Conference reports Creating efficient and equitable food systems Workshop on Food Security in the Sudan, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK, 3-5 October 1988

This workshop brought together peo- ple from many different disciplines and many different points of view: from nutritionists to macroeconom- ists; from Band Aid to the World Bank. What united them was a com- mon concern with food security in the Sudan, a country embroiled in civil war and with more than its fair share of problems in the food sector. In addressing these problems, the chal- lenge was to find a way of crossing disciplinary and possibly ideological barriers to create a common frame of analysis. Food security is often de- scribed as a topic which requires multidisciplinary and multisectoral analysis; but it very rarely receives the kind of concentrated focus at the country level that the participants at this workshop were able to provide.

Twelve papers spanned the issues of production, marketing and consump- tion, concentrating on Sudan, but with some comparative analysis from other countries. From the mass of detailed analysis on individual topics, there emerged five transcending themes. These are important for Sudan, but also for the many other countries in Africa which face similar problems.

Defining food security

The first theme was that a new approach was needed to defining food security. The traditional definition fo- cuses on food consumption: ‘access to enough food for an active, healthy life’. This was found to be incomplete: it misses the connection between food, poverty and livelihood and underesti- mates the vulnerability of many peo- ple in the Sudan to a sudden collapse of their domestic economy. The pap- ers by Simon Maxwell (‘National food security planning: first thoughts from

FOOD POLICY August 1989

the Sudan’), Alawia El Amin (‘Anthropometric indicators of mal- nutrition in northern Sudan’) and Alex de Waal (‘Emergency food security in western Sudan: what is it for?‘) showed that food insecurity was a serious problem in the Sudan, even defined in strict nutritional terms. With a broader focus on livelihood security, however, the problem was seen to be much more widespread. It was also seen to require a different approach to the traditional one of food supplementation, since - as de Waal argued in particular - people’s own priorities were often to sustain long-term productive capacity rather than maintain short-term food intake. Malnutrition is closely related to poverty and vulnerability: it was use- ful to think of these as three overlap- ping circles, with food insecurity con- centrated in the area where they over- lap.

Economic growth

The second theme concerned the role of economic growth in tackling the problem of food insecurity. No one argued that economic growth was not desirable, even necessary. But evi- dence accumulated from papers deal- ing with both the national and regional levels - by Mohammed Nureldin Hus- sain (‘Food security and structural adjustment programmes: the con- flict’), Mustapha Babiker Ahmed (‘Beyond the political economy of food insecurity in the Sudan: implica- tions for research and policy’), and David Evans and Mohamed Diab (‘Food security, income distribution and growth in the Sudan: some pre- liminary findings’) - that (1) the im- pact of growth would depend on the form it took, and (2) that even growth

directed at the poor would leave sub- stantial problems of food insecurity in its wake. The first conclusion served to emphasize the choice of develop- ment path. Growth in Sudan can be secured by focusing on the ‘modern’ sectors of the economy, industry, irri- gated agriculture or the mechanized rainfed sector; or it can be achieved by focusing on traditional rainfed agricul- ture and the informal sector in towns. The evidence is quite clear that the second strategy is the only one that will make a significant difference to the incomes and, therefore, the food security of the poorest groups.

Whatever the success of a poverty- oriented growth strategy, however, the sobering conclusion was reached that growth would not eliminate food insecurity in the Sudan. As Andrew Shepherd (‘Improving food security at household level: post-drought de- velopment in Kordofan and Red Sea Hills, Sudan’), David Keen (‘Some problems with targeting emergency grain in Western Sudan, 1985’) and Geoff Bright (‘Agricultural produc- tion: an analysis of trends’) all argued, some of the worst problems of pover- ty, vulnerability and malnutrition are found in areas like the Red Sea Hills or the isolated districts of Darfur and Kordofan, as well as among displaced people in Khartoum, where economic growth would be slow to percolate and where new income-earning opportuni- ties would be difficult and expensive to establish. As a result, there was strong support for the view that food security, the creation of a food system that was efficient and equitable, was a legitimate objective of policy.

Government role

The third theme concerned the role of government in bringing about this ‘efficient and equitable food system’. As described by Maxwell, some gov- ernment interventions were con- troversial, notably the support for large-scale mechanized sorghum far- mers, analysed by Graham Shuttle- worth (‘Grain marketing interventions by the state: what to do and why to do it’), and the untargeted nature of the wheat subsidy. But there was no general support for the view that

289

Conference reports

government should leave questions of food security entirely to the market. Indeed the reverse was true. Respond- ing to papers by Shepherd, Keen and Mike Hubbard (‘Local government and food security in Kordofan region, Sudan’), and taking into account the Zimbabwean experience described by Ed Theunissen (‘Grain production and marketing in Zimbabwe’), many participants were concerned with the need to strengthen government struc- tures and expressed dismay at the way relief operations by aid donors and voluntary agencies tended to under- mine government rather than rein- force it. One of the strongest themes to emerge at the end of the workshop was the need to support local govern- ment in particular, from the regional governments, down to district councils and local leadership in individual vil- lages.

Targeted interventions

What government should actually do was the subject of the fourth theme, and here there was strong support for the idea of targeted interventions, in production as well as consumption. The papers by Keen and Bright showed the rich to have benefited more than proportionately from targeting in the past and suggested that programmes aimed at the poor, especially during emergencies, had been bedevilled by poor administra- tion, corruption and political influ- ence. Nevertheless, as Shepherd argued, some programmes had been successful, in targeting women, for example, or in reaching defined geo- graphical areas like the Red Sea Hills. There was optimism about the scope for production policies and program- mes that would benefit poor farmers and nomads; and for targeted con- sumption subsidies that would reach the urban poor. On the production side, these interventions would be good for growth, although there was doubt in some minds about whether a growth-distribution trade-off could be dismissed so easily, particularly when measures were aimed at the very poor in the most difficult areas. On the consumption side, targeted interven- tions would be more expensive to

290

administer, but would be considerably cheaper overall than the present generalized subsidies.

The final theme reflects the quality of the discussion throughout the work- shop. It is that food security provides a valuable focus for analysis spanning different perspectives. The four previ- ous themes all emerged from discus- sion reaching from the level of nation- al economy to villages and house- holds; and all commanded support from specialists representing different disciplines. At the end of the work- shop, all agreed that they had learned

from each other and that contact should be maintained, perhaps through an unofficial network.

Simon Maxwell Institute of Development Studies

Sussex, UK

There are plans to publish a book contain- ing the papers presented at the workshop. In the meantime, copies of the workshop report can be obtained from Simon Max- well, IDS, University of Sussex, Brighton, BNl 9RE, UK. Copies of the papers are also available, at cost.

Replenishing IFAD’s funds Twelfth Session of the 143-nation Governing Council of the United Nations International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Rome, Italy, 24-27

January 1989

‘To speak plainly - IFAD is facing a crisis’. Thus Mr Ian Buist, speaking for the UK government, began his speech to the governing council of an organization that has a mandate to help poorer farmers in developing countries increase their food output.

The crisis concerns the familiar problem of funding. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has had problems with raising money for the past six years, but now the ‘problem’ has shifted. The Fund began life in 1978 as a unique agency jointly financed by Western and oil exporting countries belonging to the OPEC group. It was given $1000 million for the first three years of its work and $1100 million for 1981-83. Zero-interest loans were made to gov- ernments of developing countries for specific projects to provide seeds, tools, machinery, low-interest credit and other agricultural inputs to poorer farmers who had previously received little outside assistance.

Oil exporting countries asked in 1983 if they could pay a lower percen- tage of IFAD’s overall funds as oil prices had fallen and their economies were weaker. Western countries main- tained, however, that joint funding was an important principle of the Fund. Long drawn-out negotiations caused 1984 to be a lost year as far as income was concerned and the Fund

received only $487 million for its work between 1985 and 1987. The outcome represented a slackening of the ‘joint funding’ principle. Western countries contributed $276 million of the total, oil countries $184 million and develop- ing countries $27 million.

Early in 1988 donors started nego- tiations about replenishing the Fund for the period from 1988 to 1990; there were hopes of completing them within six months. But the talks again drag- ged on and attempts to complete them at this governing council also ended in failure. This time the problem is be- tween the oil exporting countries.

Overall figure

IFAD is hoping to raise an overall figure of $760 million for three years, of which Western donors are likely to contribute $276 million plus $3 for every dollar contributed by the non-oil developing countries (who have set themselves a greatly increased target of around $75 million). This would therefore bring the West’s contribu- tion up to $501 million.

Saudi Arabia wants to reduce its contribution from the $73 million it paid last time and hopes that other gulf states will make up the shortfall. But the other countries seem reluctant to do this. OPEC member Iran is expected to contribute $12 million to

FOOD POLICY August 1989