Conclusions and recommendations
Demand
1. Biofuels
are driving higher and more volatile food prices and are having
a major detrimental impact on food security. In some cases biofuels
may be even more damaging to the environment than fossil fuels.
We recommend that the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO),
which commits the UK to consuming biofuel equivalent to 5% of
transport fuel volumes, be revised to exclude agriculturally-produced
biofuels. We recognise that the revision of the RTFO would make
it more difficult for the UK to meet its EU target of deriving
10% of transport energy from renewable sources. However, the EU
target does not apply until 2020. Consequently there is nothing
to stop the UK from revising the RTFO now. (Paragraph 16)
2. In addition to
revising RTFO, the UK must continue to push its European partners
to revise the target under the Renewable Energy Directive (RED)
which requires EU countries to derive 10% of their transport energy
from renewable sources by 2020. This reform could include introducing
Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) factors into the RED, and imposing
a cap on the level of food-based biofuel which can count towards
the RED target. The introduction of ILUC factors and the imposition
of a cap are not mutually exclusive options: both can be pursued
concurrently. We recommend that the UK Government push for both,
and that it push for the cap to be set at as low a level as possible.
(Paragraph 17)
3. We were pleased
to receive the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International
Development's assurance that biofuels would be discussed at the
'Nutrition for Growth' event. We also urge the Government to raise
the issue at the G8 summit itself, and at the meeting of the EU
Energy Council on 6 June. The Government should explain the outcome
of these discussions to us in its response to this report. (Paragraph
18)
4. We welcome the
Government's support for non-food-based biofuels. We recommend
that the Government give particular support to the use of biofuels
such as those derived from waste products, whose production does
not require land. (Paragraph 20)
5. We recommend that
the Government redouble its efforts to reduce the level of food
waste in the UK. It should begin by taking on board the suggestions
made in its own Foresight report on The Future of Food and Farming.
For example, the Government should launch consumer campaigns to
reduce waste and promote FareShare and similar schemes for unwanted
food. The Government should also set targets for food waste reduction
for producers and retailers and introduce sanctions for failure
to meet the targets. (Paragraph 21)
6. The rate of increase
in global meat consumption is unsustainable: the consequence is
a growth in the production of grain-fed livestock, with crops
used to feed livestock instead of humans. Clearly this does not
mean that the world should stop consuming meat: this would be
disproportionate and unrealistic. However, in the longer-term
it may be appropriate to focus on sustainable systems such as
pasture-fed cattle rather than on grain-fed livestock, with meat
promoted as a occasional product rather than an everyday staple.
(Paragraph 22)
7. The global population
continues to increase, and food production is expected to have
to increase by 60-70% by 2050. In future population growth is
expected to be concentrated amongst the poorest and least food
secure countries; this will have implications for both chronic
hunger and vulnerability to shocks. While detailed discussion
of population-related policies is beyond the remit of this report,
we urge DFID to maintain the strong focus on women's reproductive
rights shown in last year's Family Planning Summit and maintain
this sector as a priority for expenditure. (Paragraph 26)
Supply
8. Agricultural
extension services play a critical role in improving smallholders'
food security. In order to be sustainable, extension services
should be funded from locally-generated revenue flows. DFID should
devote a greater proportion of its budget to supporting the development
of agricultural extension services, particularly those targeted
at women. (Paragraph 30)
9. We recommend that
DFID ensure that the agricultural extension workers whose work
it supports address the issue of land degradation in their work.
(Paragraph 31)
10. If we are to help
smallholders to engage with large corporations, supporting the
development of farmer organisations, including co-operatives,
is vital. We recommend that DFID support the formation of farmer
organisations, and seek to ensure that such organisations are
fairly and transparently governed, with fair representation for
women and marginalised farmers. (Paragraph 33)
11. The Africa Enterprise
Challenge Fund (AECF), part-funded by DFID, has played a key role
in helping smallholders to engage in corporate value chains. DFID
should scale up its funding for initiatives such as AECF which
help smallholders to engage with corporations. (Paragraph 34)
12. Smallholders should
be provided with information on global markets. We welcome the
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Development's
acknowledgement of the potential of mobile technology; this can
play a key role in providing access to market information to smallholders.
(Paragraph 35)
13. We support the
recommendations of the Fairtrade Foundation: companies which purchase
crops from smallholders should contract to offer payment in regular
instalments throughout the year, rather than simply paying at
harvest time, and companies should also consider contracting
to pay smallholders in advance. (Paragraph 36)
14. Offering smallholders
a guaranteed price for their crop encourages them to invest in
their farms, but price guarantees offered by the public sector
are often problematic. Price guarantees offered by private companies
are preferable. We recommend that DFID encourage more of its private
sector partners to offer guaranteed prices to smallholders, or
to guarantee to buy a certain quota of crop. (Paragraph 37)
15. Both small- and
large-scale farms have a role to play in feeding a growing population
sustainably and in reducing rural poverty. For most countries
a mixture of the two will be most appropriate. Determining the
precise balance between small-scale and large-scale farms is a
matter for each individual country: it is not our place to lecture
developing countries about how their agricultural sectors should
be structured. In some cases, a shift towards somewhat larger
farms is likely to increase food production and improve the efficiency
of the agricultural sector. However, in many cases, smallholders
will retain a key role. In all cases, the generation of employment
and the productive use of land will be paramount. (Paragraph 40)
16. We welcome the
G8's focus on transparency. We recommend that the Government require
UK-domiciled corporations to be transparent about land deals,
and that it use its influence to ensure that the World Bank meets
adequate standards of transparency and consultation in its own
investments. (Paragraph 41)
17. Implementation
of the UN Voluntary Guidelines on the Governance of Tenure would
help to mitigate current concerns about commercial land acquisitions.
We welcome the Government's support for the Voluntary Guidelines,
and were pleased to be told by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State for International Development that the issue would be
discussed during the forthcoming G8 summit. We ask the Government
to explain the outcome of these discussions to us in its response
to this report. (Paragraph 42)
18. Work to establish
land registers which improve smallholders' security of tenure,
such as that conducted by DFID in Rwanda, has a dual benefit:
it enables smallholders to invest in their land while also providing
them with greater security against so-called 'land grabs'. We
welcome the news that DFID is designing a similar programme in
Ethiopia, and we suggest that it consider launching additional
projects of this nature elsewhere. (Paragraph 43)
19. We warmly welcome
the discovery of large-scale groundwater reserves in Africa by
the British Geological Survey. In the long-term, this discovery
may have major benefits for food security. DFID should support
the development of scientific knowledge and capacity in these
areas. For example, DFID could support an increase in the number
of climate stations, and the training of hydrogeologists. (Paragraph
46)
20. Improving rural
infrastructure would have a dramatic effect on food security.
Across much of the developing world, inadequate roads and storage
facilities lead to large-scale post-harvest crop losses. Particularly
in Africa, a lack of irrigation undermines agricultural productivity.
DFID should give a higher priority to these issues. (Paragraph
49)
21. We recognise that
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are controversial and clearly
not a panacea. However, it could be argued that GMOs have the
potential to make a valuable contribution to food security. DFID
should ensure that any support it gives is beneficial to the poorest
and most food insecure, and that any commercialisation or extension
of GM seeds to smallholder farmers does not undermine their ability
to save and store traditional seed varieties. (Paragraph 54)
22. Agricultural research
has a key role to play in ensuring food security. We support the
recommendation of the Food Ethics Council: DFID should make agricultural
research a high priority. We welcome the Government's current
work on this, and we urge DFID and DEFRA to ensure that their
work in this area is joined-up. Progress in agricultural research
will have benefits in the UK as well as in developing countries.
(Paragraph 56)
23. We welcome the
Government's pledge to provide £1.8 billion of funding to
tackle climate change over the next two years. Making detailed
recommendations as to how this money should be spent is beyond
the remit of this report; however, it is crucial that the Government
sticks to its pledge. The Government should also work with its
international partners to ensure that the commitments made at
the Copenhagen conference are met. (Paragraph 58)
24. While much discussion
focuses on the implications of climate change for agricultural
productivity, DFID should not lose sight of the fact that agriculture
can in fact make a valuable contribution to climate change mitigation.
Agroforestry, for example, can help to improve carbon sequestration.
Where appropriate DFID should support models of agricultural production
that have the potential to contribute to emissions reductions.
(Paragraph 59)
25. For farmers, improving
levels of resilience to climate change is vital. DFID should help
farmers to boost their resilience through techniques such as crop
diversification, insurance, improved land management, more appropriate
planting dates, and the use of more resilient crop varieties.
(Paragraph 60)
Recent shocks and their impact
26. We
recognise that maintaining large-scale food stocks can sometimes
be problematic and costly. However, given the increasing volatility
of food prices over recent years, we believe there may be a case
for judicious use of stocks to relieve the tightness of markets.
We recommend that the Government conduct further research into
this. Specifically, the Government should consider under what
circumstances it would be appropriate for a national government
to pursue strategic stockholding for national food security purposes.
It should consider what the costs, risks and benefits of this
strategy would be, and what capacities would be required. (Paragraph
69)
27. The launch of
the Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) is a major step
forward in the fight against food price volatility. We commend
all participant countries for supporting this initiative, but
we recognise that its long-term success will depend upon the quality
of information provided by participant countries. (Paragraph 71)
28. The introduction
of export controls by certain countries was regrettable, and served
to make an already bad situation worse. The decision by the G20
to remove any export bans for food purchased by the World Food
Programme is a welcome step in the right direction, but more needs
to be done. The UK should encourage its international partners
to remove any remaining export bans and to dissuade them from
introducing any new ones. It should also commit to raising this
issue at the forthcoming G8 summit. (Paragraph 72)
Speculation
29. Evidence
as to the impact of speculation on food prices is inconclusive.
While there has been a proliferation of recent research on this
topic, there is still no consensus. We recommend that the Government
study the latest research in detail, and that it use this research
to inform its future policy on this issue. (Paragraph 74)
Social Protection
30. When
shocks occur, social protection plays a vital role in protecting
the food security of the poorest. In 14 of the 29 countries in
which it has bilateral programmes DFID does not currently plan
to fund social protection. We ask the Department to explain the
thinking behind this. (Paragraph 79)
Humanitarian Assistance
31. Where
emergency interventions are needed to protect food security, cash-
and voucher-based schemes are preferable to in-kind food aid provided
markets are accessible and functioning. Where appropriate, we
recommend that DFID and its partner organisations favour cash-
and voucher-based schemes over in-kind food aid. (Paragraph 80)
32. WFP's 'Purchase
for Progress' scheme has a double benefit: it supports WFP's humanitarian
work while also supporting local economies in developing countries.
We were pleased that the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State
agreed to consider scaling up DFID's support, and we reiterate
our belief that this would be a wise thing for DFID to do. (Paragraph
81)
33. Given that urban
food insecurity is increasingly common, we urge DFID to think
give more consideration to how it provides social protection in
urban areas. Cash- and voucher-based schemes are especially important
in urban settings. (Paragraph 82)
Emergency food stocks
34. The
maintenance of food stocks for humanitarian purposes is of critical
importance. These stocks should be managed by individual countries,
as this gives the countries concerned greater ownership of the
policy. Stocks should be stored on a decentralised basis. We recognise
that some countries may lack the capacity to store and manage
stocks satisfactorily; in these cases, we recommend that DFID
support capacity building. (Paragraph 83)
Nutrition
35. Undernutrition
affects over 30% of the world's population, and 26% of all the
world's children suffer from stunting. We find this quite shocking
and wholly unacceptable. Undernutrition has long-term health implications;
more broadly, it also represents a barrier to development. Combating
the scourge of undernutrition should be a top priority for the
international community. We welcome the forthcoming 'Nutrition
for Growth' event, and urge participants in the event to make
substantive commitments. (Paragraph 87)
36. The importance
of nutrition in the 1,000 day period between conception and a
child's second birthday is well-recognised, but the latest evidence
stresses the extent to which maternal nutrition on the day of
conception influences the risk of her child suffering from stunting.
Nutrition programmes should therefore focus on meeting the nutritional
requirements of all women of childbearing age. (Paragraph 88)
37. At the 'Nutrition
for Growth' event on 8 June 2013, DFID should launch additional
bilateral nutrition programmes. The Executive Director of WFP
suggested to us that DFID could operate bilateral nutrition programmes
in any country which has committed to the Scaling Up Nutrition
(SUN) initiative: we accept that this is unrealistic, since it
would include a number of countries in which DFID has no bilateral
presence. However in four SUN countries (Ghana, Kyrgyzstan, Rwanda
and Sierra Leone), DFID has a bilateral presence but does not
have a bilateral nutrition programme. In these countries, bilateral
nutrition programmes should be launched., with a particular focus
on nutrition during pregnancy and early years. (Paragraph 90)
Adaptation to extreme weather events
38. Climate
change and disaster risk reduction are of the utmost importance
for food security, and it is important that the UK maintain its
current proactive approach to these matters. Forecasting tools
such as remote sensing also have an important role to play. (Paragraph
92)
39. While forecasting
is important in itself, ensuring adequate responses to forecasts
is equally crucial, and this should be a priority for the international
community. We recommend that DFID ensure appropriate accountability
mechanisms are in place for triggering, escalating, recording
and justifying responses to forecasts. The international response
to the 2011 Somalia famine was inadequate. This was due to a variety
of factors: we recognise the inherent difficulties in operating
in insecure environments such as Somalia, but this does not absolve
the international community entirely. We commend FAO for recognising
certain shortcomings in its own advocacy work. More broadly, there
is some disagreement as to whether agencies responded to forecasts
as promptly as they should have done. DFID should press relevant
actors to ensure that these allegations are fully investigated,
with a view to minimising the risk of any such situation occurring
in future. (Paragraph 93)
| 
