Afternoon Musings

A brief foray into hunger in the US

2013-10-17T14:33:00.003-04:00

Continuing our conversation on global hunger, let's shift our focus to countries that are often not connected with hunger in general discourse, namely those part of the Western world. We will first briefly explore hunger in the United States before examining it in Canada and the United Kingdom.

In 2006, the US changed the language of hunger: hunger has been relabelled as "food insecurity" in an attempt to account for the variations and severity of food insecurity prevalent within its borders today. Although the methods to measure hunger were not altered, the new label allows policymakers, amongst others, to understand the levels of food insecurity and develop strategies to address it (USDA: http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/definitions-of-food-security.aspx#.UjyVjWTXhcQ). Such labelling however runs the risk of shifting the emphasis from hunger as it effects people to a more political debate.

The United States Department of Agriculture published a report in September 2011 titled, “Household Food Security in the United States in 2010” by Alisha Coleman-Jensen, et al. This report highlights the following:

1. Although an estimated 85.5% of American households were food secure throughout 2010, approximately 14.5% were food insecure at least some part of the year. This is the highest number of food insecure households ever recorded in the United States.

2. Approximately 6.7 million households, or 5.4% of all households, had very low levels of food security. This number has risen from the previous 4.7 million households (or 4.1%) noted in 2007 (http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.htm). While these statistics identify food insecurity for households, bear in mind that some members of the household may eat significantly less than other members (ibid), particularly if parents forego their food portions to ensure their children and/or elderly members of the household get enough to eat.

3. According to the same report, households with children were more at risk for experiencing food insecurity. The report notes, "in 2010, children were food insecure at times during the year in 9.8 percent of households with children (3.9 million households.) In [1%] of households with children, one or more of the children experienced the most severe food-insecure condition measured by USDA, very low food security, in which meals were irregular and food intake was below levels considered adequate by caregivers (Coleman-Jensen 2011, p. vi)".

Given the statistical data for the USA, there is a definite correlation between poverty levels and the ability to ensure food security for a family. For instance, 59% of food insecure households took part in one or more of the "three largest Federal food and nutrition assistance programs" during one month (Coleman-Jensen, Alisha, Mark Nord, Margaret Andrews, and Steven Carlson. "Household Food Security in the United States in 2010." ERR-125, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Econ. Res. Serv. September 2011. http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/err125/ ).

Citing the Centre for American Progress' Hunger in America report, The "No Kid Hungry" campaign of Share Our Strength, notes that the combined costs of hunger and food insecurity is approximately $130.5 billion in the USA (http://www.nokidhungry.org/problem/economic-impact). In 2011 alone, the US government spent $718 billion on defense and international security assistance (Plumer, Brad, "America's staggering defense budget, in charts", Wonk Blog, The Washington Post, January 7, 2013: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/07/everything-chuck-hagel-needs-to-know-about-the-defense-budget-in-charts/).

Is it not a matter of national security to feed the people living within its borders? If a fraction of those funds were directed towards addressing hunger and food insecurity in the US, it would aid significantly in addressing this crisis. However, it would be simplistic to assume that mere funds will eradicate the problem. Attention must also be paid to the economic instability and poverty experienced by individuals that leads to food insecurity and hunger.

In 2012, a report published by the National Resources Defence Council highlighted that the US annually throws away approximately 40% of its food at a cost of $165 million, with the level of food waste being 50% higher than in the 1970s, and 10 times as much as someone living in Southeast Asia (http://www.nrdc.org/food/files/wasted-food-ip.pdf). Had the food thrown away instead been utilized appropriately, perhaps many more would have had a chance to eat. This issue deserves more attention than it has received in the past. It is vital that the public becomes aware of such matters and brings it to the attention of their political representatives; it is only through a strong public voice that we will be able to incite change.

In the next musing, I will attempt to examine if the production of biofuels will impact the cost of food.

Until we meet again!

Venturing deeper into hunger

2013-09-23T13:51:00.001-04:00

In my last musing, I noted that hunger is "the single greatest solvable problem in the world". What I did not note was that this problem is solvable because the world currently produces enough food to feed every single person living today ("Hunger", United Nations Resources for Speakers on Global Issues, http://www.un.org/en/globalissues/briefingpapers/food/index.shtml). I repeat, we have enough food in the world today to end hunger. Rather, the research indicates that it is more the impact of economic, environmental, and political reasoning that prevents access to food.

What exactly is hunger? In economically stable environments where food is affordable, hunger is the uncomfortable sensation experienced in the stomach when a person skips a meal. For the millions of individuals who do not have enough food to eat everyday, the feeling of hunger goes further than that: the individual lacks the strength or energy to undertake the simplest of tasks. He or she feels weak, tired, unable to concentrate or focus. The predominant thought on their mind often is "when am I going to eat?"(Ibid).

What causes hunger? According to the United Nations, key causes of hunger include: natural disasters, conflict, poverty, poor agricultural infrastructure, and the over-exploitation of the environment. Additionally, changes in global financial and economic markets also have a significant impact on those going without, particularly if food prices rise making sustenance unaffordable for many. A key example of this is the recent 2008 economic crisis (Ibid).

In the next few musings, I will address hunger as it exists in the developed world. Too often, the focus is predominantly on hunger that exists in the developing world and although that is entirely justifiable as the majority of the world's hunger population resides in that part of the world, we cannot forget that hunger is a global crisis. Hunger does not exclude those living in developed nations.

A mark of a developed nation should and must be that the population residing within its borders does not go hungry. The very fact of their "development" should prohibit this crisis to arise. However, approximately 19 million of the world's hungry population live within the nations of the developed world. Many may argue that given the population of the developed world, with the population of the United States alone being greater than 315 million, 19 million does not indicate a population suffering from a hunger crisis. I would argue that 1 person suffering from hunger is 1 too many. Still too hard to connect?

Consider this: What if you were hungry?

[Hunger Chair by Aoife city womanchile, available under a Creative Commons Attribution Licence 3.0 unported (CC BY 3.0) at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ The image can be found at http://www.flickr.com/photos/aoifecitywomanchile/2530681611/]

The next musing will discuss hunger in the United States, followed by musings on hunger in Canada and the UK.

Hunger: the solvable dilemma still unsolved

2013-09-12T12:56:00.000-04:00

Often I catch myself pondering topics and subject matter that randomly arrest my attention. So much so that I will start researching the topic in an attempt to learn as much as I can about it and the divergent views that may exist on it. Once I am comfortable with the topic, I will start sharing with those closest to me all that I have learned. In an attempt to catalogue and share what I learn, this space will be the home for my many musings in order to always remember all that I have learned and seek to learn. I hope you will join me on this journey.

As an opening entry to this escapist space, I thought it important that the discussion commence by examining, what the World Food Programme (WFP), the food assistance arm of the United Nations and the world's largest humanitarian effort to address world hunger, classifies as the “single greatest solvable problem facing the world today”: hunger. Growing up in developing countries, this topic has always been on my mind: how can there be a shortage of food when the very idea of hunger being a "solvable problem" indicates that it is entirely plausible to feed every single human being on earth?

My father did not grow up with enough to eat and his mother often went hungry to feed her children. My father-in-law, forced out of East Africa under the rule of Idi Amin, arrived in Canada and here often subsisted on one small meal a day. These examples are by no means indicative of the extreme poverty that touches so many men, women, and children around the world, but for me, they serve to humanize a phenomenon that so many of us are fortunate enough never to have experienced. Unfortunately, approximately 870 million people in the world (as of 2012) are asking the question: 'Will we have anything to eat for dinner?' rather than the question many of us ask around supper time, 'What's for dinner?'

To provide a perspective of the world's hunger condition from the latest statistics, note the following points provided by the World Food Programme (WFP):

One in every eight people goes to bed hungry every night (FAO, 2012).
Although much progress has been made in reducing global hunger, this progress has slowed and levelled off as of 2007-8 (FAO, 2012), a time where world economics shifted towards a recession mindset.
Hunger kills more people every year than AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined; as such, it is number one on the list of the world's top 10 health risks today (UNAIDS, 2010; WHO, 2011).
As of 2010, 29 countries are suffering from "alarming levels" of hunger, with the majority of countries being in Sub-Saharan Africa, as noted by the Global Hunger Index (source: Economist.com).
If women in rural areas had the same access to land, technology, financial services, education, and markets as men, the number of hungry people could be reduced by 100-150 million (FAO, 2011).
By 2050, climate change and erratic weather patterns could have pushed another 24 million children into hunger, with almost half of them living in sub-Saharan Africa (IFPRI, 2009).

It is staggering to see the numbers, particularly the fact noted in number 3 - how is it that the mass media is not raising this issue as critical? How is it that politicians and world leaders are not engaged in an overtly active action plan on addressing this issue? Because, contrary to what we would hope, it is not simple, although entirely possible, for countries to embark on an action plan to eradicate world hunger.

The solution does not only equal the provision of food to everyone going without. There are political, economical, agricultural and social frameworks that must be considered when determining the best strategy to address this issue; these frameworks must then be considered within the context of the socio-political construction of individual countries and not just as the world as a collective population.

For instance, the goal of agriculture practices varies from country to country dependent upon the specific needs identified by social leaders and politicians. John Parker, in the article "The 9 billion-people question", notes that agriculture is required to produce other matter instead of simply food, such as biofuels, etc. ('Blood and Oil', The Economist, February 26, 2011, http://www.economist.com/node/18200618). Agriculture in itself is further utilized to alleviate situations that create hunger through poverty, such as the creation of jobs, etc. According to Parker, because the era of cheap food has come to an end, there is a cause of concern regarding the task of feeding the world's growing population. He identifies two groups that have dissimilar views on this matter. One group is concerned predominantly with feeding the global population, arguing that unstable food prices make it difficult for this concern to be met. They contend that "more needs to be done to boost supplies through the spread of modern farming, plant research and food processing in poor countries" (ibid). The other group however, views the modern food business as the antagonist, and focuses on issues more prevalent in richer countries of animal welfare, environmental degradation of food production, obesity, and lack of nutrition in food.

Given the multiple viewpoints that exist regarding hunger, it is easy to get lost in the semantics of the issue and forget the severity of the larger picture: millions of people continue to go hungry every night. Because factions in the debate often assume opposite ends of the spectrum, they are blind to the possibilities of working together to address the problem holistically and determining solutions that are cognizant of the bigger dilemma. This is not to say that a solution will encompass all elements of the issue; rather, it will generate perspectives and possibilities that are better suited to address specific elements of the debate.

Therefore, there needs to be an action plan that addresses the causes, effects and solutions to the global hunger problem simultaneously while being cognizant of country-specific conditions that must be taken into account. As we progress through this debate over the coming weeks, we will examine some of these action plans and their efficacy in aiding to alleviate global hunger.

As the WFP has noted, this is not a helpless situation: many countries are making significant strides in addressing this issue. For instance, over the last 10 years, Brazil has reduced the number of hungry people within its borders by approximately 33%. China and Russia, once on the receiving end of WFP food aid, are now contributing members to the WFP food stocks utilized for other countries.

Too often it is noted that it is simply too costly to end global hunger, however consider this: while nobody can argue the need for funds to address the current Syrian humanitarian crisis, in one afternoon the G8 countries were able to raise $1.5 billion for Syria, while the same amount promised by the G8 to the Global Agricultural and Food Security Programme has not yet been fulfilled. Although I refrain from ranking human need, it is still vital to consider why overcoming hunger and extreme poverty are not commanding the same call for aid as the Syrian crisis. Adrian Lovett, Europe Executive Director for ONE, says it perfectly in his remarks after the 2013 G8 summit: both crises are a "matter of life and death" (http://www.one.org/us/2013/06/18/what-we-learned-at-erne/).

In the hope of learning more about this critical matter and inspiring you to join the fight against global hunger, over the next few weeks, I will be exploring hunger globally, within specific countries, and in war-torn areas and refugee camps. I hope to cap this topic by exploring the work undertaken by organizations and individuals around the world fighting to end global hunger.

Thank you for joining me on this journey.

Peace and love,

Sheliza