peace) and the arguments of the critical aid scholars, particularly composed of free-market economists such as William Easterly and Dambisa Moyo. Chapter Three progresses away from the politics of hunger and focuses instead on consumption, collectivism and the choices of the poor. It is argued that the rational economic models outlined in the first two chapters do not take into account this human face of hunger. Banerjee and Duflo (2011b) propose that this lies with the lack of research into the relationships people have with food, whether directly as consumers or indirectly as members of a particular family, clan, ethnicity or nation. This chapter looks at three types of consumption – instrumental, hedonistic and symbolic – and suggests that traditional approaches to international hunger misjudge the importance of a relationshipbased approach. Concluding the project, the final section offers an example of an alleviation approach aimed at mobilising the general public: a website called Freerice, which is endorsed by the World Food Programme (2012b). It is entitledPlay and Feed Hungry People as an ironic reference to the intention of the website, which calls for individuals to play online games to donate grains of rice to those suffering from hunger. It has been included in this project as it exemplifies the dominant misunderstanding that food has a purely instrumental value; the satisfaction of extreme hunger. It highlights the need for a shift away from this perception of food as a simple object, towards an approach which appreciates its symbolic, emotive and contextual values. Chapter One: Food Justice: Ideological Approaches to Hunger “. Once a man be done with hunger, rich and poor are all as one. ” Euripides’ Electra 400bc. (As quoted in Wilkinson and Pickett, 2009: 3). This chapter is concerned with identifying ideological approaches towards hunger. It is an attempt to simplify the vast selection of theories and concepts which underpin the dominant assumptions that can be recognised today. The first part will look at theories of justice (including utilitarianism and fairness) and theories of entitlement (the capability E-International Relations ISSN 2053-8626 Page 2/22 Approaching International Hunger Written by Jennifer Panting approach). The link between justice, fairness and capabilities will be analysed through the work of distinguished economist Amartya Sen (1999). Sen moves away from the traditional understanding of hunger, which is synonymous with overall food decline. Instead, he describes an approach which considers hunger as a side product of limited entitlement and purchasing power. This is important because it implies that people’s relationship with food needs to be understood much more closely. As a paradigm shift it reflects a step away from hunger as an issue of individual injustice, towards the recognition that hunger is an interconnected social problem. The second section of this chapter will begin to look at our present ‘solutions’ to hunger through the discourse of human rights. It will focus specifically on the normative rights to food and freedom from hunger, and the important differences between them. Finally, the Millennium Development Goals will be outlined and their linkages to the rights-based approach will be discussed. The concluding remarks will outline how the chapter aimed to put in place the theoretical groundwork to which the following chapters will build upon. \ Justice, Fairness and Capabilities A widely discussed and debated theory of justice is utilitarianism, which concerns the maximisation of overall benefit. For this project, it seems an appropriate concept to