20

U.S. National Progress Report on Impleme

of the U.S. Action Plan on Food S

and World Food Summit Comm
Note: This document is an overview of U.S. activities pertinent to food

security. It is intended to be representative, not exhaustive. Because of

the time and space constraints involved in its creation, this document

includes only a few of the numerous activities of government agencies

and civil society organizations, drawn from agency submissions and publicly available sources. Please send suggestions for additions or revisions to the office of the National Food Security Coordinator, as noted

above.

The U.S. Action Plan on Food Security is a joint effort of the sub-Cabinet

level Interagency Working Group on Food Security (IWG) and the nongovernmental Food Security Advisory Committee (FSAC), a subcommittee

of the Board for International Food and Agricultural Development.

The IWG is co-chaired by:

August Schumacher, Jr.

Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Frank E. Loy

Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs

U.S. Department of State

Brady Anderson

Administrator

U.S. Agency for International Development

The Domestic Sub-Group of the IWG is co-chaired by:

Shirley Watkins

Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services

U.S. Department of Agriculture

David Satcher, M.D., Ph.d.

Assistant Secretary for Health and Surgeon General

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Questions regarding the Action Plan may be directed to:

Patricia Garamendi

National Food Security Coordinator

Foreign Agricultural Service

U.S. Department of Agriculture

1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Room 3008

Washington, DC 20250-1081

Tel. (202) 690-0776; Fax (202) 720-6103
Executive Summary 

Domestic Highlights 

International Highlights 

Progress in Reducing Food Insecurity 

The Cost of Ending Hunger 

The Cost of Not Ending Hunger 

Need To Redouble Efforts To Achieve Food Security Objectives 

Conclusion 

Background Information 

The Challenge: The World Food Summit 

The U.S. Response: The U.S. Action Plan on Food Security 

U.S. National Mechanisms for Food Security Priority Setting and Implementation 

The State of Food Security 

The State of International Food Security 

The State of U.S. Domestic Food Security 

Implementation Report 

Priority Area I: Economic Security and Policy Environment 

Priority Area II: Trade and Investment 

Priority Area III: Research and Education 

Priority Area IV: Sustainable Food Systems and the Environment 

Priority Area V: Food Security Safety Net 

Priority Area VI: Information and Mapping 

Priority Area VII: Food and Water Safety 

The Role of Civil Society 

U.S. Government Efforts To Involve Civil Society 

An Evolving Relationship: Steps to Closer Collaboration 

Civil Society Roles, Activities and Acccomplishments 

Appendix A: List of Acronyms 

Appendix B: The U.S. Action Plan in Brief 

Appendix C: Interagency Working Group on Food Security 

Appendix D: Food Security Advisory Committee 
2

Food security is achieved when

all people at all times have

physical and economic access

to sufficient food to meet their dietary

needs for a productive and healthy

life. Sadly, over 800 million people in

the world go to sleep hungry or

undernourished each night. Even in

the United States, where food is

plentiful, safe, nutritious, and relatively inexpensive, in 1999 10.5 million

households were food insecure, and

of these, in nearly 3.1 million households, someone was hungry at some

point during the year.

The World Food Summit of 1996

provided an opportunity to focus

attention on efforts to address

hunger and food insecurity. This

national report discusses what the

United States has done to address

international and domestic commitments on food security, and key

achievements, best practices, and

lessons learned from both government agencies and civil society

groups to share with the international

community as well as U.S. stakeholders. The report also highlights

that the U.S. Government and civil

society now know what actions and

investments would cut hunger in half

both domestically and internationally.

The development of the U.S. Action

Plan on Food Security has raised the

profile of food security and has

enhanced communication and coordination between government and

civil society for more effective action

in furthering food security goals and

greater coherence among private

and public food security programs.

Domestic Highlights

The Clinton/Gore Administration has

made addressing hunger a priority,

both at home and abroad. In March

1999, the United States released its

U.S. Action Plan on Food Security,

which outlines the means by which

the United States will address 

national and domestic food se

goals, and represents commit

of both the public sector and c

society.

There have been several initia

strengthen the nutrition safe

In 1998, the first successful C

Administration proposal to exp

access to the child nutrition pr

in 20 years created a new afte

school snack program and a

research pilot for a universal s

breakfast program. Food stam

were restored to some legal im

grants, and funding for food a

tance for low-income, vulnera
women and children and for the

school breakfast program was

increased.

The U.S. Government created a

Community Food Security

Initiative in 1999 to coordinate public and private sector response to

U.S. domestic food security commitments in the U.S. Action Plan.

Through this initiative, more than

10 million pounds of excess food

have been donated to the poor that

would have otherwise gone to waste.

It has also created a multitude of

public and private commitments and

partnerships to fight hunger, and has

facilitated implementation of community-based food security programs

and community access to nutrition

assistance programs.

A national food security objective.

Healthy People 2010, the Nation’s

health goals for this decade and a

framework to define the national

health agenda and guide health promotion and disease prevention policy, includes for the first time an

objective to halve food insecurity by

2010, five years earlier than the

World Food Summit target. In addition, some States, like Connecticut,

have set a statewide goal of eliminating food insecurity by 2010.

Welfare reform. The U.S. Action

Plan was developed in the context of

a revolutionary change in the way

cash assistance is provided to lowincome persons that emphasizes

work, responsibility, and family.

Millions on welfare are going to

work, staying employed, and earning

more for sustainable self-reliance.

The United States has implemented

many welfare-to-work programs to

prepare and place long-term welfare

recipients in quality jobs and to provide a broad array of services related to transportation, child care, and

health insurance to help in the transition to self-sufficiency.

The Empowerment

Zone/Enterprise Community

Initiative. The United States is providing $1.5 billion in performance

grants and more than $2.5 billion in

tax incentives for job creation and

job-related activities for 144 urban

and rural communities designated as

Empowerment Zones or Enterprise

Communities. The Federal seed

money has leveraged over $10 billion in additional public and private

investment.

Expanding health care coverage

to uninsured children. The State

Children’s Health Insurance

Program, created in 1997, has

enabled States to expand health

care coverage to over 2 million uninsured children from families with

incomes too high to qualify for

Medicaid but too low to afford private

health insurance.

The United States has als

ed and enhanced the qua

early childhood develop

grams for low-income c

Under the Clinton/Gore

Administration, funding fo

Start has more than doub

increasing enrollment by 

200,000 children, enhanc

quality of services, launch

initiative called Early Hea

infants and toddlers, and 

partnerships with provide

full-day and full-year Hea

services to help low-incom

obtain full-time work.

In 1997, President Clinton

announced a National Fo

Initiative for reducing foo

ness from farm to table. T

tive has resulted in strate

of U.S. food safety efforts

ments in the national food 

veillance system; impleme

Hazard Analysis and Crit

Point systems in appropri

of the food supply; new sc

information and tools to b

trol food safety hazards; i

ments in risk assessment 

ties and inspection; expan

research and consumer e

and enhanced safety of im

foods. A strong science b

all these efforts.
4

International Highlights

The Clinton/Gore Administration has

shown an unprecedented interest in

Africa, particularly with respect to its

food security challenges. The

President’s historic visit to Africa in

March 1998 laid the foundation for a

new U.S.–Africa partnership, and

has resulted in initiatives to improve

nutritional status and increase rural

incomes by renewing commitment to

agriculture and food security and

promoting sound economic development and strong democratic societies. These include the Africa

Food Security Initiative, the

Education for Development and

Democracy Initiative, and the

Africa: Seeds of Hope Act. The

United States has also supported

African efforts to increase economic

opportunity and income for their people through increased openness to

international trade and investment

through such initiatives as the

Partnership for Economic Growth

and Opportunity in Africa of 1997,

the Africa Trade and Investment

Program, and the 2000 African

Growth and Opportunity Act.

The 1998 Africa: Seeds of Hope

Act refocuses U.S. development

assistance resources on agricultural

and rural development for smallscale farmers and struggling rural

communities, focusing on microcredit finance strategies, agricultural

research, agricultural extension, and

enhanced private enterprises in agriculture. The Act also calls for

increased participation by African

partners in decision-making on

development and greater emphasis

on entrepreneurial opportunities for

women in development programming, in recognition of the role of

women in small-scale agriculture.

Finally, the Act calls for renewed participation by U.S. land-grant universities in agricultural research, microenterprise, and other efforts to

reduce poverty and hunger in Africa.

So far the Africa: Seeds of Hope

legislation has produced the following results for food security and agriculture:

• Real expansion of U.S. microenterprise programs to alleviate

rural poverty

• Increased support for farmers

associations, cooperatives, and

rural organizations for poverty alleviation and self-sufficiency

• Increased support to agricultural

research in the East, West, and

southern African subregions

• Increased U.S. funding for agriculture for the first time since 1985

• A special program to link the international agricultural research centers with U.S. universities.

Trade capacity building acti

The capacity of developing co

and transitional economies to 

pate in the multilateral trading 

tem will be an important facto

evolution of a global economy 

works for everyone. The U.S.

Government has committed o

$600 million to trade capacity 

ing activities over the past 2 y

Research has shown that chil

who suffer malnutrition in thei

years are less able to learn an

hungry children are less likely 

attention in school. Starting in 

the United States will support 

Global Food for Education m

lateral school feeding progr

improve student enrollment, a

dance, and performance. The 

States will purchase surplus a

tural commodities and donate 

for use in school feeding nutri

programs in countries with str

commitment and action plans 

expand access and improve t

quality of basic education, wo

partnership with the World Fo

Programme of the United Nat

and private voluntary organiza

For the first year of the progra

United States will spend $300 

lion, feeding as many as 9 mi

school children and preschoo
Expanded funding for biotechnology and agricultural research. The

U.S. Agency for International

Development (USAID) provides funding for biotechnology and biosafety

capacity building in less developed

countries of approximately $7 million

per year for international agricultural

research center programs, innovative

public and private university partnerships for agricultural biotechnology

support and policy, and African livestock vaccine development.

Direct support to International

Agricultural Research Centers. In

1999, the United States, through

USAID, contributed $39 million to 16

international agricultural research

centers through the Consultative

Group on International Agricultural

Research. These centers, generally

located in developing countries, produce improved technologies and recommend policies for adaptation and

use in those nations for all the basic

food crops, livestock, and natural

resources.

Largest increase in U.S. international food assistance in a

decade. In both fiscal years 1997

and 1998, the United States provided roughly 3 million metric tons, valued at $1 billion, of food assistance

to over 60 developing and re-industrializing countries, reaching millions

of people. In fiscal year 1999, that

amount tripled to 10 million tons, valued at more than $2.4 billion, and the

number of countries served

increased to 82. This assistance was

divided almost equally between

emergencies and longer term development programs.

Reversing the decline in foreign

assistance for agriculture. The

U.S. Government has reversed the

decline in foreign assistan

for agriculture projects tha

1985, expanding this fund

$300 million in fiscal year 

addition, USAID has, for t

time in many years, broug

professionals on board in 

2000 to begin staffing the 

agriculture program.

U.S. food assistance arrives on the S.S

at the port of Massawa, Eritrea.
6

Hurricane relief and reconstruction. In response to two devastating

hurricanes in 1998, Mitch and

Georges, the United States has provided $621 million in reconstruction

assistance to Central America and

the Caribbean for restoration of

national health care delivery systems

and schools; community water and

sanitation; economic reactivation

through rebuilding farm-to-market

roads; re-establishment of agricultural production; replacement of lost

housing and shelter; a risk mapping

and early warning system; and disaster mitigation watershed restoration.

In 2000, USAID and the U.S.

Department of Agriculture (USDA)

jointly provided nearly $45 million in

direct or indirect assistance to

foreign countries to help them

strengthen food security, sustainable agriculture, and natural

resource management, including

over 80 projects annually that

address several priority areas of the

U.S. Action Plan. Key issues are

breaking down barriers to trade within sub-continental regions, developing economic models that can predict

famine and food insecurity, and

developing solutions to water

resource constraints.

U.S. support for Codex

Alimentarius. The United States

has been a leader in the Codex

process since its inception, and continued U.S. leadership will result in

increased food safety and food security worldwide, including in the United

States, because of the global nature

of our food supply. (The Codex

Alimentarius is a collection of internationally adopted food standards

intended to guide the establishment

and harmonization of national

requirements for foods and, in so

doing, facilitate international trade.)

U.S. support to WHO food s

programs: The United States 

ommended a food safety age

item to the World Health

Organization (WHO) Executiv

Board. It was ultimately pass

resolution on food safety in M

2000 at the Fifty-Third World 

Assembly. The United States 

also supported an enhanced W

food safety role by providing

resources for programs and s

loans.

Participatory, grass-roots

approach to development. T

Peace Corps sends volunteer

work in 77 countries on projec

which emphasize small-scale

priate technology, and capacit

ing of counterparts, institution

community groups for sustain

In 2000, a total budget of $24

lion is available for work in the 

ing sectors, all with implication

food security: agriculture, bus

development, education, envi

ment, and health. The project

water and sanitation, special i

tives for girls’ education, HIV/A

information technology, partic

of nongovernmental organizat

(NGO), women in developme

youth development.
Time Period

1969-71 1979-81 1990-92 

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

959 938

822 

East & SE Asia South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa Latin America Near East-N.Africa

Number of Undernourished People,

Developing World, 1969-1997

Source: FAO estimates, O

Progress in Reducing Food

Insecurity

In developing countries. We have

made significant progress in ending

hunger. Thirty years ago there were

959 million undernourished people in

the developing world. Today there

are 792 million, in spite of a 2 billion

rise in population. In recent

decades, the proportion of the

world’s population that is hungry has

dropped 50 percent and the absolute

number has fallen by 17 percent.

In the United States. With the help

of the strongest economy in a generation and the Nation’s nutrition safety

net, the problem of hunger has been

reduced, but not eliminated.

Comparing the rates of U.S. food

security between 1995 and 1999

shows a 12-percent decline in the

number of food-insecure households

and a decline of 24 percent in the

number with hungry members.

Sustained economic expansion has

reduced the U.S. poverty rate to its

lowest level since 1979.

The Cost of Ending 

Despite the progress we 

hunger persists, and this 

unacceptable in a world o

In developing countries

for halving world hunge

by USAID found that viab

affordable strategies exist 

ing the World Food Summ

halving global hunger tha

sustained but modest inc

current global developme
8

tance levels of $2.6 billion annually,

with the U.S. share at $685 million

per year. This study formed the

basis for the discussion of resource

requirements to cut hunger in half in

the U.S. Action Plan on Food

Security. Within the broad strategic

areas outlined in the U.S. Action

Plan, the five areas with the highest

potential to reduce malnutrition at the

lowest cost are agricultural research,

rural roads, safe water, targeted

income-earning opportunities, and

women’s education.

In the United States. According to

estimates by public advocates, ending food insecurity and hunger in the

United States through additional

domestic food assistance would cost

about $6.9 billion, but is a short-term

emergency solution that would temporarily close the food gap of foodinsecure households, but not ensure

they stay food secure. Producing

income levels to enable families currently below the poverty level to

achieve and maintain economic

independence would cost between

$76 and $119 billion a year.

Civil society organizations have also

outlined strategies to address food

insecurity. For example, Bread for

the World Institute’s Program to End

Hunger shows that a relatively modest investment in money and political

will could dramatically reduce

hunger, cutting hunger in half in the

United States within two years and

worldwide in two decades. The cost

to the United States would be roughly $6 billion a year. That is equivalent to one-third of 1 percent of the

Federal budget, and would cost each

person in the United States about 6

cents per day.

The Cost of Not Ending

Hunger

Not addressing hunger costs us at

home and abroad in terms of treating its consequences: poor health,

impaired cognitive development of

our children, crime and conflict.

Several World Bank studies have

estimated the worldwide loss of productivity caused by malnutrition and

micronutrient deficiencies: hunger

steals 46 million years of productive,

disability-free life each year, valued

at $16 billion. In South Asia alone,

the productivity lost to hunger is 5

percent of Gross National Product.

Clearly, the global cost of overcoming hunger is only a fraction of the

cost of allowing it to persist.

Need To Redouble Effo

Achieve Food Security

Objectives

Despite extensive and serious 

national and U.S. efforts, curre

jections of food insecurity at h

and abroad show that we are 

track to meet the World Food

Summit and U.S. Action Plan 

of halving food insecurity. The

large gap remaining in resour

required to reach the targets. 

U.S. Action Plan was launche

against the backdrop of the lo

economic expansion in U.S. h

and the strongest economy in 

eration. The sustainability of g

made is uncertain during an e

nomic downturn.

While the U.S. Action Plan on 

Security sets laudable goals, 

against daunting trends of dec

foreign aid, and it encompass

significant new initiatives or

resources either internationall

domestically. We will not mee

food security goals without a s

stantial increase in resources 

agricultural productivity and ru

incomes overseas. There is a 

to support families trying to ea

living and communities workin

sustain food security at home
Abroad, much of the needed

resources must come from private

trade and investment. But, in parts

of the world where food insecurity is

most rampant, such as Africa, investments must come in part from public

resources for: supporting agriculture

and rural development; helping governments improve policies; training

policymakers and researchers; developing new technologies; preserving

the environment; sustaining targeted

food interventions; supporting civil

society initiatives; and facilitating a

better private sector environment.

In the United States, advocates estimate that hunger could be reduced

through additional investment in our

nutrition assistance programs; support to enable all full-time workers to

earn enough income to feed their

families, including the Earned

Income Tax Credit and access to

adequate health insurance, child

care and education; and safety net

programs for people who, because of

disability and other reasons, cannot

work for a living.

Conclusion

The goal of reducing hunger is

attainable both at home and abroad.

What is needed is leadership, vision,

and commitment by governments

and civil society. The chief domestic

and international strategies to

address hunger are: to improve

livelihoods; invest in health and education; and empower poor people to

participate in decisions that affect

their lives. An investment in ending

hunger is an investment in the health

and productivity of our citizens and

the cohesiveness of our national and

global societies.
10

The Challenge 

World Food Summit. The

United Nations Food and

Agriculture Organization

(FAO) convened the World Food

Summit in Rome in November 1996

to focus attention on the continuing

problem of hunger and malnutrition

facing more than 800 million people

worldwide and to renew commitment

to achieving sustainable food security for all. The Rome Declaration on

World Food Security and World Food

Summit Plan of Action endorsed at

the World Food Summit provide a

framework for concerted policies and

actions needed at international and

national levels to address the root

causes of food insecurity: war and

civil strife; inappropriate national policies; inadequate access to research

and technology; barriers to trade;

environmental degradation; poverty;

population growth; gender inequality;

and poor health. At the World Food

Summit, the United States, 185 other

countries, and the European

Community pledged to reduce the

number of undernourished people by

half by 2015. The United States subsequently also committed to a more

ambitious target of reducing domestic food insecurity by half by 2010.

The U.S. Response:The

U.S. Action Plan on

Food Security

The U.S. Plan of Action on Food

Security outlines the means by

which the United States will address

international and domestic food

security goals. It represents commitments of both the public sector and

civil society. The U.S. Action Plan discusses the critical factors contributing to food security and provides a

strategic framework for addressing

them. It envisions government serving as a facilitator to empower communities and an active role for civil

society. The U.S. Action Plan identifies priorities, actions, and commitments to be undertaken by the U.S.

Government collaboratively with civil

society to achieve greater food security at home and abroad. A summary of the U.S. Action Plan is provided

in appendix B. A full copy of the

report can be found on the Internet

at http://www.fas.usda.gov/icd/summit/pressdoc.html.

There are seven priority areas of the

U.S. Action Plan which are the factors which contribute to food security:

an appropriate economic and policy

environment; trade and investment;

research and education; sustainable

agricultural practices; a strong safety

net; improved identification of the

food insecure; and safe food a

water. Addressing them will r

a collaborative effort of govern

businesses, nongovernmenta

izations, and communities.

U.S. National Mechanis

For Food Security Prio

Setting and Implementa

The United States has applied 

interagency process for policy 

ing, monitoring, and reporting 

food security issues and form

a national action plan with inp

and involvement of the private 

and NGO’s, through an Intera

Working Group on Food Secu

and a Food Security Advisory

Committee.

The Interagency Working Gro

Food Security (IWG), first esta

lished to prepare for the 1996 

Food Summit, is the U.S.
Government mechanism to develop,

implement, and monitor a long-term

action plan to achieve food security

commitments made at the World

Food Summit, as set out in the U.S.

Action Plan on Food Security. The

IWG is co-chaired by the

Department of State, USDA, and

USAID.

The Food Security Advisory

Committee (FSAC) was established

in December of 1997 to provide civil

society input to the IWG’s work of

implementing and monitoring food

security commitments. The committee collaborated with the U.S.

Government on the development of

the national food security action

plan. It will continue to participate in

implementation of the U.S. Action

Plan and serve as an outreach vehicle to all nongovernmental sectors.

The FSAC is composed of representatives of academia; agribusiness;

commodity groups; farmers; food

recovery and food bank interests;

foundations; nutrition and food policy

experts; and NGO’s for environment,

fisheries, food aid, population, and

sustainable development.

There have been public and private

sector efforts to support community

food security initiatives domestically.

The Community Food Security

Initiative is the government mechanism to coordinate action on domestic food security commitments, working with civil society. In the private

sector, the Community Food Security

Coalition has over 275 grassroots,

civil society organization members.

They focus on food and agriculture

issues and community-based solutions to hunger, poor nutrition, and

the globalization of the food system.
12

7

9

8

6

5

4

3

1 

1965

Milli

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Business as usual

On track

Range around the point 

estimates made at the 

World Food Summit

Range around the projected 

figure for 2015

Range around the 

point estimate for 1996

World Food Summit 

target

Revised point estimates 

made in 2000

FAO estimates of the number of

undernourished people in the world are

necessaril y based on imperf ect

information. As better data become

available the estimates are revised

retrospectively. Range estimates

therefore provide a more reliable

illustration of the number of

undernourished people over time. The

estimated ranges for past, projected and

target paths are based on a range of

5 percent above and below the past,

projected and target numbers considered

by the World Food Summit in 1996. Within

these ranges, the most recently

calculated point estimates are shown.

Number of Undernourished in the Developing World

Observed and Projected Ranges Compared With the World Food Summit Target

How are we doing in meeting

food security commitments?

Current projections of food

insecurity at home and abroad show

that, despite encouraging improvements, we are not on track to meet

the World Food Summit target.

The State of International

Food Security

According to FAO, 792 million people

in developing countries and 34 million people in developed countries

remain hungry today. Since the

early 1990’s, only 39 countries have

reduced their number of undernourished people. In the rest of the

developing countries, the number of

the undernourished has risen

cially in Africa.

The annual 8 million reduction 

number of undernourished is 

slow to reach the World Food

Summit target of halving world

hunger. Acceleration of progr

essential in order for the num

undernourished people to dec

the necessary rate of 20 millio

Source: The State of Food Insecurity in the World, 
India 208

Other Asia and

Pacific 167

Latin America

and Caribbean

55

Sub-Saharan

Africa 186

Near East and

North Africa 36

China* 140

200 150 100 50 0 0 10 20 30 

Southern Africa

East Africa

Central Africa

West Africa

North Africa

Near East

South America

Caribbean

Central America

North America

Other South Asia

India

Southeast Asia

Oceania **

Other East Asia

China* 

Number of Undernourished, by Region,

1996–1998 (millions)

Number and Proportion of Undernourished, by Regi

and Subregion, 1996–1998

Number of Undernourished

(millions)

Proportion of Underno

(%)

**Papua N

ple per year. In fact, in some countries the problem of hunger and food

insecurity may persist and even

worsen, without concerted and determined actions, because of the anticipated increase in the world’s population and the pressures placed on

natural resources.

The Economic Research Service

(ERS) reports that broad trends in

food production and prices indicate a

decline in the share of people who

lack access to adequate food. There

is variation among regions, countries,

and income groups within countries,

however. Of the 67 countries evaluated, food consumption is expected

to fall short of the nutritional requirement in 30, while 45 are expected to

face a decline in per capita consumption through 2009. Unequal

purchasing power exacerbates food

insecurity, and distribution-related

problems will intensify more than

they will spread.

The greatest numbers of undernourished people are in the South, East,

and southeast of Asia, and subSaharan Africa. Food insecurity,

measured in terms of the availability

of kilocalories per capita per day, is

most severe in sub-Saharan Africa,

followed by South Asia. In all

regions, food insecurity is directly

related to income. The less money

families have, the more food insecure they tend to be.

South Asia has the highest numbers

of undernourished in the world. The

problem stems in large part from

several interrelated factors. There is

deep poverty among the 

less and other particularly 

groups, which limits acce

Low education and socia

women limit their control 

bution of food within the h

and affects their food sec

that of their children. A h

tion density combined wit

monsoon climate and poo

safe water and sanitation 

poor health and inhibits th

of available food.

In sub-Saharan Africa, hu

caused by low food availa

poverty, especially in the 

and least developed coun

lack of education and poo

also contributing factors.

Source: The State of Food Insecurity in the World, FAO, 2000. Source: The State of Food Insecurity in the W
14

Food Insecure

Hunger

Percent of Households

12

9

6

3

0

1995 1996 1997 1998 

Prevalence of Food Secur

and Hunger in the United

States, 1999

(Source: USDA, FNCS, “Household Fo

Security in the United States in 1999 (

2000).

10.1% Food Insecure

89.9% Food Secure

7.1% Food Insecure

without Hunger

3.0% Food Insecure

with Hunger

Prevalence of Food Insecurity and Hunger 

in U.S. Households, 1995-99

Source: Calculated by ERS based on Current Population Survey Food Security Supplements 

April 1995, August 1996, April 1997, September 1998, and April 1999. Data are adjusted for

cross-year comparability.

Significant growth in agricultural production is drained by relatively high

population growth and limited financial resources that constrain imports

and will lead to declining per capita

consumption. According to ERS, the

number of people in the region failing

to meet their nutritional requirement

is expected to jump 40 percent over

the next decade to well over 400 million in 2009, meaning roughly 60

percent of the region’s population will

be food insecure.

In most other areas of the world,

food availability is generally adequate. Chronic food insecurity in

East Asia is centered in a few countries that have yet to partake fully in

the growth process. In Latin America

and the Caribbean, per capita

income is much higher than in other

developing countries. There are,

however, significant pockets of

poverty and skewed income distribution, which suggest the presence of

undernutrition. A number of countries, especially in Central America

and the Caribbean, are still very

poor, with a much higher percentage

of their population food insecure and

dependent on food imports. In other

areas, female illiteracy is quite high,

indicating the possibility of undernutrition within households.

The State of U.S. Domestic

Food Security

The majority of American households are food secure. Yet, even in

the United States, where food is

plentiful, safe, nutritious, and relatively inexpensive, 10.5 million households, or 10 percent, were food insecure in 1999. About 31 million people, 39 percent of them children,

lived in these households. In 3.1 million households, one or more household members were hungry at least

sometime. Faced with limited

resources, one out of six Americans

turns to government food assistance

programs. Others cope with food

insecurity by skipping meals, substituting less expensive, less nutritious

alternatives, or seeking emergency

food from soup kitchens or food

pantries.
How Households Respond to Food Insecurity, 1995, 1998, and 1999

Percent of Households

1995 1998 1999 1

adjusted adjusted adjusted una

Households:

Worried food would run out before (I/we) got money to buy more 13.0 12.8 11.3 

Food bought didn’t last and (I/we) didn’t have money to buy more 10.6 10.8 9.9 

Couldn’t afford to eat balanced meals 10.0 9.1 8.0 

Adults:

Adult(s) cut size of meals or skipped meals 6.5 6.0 4.7 

Respondent ate less than felt he/she should 6.3 5.7 4.4 

Adult(s) cut size or skipped meals in 3 or more months 4.7 7.2 3.4 

Respondent hungry but didn’t eat because couldn’t afford 3.1 2.6 2.1 

Respondent lost weight 1.7 1.6 1.2 

Adult(s) did not eat for whole day 1.5 1.3 1.0 

Adult(s) did not eat for whole day in 3 or more months 1.1 0.9 0.6 

Children:

Relied on few kinds of low-cost food to feed child(ren) 13.2 13.6 12.1 

Couldn’t feed child(ren) balanced meals 8.7 8.4 7.3 

Child(ren) were not eating enough 4.8 4.4 4.2 

Cut size of child(ren)’s meals 2.0 1.6 0.9 

Child(ren) were hungry 1.7 1.1 0.8 

Child(ren) skipped meals 0.8 0.8 0.5 

Child(ren) skipped meals in 3 or more months 0.6 0.5 0.4 

Child(ren) did not eat for whole day 0.2 0.2 0.1 

1Item response frequencies weighted to population totals.

2The actual wording of each item includes explicit reference to resource limitation, e.g., “because (I was/we were) running out of money to buy food,” or

“because there wasn’t enough money for food.”

3Households not responding to item are excluded from the denom

Households without children are excluded from the denominator o

referenced items.

Source: Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement, Ap

August 1998, and April 1999.
16

All households

With children < 6

With children < 18

Married-couple families

Female head, no spouse

Male head, no spouse

Other household with child **

With no children < 18

More than one adult

Women living alone

Men living alone

Households with elderly

Elderly living alone

White non-Hispanic

Black non-Hispanic

Hispanic***

Other non-Hispanic

Under 0.50

Under 1.00

Under 1.30

Under 1.85

1.85 and over

Income not known

Inside metropolitan area

In central city 

Not in central city** **

Outside metropolitan area

Northeast

Midwest

South

West

0 10 20 30 

1995

1999

Household composition:

Race/ethnicity of household:

Household income-to-poverty ratio:

Area of residence:

Census geographic region:

Percent of households

**, ***,   -- See notes to tables, page 9.

Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population Survey Food Security

Supplements as of April 1995 and April 1999, adjusted for cross-year comparability.

Prevalence of Food Insecurity, With or Without Hunger,

1995 versus 1999

In the United States, those who may

be particularly susceptible to food

insecurity are: the homeless; poor

children; some female-headed

households; Native Americans; other

minorities; central city residents; the

working poor; some legal immigrants; able-bodied adults without

dependents who have lost eligibility

for benefits; some elderly and

immuno-compromised individuals;

some residents in rural and remote

areas; and migrant farm workers.

The most important cause of chronic

food insecurity in the United States

is poverty, followed by difficulty

accessing food. Low literacy, certain

disabilities, and poor health can all

increase the risk of food insecurity

and hunger for individuals. Access

to food can be limited by lack of

transportation, living in remote locations, or lack of affordable food

stores. Additionally, some people

may feel stigmatized by accepting

food assistance.
All households

With children < 6

With children < 18

Married-couple families

Female head, no spouse

Male head, no spouse

Other household with child ** 

With no children < 18

More than one adult

Women living alone

Men living alone

Households With elderly

Elderly living alone

White non-Hispanic

Black non-Hispanic

Hispanic***

Other non-Hispanic

Under 0.50

Under 1.00

Under 1.30

Under 1.85

1.85 and over

Income not known

Inside metropolitan area

In central city 

Not in central city** **

Outside metropolitan area

Northeast

Midwest

South

West

0 3 6 9 12 15 18

1995

1999

Race/ethnicity of households

Household income-to-poverty ratio

Area of residence

Census geographic region

Percent of households

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population Survey Food 

Security Supplements of April 1995 and April 1999, adjusted for cross-year

comparability.

Household composition

**, ***, **** -- See notes to tables, page 9.

Prevalence of Hunger,

1995 versus 1999

With the help of the stron

my in a generation and th

nutrition safety net, the pr

hunger has been reduced

eliminated. Comparing th

U.S. food security betwee

1999 shows a 12-percent 

the number of food-insec

holds and a decline of 24 

the number with hungry m

The U.S. Action Plan was 

against the backdrop of th

economic expansion in U

and the strongest econom

eration. The sustainability 

made is uncertain during 

nomic downturn.
18

The seven priority areas of the

U.S. Action Plan are:

1) economic security and policy environment; 2) trade and investment; 3) research and education;

4) sustainable food systems and the

environment; 5) food security safety

net; 6) information and mapping; and

7) food and water safety. This report

follows the same structure as the

U.S. Action Plan on Food Security,

reporting international and domestic

activities separately under each of

the seven priority areas, and

includes a section on the food security activities of civil society.

Priority Area I: Economic

Security and Policy

Environment

Food security requires an enabling

political, social, and economic environment. Promoting opportunities

and providing support services for

work, establishing broad-based participation, and enhancing gender

equality are essential. In the international arena, support for good governance and conflict prevention are

also necessary.

Domestic Actions

Welfare Reform

The Personal Responsibility and

Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act

of 1996 provided a historic opportunity to reform the way welfare services are provided to low-income persons, by emphasizing work, responsibility, and family. The law transformed cash assistance from an entitlement program to a block funding

grant called Temporary Assistance

for Needy Families which provides

States with considerable flexibility in

designing welfare programs. It

imposed lifetime limits on the time a

family could receive cash aid. The

law also contains strong work

requirements, performance bonuses

to reward States for moving welfare

recipients into jobs and reduc

gitimacy, comprehensive child 

port enforcement, and suppo

families moving from welfare 

work, including increased fun

child care.

Employment programs help r

ents go to work, increase the

ings, and reduce welfare paym

However, former welfare recip

generally find relatively low-w

entry-level jobs with few bene

Fewer are participating in Me

food stamps, and child care a

tance than are eligible. They 

more struggles to make ends 

than peers who never receive

assistance. One-third report 

to cut meal size or skip meals

ly 40 percent report problems 

rent, mortgage, or utility bills.

The continuing struggles of fo

welfare recipients suggest the

continue to need help transitio

toward self-sufficiency. In the

absence of public assistance, 

biggest deterrents to work are 

need for child care, health ins

and transportation. Programs 

as the $3 billion Welfare-to-W

grants that emphasize jobs w

pay enough to allow self-relia

and provide a broader array o

sitional services for the least 

able are promising in that reg
Welfare Rolls Decline as More

Recipients Go to Work

Caseloads have fallen to historic

new lows. Since January 1993, welfare rolls have fallen by 7.8 million, or

more than 56 percent, resulting in

the smallest number of people on

welfare since 1968. In August 1999,

the Council of Economic Advisers

reported that the single most important factor contributing to this historic

decline is the implementation of welfare reform. Of the caseload reduction from 1996 to 1998, approximately one-third is due to Federal and

State policy changes resulting from

welfare reform, and about 10 percent

is due to the strong economy.

Independent studies confirm

record numbers of people are

moving from welfare to work. A

national survey by the Urban Institute

found 69 percent of recipients had

left welfare for work, and 18 percent

had left because they had increased

income, no longer needed welfare, or

had a change in family situation. A

1999 General Accounting Office

report found that between 63 and 87

percent of adults have worked since

leaving the welfare rolls, and recent

evaluations from Minnesota, Los

Angeles, and Connecticut confirm

that well-designed welfare reform initiatives significantly increase the

employment of welfare recipients.

The Minnesota results also show

that welfare reform can increase

marriage rates and marital stability

among low-income families. Between

1992 and 1999, the employment rate

of former welfare recipients

increased by 82 percent.

Innovative State Welfare-to-Work

programs that employ various combinations of job support and training,

like Milwaukee’s New Hope Project,

have been shown to increase participants’ employment and reduce their

poverty and use of public assistance

programs. They improve children’s

classroom behavior, school performance, and social competence. This

may be due to better access to quality child care.

Helping the Disadvantaged

Move From Welfare to Work

Welfare-to-Work grants. The U.S.

Department of Labor administers the

Welfare-to-Work grant program for

States and local communities to

move welfare recipients and certain

noncustodial parents into lasting,

unsubsidized jobs. Funds can be

used for job creation, placement, and

retention efforts, including wage subsidies to private employers and other

critical post-employment support

services. The grants total $3 billion

split between fiscal years 1998 and

1999. Grantees have up to 3 years

to spend the funds. One hundred

and ninety-one competitive grants

have been awarded to local organizations, such as workforce boards,

cities and counties, comm

based organizations, and 

Approximately 200,000 pa

were enrolled in the prog

March 2000.

Tax credits for employe

Welfare-to-Work and Wor

Opportunity Tax Credits e

more employers to hire w

ients and other disadvant

viduals. They also encou

employers to provide cert

ee benefits such as traini

coverage, and dependent 

Welfare-to-Work Tax Cred

in the Taxpayer Relief Act 

offers a credit equal to 35 

the first $10,000 in wages 

year of employment, and 

of the first $10,000 in wag

second year for a total cre

$8,500.

The Job Opportunities f

Income Individuals Prog

job creation program to d

and evaluate ways of crea

employment opportunities 

income individuals such a

and financial assistance t

employers in the commun

self-employment and mic

business opportunities. T

gram funds approximately 

grants each year for nonp

zations, including commu

opment corporations, for 

project periods and a max

$500,000 per project.
20

Using community kitchens to help

Americans move from welfare to

work. The U.S. Government, in partnership with the American School

Food Service Association and community and nonprofit organizations,

has established a program for school

cafeterias and community kitchens to

help qualified low-income, disadvantaged individuals in obtaining job

training and opportunities for self sufficiency, alongside nutrition education

services. USDA is also providing

$370,000 in grants to support school

cafeterias and community kitchens in

helping food stamp recipients and

low-income families obtain skills for

employment in the food service

industry.

Helping low-income fathers and

working families support their

children. To ensure that lowincome parents who are not living

with their children provide the financial and emotional support their children deserve, the United States has

taken a number of measures. Today,

parents who owe child support can

have their wages garnished, their

bank accounts seized, their Federal

loans denied, and their tax refunds

withheld. Child support collections

have doubled from $8 billion in 1992

to nearly $16 billion in 1999. The

number of families actually receiving

child support has also increased.

The Clinton/Gore Administration is

seeking $255 million for the first year

of a new “Fathers Work/Families

Win” initiative to promote responsible

fatherhood and support working families. The “Fathers Work” grants

would help approximately 40,000

low-income, noncustodial parents

work, pay child support, and reconnect with their children.

Support Services for Working

Families

Making it easier for working families to own vehicles and receive

food stamps. Some families need a

car to get to work. However, owning

a car can often be the one item that

makes a household ineligible for food

stamps. Current law limits food

stamp eligibility to most families owning a car worth less than $4,650.

This limit has increased only 3 percent since it was set in 1977, while

the cost of cars has nearly tripled.

The President’s 2001 budget proposal would make it easier for working

families to own a reliable vehicle and

receive food stamps.

Improving access to affordable

and quality child care. Under the

Clinton/Gore Administration, Federal

funding for child care has more than

doubled, helping parents pay for the

care of about 1.5 million children in

1998. The 1996 welfare reform law

increased child care funding by $4

billion over 6 years to provide child

care assistance to families moving

from welfare to work and other lowincome families.

Head Start expansion initia

1997, Head Start expansion f

were used for the first time to 

Head Start services for childre

while also helping parents on 

move to work. Under the new 

tive, Head Start expansion fun

being used to build partnersh

child care providers to deliver 

and full-year Head Start servi

where children stay in one pla

day, which can, in turn, help p

obtain full-time work.

Ensuring that eligible famili

Food Stamps and Medicaid

its peak in 1994, food stamp p

pation has declined sharply b

ly 11 million people. While pa

the drop can be explained by 

strong economy and the succ

welfare reform, many poor fam

no longer participate despite c

ued eligibility. Medicaid and fo

stamps are essential supports 

working families, and could ke

them off welfare in the first pla

people leave welfare for work

ued access to health insuranc

nutritional assistance is critica

making the transition to self-s

cy. It is important for eligible p

to know these services are st

able. The U.S. Government h

taken several steps, including 

lic education campaign, to ma

sure that everyone knows how 

apply for benefits and that Sta

local agencies reach out to el
low-income working families, follow

proper administrative procedures,

and eliminate barriers to participation.

Restoring Food Stamp Program

eligibility to legal immigrants. In

1998, food stamp benefits were

restored to 225,000 legal immigrant

children, senior citizens, and people

with disabilities who were in the

United States when welfare reform

became law. A proposal to restore

food stamp benefits to legal immigrants in the United States before

August 22, 1996, who reach age 65

or who live in families with foodstamp-eligible children was included

in the Administration’s 2001 budget,

that would make food stamp benefits

available to another 165,000 by

2005.

Breaking the Cycle of

Dependency

The Individual Development

Account Program. The Assets for

Independence Demonstration

Program was established in 1998 to

support the work of States and community-based organizations in using

individual development accounts as

an asset-based development strategy. Individual development accounts

are dedicated savings accounts that

can be used by eligible participants

for purchasing a first home, paying

for post-secondary education, or

capitalizing a business. They consist

of participant savings from earned

income and are matched by deposits

of up to $8 for each dollar saved.

These investments have the potential

to bring a new level of economic and

personal security to families and

communities. The intent of the

demonstration is to encourage participants to develop and reinforce

strong habits for saving money.

Preventing teen pregnancy. The

1996 Personal Responsibility and

Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act

requires unmarried minor parents to

stay in school and live at home or in

an adult-supervised setting in order

to receive assistance. It supports

“second chance homes” to provide

teen parents with the skills and support they need, giving them guidance

in parenting and in avoiding repeat

pregnancies. The Act als

$50 million a year for Stat

nence education program

Government has provided 

a national evaluation of th

grams. The National Cam

Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 

nonprofit organization, wa

response to the President

State of the Union Addres

President Clinton announ

National Strategy to Preve

Pregnancy. Teen birth rat

declined nationwide by 20 

from 1991 to 1999. They 

the lowest level on record 

tracking began 60 years a

cal year 1999, at least 35 

communities in the United 

had teen pregnancy preve

grams funded by the Dep

Health and Human Servic

(DHHS).

Support services for ho

vets. Nearly one-quarter 

homeless adults and one

homeless men are vetera

been estimated that more 

200,000 veterans may be 

on any given night and th

many experience homele

the course of a year. The

Department of Veterans A

administers $150 million i

ized homeless assistance 

homeless veterans with o

physical and mental healt

food, housing, case mana
22

therapeutic work opportunities, and

referrals to community services. The

VA has awarded more than $53 million to more than 200 nonprofit community providers or State and local

governments to establish and operate supportive housing, service centers, and transportation to homeless

veterans. In fiscal year 2000, VA

nearly doubled the number of homeless outreach programs, including 11

targeted to the needs of homeless

women veterans. The VA homeless

assistance web page

http://www.va.gov/health/homeless/a

ssistprog.htm serves as a catalog of

social services.

Housing Assistance and

Community Development for

Urban Areas

The U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development provides grants

to States and communities for community development activities and

promotes private sector initiatives at

the community level for effective use

of housing and economic development resources; public and private

sector partnerships; and public entrepreneurship.

The Empowerment Zone/

Enterprise Community Initiative

(EZ/EC) is a key element of the

Clinton/Gore Administration’s job creation strategy for America. The

EZ/EC effort provides tax incentives

and performance grants and loans to

create jobs and expand business

opportunities in the most economically distressed areas of inner cities

and the rural heartland and focuses

on activities to support people looking for work: job training, child care,

and transportation. There are 144

designated Empowerment Zones or

Enterprise Communities receiving

more than $1.5 billion in performance grants and more than $2.5 billion in tax incentives for job creation

and job-related activities.

Over 2,500 neighborhood-based

projects and programs are underway.

Federal EZ/EC seed money of $1 billion has leveraged over $10 billion in

additional public and private investment, resulting in programs which

have generated jobs, provided business assistance and services, and

trained and educated youth and families. Other programs have improved

access to child and health care and

transportation services, and

increased residents’ safety and

involvement in their neighborhoods.

Over 68,000 zone residents have

received job training through 800

programs, and at least 250 job fairs

have been held to place residents in

jobs. Extensive social service

also been established. There 

over 200 child care programs 

14,000 families in the EZ/ECs

almost 400 health-related pro

serving 400,000 residents, an

approximately 450 youth prog

serving 200,000 young perso

The USDA Community Food

Security Initiative provides tec

assistance to EZ/EC commun

a wide variety of nutrition and 

security-related projects.

Housing vouchers for hardpressed working families. T

Clinton/Gore Administration is 

ing $690 million for 120,000 n

housing vouchers to help Am

hard-pressed working families

These housing vouchers subs

the rents of low-income Amer

enabling them to move closer 

opportunities—many of which 

being created far from where 

families live. Of the 120,000 n

housing vouchers, 32,000 will 

geted to families moving from 

fare to work, 18,000 to homel

individuals and families, and 1

to low-income families moving 

new housing constructed thro

Low Income Housing Tax Cre

The remaining 60,000 vouche

be allocated to local areas to 

address the large unmet need 

affordable housing.
International Actions

Multilateral diplomacy. The

Department of State promotes

increased food security around the

world by advocating for an overall

conducive environment, and supporting food security initiatives through

diplomatic channels. Through multilateral and bilateral negotiation, the

United States defends the rights consistent with Article 25 of the

Universal Declaration of Human

Rights that “everyone has the right to

a standard of living adequate for the

health and well-being of himself and

his family, including food, clothing,

housing and medical care and necessary social services....”

Model for halving world hunger.

As part of the preparation of the U.S.

Action Plan on Food Security,

USAID commissioned a study in

1998 on the projected cost of meeting the World Food Summit target of

reducing world hunger by half by

2015. The study estimated that the

target could be reached with additional global overseas development

assistance of $2.6 billion annually.

The approximately $43 billion total

over 16 years would be optimally distributed as follows: $500 million for

preventing or reducing conflict; $1.7

billion for promoting democracy and

good governance; $2 billion to support economic liberalization and

reform; $27.6 billion in agricultural

technology research and extension;

Representatives from all tribes monitor 

tion of food rations to the 70,000 refug

Kakuma camp to ensure equitable dist
24

$1.2 billion for rural infrastructure,

especially roads; and $10.4 billion in

targeted programs for the poor,

women’s education, and increasing

access to safe water, especially in

Africa and South Asia.

National enabling environments.

USAID provides approximately $100

million annually in funding and technical collaboration to help developing

countries improve their economies

through:

• Promoting economic growth and

institutional reform through privatization, rationalized financial markets, legal, institutional and regulatory reforms for competitive markets, and an enhanced business

environment for trade and investment.

• Strengthening the capacity of participating countries and USAID to

research, analyze, and monitor

food security issues. They need to

formulate policies, institutional

reforms, investment plans, and

management processes that promote food security. For example,

tools and guidelines for policy

analysis have been produced,

including a policy analysis matrix

currently used by ministries and

social scientists globally.

• Supporting national agricultural

policy development capacities so

that USAID missions and hostcountry decision-makers better

understand, define, and respond

to critical priorities for achieving

sustainable and equitable growth

and address agricultural policy

issues, especially those relating to

trade reform, market performance,

food equity, and agricultural sustainability.

Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development,

Development Assistance

Committee Poverty Reduction

Guidelines. USAID participated in

the drafting of the Development

Assistance Committee’s Poverty

Reduction Guidelines in order to:

1) ensure that food security policy

targets were adequately addressed;

2) provide an enabling policy environment for food security progress;

and 3) identify areas of policy coherence in donor countries. The guidelines will provide benchmarks for

evaluating donor performance in providing economic security through

poverty reduction. They are currently

in their final stages of review.

Microenterprise and farmer organizations in Africa. Two important

elements of economic security in

Africa are to make small loans to

microbusinesses, mainly womenowned, and to expand small farmer

marketing opportunities through

grassroots organizations. USAID

support for both microenterprise and

farmer organizations in Africa has

doubled since 1995.

The Greater Horn of Africa

Initiative is a U.S. Presidentia

eign policy initiative launched 

1994. It addresses the recurr

cycle of crisis, instability, and 

in the Greater Horn of Africa r

That region encompasses Eth

Eritrea, Sudan, Somalia, Uga

Djibouti, Kenya, Tanzania, Rw

and Burundi. This initiative im

food security and establishes 

tem for conflict early warning, 

vention, and response.

U.S. support for multilateral 

opment banks. In fiscal year 

appropriations for the multilate

development banks, which are 

World Bank and the four regio

development banks for Asia, A

Europe, and Latin-America, to

$1.1 billion, including $975 m

soft loan windows which prov

financing on concessional ter

the poorest countries unable t

row in international capital ma

The United States also uses r

ishment negotiations for the m

eral development banks as op

nities to press for U.S. policy p

ties and secure needed institu

reforms to bolster effectivenes

reducing poverty, build marke

ed policies, and promote sust

economic growth.

Enhanced Heavily Indebted 

Countries Initiative. Debt re

heavily indebted poor countrie

free up resources to impleme
growth and poverty reduction programs and invest in health, education, and rural development. The

Clinton/Gore Administration is seeking $810 million to help reduce the

debt of 32 countries expected to

qualify. Ten countries have been

determined eligible for debt relief.

Total debt service relief committed to

these countries will amount to more

than $16 billion, or $9.1 billion in net

present value terms.

Culturally relevant technical and

gender expertise. USAID’s Office

of Women in Development sponsors

grant programs to strengthen nongovernmental organizations and professional associations, support

research on gender and food security, and foster model partnerships

with the private sector. Activities

focused on agricultural issues

include: 1) studies on gender

issues; 2) a review of gender and

agribusiness literature; and 3) training programs covering improved

agricultural practices in production,

processing, and preservation.

Examples of studies include farm

restructuring in Uzbekistan and

Kyrgyzstan; women’s economic

activities (microenterprise, agriculture

and the formal sector) in Jordan;

gender issues and impact of the

adoption of vegetable and fish production in Bangladesh; intra-household resource allocation issues in

Ethiopia; and gender and agroforestry in Ghana.

The Peace Corps and gender.

Since 1974, the Peace Corps has

had a formal requirement to give particular attention to activities that integrate women into the national

economies of developing countries.

This improves their status and

assists in the overall development

effort. The Peace Corps applies participatory needs assessments and

considers gender issues in project

design, implementation, monitoring

and evaluation, and training. The

Peace Corps uses Women in

Development committees as a

resource to address gender issues.

In Peace Corps agricultur

such as post-harvest stor

keting and craft/food prod

Guatemala and Honduras

and youth play a growing 

improving the nutritional s

family. Conferences and 

are also sponsored to bui

ship capacity of women a

Women in agriculture. T

the world, particularly in d

countries, women make s

contributions to food prod

natural resource manage

millions of rural women w

Photo courtesy of the World Food Programme of 
26

2

live below the poverty level, with limited resources, training, or education.

The President’s Interagency Council

on Women was formed in 1995 to

coordinate implementation of U.S.

commitments to the Beijing Platform

for Action adopted at the UN Fourth

World Conference on Women. In

1998, the council sponsored the

Second International Conference on

Women to create opportunities for

women and raise international

awareness of their contributions to

rural development and production

agriculture. The conference focused

on the status of women in agricultural economies and how they are

impacted by rural policies, both in

the United States and internationally.

The conference provided practical

information and training, and examined networking and outreach opportunities for rural women. USDA created the Women in Agriculture Web

site to provide an ongoing communications network for sharing information, trading ideas, and increasing

opportunities and resources.

Priority Area II: Trade and

Investment

The ability to purchase food is as

important in addressing food security

concerns as its physical availability.

Food security means having the

capacity and infrastructure to feed

one’s own people, either through

domestic production or imports. So

encouraging open markets and trade

liberalization is a part of food security.

Continued agricultural trade reform

will increase food security on both a

global and individual country basis

by encouraging economic growth

and diversification of production by

comparative advantage. Trade

expands sources of food supply,

enhances a country’s purchasing

power with export earnings, and lowers prices. Lower prices, in turn,

enhance the purchasing power of

poor consumers. Where there is not

a comparative advantage in food

production, pursuing short-term selfsufficiency in food on marginal land

may strain fragile natural resources.

A strategy of self-reliance may be

more sustainable in the long term,

for example, developing other sectors of the economy in order to trade

for food.

Reducing trade barriers, the s

of multilateral trade negotiatio

expected to boost global trade

examined the likely impact of

increased export earnings on 

security. The accelerated exp

growth scenario resulted in a 

percent jump in commercial im

for all studied countries by 20

would reduce the number of p

failing to meet their nutritional 

89 million people, or 9 percen

2009, compared to the baseli

jection.

The United States has suppo

variety of initiatives to support

African efforts to grow through

increased openness to interna

trade and investment.

The African Growth and

Opportunity Act, part of the 

and Development Act of 2000

created to expand trade and c

incentives for the countries of 

Saharan Africa to continue ref

their economies and participa

more fully in the benefits of th

al economy. The Act promote

reforms in Africa to increase i

ment, expand economic grow

reduce poverty. It encourages

progress on human rights, wo

rights, and democracy. Amon

provisions, the Act will:
• Open the U.S. market more fully to

a wide range of African products.

• Provide technical assistance for

economic reform and development.

• Institutionalize a long-term policy

dialogue, building on the

President’s visit in 1998 and the

1999 U.S.-Africa Ministerial.

• Emphasize the importance of

assistance and debt relief programs.

Through the Africa Trade and

Investment Policy Program, the

United States provides assistance to

help reform-oriented African countries improve the environment for

trade and private investment. The

program will catalyze relationships

between U.S. and African firms, and

help finance implementation of

aggressive, market-friendly reforms.

The United States has provided $35

million for this program since 1998.

The Clinton/Gore Administration has

requested another $30 million for FY

2000.

OPIC responds to Africa: Seeds

of Hope Act with agricultural projects. In response to the Africa:

Seeds of Hope Act, the Overseas

Private Investment Corporation

(OPIC) is working to expand its operations to back U.S. businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and private voluntary organizations that

work directly with African rural populations. OPIC is currently providing

nearly $1 billion in insurance and

financing to 50 projects in 20 subSaharan countries. OPIC has executed new bilateral investment

agreements with 12 sub-Saharan

countries, since President Clinton

announced his Partnership for

Economic Growth and Op

Africa in 1997. Later that 

launched a $120 million N

Opportunity Fund for Sou

and a $150 million Moder

Growth and Investment F

also support one or more 

vate equity funds with agg

capital of up to $500 millio

invested in privately spon

structure projects in sub-S

Africa.

Here is an example of the 

impact of OPIC investmen

activities. In May 1999, O

approved a $1.68 million 

port the organization, dep

and operation of two mob

tural processing units to c

separate cocoa beans in 

Cocoa beans are Ghana’

source of export earnings

new machines are expect

increase Ghanaian cocoa 

export earnings by 10-20 

The project is expected to 

U.S. and local jobs and pr

strong source of foreign e

earnings for Ghana.

Investment in infrastruc

facilitate trade. The trans

and telecommunications i

ture of the most impoveris

tries, particularly in Africa

capable of efficiently hand

increased international tra

U.S. agencies, particularly 
28

Export-Import Bank, and the Trade

and Development Agency, have

agreed to expand their engagement

with African countries and regional

organizations in an effort to improve

African infrastructure, through technical assistance and OPIC support for

private investment in these areas.

Supporting agribusiness

approaches to increasing the

incomes of poor farmers. USAID

provides significant support to farmer

organizations, market development,

and local agribusiness in their efforts

to increase farm family income and

food security. USAID agriculture

investments seek to increase farm

incomes through expanding crop

production for trade. In addition, by

fostering new links with U.S. agribusiness — such as the Partnership for

Food Industry Development, the

Agricultural Biotechnology Support

Project, and collaboration with U.S.

coffee and cocoa associations —

USAID is helping U.S. agribusiness

in ways that also expand income and

food security prospects of poor rural

people around the world.

The Peace Corps and business

development. The Peace Corps is

uniquely positioned to give voice to

communities to help shape the direction of economic growth so that it is

culturally and environmentally appropriate. With its focus on grassroots

and community-based development,

the Peace Corps can ensure that

economic opportunities make their

way beyond major metropolitan

areas. Business development projects in the Peace Corps focus on

five major objectives: 1) increasing

family income; 2) improving th

ronment for businesses; 3) ed

young people to enter the wo

4) assisting businesses to find 

kets for traditional and value-a

products; and 5) community e

Refugees at the Kakuma camp learn garde

techniques at a community gardening dem

stration plot for use in their own family gard
nomic development, particularly

strengthening rural agricultural businesses, cooperatives, and microcredit initiatives.

Cold chain. USDA technical staff

assists countries to address their

weaknesses in the storage, distribution, and marketing of perishable

food. Food losses due to cold chain

weakness in emerging markets

result in as much as half of the food

grown being destroyed prior to consumption.

Hemispheric Free Trade

Expansion project. In support of

the U.S. Government’s commitment

to work towards the creation of a

Free Trade Area of the Americas

(FTAA), USAID has provided technical assistance to help countries of

Latin America and the Caribbean

meet international trade obligations

under the World Trade Organization

(WTO) in the area of customs valuation and sanitary and phytosanitary

measures. USAID-supported programs with the Federal Trade

Commission and the Department of

Justice have strengthened competition policy investigation and enforcement capability in Brazil and

Argentina. USAID is also developing

a program of targeted regional assistance to the Andean region to

address WTO obligations, facilitate

business, and increase civil society

participation in the FTAA process.

The U.S. WTO proposal advances

food security. The United States

recognizes the importance to many

WTO members of expanding global

food security through the WTO

Agricultural Negotiations. The United

States supports policies that address

nontrade concerns such as food

security, resource conservation, rural

development, and environmental

protection through nontrade-distorting means. Further trade liberalization in agricultural products and the

promotion of international food aid

are important elements in strengthening food security. The United

States proposes a number of provisions to increase market access and

export competition, reduce domestic

support, and provide special and differential treatment for the least developed countries. These provisions

will enhance food security by encouraging economic growth, diversifying

production by comparative advantage, and enhancing a country’s ability to purchase food through

increased export earnings.

The United States also proposes

measures to ensure that trade in

products of new agricultural technology, including biotechnology, is timely, transparent, and predictable.

Biotechnology has the potential to

expand food security by increasing

agricultural production currently limited by environmental problems, such

as drought and weeds. It conserves

costly inputs and water re

and also improves the nu

content of food.

Recognizing that liberaliza

will not entirely address th

security needs in all deve

countries, the U.S. propos

the continued availability o

tional food aid for countrie

The United States continu

mitment that implementat

reform program will not ad

affect the availability of su

aid for countries in need. 

mitment was expressed in 

Uruguay Round’s “Decisio

Measures Concerning the 

Negative Effects of the Re

Program on Least Develo

Net-Food-Importing Deve

Countries.” The U.S. prop

includes provisions for ca

ing in developing countrie

enhance their integration 

international trading syste

ability to benefit from it.

Trade capacity building. 

capacity of developing co

transitional economies to 

in the multilateral trading s

be an important factor in t

tion of a global economy t

for everyone. The United 

ognizes that many develo

tries face challenges in fu

ing into the global trading 

improve their economies 
30

3

implement their WTO commitments.

The U.S. Government has committed

over $600 million to trade capacity

building activities during the past 2

years.

In the area of trade-related capacity

building for the agricultural sector,

the United States has hosted training

sessions, seminars, and conferences

on the WTO and trade-related topics

such as international trade policy,

WTO rules, and procedures for

implementing them. The United

States has provided training to help

countries gain WTO accession and

participate in WTO negotiations. It

has funded the participation of developing countries in the international

standard-setting bodies. The United

States has helped build capacity in

pest and disease management related to risk analyses, surveillance, and

control mechanisms to protect animals and plants. U.S. assistance

has enhanced food safety, efficient

pesticide use, monitoring of chemical

residues in produce and meat, safe

food preparation, and distribution of

fresh produce. Other assistance has

provided training in the causes and

control of waterborne diseases,

water safety, manure handling, personal sanitation, and worker safety.

The United States provided assistance that improved cold chain storage and enhanced the existing marketing channels for perishable food

products while reducing spoilage

rates and product quality loss. U.S.

assistance improved market information dissemination, development of

agribusiness and extension, rural

cooperative development, and risk

management. Other advice was provided for small-scale farmers in farm

management, agricultural marketing,

post-harvest handling and storage,

improved land cultivation practices,

and other agricultural techniques.

In 2000, the USAID Women in

Development Office prepared a

paper on gender issues in trade and

joined with other partners to support

a research project to examine the

impact of macroeconomic policies on

women’s subcontracted labor in

Thailand, the Philippines, India,

Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

Gender and agribusiness. The

Office of Agriculture and Food

Security in USAID’s Center for

Economic Growth and Agricultural

Development made a special effort

to integrate gender considerations in

the development of a public-private

partnership on cocoa production and

marketing. USAID is sponsoring an

initiative in cooperation with the

University of Illinois to form publicprivate research partnerships to

investigate women’s roles in agribusiness, including case studies on

women’s labor and agribusiness

employment practices at processing

plants in Zimbabwe and Thailand.

Priority Area III: Resea

and Education

Domestic Actions

The Food Assistance and

Nutrition Research Program 

ducts research related to the

Nation’s domestic food assista

and nutrition programs. This a

covers the benefits of improve

and food choices; the factors 

influence diet and nutrition; an

outcomes of policies and prog

aimed at improving the nutritio

health, and food security of

Americans. In fiscal year 199

fiscal year 1999, funding total

$10 million annually. Outcom

importance for implementing t

U.S. Action Plan on Food Sec

include a Community Food Se

Assessment Conference in Ju

1999 and a toolkit for commu

food security assessment.

Mississippi Delta nutrition

research and education pro

The Agricultural Research Se

(ARS) is conducting research 

impact of food insecurity on h

risk, low-income, poorly educa

minority populations in the

Mississippi Delta, an impover

area of the United States. Fa

addressed by this research ar

health and nutritional status; t

causes of food insecurity; and 

effect of farmers markets, gar
nutrition assistance programs, and

emergency feeding programs.

Piloting expansion of the School

Breakfast Program. In 1998,

Congress authorized a School

Breakfast Pilot Project, designed to

assess the effects of this universal,

free school breakfast program on a

broad range of student outcomes,

including academic achievement,

school attendance and tardiness,

classroom behavior and attentiveness, and dietary status.

Researching effective nutrition

education methods. In 1999, the

United States released a number of

nutrition education-related research

reports available on the Internet at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/. These

include: 1) an evaluation of statewide

nutrition education networks, an

approach to expanding the reach of

nutrition education and promotion for

food stamp participants’ choices;

2) a study of nutrition education in

the Special Supplemental Food

Program for Women, Infants and

Children (WIC); 3) a review of the

nutritional status of WIC participants;

4) a report on the nutrient composition of meals planned and changes

in school food service operations in

schools using nutrient-based menu

planning systems; 5) an examination

of the feasibility of using local consortia to deliver nutrition education;

and 6) results of the Team Nutrition

pilot communities.

Expanding the use of the Internet

for nutrition education and promotion. In 1999, the Food and

Nutrition Service (FNS) partnered

with the National Agricultural Library

to better make nutrition education

resources available over the World

Wide Web, including materials for

promoting nutrition in schools, a program access guide for the working

poor, and a package of downloadable Food Stamp Program education

materials in both English and

Spanish.

Helping people build healthy and

thrifty diets. The United States

Government updated the Thrifty

Food Plan used to establish food

stamp benefits for low-income

households. This revision addressed

new information on nutritional needs,

food composition, food costs, and

consumption patterns. Menus and

recipes based on the plan were

developed by researchers at

Pennsylvania State Unive

tested on food stamp hou

Research on poverty an

market support. The DH

of the Assistant Secretary 

Planning and Evaluation 

conducts a variety of rese

low-income families with c

and other at-risk populatio

as immigrants, the disable

mentally ill, and substanc

Research has focused on 

security and health outco

families who leave welfare

effects of welfare reform o

teen pregnancy preventio

market processes, and ev

welfare-to-work programs

studies looked at the avai

social services to help ind

remain in the labor marke

child care, health care, an

Earned Income Tax Cred

tion, ASPE funds two pov

research centers.
32

International Actions

Education

Global Food for Education program. An estimated 300 million children in developing countries are

chronically hungry, and 120 million

do not attend school, over 60 percent of whom are girls. Others are

enrolled in school but underperform

or drop out in part due to hunger or

malnourishment. One of the most

successful U.S. domestic strategies

to support both food security and

education has been the school

meals program, currently serving 27

million children daily. On July 23,

2000, President Clinton announced

a Global Food for Education pilot

program to expand access to basic

education and improve childhood

development in poor countries.

Better access to basic education can

be a catalyst for poverty reduction

and broader participation in the benefits of global economic integration.

Literacy is fundamental for labor and

agricultural productivity; improving

basic health, especially maternal and

infant health; reducing abusive child

labor; promoting sustainable population growth; and expanding democratic participation.

Building on ideas promoted by

George McGovern, Ambassador to

the U.S. Mission to the United

Nations Agencies for Food and

Agriculture, and former Senator

Robert Dole, a multilateral school

feeding program will be launched to

improve student enrollment, attendance, and performance in poor

countries. The United States will

purchase surplus agricultural commodities and donate them for use in

school feeding and preschool nutrition programs in poor countries with

strong commitment and action plans

to expand access to and improve the

quality of basic education, working in

partnership with the World Food

Programme of the United Nat

and private voluntary organiza

For the first year of the progra

United States would spend $3

lion for commodities, internati

transportation, and other cost

current authorities, feeding as 

as nine million schoolchildren 

pre-schoolers. This multilater

would benefit greatly from the 

port and input of other donors 

countries.

Girls’ education. The United 

has long recognized the powe

development impact of increa

and better quality education fo

Photo courtesy of the World Food Programme of the Un
and women, and has been a pioneer

in supporting programs for educating

girls and women. The USAID invests

around $98 million per year on basic

education, and much of these funds

are devoted to girls and women.

Although a number of donors are

active in this work, USAID is the only

agency focused on mobilizing nontraditional sectors to fund and implement girls’ education. USAID provides technical leadership in promoting education policy reform by governments of developing countries

and in mobilizing nongovernmental

resources. Efforts include: 1) stimulating private sector investment in

locally initiated and funded programs

to promote girls’ participation in primary school; 2) mobilizing religious,

business, and community leaders to

be advocates for girls’ education with

central government; and 3) analytic

studies to identify the barriers to

girls’ education and the financial and

human resources needed to implement low-cost, locally owned actions

to overcome those barriers.

The Peace Corps and girls’ education. Peace Corps girls’ education

activities raise awareness of the benefits of girls’ education and address

enrollment and retention issues. The

Peace Corps also integrates gender

awareness and women’s themes into

curricula and uses inclusive teaching

techniques. One strategy is to provide support services to address

constraints that prevent girls from

going to school. There are also

activities to build self-esteem and

leadership skills, such as scholarships, camps, clubs and sports;

mentoring and career dev

and conferences and wor

Guinea, the Peace Corps 

a magazine from materia

tributed by girls to provide 

and discussion vehicle th

girls from all over the cou

express their views on co

and health issues that aff

The Education for Deve

and Democracy Initiativ

vide $120 million in the fir

to improve education and 

access to the technology 

mation needed to compet

21st century. Activities in

1) strategic partnerships b

U.S. and African institutio

universities, primary and 

schools, and civic society 

2) improved instructional 

with emphasis on distanc

and increasing the use of 

tion technology for educa

poses; 3) resource center

ed by Peace Corps volun

schools and communities 

World Wide Web; and 4) 

girls’ and women’s partici

formal and nonformal edu

including mentoring and s

ships.

A key objective of the Co

Program is to assist coun

developing agricultural sy

essary to meet their dom

needs. Since January 19
34

2,000 fellows from 67 countries have

received training in a wide range of

agriculture and food-security-related

subjects such as production; crop

and livestock marketing and consumption; agricultural finance; and

business management. There was

also training in food safety and

phyto-sanitary issues, biotechnology,

agricultural policy and WTO accession, and transportation and storage

issues.

Developing human capacity. The

USAID-sponsored “Leadership for

Change” program in Kenya,

Tanzania, Uganda, Mali, Senegal,

and Benin provides training in professional skills for gender analysis,

program management, proposal writing, mentoring, and advocacy related

to involving women in the fields of

agriculture and the environment.

The experiences of “Leadership for

Change” will be published as a training manual.

Research

In addition to improving income to

afford food, another element of food

security is enhancing food production capabilities. Research and

extension should be made an integral part of the process to increase

food production.

Food production is more than adequate in the developed nations, and

considerable progress has been

made in some developing nations.

The food situation, however, remains

grim for many people in most developing nations, especially in South

Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

Redistribution of food supplies

through food aid is expensive and

depends to a large extent on donor

surplus production. The answer is to

increase food production. This will

lower food costs–a step that is of the

greatest importance to poor consumers who spend a large proportion of their meager income on food.

Since there is generally little opportunity to expand crop land, land must

be made more productive. To bring

this about, more and sustained

research is urgently required.

Biotechnology and food security.

What constrains agricultural performance in poor countries? Shortage of

arable land, poor moisture availability, declining soil fertility, limited

access to costly farm inputs, limited

technological base, and agricultural

pests and diseases all play a role.

Biotechnology-derived solutions

could reduce the need for high-cost

agro-chemicals and irrigation by controlling diseases and weeds, thus

promoting sustainable agricultural

production.

The debate on biotechnology 

about its applications for poor 

tries, but rather, how to promo

support, and apply it in ways 

enhance food production, red

hunger and poverty, and supp

developmental processes in a 

and environmentally sustaina

manner, in addition to market-

objectives. More assistance i

ed in:

• capacity building for:

1) making decisions for eng

ment in and application of b

nology in different countries

2) developing a knowledge 

for decision-making in the u

biotechnological approache

3) priority-setting for biotech

aimed at solving specific pr

of national importance; and 

4) establishing policy struct

for biosafety and intellectua

erty protection.

• establishing linkages and 

erative mechanisms for bi

nology development, transfe

sustainable application.

• public education and awa

for informed decision-makin
New nutritional benefits of

biotechnology. Recent developments in biotechnology hold promise

for addressing nutrient deficiencies.

Researchers at the Swiss Federal

Institute of Technology and the

International Rice Research Institute

(IRRI) in the Philippines, with funding

from the U.S. Rockefeller

Foundation, have successfully genetically modified rice grains to contain

more iron and beta-carotene, the

chemical that the body converts into

vitamin A. Vitamin A deficiency

causes more than 1 million childhood deaths each year and is the

single most important cause of blindness among children in the developing countries. Iron-deficiency anemia

affects 2 billion people, nearly onethird of the world’s population, and is

the most widespread nutrient deficiency in the world. This demonstrates the potential of biotechnology

to have a significant consumer benefit. In addition to the annual grant,

USAID provides IRRI an additional

$1 million to help bring this technology to the point where vitamin Aenhanced “golden rice” can be made

available to farmers and consumers.

Expanded funding for biotechnology and agricultural research:

USAID provides funding for biotechnology and biosafety capacity building in less developed countries of

approximately $7 million per year.

These funds are used primarily for

international agricultural research

center programs ($4 million); an

innovative public-private-university

partnership for agricultural biotechnology support and policy ($2 million); and African livestock vaccine

development ($1 million). In addition, USAID initiated two new efforts

in fiscal year 2000 in genetically

engineered, nutritionally enhanced

crops, including adaptation of golden

rice by IRRI ($1 million) and a partnership with Monsanto Corporation

to adapt vitamin A-enhanced mustard oil for India ($500,000).

Direct support to International

Agricultural Research Centers. In

1999, the United States, through

USAID, contributed $39 million to 16

international agricultural research

centers through the Consultative

Group on International Agricultural

Research (CGIAR). These centers,

generally located in developing countries, produce improved te

and recommend policies 

tion and use in those nati

the basic food crops, lives

natural resources. An exa

the importance of the wor

out by the centers was pr

October 2000, when two 

at the International Maize 

Improvement Center in M

received the coveted Wor

Prize for their long-term re

the development of Qualit

Maize. Researchers at a

CGIAR Center, IRRI in th

Philippines, received the s

award in l996.

Cooperative research. I

research on food security 

long history of cooperatio

international agricultural r

centers affiliated with the 

with over 30 formal and in

research collaborations. 

ple, Integrated Pest Mana

research is conducted at 

tions, with more than 75 p

focused on developing en

tally friendly pest control t

gies. In 1999, a formal ag

was signed between the C

ARS to conduct cooperat

research in areas that inc

tainable farming practices

resource management, a

breeding for traits like gre

resistance and nutritional 

addition, USAID has foste
36

stronger linkages between the international agricultural research centers

and the scientific agricultural

research of U.S. land-grant colleges

and universities. Many of the

research projects funded by USAID

are focused on improving food security among the most vulnerable populations and should reduce the need

for food aid.

Collaborative research support

programs. USAID provided $20

million in fiscal year 2000 for collaborative support programs to conduct

research in technical aspects of

commodity production, as well as

policies and resource management

practices. This research improves

access to resources and promotes

sustainable income growth among

the rural poor. For example, two

sorghum lines resistant to striga

weed will provide yield increases 50-

100 percent greater than those of

the highly susceptible local

sorghums in Ethiopia. A livestock

early warning system is reducing

animal mortality in East Africa and

will cut losses in half over the next 4

to 8 years, saving pastoralists over

$100 million. In the Horn of Africa,

research on patterns of bartering

assets as a mechanism to cope with

crises such as drought and conflict

will better enable the post-crisis

recovery of the region’s most foodinsecure people.

Direct support to international

agriculture institutions. The USDA

Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS)

has been instrumental in providing

direct research support to international agriculture institutions trying to

solve critical production problems.

FAS works mostly through U.S. universities. In fiscal year 2000, FAS

provided $2.2 million for food security research, technical assistance,

and training and policy activities.

These funds require matching

resources from other U.S. Federal

agencies, universities, the private

sector, international organizations,

and foreign governments. The total

amount invested, therefore, far

exceeded $2.2. million. Currently, a

diverse group of U.S. institutions are

collaborating in nearly 140 research

partnerships with 52 countries to

promote the safe and appropriate

development and application of

biotechnology and other tools for

food safety. There are other cooperative projects to improve the nutritive

value and resistance of crops and

livestock and environmental sustainability. Specifically in Egypt, FAS

supported 22 collaborative research

projects that allowed U.S. and

Egyptian scientists to work together

to solve critical problems that both

countries face in the production of

wheat, maize, rice, and faba beans.

Information and technology 

fer. The United States transfe

technology to potential users 

cooperative partnerships and

research networks which help 

age and expand research res

Cooperative research and dev

ment agreements yield new te

nologies and improved varieti

plants that will enhance food p

tion, food safety, and food sec

Scientific exchanges. Visitin

entist programs provide oppo

for U.S. and foreign scientists 

share experience and knowle

fiscal year 1999, 59 foreign sc

from developing nations partic

in the Foreign Research Asso

Program. The ARS Internship

Program for Early Career Sou

African Scientists provides gre

opportunities for rural develop

and rural income generation t

education, work experience, a

entific and technology exchan

Agricultural research inform

USDA’s science magazine,

Agricultural Research, publish

monthly by ARS, is available e

tronically on the Internet at

http://www.ars.usda.gov. The 

site includes other food and a

tural publications as well as a

searchable database of curre

research efforts.
4

Gender research. With support

from USAID, the International Food

Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has

organized a monthly seminar series,

“Strengthening Development Policy

Through Gender and Intra-household Research,” to present the

results of gender research to a

Washington-based network of development professionals, academics,

policy makers, and NGO’s. This

forum provides an opportunity to

review and exchange findings on

gender and intra-household allocation of assets including agriculturally

earned income, land, food, and tools

of food production. USAID and

IFPRI have supported research linkages with universities and research

organizations in Ethiopia, South

Africa, Ghana, Peru, Ecuador, and

Bangladesh. Grant support from

USAID has financed work with

African NGO’s in many countries on

women’s agriculture and food security issues, including Kenya, Tanzania,

Uganda, Mali, Senegal, and Benin.

USAID has helped NGO’s and other

institutions to increase their organizational viability in Mexico, South

Africa, Nicaragua, India, Mali, El

Salvador, and India. USAID has

worked with the Asia Foundation to

strengthen the capacity of women

and women’s NGO’s to address barriers to women’s economic participation in Bangladesh, Cambodia,

Nepal, and Sri Lanka.

Priority Area IV: Sustainable

Food Systems and the

Environment

Domestic Actions

Improving community food production and marketing to boost

farm-to-school projects. USDA’s

Small Farms/School Meals Initiative

will conduct regional workshops to

help States establish local production, processing, and distribution

arrangements. This allows farmers

to sell fresh produce to local schools.

Supporting research and education for sustainable agriculture.

The Sustainable Agriculture

Research and Education (SARE)

program helps farmers and ranchers

to adopt sustainable practices that

are profitable, environmentally

sound, and good for communities.

Since 1988, SARE has helped raise

farm profits and enhance communities through an innovative research

and education grants program.

SARE awards over 250 new grants

each year that assist farmers with

long-term solutions to today’s challenges.

America the Beautiful is 

urban and community fore

forest stewardship progra

Forest Service. It aims to 

improve trees in every co

across the country. For st

maintaining 62,000 garde

America the Beautiful don

19,675 pounds of bulk ve

seeds and 607,202 packe

over the past year. From 

dens, 10,000 volunteers h

vated 8 billion pounds of f

hungry.

Direct marketing suppo

ers. The Agricultural Mar

Service (AMS) has an act

marketing program to link 

consumers, creating new 

small local farmers and im

consumer access to fresh 

affordable produce. Direc

includes farmers markets

own-farms, roadside stan

scription farming, commu

ported agriculture, and ca

Activities include: 1) prom

development and operatio

ers markets and other ma

activities which support sm

ers; 2) serving as a one-s

mation source on direct m

services; and 3) conductin

on farmer direct marketing
38

Information services include a directory of farmers markets with over

2,700 entries, guidance on how to

establish a farmers market, and a

bibliography of direct marketing

resources. There is also a Web site

and a telephone hotline (800-384-

8704) to provide the dates, times,

and locations of USDA-sponsored

farmers markets.

Many low-income, urban areas do

not have grocery stores; residents

often have limited access to quality,

affordable produce. AMS facilitates

farmers markets in these neighborhoods to improve the residents’ nutrition and health. Other activities that

directly address food security include

allowing food stamp recipients to

purchase produce from farmers markets through debit cards and promoting farm-to-school programs whereby farmers market directly to

schools.

Other agencies, such as FNS; the

Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service

(CSREES); and the National

Resources Conservation Service,

have also supported direct marketing, including farmers markets, for

low-income communities and farmto-school initiatives to help small

farmers sell product directly to

schools.

Grants for farm-to-school activities. In September 2000, the

CSREES Initiative for Future

Agriculture and Food Systems

Program awarded $2 million i

grants to increase farm-to-sch

activities in partnership with th

Community Food Security Co

and family farms alliances, sc

districts, State departments o

cation, and universities in Cal

New Jersey, New York, and

Pennsylvania.

Supporting organic agricul

response to extensive input fr

consumers and farmers, the U

States is establishing nationa

ic standards and labeling that 

among the most comprehens

the world. Whereas most oth

tors of agriculture in the Unite

States are losing farmers, the 

ber of organic farmers is incre

by 12 percent per year. Estab
a uniform national organic standard

provides more growth opportunities

in organic agriculture and furthers

the development of another new and

lucrative market for farmers. In addition, the United States has proposed

$5 million for research to develop

improved organic production and

processing methods, evaluate economic benefits to farmers, develop

new markets, and support general

research on organic farming.

Climate forecasting and management of marine resources. The

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA) contributes to

food security by providing information

for improved farming decisions and

sustainable management of fisheries. Better climate forecasting,

such as predicting El Niño events,

results in benefits to U.S. agriculture

of more than $300 million annually

from improved crop decisions and

inventory management. NOAA also

engages in a variety of programs to

monitor the availability and nutritional

adequacy of seafood supplies and

reserve stocks throughout the United

States and around the world.

Environmentally sound aquaculture

will help meet the increasing

demand for seafood with high-quality

and reliable products without overfishing wild populations. In 1999,

NOAA convened a panel 

to identify current use and 

applications of ecosystem 

in fisheries management 

research. The panel prod

report to Congress. Than

another NOAA initiative,1

miles of coral reef habitat 

Virgin Islands is now prot

under the U.S. National C

Action Plan.

Consultation with Nativ

Americans on fisheries 

NOAA also consults with 

Americans on fisheries is

has co-located five memb

Northwest Indian Fisherie

Commission with its staff 

Washington State to foste

involvement of the tribes 

Habitat Conservation Pla

The tribes have a vested 

salmon habitat conservat

port of NOAA’s Minority S

Institution Capacity Buildi

Partnership Program, the 

Northwest Fisheries Scie

proposed a formal collabo

the Northwest Indian Coll

expand ongoing program

culture, marine science, a

resources for the 40 mem
40

International Actions

The Africa Food Security Initiative

(AFSI) is a critical means to achieve

the objectives of the 1998 Africa:

Seeds of Hope Act. This 10-year

program of bilateral and regional

activities seeks to reduce childhood

malnutrition and increase rural people’s incomes in three ways:

increasing agricultural production,

improving market efficiency and market access, and expanding trade and

investment in agriculture. AFSI

strengthens and expands successful

bilateral programs in agriculture and

food security, and supports national

and regional agricultural technology

development as well as policy

research networks. AFSI is in its

third year of implementation, and is

active in 11 countries: Ethiopia,

Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Mali,

Mozambique, Rwanda, Uganda,

Tanzania, and Zambia. Total funding

for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 is $61

million. The annual $30 million level

for AFSI was increased 50 percent

to $45 million in 2000, allowing

USAID to continue to expand agriculture programs in other needy

countries. So far, as a result of the

initiative, U.S. support for microenterprise programs in Africa has expanded from $17 million to $38 million

since 1995. Support for development of farmer organizations has

almost doubled to $41 million since

1995. Title II nonemergency programs for development purposes in

Africa have increased by almo

percent since 1995-96. Finall

incomes of small-scale farme

increased in countries served 

USAID programs expanded w

AFSI resources.

Gender support to the Afric

Food Security Initiative. The

USAID Women in Developme

Office has supported a range 

activities on gender issues in 

of the AFSI priority countries. 

grant to Winrock International 

moted women’s leadership in 

agricultural and environmenta

by creating a network of Africa

women scientists and leaders 

mitted to building the skills an

capacity of development profe

Containers of U.S.-donated vegetable oil ar

recycled and used to plant seedlings.
als and institutions. This program

will identify and address constraints

to women farmers in Mali, and

improve access to agricultural extension and education for a range of

food and cash crops in Uganda.

Another grant program to Self-Help

Development, International in Malawi

supported multi-sectoral communitybased development projects, including a community diagnostic problemsolving tool, focused on womenheaded households.

Pest eradication for Africa. USAID

and USDA provide significant technical resources, amounting to more

that $20 million a year, to subSaharan Africa to eradicate pests

such as locusts, grasshoppers,

screw worm, and rodents.

Carbon sequestration in agriculture. The degradation of agricultural

lands in developing countries, with a

consequent loss of soil carbon, contributes to food insecurity and global

climate change. USAID and its university partners cosponsored an

international expert workshop on

carbon sequestration, sustainable

agriculture, and poverty alleviation

with the International Fund for

Agricultural Development, FAO, and

the World Meteorological

Organization in late August 2000.

The workshop was convened to

increase international awareness of

how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can be reduced through

improved agricultural and agroforestry production activities that

sequester carbon in biomass and in

soils; sequestration of carbon in soils

also increases nutrient retention and

food productivity.

Hurricane relief and reconstruction. Hurricanes Mitch and Georges

devastated the Caribbean and

Central America in late 1998 and

seriously set back the economies of

several nations. In a week’s time,

decades of development progress

were lost as roads, bridges, schools,

health clinics, crops, and livestock

were destroyed. Damage was estimated at $8.5 billion for the region.

The United States responded immediately with relief supplies and food

aid, then turned to the enormous

task of helping the affected countries

assess damage and repa

infrastructure and restore 

The food airlift was the la

U.S. history, delivering 84 

pounds of food by the end 

The United States has pr

$621 million in reconstruc

tance through USAID and 

ernment partners for resto

national health care delive

and schools; community w

sanitation; economic reac

through rebuilding farm-to

roads; re-establishment o

al production; replacemen

housing and shelter; a ris

and early warning system

watershed restoration.

Better agricultural and en

practices could have prev

much of the hurricane da

ticularly to Nicaragua and 

Therefore, the U.S. appro

hurricane project is to hel

institutions “build back be

vent such widespread da

future. In an innovative p

the Dominican Republic, 

USDA are using the proc

nearly $15 million food aid 

to rehabilitate and recons

ects aimed at communitie

farmers. To date, 33 comm

based projects have been 

including reconstruction o

and cocoa plantations, re

access roads, reconstruc

aged facilities, replenishin

Men in the outskirts of Negele,

Ethiopia spray their cattle for ticks as

part of a livestock development project initiated by Save the Children

USA.
42

livestock, and rehabilitating small

farmer associations. The Food and

Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA), and CSREES provided technical support to the affected areas.

The Environment and Natural

Resources

Global Environment Facility (GEF).

The United States provided nearly

$36 million in fiscal year 2000 funding for the Global Environment

Facility (GEF) to support work on

transboundary and global environmental problems. The GEF provides

grant and concessional funding for

developing-country efforts to prevent

the loss of endangered species and

biological diversity, improve energy

efficiency, and limit greenhouse gas

emissions. GEF categories relevant

to food security are conservation of

biodiversity, the largest GEF category (39 percent), and cleaning up

international waters and protection of

fisheries (14 percent). Mitigating

land degradation and desertification

are cross cutting components. The

FAO was recently approved as an

executing agency for the GEF. The

GEF also recently approved a new

operational program for agrobiodiversity.

Support to sustainable agriculture

and natural resources management. Since 1992, USAID has supported collaborative research in sustainable agriculture and natural

resources management to improve

local capacity and decision-making

through a partnership of universities,

research institutions, development

organizations, NGO’s, and rural

communities around the world so

that food production and land use

are balanced with environmental

conservation.

Forests. Recognizing the essential

role of forests in maintaining productive agricultural systems in many

areas of the world, the United States

has taken steps domestically and

internationally to promote sustainable forest management for the full

range of socio-economic and environmental benefits. As a primary

donor to the CGIAR, the United

States supports the Center for

International Forestry Research.

The Center recently developed a

toolkit to guide sustainable management of forests that has been adopted by organizations such as the

African Timber Organization, the

Intergovernmental Panel on Forests,

and others. The United States

extensively contributed to combating

forest fires in forest-dependent countries that threatened significant food

sources for local and indigenous

communities.

Soils. Through U.S. support t

International Center for Agrofo

Research of the CGIAR, long

productivity and food security 

ern Africa have been increase

through novel soil fertility diag

and improvement strategies.

International fisheries.

Overexploitation threatens fish

that are critical to food securit

many countries, particularly in 

coastal communities. The Un

States joined 94 other nations 

December 1995 in adopting th

Kyoto Declaration and Plan of 

on the Sustainable Contributio

Fisheries to Food Security. Th

United States is actively work

achieve the goals of the Kyoto 

ference and other such agree
by implementing global fisheries

agreements, expanding regional fisheries management organizations,

ensuring that fish trade promotes

food security, and through the development of sustainable and environmentally sound aquaculture. U.S.

support to the International Center

for Living Aquatic Resources through

the CGIAR has enabled the development of an enhanced geographical

information system and the first global database on coral reefs and their

resources.

Aquaculture. The United States

supports the Bangkok Declaration

and Strategy on Aquaculture adopted in February 2000, which sets out

a framework for enhancing global

food security through aquaculture.

Operationally, the United States supports aquaculture projects being

undertaken by the Fisheries Working

Group of Asia-Pacific Economic

Cooperation to fight destructive fishing practices in the Asia-Pacific

region.

Water security. Agricultural irrigation accounts for as much as 70 percent of all water usage around the

world. It is estimated that a 17-percent increase worldwide is needed to

provide water for irrigated agriculture

to meet future food needs. Without

water to expand irrigated agriculture,

pressures to meet food deficits by

further expanding rain-fed agriculture

through clearing forest and marginal

lands could have serious environmental consequences. USAID is

assisting countries with cross-border

water issues to manage shared

water resources under conditions of

extreme scarcity and stimulate cooperation to avoid disputes in southern

Africa, the Middle East, th

Asian Republics, Central 

and the Caucasus. Anoth

project helps government

stakeholders in Asia and 

East to reach agreement 

table and sustainable stra

Women in the villages around Negele, Ethiopia 

water at a water pump created by Save the Ch

USA, reducing time for this essential task from 

to under 1 hour.
44

policies for managing scarce water

resources. U.S. support to the

International Water Management

Institute, through the CGIAR, has

enabled the development of an analytical computer-based tool, called

the World Water and Climate Atlas.

This tool has improved water management, thus mitigating threats

from water shortages leading to food

insecurity, conflicts, and environmental imbalance.

Global energy and environment.

FAS technical experts promote environmentally sound policies,

approaches, and technologies in

USAID’s assistance programs.

Efforts are aimed at advancing energy conservation and efficiency, using

alternative energy sources, halting

deforestation and stimulating reforestation, promoting sound natural

resource management, and understanding the relationship between

policy and sustainable use of natural

resources and the development of

new technology.

USAID NGO Title II food security

programs and environmental

capacity building for NGO’s.

Almost all Title II development food

aid programs implemented by NGO’s

are designed to promote food security and health. USAID has embarked

on an ambitious program of capacity

building in environmentally sound

design and implementation of projects for both U.S. and host country

NGO’s in order to implement environmental regulations applied since

1997.

The Peace Corps and the environment. Peace Corps environmental

projects address environmental education and awareness, sustainable

agricultural practices (commonly in

agro-forestry), and natural resource

management. For greater sustainability, the potential for income generation and adding value for agricultural products is increasingly considered when determining appropriate

environmental project activities.

Examples are food processing and

handicrafts made from nontimber forest products. In Honduras, a Peace

Corps extension project for hillside

farmers implemented soil conservation strategies. Farmers trained by

volunteers are sought by NGO’s and

local governments as community

leaders in agricultural development

and environment issues. In Togo, the

Peace Corps has conducted training

on making and using improved-efficiency cook stoves to reduce the

amount of fuel wood needed.

Support to conservation and management of biodiversity. The international programs of the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service (FWS) assist

foreign countries in becoming selfsufficient in their capacity to manage

and conserve their biological

resources. FWS has international

projects in graduate-level training in

wildlife management and con

tion of natural resources and 

munity-based conservation pr

that emphasize environmenta

cation and public awareness.

USAID sponsored a 4-year gr

program that included innovat

interventions, operations rese

and advocacy in several secto

including economic growth an

development. An example of 

activity affecting food security 

evaluation of rural credit progr

affect on the well-being of ind

and households in Ecuador.

Indicators of well-being consid

are income, nutrition, educatio

time allocation patterns. Tech

assistance on gender issues 

been applied to environmenta

grams, especially in the Latin

America and Caribbean regio

partnership with such organiz

as the Nature Conservancy th

its Parks in Peril Program. US

also played an important role 

ing to organize the Communit

Conservation Coalition.
5

Priority Area V: Food

Security Safety Net

Domestic Actions

Food and Nutrition Assistance

The major domestic food assistance

programs that make up the U.S. food

security safety net are administered

by the Food and Nutrition Service,

with the Administration on Aging providing nutrition services for the elderly. They are as follows:

• The Food Stamp Program

ensures that low-income families

and children have the resources

they need to purchase a nutritious

diet, resulting in significant increases in food availability for participating households. The program provides monthly nutrition assistance

for participants to purchase

approved food items at approved

food stores. It currently serves 17

million children and adults a

month.

• The Child Nutrition Programs

include the school meals programs, the Summer Food Service

Program, the Special Milk

Program, and the Child and Adult

Care Food Program. Through

these programs, the United States

Government partners with schools,

local government agencies, and

private nonprofit organizations to

provide nutritious meals and

healthy eating environments for

schoolchildren of all ages. These

programs serve more than 26 million children every school day.

• The Special Supplemental Food

Program for Women, Infants

and Children (WIC) provides supplemental foods, nutrition and

health counseling, and a link to

health care for low-income

women, infants, and children up to

age 5 who are at nutritional risk.

The program currently reaches

over 7 million low-income pregnant

and postpartum women and their

children. After controlling for selfselection bias, participation in the

WIC program has significant positive effect on children’s intakes of

iron, folate, and vitamin B-6.

• A variety of commodit

grams, such as the Co

Supplemental Food Pro

Emergency Food Assis

Program, and the Food

Distribution Program on 

Reservations, provide c

foods to special popula

need them.

• The Nutrition Services 

Elderly program provid

to the States and tribes 

congregate and home-d

meals and nutrition scre

assessment, education

seling to older America

objective is to enable o

Americans to remain in

Priority is given to those 

in greatest economic or 
46

need, with particular attention to

low-income, minority older adults.

In 2000, funding for the program

was $521,412,000 for States and

$18,457,000 for the tribes.

• The Community Food and

Nutrition Program provides assistance to statewide public or private

agencies at the community, local

and national levels to: 1) better

coordinate existing private and

public food assistance resources;

2) identify potential sponsors of

child nutrition programs; and

3) develop innovative approaches

to nutrition needs at the State and

local level. Funding to provide

statewide nutrition services

increased by 23 percent from fiscal

year 1999 to fiscal year 2000.

Providing food stamps to Kosovar

refugees. In 1999, the United

States facilitated participation of

Kosovar refugees in the Food Stamp

Program upon arrival in this country.

Establishing a toll-free number for

food stamp information. In 1999,

a toll-free telephone number was

established to inform the public

about food stamps. It covers eligibility and benefits and offers a referral

to local food stamp program offices

for more direct assistance in both

English and Spanish.

Promoting the Afterschool Snack

Program. The United States recently initiated a new program in the food

security safety net that provides

afterschool snacks to children

through the National School Lunch

and Child and Adult Care Feeding

Programs. The U.S. Government is

promoting awareness of the afterschool snack program and other

food assistance programs through

the school community.

Encouraging breastfeeding. The

U.S. Government has sponsored

extensive breastfeeding promotion

efforts for low-income mothers

through the WIC program since

1989. It launched a national campaign to increase breastfeeding initiation and duration rates among WIC

participants, increase referrals to

WIC for breastfeeding support, and

increase general public acceptance

and support of breastfeeding. It has

also developed and disseminated

educational materials, provided an

enhanced WIC food package for

nursing mothers, and sponsored a

Breastfeeding Promotion Consortium

of health professional and advocacy

organizations. Most recently,

$500,000 was provided to develop

breastfeeding support kits for health

care providers. These efforts have

significantly increased breastfeeding

initiation rates among low-income

women and WIC participants.

Expanding the WIC Farmers

Market Nutrition Program. 

the benefits provided through 

WIC program is vouchers to b

fresh produce at farmers mar

which both supports local farm

and improves the access of p

pants to nutritious food. This 

gram has expanded from 9 S

agencies at its inception in fis

year 1992 to 39 State agenci

including four Indian Tribal

Organizations, in fiscal year 2

Total available funding for this 

gram has grown over this sam

period from $3 million to $19 

Strengthening WIC nutrition 

ices. In fiscal year 2000, $1.

lion was made available in W

Special Project Grants to imp

and strengthen the effectiven

WIC nutrition services in three

States: Tennessee, Washingt

and New Mexico. Small gran

awarded to Iowa, Massachus

and Maine to develop propos

fiscal year 2001.

Providing fresh fruits and v

bles to children on reservat

To enhance the development 

food systems, FNS contracts 

the Department of Defense’s

Defense Support Center in

Philadelphia for the purchase 

delivery of fresh fruits and veg

bles that are provided under t

Food Distribution Program on 
Reservations. It is policy to purchase this produce locally from

small-scale farmers where feasible.

National Nutrition Summit. USDA

and DHHS cosponsored a National

Nutrition Summit in May 2000 in

Washington, DC to: 1) highlight

accomplishments since the landmark

1969 White House Conference on

Food, Nutrition and Health; 2) identify

continuing challenges and emerging

opportunities in these areas; 3) focus

on nutrition and lifestyle issues

across the lifespan, particularly obesity; and 4) heighten awareness of

the continuing challenges in solving

problems of hunger and food insecurity in the United States and encourage collaboration.

Health and Social Services

DHHS provides a diverse array of

complementary health and social

services necessary for food security.

The Administration for Children

and Families is responsible for

some 60 programs that provide services and assistance to needy children and families. It administers the

new State-Federal welfare program,

Temporary Assistance to Needy

Families, administers the national

child support enforcement system,

and the Head Start program. It also

provides funds to assist low-income

families in paying for child care and

supports State programs to provide

for foster care and adoption assistance.

The Health Resources and

Services Administration (HRSA)

provides health resources for medically underserved populations

through a nationwide network of 643

community and migrant health centers, and 144 primary care programs

for the homeless and residents of

public housing. It serves 8.1 million

Americans each year. HRSA also

works to build the health care workforce, maintains the National Health

Service Corps, and provides maternal and child health services and

services to people with HIV/AIDS.

Expanding health care coverage

to uninsured children. The State

Children’s Health Insurance Program

(S-CHIP), created in 1997 and funded for $48 billion over the next

decade, enables States to expand

health care coverage to uninsured

children from families with incomes

too high to qualify for Medicaid but

too low to afford private health insurance. This program, together with

Medicaid, provides health care coverage for prescription drugs, vision,

hearing, and mental health services

for these previously uninsured children. Every State has implemented

S-CHIP, providing health insurance

coverage to over 2 million children

nationwide since the beginning of the

program. In addition, the 

children enrolled in Medic

increased because of sta

reach and eligibility simpl

efforts.

Connecting child nutriti

improved children’s hea

School lunch data is now 

to assist Medicaid in enro

lions of children in health 

Emphasizing prevention 

early recognition of nut

concerns. The DHHS-s

Bright Futures in Practice

Program provides develo

guidelines from the prena

through adolescence, as 

strategies and tools to he

professionals incorporate 

information and counselin

primary care services an

nerships in nutrition with 

community members.

Head Start is America’s 

early childhood developm

gram for low-income pres

dren ages three to five. U

Clinton/Gore Administrati

for Head Start has more 

bled, increasing from $2.2 

fiscal year 1992 to $4.66 

fiscal year 1999. With the

tional funds, Head Start h

increased enrollment by o

200,000 children, enhanc

quality of services, and la
48

new initiative called Early Head Start

to serve infants and toddlers. In fiscal year 1998, Head Start served

822,000 children and their families.

The fiscal year 2000 budget provides

$5.3 billion — an increase of $608

million over fiscal year 1999. The

goals is to serve 1 million children in

Head Start by 2002.

Early Head Start. The Early Head

Start program was initiated in 1994

to expand the benefits of early childhood development to low-income

families with children under 3 and to

pregnant women. In fiscal year 1999,

the program was funded at $349 million and served approximately

40,000 children.

Outreach to underserved populations. In 1999, the Head Start

Bureau conducted an analysis that

identified traditionally underserved

groups, with a particular focus on the

growing Hispanic population, and

specific steps to improve outreach

and services. As a result, the percentage of Hispanic children served

rose by 1.7 percentage points, from

26.1 percent to 27.8 percent.

Nutrition and Health Services

for Native Americans

The Indian Health Service is the

principal Federal health care provider

and health advocate for Native

Americans. Its goal is to assure that

comprehensive, culturally acceptable

personal and public health services

are available and accessible to

American Indian and Alaska Native

people.

Providing culturally appropriate

food packages to reservations. In

1997, the U.S. Government initiated

a comprehensive review of the food

package being distributed to participants in the Food Distribution

Program on Indian Reservations.

The review team included tribal leaders, tribal program operators, health

and nutrition experts, and Federal

commodity procurement personnel.

The review team achieved its goal of

increasing the appeal of the food

package and improving its nutritional

profile, without increasing its cost.

Community Food Securit

Food Recovery

Food recovery: In 1996, the 

States initiated a government-

effort to work with nonprofit an

hunger groups to increase the 

ery and gleaning of excess fo

distribution to the hungry.

Achievements include:

• The first National Summit o

Recovery convened by Vice

President Gore in 1997 to g

ate national attention to the 

catalyze new public-private 

nerships, and announce ne

Federal activities.

• Creation of grassroots food 

ery projects in more than 40

States in conjunction with fa

and ranchers. Through thes

ects, more than 10 million p

of excess food have been c

ed for donation to nonprofit 

such as the Society of St. A

• Distribution of more than 20

copies of A Citizen’s Guide 

Food Recovery and Gleanin

easy-to-use manual on star

expanding nonprofit food re

efforts and other materials t

encourage people to volunt

such activities.

• A new partnership between

Hewlett Packard and Ameri

Second Harvest to install an

operate a new Web-based s

Resourcelink. This is an inf
tion service to match food availability among growers, manufacturers, processors, and distributors

with the food needs of America’s

Second Harvest food bank network and its 188 food banks and

26 million customers. This service

also provides information on an

alliance of shipping companies

that can provide no-cost or lowcost transportation.

In 1999, the United States established a government-wide

Community Food Security

Initiative (CFSI) to coordinate the

domestic aspects of the U.S. Action

Plan. The CFSI has established a

system of State food security

liaisons, held a national food security

summit, and completed an action

plan. A copy of the Community Food

Security Initiative Action Plan can be

found on the Internet at

http://www.reeusda.gov/food_security/actplan.htm. In 2000, a

Community Food Security Resource

Kit was released that provides comprehensive information on best practices and Federal resources to fight

hunger, improve nutrition, and

strengthen local food systems. The

CFSI has already significantly

increased the visibility of community

food security nationally.

Community food security commitments: The U.S. Government,

through CFSI, has generated over

100 new public, private, and nonprofit sector commitments at the national, State, and local levels to fight

hunger and strengthen local food

systems. Most are carried out in

conjunction with nonprofit groups.

For example:

• Share Our Strength is e

Operation Frontline, a p

engages chefs to teach 

nutrition education clas

distributes cookbooks t

income families.

• World Hunger Year is w

USDA to publicize and 

“Replication Manuals” f

the most effective grass

hunger and poverty pro

the United States.

• The Millennium Green 

encourage all American

or adopt a tree in hono

Millennium is also enco

gardeners to plant an e

produce for the hungry.

• Foodchain’s national co

kitchen initiative, the D.

Kitchen, and the Ameri

Food Service Associati

starting a national prog

vert school cafeterias in

nity kitchens. The prog

bines food rescue with 

On February 14, 2000, 

announced $370,000 in 

this effort.

• America’s Second Harv

USDA are distributing f

outreach materials and 

ing 10 food banks to w

USDA to develop food 

action plans.
50

• The Community Food Security

Coalition (CFSC) is undertaking a

major new initiative to connect

family farmers with school food

services. CFSC will produce a

report describing innovative farmto-school programs, cosponsor a

series of regional training workshops to stimulate new farm-toschool programs, and initiate a

campaign to institute a healthy

foods, healthy schools approach

around the country. On October

14-15, 2000, the CFSC sponsored

the first ever National Summit on

Community Food Security to bring

all stakeholders together to begin

jointly implementing these commitments.

More commodities for food banks

and hot meals programs. This

year, the United States will spend

well over $200 million to purchase

more than 200 million pounds of

food for distribution, mostly through

faith-based organizations and other

nonprofit groups.

The Congressional Hunger Center,

co-chaired by Congressmen Tony

Hall and Frank Wolf, sponsors leadership development programs and

education, research, and advocacy

projects to address hunger. The

center supports the national Mickey

Leland Fellows program whereby 20

young people a year perform direct

community service combined with

public policy related to hunger.

Beyond Food, a joint project of

AmeriCorps and the center, enlists

80 people each year to work on

community hunger initiatives in

Vermont, Wisconsin, the Mississippi

Delta, and Washington, D.C.

Activities have included nutrition education, community gardens, and food

recovery.

International Actions

For countries where people a

need, the United States suppo

international and bilateral hum

an assistance efforts to provid

emergency relief and foster de

ment.

The Department of State pro

substantial support for refugee

internally displaced persons, d

vantaged children, and the dis

The mission performance plan

embassies contain, as neede

priority goals related to food s

emergency relief, gender-neu

education opportunities, and t

empowerment of women. Po

stability, maternal care, and th

advancement of health, espec

reduction in the prevalence of

HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and m

are among the high priorities 

to break the vicious cycle of d

and poverty.

Humanitarian assistance to 

In 1999, the United States pro

nearly $1 billion in humanitari

assistance to sub-Saharan Af

Each year, USAID’s Offices fo

Foreign Disaster Assistance,

Transition Initiatives, and Food 

Peace team with the Departm

State’s Bureau of Population,

Refugees, and Migration and 

international agencies and NG

provide humanitarian assistan

Africa.
Food Aid

Food aid is a unique resource for

addressing hunger and nutrition

problems; it is self-targeting and

attractive to those really in need. A

major determinant of the effectiveness and sustainability of foreign

assistance is the extent to which it

strengthens self-reliance and the

ability to cope with future crises. In

planning, executing, and targeting

food aid, the United States encourages implementing partners to

engage local nongovernm

organizations, local exper

the beneficiary community

policy guidelines encoura

countries and implementi

to link relief and developm

relief programs reinforce d

ment objectives and that 

are designed to help prev

gate disasters.

The United States remain

world’s major provider of f

tance. In fiscal year 1999

surpluses in some U.S. co

and an increased need fo

worldwide led to the large

increase in U.S. internat

assistance in a decade. 

unprecedented combinati

events dramatically increa

need for international food 

tance, including the contin

hurricane recovery effort 

America and the Caribbe

and the financial crisis in 

droughts in the Horn of A

continuing food emergenc

ing from conflict.

In both fiscal years 1997 

the United States provide

3 million tons, valued at $

food assistance. It went t

developing and re-industr

countries, reaching million

ple. In fiscal year 1999, th

tripled to 10 million tons, v

more than $2.4 billion, an

ber of countries served in

A woman carries wheat back to the Harena camp for

internally displaced persons outside of Asmara, Eritrea.
52

82. This assistance was divided

almost equally between emergencies and longer term development

programs.

U.S. Government food aid accomplishments for fiscal years 1997-99

include improvements in food aid

management and commodity monetization, introduction of Title II program performance indicators that

demonstrate beneficiary level

impacts, increased documentation

and reporting on accomplishments,

increased nutritional benefit to food

aid recipients through vitamin A fortification of vegetable oil, and several

impact evaluations.

Integrating direct feeding activities

with other productive inputs is an

effective way of moving people from

relief to recovery. General feeding

rations provide the safety net to support displaced persons or refugees

in the short term after an emergency. Nonfood inputs, such as

training, seeds, and tools, support

the move from relief dependency to

self-reliance. Food-for-work programs provide rehabilitation of rural

infrastructure and local agricultural

systems, while meeting people’s

immediate food needs. As general

rations are scaled back for the population at large, targeted supplemental

rations can continue providing aid for

the most vulnerable groups. Another

way food aid contributes to development is the complementary investment in food transport, storage, and

handling facilities, including roads,

ports, and warehouses, which can

then support private sector economic

activity and increase access to markets.

There is a growing mismatch

between food aid supply and

demand, in part due to rising requirements for food aid against limited

global availability. In response, the

United States is increasingly u

geographical targeting of food 

tance and directed use of food 

programs which have as their 

and objectives sustainable de

ment leading to the alleviation 

food insecurity.

Decisions regarding food aid a

tions were directly affected by 

U.S. Action Plan on Food Sec

Food-security-related criteria 

been incorporated into progra

considerations. Priority is give

programs in countries with sig

chronic food insecurity, and to 

that include a capacity-buildin

ponent such as training, exten

and infrastructure. Proposals 

indicate how the project would 

countries attain sustainable fo

security and graduate from fo

The Farmer-to-Farmer Initia

managed by USAID, provides 

term technical assistance thro

U.S. volunteer farmers to impr

production, marketing, and dis

tion of agricultural commoditie

developing countries, funded 

pally through the Public Law 4

Title II program. In 1999, the 

gram was funded for nearly $

lion and supported 710 assign

in 31 food-insecure countries.
Food Security Commodity

Reserve. The Food Security

Commodity Reserve Act of 1996

provides for a 4-million-ton food

reserve to meet humanitarian food

assistance needs in developing

countries, when other U.S. food

assistance funding has been fully

committed. USDA has also contributed to faster response to emergencies overseas by pre-positioning

commodities at major U.S. ports. The

Africa: Seeds of Hope Act also

enhances the capacity of the United

States to respond to urgent humanitarian food crises in a timely manner

by authorizing advance purchase to

replenish the Food Security

Commodity Reserve.

The Food Aid Convention is the

legal instrument for ensuring a minimum flow of cereals as food aid.

The United States participated in the

recent renegotiation of the treaty

effective July 1, 1999, which has

improved the convention structure

and commitment levels to make it a

more effective mechanism for managing global food aid flows. Reforms

include: broadening the list of products eligible for consideration as

donated food aid; establishing a minimum global level for food aid donations of 5.5 million tons; placing more

emphasis on monitoring and evaluating the impact and effectiveness of

food aid operations; and committing

to support recipient countries’ development and implementation of their

own food security strategies.

Donor coordination. The United

States works in close partnership

with numerous bilateral, international, regional, and subregional organizations on food-assistance-related

issues. A coordinated approach is

seen as the most effective way to

support national food security efforts.

USAID and the European

Commission established a

Permanent Mechanism for

Consultation and Coordination on

development cooperation and

humanitarian assistance under the

umbrella of the Trans-Atlantic

Initiative.

Food aid codes of conduct.

USAID collaborated on drafting a

Code of Conduct for Food Aid in the

context of Food Security for the Intergovernmental Authority on

Development, a subregional organization comprised of the seven most

drought-prone countries of the

Greater Horn of Africa. The code

incorporates best practices on linking

relief to development, conflict resolution, gender perspective, and other

development components. It further

recognizes: 1) the importance of

food aid as one resource to address

hunger and disease due to food

shortages; 2) long-term food security

efforts and their role in mitigating

emergencies; 3) food aid as a flexible

resource which must be programmed carefully so as not to interfere with long-term food self-reliance;

and 4) full integration of food aid with

complementary investme

al trade policies, and othe

resources. The United S

contributed to the NGO-s

Sphere Humanitarian Cha

Minimum Standards in Di

Relief code of conduct for 

gency relief, in which food 

critical component, and w

target its humanitarian as

projects and organization

vide assistance in keeping 

principles.

HIV/AIDS

U.S. Government leader

addressing the HIV/AID

USAID is a leader in deve

implementing internationa

tion and control programs 

HIV/AIDS and sexually tra

diseases, including condo

tion and behavioral chang

tions. Since 1986, USAID

programs have reached m

22 million people. Agency 

have trained more than 1

cators, collaborated with m

600 NGO’s to expand pre

services, improved sexua

ted disease programs in 2

tries, and, in 1997 alone, 

over 230 million condoms
6

54

The Peace Corps and HIV/AIDS.

The global HIV/AIDS epidemic has

reached critical proportions, particularly in Africa, where an estimated 14

million people have died of the disease, and 24 million of the world’s 34

million infected people live. In June

2000, the Peace Corps announced

an initiative to fight HIV/AIDS, supported by $1.5 million from USAID

over the next 5 years and donations

from the Gates and Packard foundations. The Peace Corps will train all

2,400 Peace Corps volunteers serving in 25 countries in Africa as AIDS

educators and will increase the number of volunteers working on AIDSrelated projects by the end of 2000

six-fold.

Support to Livelihood

Strategies

Indigenous wild foods and their

role in food security. Indigenous

wild foods are vital to people coping

with food shortages. USAID sponsors activities in the Greater Horn of

Africa to gather and share knowledge on the use and potential of

indigenous wild food plants within the

region, including an assessment of

their role in food security.

The role of livestock in improving

food security. Food security in the

Horn of Africa depends largely on

livestock. Approximately 70 percent

of the land in this region is pastoral

rangeland. There is little or no viable

economic alternative to livestock production. Therefore, livestock disease

represents a serious constraint to

increased food security in this region.

USAID funding in the livestock sector

allows for improved animal health

care at decreased cost, and provides

vaccination against rinderpest, a

serious disease of cattle in East and

Central Africa. These programs are

particularly important in times of

drought, when maintaining animal

health and productivity is critical to

reducing food aid needs of vulnerable pastoral communities.

Priority Area VI: Inform

and Mapping

Having quality data available t

national monitoring, evaluation 

reporting is essential for asse

effectiveness of activities and

progress toward meeting food 

ty goals and for targeting and 

ing policies and programs. Q

data tells us who and where t

nerable groups are and the ca

of their poverty and food insec

The United States has made 

impressive investment in deve

survey instruments, methodol

and systems for collecting and 

lyzing information on factors r

to food security status, both a

and abroad, which allow us to

assess how successful our st

gies have been in reducing fo

insecurity and thus plan effect

programs.

Domestic Actions

A national food security obj

DHHS led the effort to develo

Healthy People 2010, the Nat

health goals for this decade a

framework to define the nation

health agenda and guide hea

motion and disease preventio

cy. Ten-year health objectives 

first initiated in 1979. In Janua

2000, new national health goa

objectives were set, with input 

civil society organizations, inc
the professional, voluntary and business sectors, and State and territorial health agencies. These new goals

will be monitored for the next

decade. For the first time, a national

objective was set to reduce food

insecurity by half by 2010, 5 years

earlier than the World Food Summit

target. Specifically, the target is to

increase the prevalence of food

security to at least 94 percent of all

U.S. households, compared to the

baseline in 1995, when 88 percent of

all U.S. households were food

secure.

U.S.-mandated national nutrition

monitoring. The United States collects data under a legislatively mandated interagency program knows as

the National Nutrition Monitoring and

Related Research Program. Key

components in this system include:

national food supply data and household-based food expenditures; food

composition and nutrient data bases;

food consumption and nutrient

intakes; nutritional status and nutrition-related health status; and knowledge, attitudes, and behavior

assessments.

U.S. food security measurement

project. Since 1995, the U.S.

Government has fielded a largescale survey effort to measure the

extent of food insecurity and hunger

among American households. The

food security survey module is

specifically designed to measure the

prevalence of household food insecurity and hunger in the U.S. population and is the outgrowth of over a

decade of research in this field in the

United States. It is fielded annually

as a supplement to the Current

Population Survey, a monthly laborforce survey conducted by the

Census Bureau. At an annual cost of

about $440,000, the data collection

involves interviews with approximately 45,000 households regarding their

ability to provide food for all members, including questions on food

expenditure patterns, adequacy of

household food supplies, instances

of food stress, and situations where

reductions of food quantity and/or

quality for adults and children in the

household were necessary due to

lack of financial resources.

Responses to the survey are scaled

to classify household status: food

secure, food insecure without

hunger, food insecure with hunger.

Other activities include: $225,000 to

sponsor a conference to expand collaboration with universities, research

institutes, and public interest groups

on future research needs related to

food security research measurement; to develop a set of food security items for inclusion in Federal nutrition monitoring surveys; and to support inclusion of the core household

food security measurement module

in various national surveys. Also,

FNS and ERS have deve

handbook to help States 

munities adopt methods t

hunger and food insecurit

A number of other U.S. su

measure food insecurity, i

the National Health and N

Examination Survey (NHA

NHANES has included th

household food security m

beginning in 1999, and 13 

items were included to me

vidual food security, food 

and hunger in 2000. NHA

collects data on health, d

and some domestic food 

program participation, thu

for correlational analyses 

factors with food security.

U.S. food security estim

U.S. Government first rele

national food security stat

mates, based on data col

April 1995, in October 19

estimates provide the bas

the national food security 

Succeeding reports docu

extent of food security in t

States overall and among 

target groups through 199

were complemented by th

in 1999 of an analysis of 

recipients’ food security st

measures of nutrient avai

These reports are availab

Worldwide Web at

http://www.ers.usda.gov/b

security and at
56

http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/

MENU/Published/FSP/

FSPNutritionSecurity.htm.

An interagency Welfare Reform,

Nutrition and Data Needs Working

Group meets periodically to assess

the adequacy of data and measurement methods for monitoring the

impact of welfare reform on nutritional and health status. Data and measurement topics include food security,

food sufficiency, hunger, and participation in food assistance and welfare

programs.

National study of the emergency

feeding system. ERS is conducting

the most comprehensive national

study ever of the tens of thousands

of food pantries, emergency

kitchens, and food banks that comprise the Nation’s emergency feeding

system. The study will provide information about how such organizations operate, what successes they

have achieved and the challenges

they face, and the characteristics of

the people who obtain food through

the emergency feeding system.

International Actions

The Famine Early Warning System

Network (FEWS NET) is a USAIDfunded partnership working to

improve food security in 17 droughtprone countries in Africa. The objective of FEWS NET is to help establish more effective, sustainable, and

African-led food security and

response planning networks that

reduce the vulnerability of at-risk

groups. FEWS NET’s work contributes to the development of a unified international early warning system with global coverage based on

national early warning systems,

including capacity building in regional

and national institutions. FEWS and

the subsequent U.S. food aid

response are widely credited with

averting what was predicted to be a

major famine in East Africa earlier

this year.

FEWS NET specialists in the United

States and Africa assess remotely

sensed data and ground-based

meteorological, crop, and rangeland

conditions for early indications of

potential famine areas and evaluate

factors affecting local food availability

and access in order to identify vulnerable populations requiring assistance. These assessments are continuously updated and disseminated

to provide decision makers wi

most timely and accurate info

available. FEWS NET, in part

with NOAA, the National Aero

and Space Administration, an

U.S. Geological Survey (USG

provided the following service

on-line Internet access to sate

data on rainfall estimates for s

Saharan Africa; 2) on-line Inte

access to Normalized Differen

Vegetation Index analyses; 3) 

Internet access to all FEWS-r

data archived on USGS’ Afric

Dissemination Service and di

satellite data and application s

at regional centers for East an

Africa and the Southern Africa

Development Community.

Hurricane food security ass

ment. Beginning in March 20

FAS Production Estimates an

Assessment Division, in collab

with USAID, has developed a 

site to disseminate information

regarding the Hurricane Mitch 

Georges reconstruction projec

including current crop conditio

satellite imagery, weather info

tion, a database on watershed 

bilitation sites, food security re

and agricultural statistics. The 

is primarily Nicaragua and Ho
Resource quality, agricultural productivity, and food security.

Beginning in 1997, ERS and its partners have used new geographic

information system (GIS) data on

soils and climate to quantify the

impact of land quality and land

degradation on agricultural productivity. This is the first time that data of

this quality have been incorporated

into international econometric analysis. The results will be incorporated

in ERS projections of food production and food security gaps in lowincome countries. This provides new

and powerful tools for examining the

interaction between environmental

factors, agricultural productivity, and

food security.

Global food security assessment.

ERS produces an annual assessment which evaluates availability and

access aspects of food security and

analyzes their trends through the

next decade. The study includes 67

low-income countries: 37 in subSaharan Africa; 4 in North Africa; 11

in Latin America and the Caribbean;

10 in Asia; and 5 in the Newly

Independent States of the former

Soviet Union. Food consumption at

the aggregate level, as well as by different income groups, is projected.

The food security position of the

countries is evaluated by projecting

the gaps between food consumption

and consumption targets. (Food

consumption is calculated by domestic production plus commercial

imports minus nonfood use.) The

targets are: 1) maintaining 

food consumption at rece

and 2) meeting minimum 

requirements. National-le

sis, however, masks the im

unequal access to income 

security. Using projection

consumption as well as in

tribution data, ERS estima

tribution gap for each cou

gap measures the amoun

needed to raise consump

each income group to the 

nutritional requirements a

number of hungry, as def

consumption falling below 

tional target.

In December 1999, ERS 

report entitled Food Secu

Assessment: Why Countr

Risk. Based on the result

global food security asses

report examines the feasi

achieving food security by 

the required growth in agr

productivity, foreign excha

ings, and population. For 

est countries, imports play 

role in the domestic food 

because foreign exchang

According to the 1999 rep

number of hungry people 

ed to reach nearly 1 billio

more than 40 percent of w

in sub-Saharan Africa.
58

Climate forecasting. USAID is

helping countries make advance

preparations for seasonal climate

variations through the use of climate

forecasting technologies. USAID

works with other U.S., international,

and regional organizations, such as

USGS, the International Research

Institute for Climate Prediction, the

World Meteorological Organization,

regional drought monitoring centers,

and the Asian Disaster

Preparedness Center, to promote a

series of Regional Climate Outlook

Forum meetings. These meetings

bring together country representatives to develop and share climateforecast information, which provides

probability guidance on seasonal

rainfall outlooks, and helps countries

to make plans in the agricultural and

other sectors. The forecasts also

provide an indication of the potential

for extreme events, such as floods,

onset of droughts, or the continuation of an ongoing drought.

Gender-disagreggated data.

Primary research conducted under

USAID’s grant to IFPRI has helped

to support linkages with regional and

national institutions in Bangladesh,

Ethiopia, South Africa, Guatemala,

Ghana, and Indonesia to create gender-disagreggated databases. These

databases are available to the local

organizations, and will also be made

accessible through the World Wide

Web. Work in Mali has included

gathering data and disaggregating

information by sex to benefit gender

research and findings. Two NGO’s

in Mali are compiling a gender database for use by Malian policymakers

and institutions. A USAID grant to

IFPRI has involved the creation of

sex-disagreggated databases. Much

of the data is collected in a compatible protocol, and is made available

to national researchers and government offices. Several data sets are

being readied for access through the

IFPRI Web site.

Use of gender-disagreggated data

improves results. In late 1998,

data collection and analysis in

Eritrea, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya,

Mozambique, and Uganda, estimated the extent to which selected projects addressed women’s roles in

food security. Similarly, as part of

the reconstruction effort following

Hurricane Mitch, USAID sponsored

a gender analysis of efforts in

Honduras and Nicaragua to assist

recovery and reactivation of small

and medium-sized farms. The result

was an increase in the availability of

sex-disagreggated data and better

identification of how labor on crops

is divided between men and women.

To provide information that co

strengthen food and agricultu

cies in developing countries,

USAID’s IFPRI program has i

gated the resource allocations 

households. Primary data co

efforts have been carried out 

Bangladesh, Ethiopia, South A

Guatemala, Ghana, and Indo

In Kenya, USAID supported a 

project to demonstrate and m

women’s contributions to food 

ty at farm and household leve

that inputs can be monetized 

included in the Gross Domest

Product.
7

Priority Area VII: Food and

Water Safety

Another aspect of food security is

food safety. Safe food is essential

not only to achieving food security,

but to maintaining physical health

and economic productivity as well.

Domestic Actions

In 1997, President Clinton

announced a National Food Safety

Initiative for reducing foodborne illness from farm to table. Key components include: expanding the national food safety surveillance system;

implementing Hazard Analysis and

Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems in appropriate sectors of the

food supply; improved coordination

between Federal, State, and local

health authorities; developing scientific information and tools to better

control food safety hazards; improving risk assessment capabilities and

inspection; research and consumer

education; and enhancing the safety

of imported foods. A strong science

base drives each of these efforts. As

a result of the initiative, the U.S.

Government has also increased its

research efforts to improve risk

assessment of foodborne pathogens;

placed greater emphasis on ensuring

the safety of domestic and imported

fresh produce and imported foods;

increased training and educational

programs aimed at reducing foodborne illness; and enhanced outbreak coordination among Federal

and State health authorities.

In August 1998, President Clinton

issued Executive Order 13100 establishing the intergovernmental

President’s Council on Food

Safety and directing the Council to:

1) develop a comprehensive strategic plan for Federal food safety activities; 2) coordinate food safety budgets; and 3) oversee the Joint Institute

for Food Safety Research in its

efforts to coordinate and prioritize

food safety research. In December

1998, the council broadened the

scope of the National Food Safety

Initiative to address chemical and

physical hazards such as pesticides

and additives in addition to foodborne pathogens.

PulseNet, a dedicated, high-speed

Internet connection, detects and

responds to emerging pathogens in

the food supply for the rapid comparison of DNA fingerprints of foodborne bacteria with those in an evergrowing database at the Centers for

Disease Control (CDC). PulseNet is

a collaborative project among CDC,

FDA, USDA, and State health

departments. In 1999, PulseNet was

extended to several labs.

In 1996, two laws were passed that

have given consumers better information and have improved the health

and safety of the food the

1) the Food Quality Prote

which streamlines regulat

cides and puts important 

health protections in place

2) the Safe Drinking Wate

which requires drinking w

tems to protect against da

contaminants like Cryptos

and gives people the righ

about contaminants in the

water.

Food safety education. 

Partnership for Food Safe

Education, a public-privat

ship, was created to redu

dence of foodborne illnes

cating Americans about s

handling practices. The p

initiated a Fight BAC!TM p

mation campaign in 1997

the partnership released 

lum program for students 

4-6 to teach the four basic 

handling messages throu

and classroom activities. 

the Food Safety and Insp

Service’s (FSIS) educatio

continued to support the 

BAC!TM campaign and me

satellite video teleconfere

educators introduced a pu

entitled “Using Partnershi

BAC! TM A Workbook for 

Safety Educators.” The F

BAC!TM costume appeare

events, public health fairs

major conventions.
60

The partnership also joined with

Pfizer and McDonald’s corporations

to provide food safety information to

millions of consumers. The partnership worked extensively to get food

safety information out through the

media. In 1999, the Food Safety

Training and Education Alliance

made available information on current food safety training and education activities, training materials, and

listings of available training courses

accessible through the following

Internet Web site: http://www.foodsafety.gov. This information was

intended for retail food service.

The National Food Safety

Information Network joins together

the U.S. Government’s primary

mechanisms for providing food safety

information to the public, and

includes: http://www.foodsafety.gov,

the “Government Gateway to Food

Safety Information”; the FSIS Meat

and Poultry Hotline; the Outreach

and Information Center of the FDA

Center for Food Safety and Nutrition;

USDA/FDA Foodborne Illness

Education Information Center;

National Food Safety Educators

Network (EdNet); and the FoodSafe

online discussion group. The EdNet

electronic newsletter distributed

monthly had over 1,200 subscribers

and FoodSafe had over 2,000 

scribers from more than 50 co

tries. In addition, FSIS at USD

issues a quarterly newsletter, 

Food Safety Educator, that re

almost 10,000 consumer subscribers.

Each year FSIS, in cooperatio

FDA and EPA, sponsor Nation

Food Safety Education Month

major food safety education fo

government and consumer or

tions as well as industry. The 

of National Food Safety Educ

Month in September 2000 wa

Smart. Keep Foods Apart—D

Cross Contaminate” to educa
public about safe food preparation.

FSIS teamed up with FDA to produce a 35-page planning guide for

educators.

Food safety information is disseminated though a wide range of communication methods. The USDA’s

Meat and Poultry Hotline is a toll-free

telephone service that helps consumers prevent foodborne illness,

specifically by answering their questions about safe storage, handling,

and preparation of meat and poultry

products. The Hotline may be

reached by calling: 1-800-535-4555

(voice); (202) 720-3333 (Washington,

DC, area); or 1-800-256-7072

(TDD/TTY). In 1999, FDA created

an Outreach and Information Center

to provide accurate and meaningful

information to the public on food

safety through a toll-free public information line 1-888- SAFEFOOD. In

addition, a specialized egg safety

campaign was developed in an effort

to reduce the incidence of foodborne

illnesses.

FSIS officially launched a national

consumer education ThermyTM campaign in May 2000 to increase use

of food thermometers in the home.

The campaign featured the food

safety messenger Thermy TM and the

message, “It’s Safe to Bite When the

Temperature is Right.” Since the thermometer campaign was launched,

over 50,000 information kits, 30,000

magnets, and posters have been distributed to food safety educators

nationwide. Many of the ThermyTM

materials are also available in

Spanish.

Environmental protection.

Americans enjoy one of the safest,

most abundant food supplies in the

world due in part to the safe use of

pesticides during food production,

processing, storage, and transportation. Ensuring the safety of the food

supply requires continued diligence

by pesticide producers, users, and

regulatory bodies. At the Federal

level, the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency evaluates the

safety of all new and existing pesticides and restricts pesticide use to

those applications that do not pose

unacceptable human health or ecological risks.

EPA employs a combination of regulatory, outreach, and partnership

activities to ensure safe food by

reducing the risk from pesticides and

reducing the use of pesticides on

food, which include:

• Reviewing existing pesticides that

pose the greatest health risks

while registering lower risk alternatives.

• Providing outreach, training, and

education to growers, pesticide

applicators, and manufacturers.

• Encouraging the development and

use of alternative pest management strategies, includi

of nonchemical approac

use of lower risk pestici

EPA has worked towards 

outlined in the U.S. Action 

implementing the Food Q

Protection Act’s requireme

single, health-based safet

for new and existing pesti

their residues in raw and 

food. Passage of the Foo

Protection Act also broug

hensive reform to our Nat

cide and food safety laws

motion many fundamenta

in our approach to protec

health and the environme

risks associated with pest

EPA now routinely consid

aggregate effects of pesti

sure from food, drinking w

other non-occupational us

as the cumulative effects 

cides that have a commo

nism of toxicity.

EPA has updated pesticid

testing guidelines to bette

risks to infants and childre

reducing the use of organ

phates. EPA has worked 

to find an alternative to m

pesticides and, in 1999, c

use of methyl parathion, a

toxic organophosphate in

widely used on crops, on 

and on many vegetables, 

quently by children.
62

International Actions

Developed countries have committed

to providing technical assistance and

capacity building for developing

countries struggling to meet their

international trade commitments

related to sanitary and phyto-sanitary

(SPS) measures under the WTO.

Technical assistance to help other

countries develop science-based

standards and strengthen national

food control systems is important not

only for fair trade, but to ensure that

consumers have confidence in the

food they eat, no matter what country it originates from.

The United States has an active program of providing technical assistance related to WTO SPS compliance, food safety, and plant and animal health to over 80 countries in

every region around the world, and

has reached even more through

regional and global activities.

The Foreign Agricultural Service,

the designated U.S. WTO notification

authority and enquiry point, provides

a variety of technical assistance to

facilitate the establishment of operational enquiry points and notification

authorities in developing countries,

support regional training seminars,

and science-based international

standards development. FAS also

provides SPS technical assistance

through the following programs:

• The Cochran Fellowship

Program provides short-term

training in the United States for

agriculturalists from selected middle-income countries and emerging democracies. Since 1996, over

250 international counterparts

from over 50 countries (about 60

per year) have been trained in food

safety, WTO accession and compliance, and related issues, in conjunction with USDA technical

agencies for animal and plant

health and food safety. This level

of activity is expected to increase

over the coming years.

• Under the Emerging Markets

Program, U.S. expertise is provided through technical assistance to

promote international trade in agricultural products with emerging

markets. Since 1996, this program

has funded over 60 different technical assistance activities to facilitate better understanding of U.S.

regulatory requirements and to

resolve specific SPS-related trade

constraints.

• The Scientific Cooperation

Program funds collaborative

research projects and scientific

exchanges between U.S. and foreign scientists on uses of science

to help solve mutually critical agricultural and forestry problems,

including technical trade barriers

and SPS issues such as food safety and threats from exotic diseases

and pests. Funding for joint 

term technical research and 

term scientific exchanges in 

safety covers 15 projects in 

countries, and in animal and 

health trade barriers it inclu

projects in 14 countries.

• The Joint Scientific and

Technical Cooperation Pr

funds projects for mutually b

cial research with foreign cu

cies from sales of farm prod

abroad under U.S. internatio

food assistance programs (

Law 480) and host country

resources.

The Food Safety and Inspec

Service administers the meat 

poultry inspection program in 

United States. FSIS annually 

ducts an Inspection Seminar f

Foreign Government Officials 

vide an overview of the U.S. m

and poultry inspection program

stock production system, and

HACCP. FSIS also provides t

cal experts to deliver training 

seminars sponsored by other 

agencies and sponsors partic

from developing countries to a

other workshops and seminar

enhance knowledge on techn

regulatory issues.
The Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service provides technical assistance to developing countries to promote science-based quarantine concepts and practices and to

control specific agricultural pests and

diseases.

The Agricultural Research Service

coordinates international agricultural

research within the U.S. Government

with the aim of linking domestic and

international activities, agricultural

researchers, and programs. At present, the agency has 368 cooperative

linkages with 51 countries, including

many in developing countries. ARS

is charged with extending the United

States’ scientific knowledge across a

broad range of agricultural, forestry,

fisheries, and food science areas.

Related to food safety, these include

scientific investigations concerning

safe and high-quality food products,

human nutritional needs, appropriate

natural resources, and environmental

management.

The ARS Food Safety National

Program aims to reduce the incidence of hazards in the food supply

from microbial and chemical contaminants and naturally occurring toxins.

Research findings are made available to the public, govern

cies, and the private secto

basis for implementing po

actions for a safer food su

for conducting educationa

designed to promote food 

The U.S. Food and Drug

Administration provides 

assistance in training, prim

foreign government count

industry groups. It also o

sultations in regulatory, en

inspection, or scientific m

laboratory operations. FD

cooperative activities in d

national and international 
64

and regulatory standards and mutually beneficial cooperative research

of foreign scientists in FDA laboratories. Under its Foreign Visitors

Program, FDA hosts short-term visits by foreign officials and industry

representatives to obtain an

overview of FDA policies, procedures, and facilities.

FDA conducted briefings in Mexico

City and Chile in 1999, and in New

Zealand in 2000, for foreign government officials and industry representatives of countries of the Americas

and of Southeast Asia and the

Pacific on new U.S. food safety

requirements. FDA participated in a

planning meeting sponsored by FAO

in December 1998 to assess training

needs and to begin to develop a

core curriculum for regional train-thetrainer workshops on good agricultural practices for Central America. It

then provided instructors for the first

regional training on this subject in

Costa Rica in May 1999 for Central

American agricultural experts and

health officials. As a result of needs

identified during the Hurricane Mitch

Reconstruction Project, FDA conducted dairy farm sanitation and milk

safety training, emphasizing on-farm

practices in August 2000.

U.S. support for Codex

Alimentarius. Codex Alimentarius,

the joint FAO/WHO food standards

program, helps protect the health of

consumers and facilitate trade

through the establishment of international food standards, codes of practice, and other guidelines. Codex

texts are based on sound science

and are therefore of unquestioned

value to developing nations as a

basis for their own food safety measures. The United States has been a

leader in the Codex process since its

inception. Continued U.S. leadership

in Codex will result in increased food

safety and food security worldwide,

including in the United States,

because of the global nature of our

food supply. Additionally, transparency, a fundamental tenet of the Codex

process, will have major, long-term

food security benefits. The United

States’ continued active participation

in Codex is an integral part of the

food safety component of the U.S.

food security initiative. The United

States will encourage increased participation in Codex by the lesser

developed countries, as a means of

strengthening food security around

the globe.

U.S. support to WHO Food S

Programs: Food security has 

and significant public health ra

tions. Human access to nutrit

food can be undermined by fo

borne illness. Given the impo

of food safety and foodborne 

to global food security, the Un

States recommended a food s

agenda item to the WHO Exe

Board, which was ultimately p

as a resolution on food safety 

2000 at the 53rd World Health

Assembly. In light of the impo

of the WHO Food Safety initia

September 2000, FDA, USDA

CDC provided funding to broa

developing country participatio

an upcoming WHO strategic p

ning meeting of food safety ex

so that their perspectives and 

could be expressed and addre

under WHO programs. The U

States has provided a scientis

work with WHO on microbiolo

pathogens in food.

Seafood safety and inspect

training. NOAA sponsors se

safety training seminars or lab

mentorships specifically for fo

nationals, and helped to estab

International Association of Fi

Inspectors. NOAA, through its 

Grant Extension Program, is h

to prevent post-harvest food lo

employing better prevention te

niques and improving the und

standing of seafood safety co

ations and control procedures
Water resource management.

Rural, agricultural areas in China

have water supplies typically contaminated with nitrate runoff, microbial contaminants, industrial pollutants, naturally occurring metals, and

mineral deposits. As a result, safe

drinking water has become the number one environmental priority in

China. FAS staff in cooperation with

EPA established on-site drinking

water treatment demonstrations in

China and Mexico.

Peace Corps water and sanitation

projects build demand for water

supply and sanitation facilities

through hygiene education and community organizing. They increase

communities’ access to potable

water and sanitation facilities and

strengthen the capacity of communities through development of water

and sanitation committees and water

boards to operate, manage, and

maintain water sources and sanitation facilities. There is a trend to

emphasize prevention of water-related diseases through hygiene education, access to latrines, and waste

management over building water

systems and wells to increase water

supply. Volunteers have developed

low-cost, low-technology, small-scale

water supply and sanitation facilities,

including a hand-auger for digging

wells to create garden irrigation

sources in Niger and the Lasso hand

pump and rainwater catchment systems in El Salvador. Due in large

part to a Peace Corps Guinea Worm

Prevention education program in

Cote d’Ivoire, cases reported in

1999 dropped 91 percent in the participating region.
66

Civil society1 contributed

extensively to preparation for

the World Food Summit and

to development of the Summit declaration and plan of action. PreSummit consultations stimulated the

creation of food security networks

along thematic and geographic lines

that are now active in World Food

Summit follow-up.

In the United States, government,

the private sector, and civil society

organizations are all engaged in policy development, economic activities,

and social services. Civil society

organizations are often implementing

partners of government domestic

and international programs for economic development, food and nutrition assistance, nutrition education,

sustainable agriculture, and community food security. The U.S.

Government recognizes the important role of all stakeholders in food

security and national follow-up

actions to the World Food Summit

recommendations, including mobilizing public opinion and resources,

contributing to the policy dialogue,

implementing food security programs, and analyzing and sharing

information.

U.S. Government Efforts To

Involve Civil Society

Civil society organizations have partnered with the U.S. Government to

address hunger and food insecurity

at home and abroad in a variety of

ways.

Development of the U.S. Action

Plan

The U.S. Action Plan itself was the

result of extensive national consultations. In addition to describing what

government plans to do, it envisions

a major role for civil society, as well

as a range of partnerships between

government and civil society. The

U.S. Action Plan is the product of 2

years of public dialogue, government

drafting, and public comment. Civil

society will continue to participate in

implementing, monitoring, and evaluating the U.S. Action Plan.

Consultations

The U.S. Government has he

series of consultations to get 

from civil society on preparing 

World Food Summit, developi

national food security action p

and conducting other food sec

activities. The U.S. Governme

committed to continuing and

strengthening communication 

civil society to maintain aware

and activity on food security. T

U.S. Government will continue 

sponsor consultations to prov

forums to exchange ideas and 

rience, make views known, re

cooperation and build partner

set priorities, and formulate im

mentation plans. On August 2

2000, the U.S. Government co

sored with NGO’s a consultat

food security to re-energize th

process of cooperation and di

Canadian Government and ci

ety representatives also partic

with an eye to developing a N

American approach to involvin

society in food security efforts

USDA has sponsored Hunger

Roundtables around the coun

a National Nutrition Summit in 

2000 that included a session 

face of hunger in America. Th

was to raise awareness and g

lic input into domestic food as

tance programs and general f

security policy that would help 

a wide range of actions to be 

taken at the community level.

1The United Nations system defines a nongovernmental organization broadly; i.e., any

not-for-profit actor which is not governmental or intergovernmental. In practice, NGO

tends to be reserved for formally constituted

nonprofit organizations that provide services

and/or mobilize public opinion in thematic

areas. Civil society refers to the sphere in

which citizens and social movements organize around objectives, constituencies, and

thematic interests. Civil society organizations (CSO’s) include membership organizations, such as farmers associations and

consumers groups; advocacy groups dealing with food security, sustainable development, population, and the environment;

humanitarian and other service delivery

organizations that support and implement

development projects and programs; and

labor unions; business and professional

associations; the media; local authorities;

business leaders; and academic and

research institutions.
Food Security Advisory

Council

As discussed above, the FSAC is the

key mechanism to get broad representative input from nutrition, food

security, and agricultural interests.

Members range from farmers to

hunger advocates to agribusinesses.

The U.S. Government decision to

renew the FSAC’s charter for another 2 years in July 2000 reflects its

strong commitment to involve stakeholders in implementing national and

international food security commitments.

International Food Security

Forums

The U.S. Government has been a

strong advocate for broadening participation of civil society in international forums on food security, including the work of the FAO Committee

on World Food Security (CFS). The

U.S. Government regularly includes

representatives of civil society in its

delegations to the CFS. Enabling

civil society organizations to take

part in the work programs of the

CFS remains a U.S. priority, along

with promoting practical measures to

widen access.

An Evolving Relatio

Steps to Closer

Collaboration

Regarding process, civil s

would like active and ope

cation with the U.S. Gove

critical food security issue

would also like to continue 

pate in U.S. food security 

Civil society’s principles fo

tion emphasize transpare

accountability, the need to 

sive, and openness to new 

alternate visions. Civil so

izations have identified ar

immediate collaboration, a

issues and concerns for f

cussion.

During consultations, U.S

ty expressed a desire to s

1) more emphasis on com

food security and urban a

2) more support to small 

and rural communities; 3) 

position on the right to foo

sideration of systemic cau

insecurity resulting from c

tion and globalization of fo

banking systems and patt

overconsumption; 5) cons

the impact of trade and in

agriculture, including biote

products, on food security 

environment; and 6) cons

the relationship between f

and market instability.
68

The U.S. Government and the community of civil society organizations

are considering a variety of ways to

achieve more consistent and effective involvement by civil society

organizations in World Food Summit

follow-up and in implementing the

U.S. Action Plan to achieve food

security; i.e., thematic working

groups and using information technology to improve communications

and build partnerships, such as

enhancing the existing U.S.

Government food security Web site

to provide a more interactive mechanism.

Civil Society Roles,

Activities, and

Accomplishments

The contribution civil society makes

to food security is extensive and varied.

Domestic Actions

While increases in the number of

jobs and reductions in the welfare

rolls indicate a healthy economy,

food insecurity continues in some

communities, as measured by use of

the emergency food system; limited

access to affordable, fresh, highquality foods in low-income or isolated rural communities; and nutritional

diseases such as obesity. At the

same time, many small farmers

experience low prices for their products and poor access to markets.

The community food security

approach, developed in 1994, comprises comprehensive solutions to

community-level food and farming

problems based on the needs of lowincome people; community focus;

self-reliance and empowerment;

local agriculture; and a food systems

approach. The community food

security movement seeks to create a

more locally based food system that

supports and benefits local farmers

and low-income neighborhoods

through linkages between producers

seeking access to markets and consumers seeking fresh, healthy food.

This movement also promotes linkages involving rural farmland protection and anti-hunger objectives,

water and food quality, and rural and

economic development.

The mission of the national

Community Food Security

Coalition (CFSC) of 275 organizations is to promote comprehensive

systems-oriented solutions to the

Nation’s food and farming needs

through policy advocacy; technical

assistance in implementing local

food security programs; coalition

building; providing a clearinghouse

and database; research and reports;

and public education through the

media, conferences, and newsletters.

Since 1997, CFSC has served over

1,000 participants in 25 workshops

across the country covering the principles and practices of community

food security, and it has devel

and distributed over 2,500 gui

books on community food sec

project design, local food polic

organizing, and inner-city farm

markets. CFSC has worked w

U.S. Government on impleme

and evaluating food security p

grams, such as the Communi

Projects Competitive Grants

Program and use of food stam

tronic debit cards at farmers m

In addition, it has served as a 

lyst in the development and o

tion of dozens of new food sys

coalitions and networks. CFS

ulates further networking thro

Internet Web site, http://www.

curity.org, and a list serve, CO

FOOD.

Food system partnerships a

activities. Several regional fo

system partnerships have bee

formed, including the Hartford 

System in Connecticut; the

Northeast Food System Partn

Community Harvest in the

Washington, D.C., area; the

Progressive Los Angeles Netw

Food and Nutrition Workgroup

Northern California Food Syst

and the Chicago Food Securi

Alliance. Activities include:

• Establishing and operating f

markets in low-income neig

hoods and providing training 

technical assistance for par
ing farmers, often working with the

national WIC food assistance program to maximize the number of

participants who receive vouchers

for produce through the USDA

WIC Farmers Market Nutrition

Program.

• Developing farm-to-institution

approaches for direct marketing of

farm produce for nutritional and

educational benefits to schools,

hospitals, and senior citizen centers to establish new sales opportunities for farmers, provide healthy

food choices, and create learning

opportunities for school children.

• Encouraging community and urban

farms to teach agricultural practices as well as provide produce to

low-income people, food banks,

and other institutions.

• Implementing educational programs on food, nutrition, the environment, and agriculture for farmto-school and community and

urban farm projects.

• Creating advisory councils and

anti-hunger and urban-rural coalitions to carry out a variety of policy

and advocacy activities. These

include monitoring food prices and

advocating for supermarkets in

low-income communities; advocating for funding for food assistance

programs and for preservation of

farmland; distributing information

on local food and nutrition services; raising awareness among the

public and government about food

system concerns; and developing

a common food policy agenda,

work plan, and approach to food,

nutrition, and agriculture-related

programs and issues.

• Establishing and operating food

banks.

• Initiating free grocery delivery

service for homebound elderly.

World Food Day. Twenty years ago,

FAO set October 16th as a day to be

observed around the world. Today,

450 nongovernmental organizations

in the United States use that occasion to work together to raise public

awareness and increase understanding and year-round action on hunger

and food security. In the United

States, World Food Day has been

institutionalized as a time for people

from all walks of life to express their

commitment to achieving a more

compassionate and food-secure

world for all. This is a grassroots

effort, emphasizing local creativity

and initiative. Schools, faith groups,

businesses, colleges, and community action groups have organized

short-term efforts around World Food

Day, such as food collections,

fundraising for long-term projects,

public policy initiatives, and community service awards. Examples

include the Bread for the World

Annual Hunger Report, National

Food Bank Week, the granting of the

World Food Prize, a major series of

Food and Law Conferences, the

nationwide Church World 

walkathon to raise funds f

hunger projects, and the 

the Community Food Sec

Initiative. A flagship event 

1984, the worldwide sate

ference reaches a thousa

accompanied by a packet 

and action ideas for class

community use. A K-12 g

riculum on food security w

pared for World Food Day 

educate children and you

around the world on the c

and solutions to hunger, a

they can play in building f

ty. The curriculum is spon

the American Federation 

Teachers, the Newsweek 

Project, the National Peac

Association, and the Wor

among others.

Domestic advocacy. Bre

World is a grassroots adv

movement against hunge

of 45,000 members, inclu

churches. For over 25 yea

for the World has been a 

advocate on food security 

hungry and poor people i

United States and interna

supporting the expansion 

ment assistance. Bread f

World is currently carrying 

islative campaign to addre

by broadening food stamp 

tion and raising the minim

Bread for the World’s repo

Program to End Hunger, 
70

2000, claims that the United States

could cut domestic hunger in half

within 2 years—and do its part to cut

world hunger in half by 2015—for

about $6 billion a year, or about 6

cents per day per American.

NGO participation in the governmental Community Food Security

Initiative. The Community Food

Security Initiative Roll Call of

Commitments includes a wide range

of domestic NGO commitments and

programs underway to address food

security in the United States. In

1996, USDA initiated a Community

Food Projects Competitive Grants

Program to provide $16 million in

seed money (from $10,000-$250,000

per project) over 7 years to private

nonprofit organizations for multi-purpose projects that meet the needs of

low-income communities, encourage

self-reliance, and promote the development of local food systems.

Descriptions of the communities to

which grants were awarded for 1996-

99 and their activities can be found

on the Internet at http://www.reeusda.gov/crgam/cfp/community.htm.

International Actions

Partnership to Cut Hunger in

Africa. As a result of NGO and private sector advocacy in creating the

Africa: Seeds of Hope and the

African Growth and Opportunity

Acts, a broad partnership of agencies (including USAID and USDA),

NGO’s, agricultural trade and producer associations, faith-based

groups, and land-grant universities

have come together to form the

Partnership to Cut Hunger in Africa.

With Bread for the World, Michigan

State University, former

Congressman Lee Hamilton, and former Senator Bob Dole in key leadership roles, the partnership is developing a strategy to cut hunger in

Africa that the U.S. Government will

apply to its efforts in reaching this

goal.

Sustainable agriculture extension

centers in Russia. Since the

breakup of the Soviet Union, food

production has fallen drastically, food

prices have increased, and chemical

fertilizers and pesticides have

become scarce and expensive. In

1997, 11 pilot extension centers

modeled after the U.S. Sustainable

Agriculture Research and Education

program were established by the

Russian Ministry of Agriculture with

technical assistance and funding

from the Center for Citizen Initiatives

and USAID to teach farmers how to

grow crops with minimal chem

inputs. All of the farmers con

to these extension centers co

farming through the severe dr

and economic upheaval of 19

a result, in December 1999, t

Russian Ministry of Agricultur

established an extension divis

and a nationwide information 

to advise farmers on sustaina

agriculture methods and expa

to 53 the number of sustainab

culture extension centers acro

country. In addition, the Minis

developing a 4-year curriculum 

sustainable agriculture.

Private sector action on the 

Action Plan. Rotary Internat

an organization on the formal 

ernment advisory committee 

security, has made alleviation 

hunger a high priority. With 1

lion members in 162 countrie

Rotary International can link p

in need of food and nutrition a

tance with members in other 

tries that can provide resourc

technical assistance. Copies 

U.S. Action Plan were provide

Rotary International leaders w

wide, along with recommenda

for specific actions. These rec

mendations include building b

public understanding of the im

tance of food security, promot

safety net of nutrition and bas

cation for vulnerable women a

children, and integrating envir
tal concerns into food security efforts

to assure sustainability. Rotary

International has budgeted $90 million for all of its programs in 2000,

which may include food security

efforts.

Urban agriculture. The proportion

and number of poor people living in

urban areas is growing, and the

locus of poverty, food insecurity, and

malnutrition continues to shift from

rural to urban areas. The challenge

of feeding cities can be met by facilitating consumer access to affordable, good-quality food, and by

ensuring that required investments

are made to increase food production, processing, and distribution

capacities and services under

hygienic, healthy, and environmentally sound conditions. Urban agriculture can be an important source of

food for some cities, when the

national rural food production, marketing, and transportation systems

are not well developed. Even in

large, congested cities, the urban

poor may have a home garden or

raise small animals as part of a coping strategy to complement household incomes and improve diet quality. In the United States, the national

CFSC, the Hartford Food System

Council, Boston’s Food Project, New

York’s Just Food, Los Angeles’ Food

From the Hood, and the Detroit

Agriculture Network are but a few

nongovernmental organizations

focused on urban agriculture. U.S.

NGO’s participate in the Support

Group on Urban Agriculture headquartered in Ottawa, Canada, which

supports urban agriculture as a

development intervention by coordinating policies and efforts of international organizations, countries that

fund development programs, and

developing countries.

International advocacy. Bread for

the World legislative initiatives helped

achieve enactment in 1998 of the

Africa: Seeds of Hope Act which

redirects U.S. foreign assistance in

Africa toward agriculture and rural

development. Recent advocacy

campaigns have focused on African

agriculture, international debt reduction, national poverty, and foreign

assistance to Africa. Bread for the

World is also involved in research

and education on distributive aspects

of food security policy with NGO’s in

Malawi and Mozambique. Through

its Debt and Development project,

with NGO partners in Zambia and

Nicaragua, Bread for the World has

worked to monitor the implementation of the international debt relief

plan approved by the nations of the

world in 1999. Bread for the World

also works to build capacity of smallholder producer organizations by

offering training in marketing, production, and new technology, and by

providing small loans and training to

women farmers.

Peace Corps-NGO partn

Increasingly, a Peace Cor

teer’s primary assignmen

NGO. Numerous other vo

are choosing to work with 

their community outreach 

typically on issues of orga

development or providing 

assistance related to the 

NGO serves and the serv

vides. The Peace Corps 

NGO’s a participatory dev

approach to increase loca

ties, a focus on the poor, 

sustainable solutions, and 

ment to working with indig

NGO’s to benefit from loc

edge.
72

Appendix A: List of Acronyms

AFSI African Food Security Initiative

AMS Agricultural Marketing Service

ARS Agricultural Research Service

ASPE Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Planning and Evaluation, DHHS

CFS Committee on World Food Security

CFSC Community Food Security Coalition

CFSI Community Food Security Initiative

CSO Civil Society Organization

CSREES Cooperative State Research, Education, 

and Extension Service

CGIAR Consultative Group on International 

Agricultural Research

DHHS Department of Health and Human 

Services

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ERS Economic Research Service

EZ/EC Empowerment Zone/Enterprise 

Community

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the 

United Nations

FAS Foreign Agricultural Service

FDA Food and Drug Administration

FNS Food and Nutrition Service

FSAC Food Security Advisory Council

FSIS Food Safety and Inspection Service

FTAA Free Trade Area of the Americas

FWS Fish and Wildlife Service 

GEF Global Environment Facility

GIS Geographic Information System

HACCP Hazard Analysis and Critical Cont

Point

HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/

Autoimmune Deficiency Syndrome

IFPRI International Food Policy Researc

Institute

IRRI International Rice Research Institu

IWG Interagency Working Group on Fo

Security

NGO Nongovernmental Organization

NHANES National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheri

Administration

OPIC Overseas Private Investment 

Corporation

SARE Sustainable Agriculture Research 

Education program

S-CHIP State Children’s Health Insurance 

Program

SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary

USAID U.S. Agency for International 

Development

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VA Department of Veterans Affairs

WHO World Health Organization

WIC Special Supplemental Food Progr

for Women, Infants and Children

WTO World Trade Organization
Appendix B:The U.S. Action Plan in Brief

The United States Action Plan on Food Security, released

in March 1999, outlines the means by which the United

States will address the World Food Summit’s goals. It is

the result of extensive national consultations and represents commitments of both the U.S. Government and civil

society—private voluntary organizations, academia, businesses, and communities.

The U.S. Action Plan on Food Security is comprised of

seven chapters, one for each element that makes up the

food security equation at home and abroad. The Plan

identifies the following priority strategies and actions:

1. Encourage a policy environment at home and

abroad that enables individuals, households, communities, and nations to attain economic and food security.

Domestically, the United States will support economic

security through jobs and human capital investment and

will partner with civil society to achieve economic security

for especially vulnerable groups. Internationally, the

United States will encourage policy reform that brings

about macroeconomic stability and fosters sound, marketoriented economic institutions. The United States will also

encourage an enabling policy environment through bilateral and multilateral initiatives, especially in concert with the

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

poverty reduction targets, and by implementing the

African Food Security Initiative.

2. Promote continued trade and investmen

tion to benefit all countries.

In new trade rounds, the United States will wor

countries to achieve freer trade and to assure 

fits, especially more stable supplies of food and 

incomes, are equitably realized.

3. Strengthen food security research and e

capacity to expand the productivity and nut

impact of agriculture and aquaculture and e

a broad range of appropriate information an

ogy reaches producers and consumers.

U.S. efforts will center on generating adequate 

meet future food security needs through privat

partnerships. Efforts will also focus on sharing 

of and improving the impacts of this research, 

in developing countries, through improved exte

linkages that help adapt new technologies to lo

tions and meet the needs of producers. Also v

public/private partnerships at home and abroa

Government and civil society will promote nutr

basic education, especially for girls and wome

4. Integrate environmental concerns into fo

ty efforts to assure sustainability.

U.S. domestic and international priorities includ

ing and implementing flexible, environmentally 

agriculture, aquaculture, and land-use policies

local food systems through grassroots partners

broad participation linking communities, farms, 

kets; and addressing global phenomena, espe

mate change, that affect the United States and 

countries.
74

5. Improve and, when possible, extend the food and

nutrition assistance safety net, especially those programs targeting vulnerable women and children.

The delivery system provided at home and abroad by

nongovernmental organization-U.S. Government partnerships is broad and largely effective, but needs improvements in targeting and more emphasis on training and

achieving effective utilization of food supplies.

6. Enhance the U.S. ability to identify food-insecure

individuals and populations to make better use of

food assistance programs and to provide an

improved decisionmaking tool for local authorities in

the United States and governments and communities

in developing countries.

The United States will refine its national survey measures

to monitor changes in nutritional status and food security

in a welfare-to-work environment. Internationally, the

United States will focus on promoting a food insecurity

and vulnerability information and mapping system

(FIVIMS) and improving—both in details and accessibility—regional and national information systems.

7. Assure that food and water production and d

bution systems meet public health safety stand

as a part of ensuring food security for U.S. and 

national consumers.

Implementation of the President’s National Food Sa

Initiative and related recent Federal initiatives will re

development and implementation of preventive con

for food production systems and enhanced surveill

and coordination in controlling foodborne illness.

Coordination with all stakeholders is essential to th

ing and education of food handlers, producers, and 

sumers to improve the global food safety system. T

United States supports the work of the Codex

Alimentarius Commission in setting international st

dards for foods and food safety.
Appendix C: Interagency Working Group on Food Security

Co-Chairs, International

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Department of State 

U.S. Agency for International Development

Co-Chairs, Domestic Sub-Group

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Members

Central Intelligence Agency

Environmental Protection Agency

National Intelligence Council

National Security Council

Office of Management and Budget

Office of Science and Technology Policy

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Office of the Vice President 

Peace Corps

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Department of Commerce

U.S. Department of Defense

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Health and Human Service

U.S. Department of Labor

U.S. Department of State

U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 
76

Appendix D: Food Security Advisory Committee

Co-chairs

G. Edward Schuh

Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of 

Public Affairs

University of Minnesota 

Christine Vladimiroff

Chair, Board of Directors

Bread for the World

Members

Andrew N. Agle

The Carter Center

Selina Ahmed

Texas Southern University

David Beckmann

Bread for the World

Margaret L. Bogle

Lower Mississippi Delta Nutrition

Intervention Initiative

John Cady

National Food Processors

Association

Ralph Christy

Cornell University

Ertharin Cousin

Albertsons, Inc.

Ada Demb

The Ohio State University

Betsy Faga

North American Millers’ Association 

Walter P. Falcon

Stanford University

Rick Foster

W.K. Kellogg Foundation

David J. Frederickson

Minnesota Farmers Union

Cutberto Garza

Cornell University

Miles Goggans

Goggans, Inc.

Richard Gutting, Jr.

National Fisheries Institute

John D. Hardin, Jr.

National Pork Producers Cou

Walter A. Hill

Tuskegee University

Charles S. Johnson

Pioneer Hi-Bred International, 

Charles F. MacCormack

Save the Children 

Whitney MacMillan

Cargill, Inc.

P. Howard Massey, Jr.

Rotary International

Cheryl Morden

International Center for Resea

Women
Sharyle Patton

Commonweal Sustainable Futures

Project

P. Scott Shearer

Farmland Industries, Inc.

Barbara Spangler

American Farm Bureau Federation

John E. Tull, Jr.

Farmer

Goro Uehara

University of Hawaii
78

80
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all it

grams and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion

age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family stat

(Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities w

require alternative means for communication of program information (Braill

large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202

2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil

Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA 

an equal opportunity provider and employer.

United States Department of Agriculture

Foreign Agricultural Service

November 2000