Why again? This is probably the question that many people ask in relation to the latest famine crisis at the Horn of Africa. And most likely more than one believes that this region is definitely cursed by nature. However starvation, unlike other disasters, does not strike suddenly but it is a consequence of a number of factors, and many of them are human factors. Although the drought has hit the region hard once more this shouldn’t be seen as the main cause of the famine in the region. The emergency response is intensively dealing with the crisis, but doest not aim to solve the root causes. Which are those? And can we find better ways to address them?
Climate change.- Developing countries vulnerability to climate change is not longer only an estimated risk but a reality. African countries are probably the most vulnerable because of their extreme poverty and dependence on rain-fed agriculture, being pastoralist activities among the most vulnerable. Minimal changes in the global temperature might cause big catastrophes that these countries have not the resources to deal with. As a consequence of resource’s scarcity more conflicts can arise or be exacerbated.
If Northern governments are serious about tackling poverty and food insecurity in Africa, they will need to intensify efforts to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. They should also provide financial assistance to help African communities and governments to adapt to climate change. Large emerging economies such as China, Brazil, and India will need to take similar action (Read more OXFAM, 2006).
Although local factors that contribute to the worsening of the environment (such as deforestation, demographic pressure of land, inadequate agricultural practices and water management) cannot be underestimated, the main responsibility for global warming relies on the industrialized economies. Unfortunately, the Conferences of Parties of the UNFCCC have not reach encouraging results showing once more the lack of political will to take more serious measurements against global warming. (Read more Church of Sweden).
Weak democracy, conflicts and the role of the international community. – The food crisis in the Horn of Africa cannot be understood without taking into account the numerous past and on-going conflicts, and the lack of truly democratic systems. These are also a cause of the crisis, either for isolating populations, hindering the mobility of pastoral communities or denying the support, or access to, humanitarian aid. The development of these conflicts and political systems have worsening in the last years shrinking in turn the role of international aid organizations. The emergence of new actors in the development arena, such as China makes things more complex. Aid organizations have a limited impact on politics, but cannot afford to adopt a passive role. It is clear that the dynamics of the development cooperation has changed, so traditional international donors are today challenged to find a smart and less harmful way to cope with this situation. An important role of regional actors (such as the African Union) is to mediate in case of conflict; these actors need to be supported by the international community. One thing is clear, without peace and respect to basic human rights famine becomes just a part of the dynamic of the conflict. There are many examples of this in the history of Africa; unfortunately history tends to repeat itself.
Food aid vs. local economies. – Logically, the focus of the emergency response is to provide water and food and most of this food comes from donor countries. This has had in many cases negative effects in the local economies. That the oversupply of food undermines the economies of the small-scale farmers it is a fact. The worst effect in the long term is total dependence on food aid. In other cases, the distribution of food aid has become a conflict in itself and food security in general can even be considered a “sensitive issue” (as I heard many times in my last trip to Ethiopia). Studies show the convenience of shifting from food aid to cash transfers which may have a better effect in the local economies. Are aid organizations ready to facilitate this kind of approach?
Agricultural policies. – The Horn of Africa is dominantly rural and small scale agriculture is still the largest economical sector. But is this sector sufficiently prioritized? The latest approach of the Ethiopian government is to welcome international investors to invest in large-scale agriculture. This has already meant internal displacement of many people, the future labor force to be employed by those international companies. This approach is certainly not going to benefit the small-scale farmers, the gross of the population. Church of Sweden (as other organizations) has for many years been supporting agricultural development projects in Ethiopia with quite of good results. However, more radical support to the small-scale agriculture is necessary. The market is not made to benefit peasants, pastoralists or women. Thus if governments are not ready subsidize this activities (common in Europe and USA) and facilitate the access to international markets, they are just condemning them to remain in poverty. Industrialized countries should support measures to stabilize commodity markets, end the dumping of subsidized exports, allow poor countries to defend sensitive agricultural sectors from low-priced imports, and further open their own markets to African exports (OXFAM, 2006). International donors (especially multilateral donors) should give a more firm support to this sector, moving away from conditionality and supporting subsidies for small-scale farmers. (Read more Church of Sweden).
These are just some of the most evident structural factors behind the crisis, factor that have already being analyzed in previous crisis. Are we ready now to learn the lessons and do our task?
Ines Bustamante, Handläggare Utvecklingsbistånd
Lämna ett svar