Food aid reform

Abstract

Since its inception, the US Food for Peace Program has provided US purchased commodities to feed millions of people around the world. It is an essential humanitarian assistance and development tool the US uses to address food insecurity, but the current program is in need of reform. In 2011, the US spent $2.1 billion sending 1.91 million metric tons of food and reaching 53 million people around the world. But sourcing food aid from the United States and sending it to destinations around the world often takes longer to deliver and is more expensive than buying food closer to the region of need. Rules which require food aid to be purchased in the US and shipped on US flagged vessels waste US taxpayer dollars and time, which is precious in crises. Current US food aid programs need to be more flexible. In some instances, US-sourced commodities may be a beneficial and useful approach. In other instances, buying food locally for distribution—or giving recipients cash or vouchers to buy food on local markets—provides important tools to get food quickly to people in need. Moreover, this approach can support local agriculture production, benefitting farmers and breaking the cycle of hunger. Many of the programs supported through food aid are directed at treating or preventing malnutrition, drawing a clear link between this aid program and a major public health crisis. This chapter outlines public health arguments for food aid reform and addresses arguments that reform will cost US farming and shipping jobs and weaken national security. It also debunks two myths associated with current reform efforts. Momentum is building for food aid reform and public health professionals have a key role to play in helping save lives worldwide.