Food security exists 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. Food security has several important dimensions: (1)Availability — achieved when sufficient supplies of food of appropriate quality are consistently available to all individuals; (2)Access — ensured when households and all individuals in them have adequate resources to obtain appropriate foods for a nutritious diet. (3)Utilization — refers to the proper biological use of food through adequate diet, water, sanitation, and health care. The Administration acknowledges that world food security is important to the United States for humanitarian, economic, and national security reasons. The United States and other nations that signed the 1974 World Food Conference Declaration committed to achieving world food security within 10 years. More than 20 years later, the world still falls far short of this goal. Eighty-eight countries are currently classified as low-income and food-deficit states. According to FAO, close to 800 million people, or 20 percent of the developing world’s population, are chronically undernourished. Most of these people are in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, millions of other people in more affluent societies do not have enough food to meet their basic needs. And millions more experience prolonged hunger during part of the year, or suffer birth defects, growth retardation, mental deficiency, lethargy, blindness, or death because they do not have the diversity of food necessary to meet their total needs. An estimated 200 million children under the age of 5 suffer protein or energy deficiencies. FAO has projected that, unless the root causes underlying food security are addressed by 2010, 700 million to 800 million persons worldwide will still be chronically undernourished. In sub-Saharan Africa alone, FAO projects that the chronically undernourished will increase from about 200 million to more than 300 million people in the next 15 years (see app. V). Most of the rest of the chronically undernourished will be found in South Asia. Poverty is a primary obstacle to food security. Worldwide, 1.3 billion people, or nearly one-quarter of the world’s population, live on less than 1 dollar a day. Their low income makes them especially vulnerable when prices for basic commodities increase rapidly and sharply. Other important factors affecting food security include weather, civil strife and war, widespread unemployment or underemployment, inadequate returns to food producers, unsustainable use of natural resources, high debt service, overvalued exchange rates, and distorted international markets. Currently, world grain stocks are at a 20-year low, grain prices are at an all-time high, and world food aid is in a sharp decline (see apps. I-III). Food insecurity and food aid problems could increase significantly over the short, medium, and long run. There are several reasons why this is so. Although population growth rates have been declining , the world’s population is expected to increase by 2.6 billion people by 2025. As a result, even with modest income growth, world food supplies will have to at least double by that year according to the World Bank. The Bank concludes that due to land and water constraints, future increases in food supplies must come primarily from increasing yields, rather than from area expansion and more irrigation. This would require a doubling of current yields over the next 30 years, which is uncertain. (See also app. IV.) An October 1995 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS) study found that world food aid needs will nearly double over the next decade simply to maintain current consumption levels. This is even if one makes reasonably optimistic assumptions about recipient countries’ ability to produce their own food or to import food commercially. Far higher food aid levels would be required if the target was to meet minimum nutritional standards. The study concluded that there is a looming mismatch between food aid resources and needs. If global food aid budgets are maintained at 1995 levels, the gap between needs and resources will grow rapidly. Factors limiting food aid availabilities include changes in agricultural policies that will likely reduce agricultural surpluses, and reductions in aid budgets of donor countries. According to the study, funding will be the major factor affecting food aid shipments in the future. It noted that recent governmentwide budget reductions in the United States and in some other countries have already resulted in significant reductions in food aid donations. For example, food aid shipments of grain by donors peaked at 15.2 million metric tons (mmt) in 1992-93, declined to 12.6 mmt in 1993-94, and were estimated to have declined to 8.4 mmt in 1994-95. U.S. shipments peaked at 8.5 mmt in 1992-93 and were estimated to drop to 4.2 mmt by 1994-95. These reductions have already affected the food security of the recipient countries. Other factors affecting the future of world food security include the following: (1)Many major agricultural producers, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and the European Union, are implementing increasingly more market-oriented agricultural policies, partly in response to the 1994 Uruguay Round trade agreement of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). More market-oriented policies are likely to result in a reduction of agricultural surpluses and in less grain held in stocks, particularly in government-held stocks. Lower average stocks, in turn, may lead to more year-to-year volatility in grain markets. Current U.S. agricultural policy removes the link between income support payments and farm prices. As a result, incentives for surplus agricultural production are diminished. U.S. government-held stocks are likely to decline sharply. (2)Although signatories to the 1994 Uruguay Round trade agreement agreed to establish mechanisms to ensure that implementation would not adversely affect food aid commitments to meet the authentic needs of developing countries and stressed the need for bona fide food aid, the agreement was not specific on how this is to be accomplished. (3)To the extent that the trade agreement results in slightly higher grain prices than without the agreement, food aid availabilities may be reduced because a given budget will purchase less grain. In terms of food security and regions of the world, Africa faces the most difficulties. According to FAO, Africa currently accounts for about 200 million, or about 25 percent, of the chronically malnourished people in developing countries. However, if no action is taken to reverse the present trend, by 2010 this figure could exceed 300 million and as much as 40 percent of the chronically malnourished. Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region where chronic malnutrition is expected to increase between now and 2010. (See app. V.) According to one recent study, Africa’s agricultural production and trade have been affected by a variety of factors from the period following independence to the present, including: (1) the effects of the Cold War on agricultural and rural development policies, (2) chronic civil and social strife and the displacement of populations, (3) the mismanagement of national resources, (4) the failure to build capacity in critical areas such as policy analysis and entrepreneurship, (5) developments in the agriculture sectors and policies of industrialized countries, (6) the reduction in demand for primary commodities, (7) shocks caused by the oil crisis, (8) periodic droughts, and (9) the entry of the former Soviet Union into world markets. In May 1996 FAO designated 14 of 48 sub-Saharan countries (involving 22 million people) as facing exceptional food emergencies. The countries and the reasons cited by FAO for the emergencies are listed in table 1. FAO described the food security situation for sub-Saharan Africa as precarious, as global cereal supplies tighten and food availabilities shrink. Sharp increases in cereal prices on the world market and the consequent higher cost of cereal imports, coupled with balance of payments difficulties in food-deficit countries, will mean that a large proportion of food imports will need to be covered by food aid. However, FAO forecasts that global availability of food aid in 1995-96 will be only 7.6 million tons, down for the third consecutive year. The reduced availability and stiff competition for food aid from countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union suggests that Africa’s minimum food needs in 1996-97 will remain unmet. Unless exceptional food aid allocations are made, FAO said, undernutrition will rise further from its already high level. Our analysis of Department of Agriculture data indicates that sub-Saharan Africa’s grains food deficit relative to its nutrition-based food needs may have increased from as much as 12 percent in 1993-94 to as much as 17 percent in 1994-95. In other words, the hungry had even less food to eat. The data also indicate an increase in the deficit for Latin America from as much as 16 percent in 1993-94 to 22 percent in 1994-95. However, the deficit probably remained quite small for food aid recipient countries in Asia, at less than 3 percent. (See app. VI.) During 1994-96, countries in Asia and the Middle East received about 19 percent of all U.S food aid. Sub-Saharan Africa’s share increased from about 31 percent to 33 percent between 1994 and 1995, but may drop to 26 percent in 1996. The share of Latin American and Caribbean recipients dropped from about 21 percent in 1994 to 16 percent in 1995. (See app. VII.) Food security in sub-Saharan Africa is threatened by continuing and rapid population growth. It is the only region in the world where the growth rate, currently at about 3.2 percent, has not started to decline. (Latin America’s rate peaked at 2.9 percent in the early 1960s and South Asia’s rate at 2.5 percent in the late 1960s.) Population growth has important consequences for food security, since Africa’s food consumption currently exceeds its food production. Presently, 30 percent of sub-Saharan Africa’s cereal output is in areas of low and unreliable rainfall. Fifty percent of cultivable land is in arid and semi-arid regions. Unless food production expands at a rapid rate, imports will have to increase dramatically to improve Africa’s food security. However, a number of African countries face a bleak economic outlook. Continuing balance of payments difficulties are seriously limiting their capacity for increasing commercial exports as well as imports. Exports of primary commodities, the main source of revenue for sub-Saharan Africa, show a 20-year history of declining terms of trade. The sharp rise in international cereal prices is estimated to have increased the food import bill of the low-income, food-deficit countries of sub-Saharan Africa by approximately $1 billion during 1994-95. In terms of income, many Africans are worse off today than they were a decade ago, and real per capita income is projected to grow at only 0.3 percent during the 1990s. By the year 2000, 30 percent of the world’s poor are expected to be in sub-Saharan Africa, compared to 16 percent in the mid-1980s. Poverty places a heavy burden on sub-Saharan Africa’s efforts to improve its food security situation, since income is more likely to be needed for current consumption at the expense of savings that could help finance investments in economic development. Increasing urbanization also adversely affects sub-Saharan efforts to improve its situation. At the current rate of urbanization (about 8 percent per year), 41 percent of the population is expected to be urban based by the turn of the century. By 2020, at least 30 cities in sub-Saharan Africa are expected to have more than 1 million inhabitants. As urbanization increases, the proportion of people not producing food will increase, and the quality of the traditional rural agricultural work force may deteriorate due to out- migration of some of the most productive people from rural areas. Moreover, because most migrants are likely to be men, a concomitant increase in female-headed households may occur. Increased urbanization is also likely to bolster the need to supply city populations with more water, diverting supply away from agricultural areas. In February 1996 the U.S. Trade Representative sent the President a comprehensive trade and development policy for the 48 countries of sub-Saharan Africa. According to the report, Africa’s aspirations for growth and development have been hampered by a combination of problems, including flawed economic policy choices, political mismanagement and an absence of democratic political institutions, weak private sectors stifled by dominating parastatals, overwhelming debt burdens, poverty and widespread unemployment, and environmental degradation. The report says that the primary responsibility for achieving sustainable economic development and increased trade and investment lies with the people and leaders of Africa. It also concludes that bilateral and multilateral international cooperation is essential to reinforce African national efforts and that resources available to the U.S. government, multilateral institutions, and others providing official development assistance to Africa are in decline. The report outlines a policy approach structured around several basic objectives: promotion of trade and investment liberalization, development of the private sector, enhancement of the infrastructure, and economic and regulatory reform. However, it contains no discussion of the food security situation affecting many sub-Saharan African countries and whether a special strategy is needed to address the problem. U.S. food aid programs have sought to enhance food security in developing countries through the use of agricultural commodities and local currencies to (1) combat world hunger and malnutrition and their causes; (2) promote sustainable economic development, including agricultural development; (3) expand international trade; (4) develop and expand export markets for U.S. agricultural commodities; and (5) encourage the growth of private enterprise and democratic participation in developing countries. Historically, the United States has provided much of the world’s food aid. (As shown in app. III, other major donors over the years include Australia, Canada, the European Union, and Japan.) According to USDA, in 1995, the United States provided about $1.35 billion worth of food aid assistance, including $500 million for emergency relief. U.S. food aid, primarily under the Public Law 480 (Food for Peace) Program, has decreased in absolute terms and as a percentage of total U.S. agricultural exports since the 1950s and 1960s when it was the primary U.S. agricultural export program. More recently, the amount of U.S. food aid has dropped dramatically from 13.1 million metric tons in fiscal year 1993 to an estimated 4.0 million metric tons in fiscal year 1995. ( See app. VII.) The decrease was due in part to budgetary constraints and the reduction of government-held commodity surpluses. A similar trend has taken place in other donor countries including the European Union, Canada, and Australia. Despite sub-Saharan Africa’s growing food security needs, U.S. food aid varies due in part to unpredictable emergency food needs. According to the Congressional Research Service, in fiscal year 1993 when eastern and southern Africa experienced a major drought, U.S. food aid amounted to 43 percent of bilateral aid, and in 1994, when conditions improved, it dropped to 27 percent. Most U.S. sub-Saharan Africa food aid is in the form of emergency and humanitarian grants under title II of the Public Law 480 program. Countries in sub-Saharan Africa receive a significant proportion of title II food aid annually. According to USDA’s Economic Research Service, the distribution of U.S. food aid has changed in the last 5 years mainly as a result of the fall of the Communist system in Europe and changing food needs around the world. It reports that from 1989 through 1992, Africa received the largest share of U.S. food aid. However, it states that in 1993 the region that received the largest share was Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union countries, especially Russia. Concurrently, the share of U.S. food aid to Asia and Latin America decreased. (See also app. VII.) Sub-Saharan African countries rarely receive long-term concessional food aid loans under title I of the Public Law 480 program, since only a few countries are in a position to make repayments. A few of Africa’s poorest countries have received U.S. food donations under title III of the Public Law 480 program, known as “Food for Development,” which can be used for feeding programs or sold on the open market, with proceeds to be used for development purposes. A few African countries have benefitted under section 416(b) of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended which permits donations of surplus food to developing countries, emerging democracies, and relief organizations. U.S. food aid programs have not been without problems. For example, in a 1993 review, we identified several problems involving the U.S. Agency for International Development’s (USAID) management of Public Law 480 titles II and III food aid programs, most notably that USAID had not developed policy guidance on how food aid should be used as a means of contributing to long-term food security. Other problems included USAID’s lack of criteria and guidance for implementing food aid programs, USAID’s inability to demonstrate the impact of its food aid programs on food security, and USAID’s failure to ensure accountability for food aid resources. We made 13 recommendations to USAID for addressing these problems. In March 1995, we reported that USAID had fully or partially implemented 11 of 13 of the recommendations. Most importantly, in February 1995, USAID issued written policy guidance on how food aid could be used to achieve food security and was in the process of developing an overall “management for results” approach that will change the focus from measuring program outputs to measuring impact. In a 1995 review, we found that title I could be making a meaningful, short-term contribution to the food supply in some recipient countries, but that its contribution to sustainable economic development was minimal because of the program’s small size relative to each country’s overall development needs. Also, we noted that title I’s importance to helping develop long-term agricultural markets—one of its primary objectives— had not been demonstrated, and that the program’s multiple and sometimes competing goals and objectives and various program requirements made it difficult for USDA to integrate title I into an effective program strategy. In November 1996 a World Food Summit will be held in Rome. This is the first major conference of world leaders to assess world food security issues since 1974. Countries attending the summit are trying to reach agreement on a broad policy statement and plan of action for significantly advancing world progress toward achieving food security. The summit will not seek to establish new institutions for promoting food security nor pledges from donor countries for increased levels of assistance. It is not clear at this time whether an attempt will be made to secure agreement on a target year for achieving global food security. Preparations for the summit have been underway for some time. Since January 1996, various forums have discussed suggested drafts of a policy statement and plan of action for the summit and country and private sector views on world food security. FAO member countries have prepared individual country position papers, laying out their views on actions needed to advance world food security and describing the status of food security within their respective borders. In addition, countries within specific geographical regions (e.g., North American, Latin America, etc.) have prepared regional papers on the subject. In early July, the U.S. government finalized a position paper for the summit that summarizes its views on food security. In addition, the United States completed a regional paper that was jointly prepared with Canada. (A high-level interagency task force, co-led by USDA, the State Department, and USAID prepared the U.S. paper and input for the joint paper with Canada.). According to the U.S. paper, the root causes of food insecurity must be addressed by both individual countries and the international community as a whole. However, the paper states that because of the difficult budget environment in both the United States and abroad, developing countries will have to take primary responsibility for improving their own food security with limited external assistance. In the U.S.’ view, countries that have demonstrated the most progress in achieving food security are those that have seriously pursued policy reform, macroeconomic stabilization, and structural adjustment, while focusing government activities on public goods investment and provision of safety nets. Such commitment and assumption of responsibility at the national level create a climate conducive to private and public external investment. Consequently, the United States plans to concentrate its food assistance efforts on those countries that are willing to review and change their national policies to improve their own food security. This approach is consistent with USAID statements in recent years that it is concentrating its assistance efforts on those countries that are partners in development and where sustainable development results can be achieved. According to USAID, sustainable development cannot be achieved in countries that are not willing to change their policies, do not allow their own citizens to participate adequately in the development process, and have not invested their own resources in sustainable development or have invested a disproportionate amount in the military at the expense of development. The United States has said that it will continue to play a major role in promoting food security around the world. To this end, the United States plans to do the following: enhance U.S. government support for research and technology development in agriculture and related sectors, both at home and abroad. continue support for food security through the use of agriculture programs, development assistance, and food aid. Employ an integrated approach to sustainable development, with a strong emphasis on those countries that show a good-faith willingness to adopt necessary policy reforms. work with all countries to achieve freer trade and to assure that the benefits are equitably realized. Urge all countries to open their markets in the interest of achieving greater stability and participation in the world market. continue support for international efforts to respond to and prevent humanitarian crises that create a need for emergency food. continue efforts to encourage and facilitate implementation of food security-related actions adopted at recent international conferences or established in recently agreed-to conventions. work within the multilateral system to enhance global approaches to food security. continue to work toward food security for all Americans. During July 29-August 22, FAO countries will present and exchange individual country position papers at a meeting in Italy. In addition, it is the first meeting where all of the regional country papers will be exchanged and discussed. The meeting will also discuss a proposed draft policy statement and plan of action for the summit. Substantive negotiations among member countries are expected, aimed at trying to reach a consensus on most, if not all, major issues to be addressed by the draft. In late September, the Committee on World Food Security will meet and try to negotiate a final text for use by the summit leaders. If not fully successful, a senior officials’ meeting will try to accomplish the same immediately before the summit itself, which is scheduled for November 13-17. A variety of issues may arise in the course of the negotiations. Although we do not know the content at this point, based on discussions we have had with officials and our monitoring of two forums where comments were provided on draft position papers for the summit, differences may surface between developed and developing countries over the amount of reform the latter need to undertake and the amount of assistance the former are willing to provide. Other issues that may arise during the negotiation process include the following: Are international grain reserves adequate given the unusually low levels to which world grain stocks have fallen and the adoption of more market-oriented agricultural policies by many countries? Do major agricultural producing/exporting countries have sufficient incentive to hold stocks adequate for coping with emergency situations? Is some sort of new global grain reserve required? Have agricultural reforms introduced by the 1994 Uruguay Round trade agreement had any negative effects to date on the least-developed and net food-importing countries in terms of access to adequate supplies of basic foodstuffs from external sources on reasonable terms and conditions, including financing of their normal levels of commercial imports? If so, are other countries prepared to increase food aid commitments to offset such effects? Will food-insecure countries be asked to open their markets to international agricultural trade as a condition for receiving assistance designed to help them achieve food security over the long run? If so, what assurances will they obtain that major agricultural producing/exporting countries will keep their markets fully open at all times, including in times of tight world supplies and rapidly rising prices? In seeking to identify what actions are needed to help all countries achieve food security, what scenarios of future world agricultural production should be considered? Should a target date for achieving world food security be agreed upon? Without a target date, will summit signatories be able to outline a realistic plan of the actions needed to achieve food security? Should a plan of action estimate the amount of resources required in agricultural production and food-related investment to achieve food security? Given that food aid donations have declined during the past 3 years and given projections of a significant mismatch between food aid resources and food aid needs in future years, what will make an action plan for achieving food security credible to food-insecure countries? In summary, we believe that the World Food Summit provides an important opportunity for all countries to address critical issues of world food security. Hopefully, it will do so in a way that significantly advances efforts by sub-Saharan African countries to cope with their food security problems. This concludes my prepared remarks. I will be happy to answer any questions you or other Members of the Subcommittee may have. Price per ton (dollars) Total grain required for nutritional needs (tons in millions) Nutrition-based food aid grain needs (tons in millions) Deficit in nutrition-based food aid grain needs (tons in millions) The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. U.S. General Accounting Office P.O. Box 6015 Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015 Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006. Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Summary: GAO discussed the food security in Africa. GAO noted that: (1) 88 countries are classified as low-income and food-deficit states and 20 percent of the developing world's population is chronically undernourished; (2) by the year 2010, 700 million to 800 million people worldwide could be chronically undernourished unless food security is improved; (3) poverty, weather, civil strife and war, population displacements, widespread unemployement, unsustainable use of natural resources, high debt services, economic mismanagement, and distorted international markets are obstacles to world food security; (4) world food supplies will have to at least double by 2025, mainly through increased yields; (5) market-oriented agricultural policies will probably limit food production surpluses in the future and budget constraints are limiting donors' ability to provide food aid; (6) Africa accounts for about 25 percent of the chronically malnourished population in developing countries; (7) food security is precarious for sub-Saharan African countries where the population growth rate remains at 3.2 percent; (8) most U.S. food aid is in the form of emergency and humanitarian grants, but Africa no longer receives the largest share of such aid; and (9) the November 1996 World Food Summit plans to seek agreement on a broad policy statement and action plan for achieving world food security.