A declining economy and a severe drought have raised concerns in Lebanon over food security as the country faces one of its worst refugee crises, resulting from the nearby Syria war, and it is these refugees and impoverished Lebanese border populations that are most vulnerable to this new threat.

A severe drought has put the Lebanese agricultural sector at risk. According to the Meteorological Department at Rafik Hariri International Airport, average rainfall in 2014 is estimated at 470 mm, far below annual averages of 824 mm.

The drought has left farmers squabbling over water. “We could not plant this year and our orchards are drying up, we are only getting six hours of water per week,” says Georges Karam, the mayor of Zabougha, a town located in the Bekfaya area in Lebanon.“Any major domestic or regional security or political disruptions which undermine economic growth and job creation could lead to higher poverty levels and associated food insecurity” – Maurice Saade of the World Bank's Middle East and North Africa Department

The drought has resulted in a substantial decline in agricultural production throughout the country. “The most affected products are fruits and vegetables, the prices of which have increased, thus affecting economic access of the poor and vulnerable populations,”says Maurice Saade, Senior Agriculture Economist at the World Bank’s Middle East and North Africa Department.

According to the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs. Although most households in Lebanon are considered food secure, lower income households are vulnerable to inflationary trends in food items because they tend to spend a larger share of their disposable income on staples, explains Saade.

Lebanon’s poverty pockets are generally concentrated in the north (Akkar and Dinnyeh), Northern Bekaa (Baalbek and Hermel) and in the south, as well as the slums located south of Beirut. These areas currently host the largest number areas of refugee population, fleeing the nearby Syria war.

According to Clemens Breisinger, senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Lebanon currently imports about 90 percent of its food needs. “This means meant that the drought’s impact should be limited in term of the food available on the market,” he says.

However, populations residing in Lebanon’s impoverished areas are still at risk, especially those who are not financially supported by relatives (as is the custom in Lebanon) or benefit from state aid or from local charities operating in border areas. Lebanese host populations are most likely the most vulnerable to food insecurity, explains Saade.

According to the UNHCR, there are just over one million Syrian refugees in Lebanon. While the food situation is still manageable thanks to efforts of international donors who maintain food supplies to the population, “these rations are nonetheless always threatened by the lack of donor funding,” Saade stresses. In addition, refugee populations are largely dependent on food aid, because they are essentially comprised of women and children, with little or no access to the job market.

Given that Lebanon depends to a large extent on food imports, mostly from international markets, maintaining food security also depends on the ability of lower income groups to preserve their purchasing power as well as the stability of these external markets.

“This means that any major domestic or regional security or political disruptions which undermine economic growth and job creation could lead to higher poverty levels and associated food insecurity,” says Saade.

In addition any spikes in international food prices, such as those witnessed in 2008, could lead to widespread hunger among vulnerable populations.

Breisinger believes that despite increased awareness of the international community, the factors leading to a new food crisis are still present.Increased demand for food generally, fuel prices, the drop in food reserves, certain government policies as well as the diversion of grain and oilseed crops for biofuel production are elements that put pressure on the food supply chain and can eventually contribute to hunger in certain vulnerable countries.

To avoid such a risk, some countries have implemented specific measures such as building grain reserves. “I am not sure how Lebanon has reacted so far,” says Breisinger.  With little government oversight and widespread corruption, Lebanon’s vulnerability to food insecurity has been compounded by unforgiving weather conditions, a refugee crisis and worsening economic conditions which, if left unattended, could spiral out of control.

Maize is a food staple in Guatemala's "Dry Corridor," which has been hit by both drought and flood. Credit: Danilo Valladares/IPS

By Joe Hitchon
WASHINGTON, Mar 16 2013 (IPS)

The world’s food security remains “vulnerable”, new data suggests, with some 870 million people experiencing sustained hunger and two billion suffering from micronutrient deficiencies.

The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), a Washington think tank, says such numbers are “unacceptably high”, and warns that anti-hunger programmes have been “piecemeal”.

In an influential annual report on the state of the world’s food policy, released Thursday, the organisation said there were some positive achievements made last year, but that a number of policy changes are still required.

Growing jobs

The report identifies agricultural development as an important potential job creator, particularly for young people. In developing countries, however, it warns that youths are no longer seeing agriculture as a viable career, looking instead to urban areas for work.

Leaders in sub-Saharan Africa – a region with the world’s fastest-growing population as well as youngest – are today looking to create job opportunities in agriculture, using new technology and farming techniques. In doing so, they are hoping to encourage the young and innovative emerging workforce in such a way that they can have a transformative impact on both economic growth and social development.

Higher production yields, after all, would simultaneously create jobs, lower food prices, and reduce hunger and malnutrition.

“Agriculture in most developing countries is a labour-intensive sector and makes up a big chunk of the labour force,” Lester Brown, founder of the Earth Policy Institute, a Washington advocacy group, told IPS.

“In recent years, large firms have introduced a type of agriculture that is very capital intensive and highly mechanised, but employs very little labour, so there has been a huge loss of employment. Further, modern agriculture requires modern infrastructure– electricity, grain elevators, fertiliser storage and mechanical expertise. To get there requires a lot of investment, but if done properly the nonfarm sector will grow alongside the farming sector.”

If properly managed, however, food policy experts say the sector’s employment potential is significant.

“Agriculture in Africa is now recognised as a source of growth and an instrument for improved food security,” Sheggen Fan, director-general of IFPRI, said Thursday.

“Africa’s agriculture can absorb large numbers of new job seekers. But in order for agriculture to be a technically dynamic and high-productivity sector that contributes to food security, it will need an influx of educated and innovative young labour.”

Conflict fuelling hunger

IFPRI’s researchers identify violent conflict, particularly in Central Africa, as both a cause and consequence of food security.

“Violence in Central Africa, especially in Nigeria, which accounts for more than a quarter of agriculture of sub-Saharan Africa has reduced output growth and food security, and has had dramatic social and economic consequences,” Mary Bohman, an official with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, said at a panel discussion Thursday.

Armed conflict in northern Mali and renewed violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo reportedly resulted in the displacement of approximately three million people within the region and forced a further 70,000 people to flee to neighbouring countries.

Fighting in Somalia and Yemen, the civil war in Syria, and unrest across the region in the aftermath of the Arab Awakening was compounded by low rainfall.

Drought in Central Asia, Eastern Europe and the United States had a dramatic impact on agricultural production and supply throughout the world. Approximately 80 percent of farmland in the United States was hit by the most severe drought in half a century, while high temperatures and low rainfall reduced wheat production in Australia, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine – among the top producers and exporters of wheat.

According to many environmentalists, such extremes will only be further exacerbated as global climate change progresses – with further risks to food security.

“2012 was an extraordinary year for climate change researchers,” said Andrew Steer, president of the World Resource Institute (WRI), a think tank.

“During the past year, it has become generally accepted that the world will see a two-degree increase in average temperature. But even then, food production, land degradation, deforestation are not the only problems – we’re talking about water risks across the spectrum and skyrocketing food prices.”

He said the new IFPRI report propels the issue of food into the centre of the discussion on climate change.

Gender factor

Experts are increasingly focusing on the centrality of gender equality in promoting agricultural growth and food security. Indeed, at Thursday’s event, presenters exhibited particular excitement over this new emphasis.

Over just the past year, new evidence on the role of gender in agricultural productivity has emerged, including in the World Bank’s annual World Development Report. This new data indicates that agricultural performance and food security improve through both agricultural and non-agricultural reforms that increase women’s access to production resources.

Further, women’s contributions to agriculture in developing countries have been shown to bring overall gains in agricultural productivity as well as increased nutritional benefits. Such contributions also improve women’s access to education, technology and financial services.

“When you look at statistics on the number of women farmers in the world, it is commonly anywhere from 40 to 80 percent in developing countries,” Danielle Nierenberg, co-founder of Food Tank, a think tank here, told IPS.

“These women, however, don’t have access to the same resources as men; don’t have access to extension services, credit or the ability to make financial transactions, they often don’t own land or are prohibited from owning land.”

Nierenberg says it is very encouraging to see donors and investors beginning to tailor their production projects to the inclusion of women.

“While men more commonly grow cotton and maize and other industrial crops, women are the ones who grow the food that feeds the family,” she says. “To be effective, initiatives will need to focus on women’s overall equality across all sectors, not just the food and agriculture sector. Until we do that, we’re not going to see the gains we need – like higher yields, economic growth, the protection of environmental resources or the reduction in malnutrition and poverty.”

IFPRI director-general Fan agrees that the status of women is “critical” to poverty reduction, particularly in bringing down levels of malnutrition.

“Women have higher standards, and have been shown to better allocate the household budget as well as feed their families with more nutritious food,” he says. “One of the biggest links between poverty reduction and malnutrition is directly related the status of women.”

A woman weeds a sesame crop field in South Sudan's Eastern Equatoria state. Credit: Charlton Doki/IPS

By Carey L. Biron
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 7 2012 (IPS)

To deal with looming food crises in the coming decades, Africa needs a Green Revolution on par with what took place in Asia during the 1960s and 1970s, according to experts in Washington.

But such a revolution would need to ensure that the mistakes made in Asia are not repeated in Africa, warned Shenggen Fan, director general of the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) here, while unveiling a new policy brief released here on Thursday.

As world leaders prepare to gather in Rio de Janeiro in two weeks for a major summit on sustainability, IFPRI cautions that the poor need to be at the centre of the debate.

“What are the implications of a green economy for the poor and hungry?” the new brief asks, focusing particular attention on Africa. “How can the poor benefit from and thrive under a green economy? What role can agriculture play?”

In mid-May, ahead of the Group of Eight (G8) summit near Washington, President Barack Obama announced a major new initiative to combat hunger, pledging to bring 50 million people out of poverty within a decade. But despite have the backing of the world’s richest countries, the new programme has “failed to pay much attention to issues of green economy and sustainability”, Fan said.

Similar problems characterised the original Green Revolution, in Asia.

Starting in the 1960s, the introduction of new technologies – particularly heavy use of fertilisers and pesticides, as well as the introduction of monocropping – in South Asia resulted in massive strides forward in the short-term ability of the region to feed itself, and was credited with staving off mass starvation in several areas.

However, the longer-term implications have been highly criticised. Significant drawbacks have included severe depletion and poisoning of groundwater and increasingly poor soil quality, resulting in lower crop yields and increased dependence on government and international resources.

“When we move to Africa, we need to take into account the green technologies and new ways of thinking” that have evolved in recent decades, Fan said.

That move needs to take place both quickly and smartly, given an ominous convergence of factors that will place particular stress on food production in Africa.

By 2050 the global population is expected to grow by two billion people, even as incomes and living standards for many continue to improve. Current projections suggest this will mean a massive increase in food requirements: 80 percent more water-intensive meat will be needed, 60 percent more cereals.

Meanwhile, the two minimum requirements for agriculture and food production – water and land – are both becoming increasingly strained.

First, agriculture already accounts for some three-fourths of global freshwater use. “Since other demands for water are expected to increase much faster, the amount available for irrigation will see only a minimal increase,” IFPRI’s researchers note. “By 2050 water scarcity could reduce cereal production potential by more than 10 percent.”

Second, the amount of land under agricultural use around the world has dropped precipitously in recent years. Further, in the two decades between 1986 and 2006, around a quarter of all global land area was affected by degradation of some kind, IFPRI researcher Ephraim Nkonya told journalists this week.

This has an adverse effect on agricultural potential, but it also has a disproportionate impact on poor communities, as some 43 percent of the poor across the globe live on degraded lands. This is especially the case in Africa, Nkonya says, which constituted a full 13 percent of the 1986-2006 degradation statistic just cited.

While degradation and deforestation are traditionally blamed on increasing population density (and the related presence of roads), Nkonya says such a correlation isn’t necessarily correct. Rather, repeated experiences have shown that weak institutions and poor governance are far more often to blame.

This discrepancy highlights a significant lack of understanding, among policymakers as well as the general public, about the costs of prevention versus inaction on land degradation.

According to Nkonya, the economics work out such that preventative measures would be just 10 percent those of inaction – a dollar invested in prevention today would otherwise cost 10 dollars to ameliorate down the road.

IFPRI offers a series of policy recommendations calling for “decisive actions on a number of fronts” to simultaneously address economic development, food production and sustainable resource use, while factoring in the full costs and benefits associated with countries’ natural resources.

Unfortunately, even as leaders gear up for the Rio talks, issues surrounding land use have been notably underemphasised.

According to a pre-Rio special issue of the science journal Nature released on Wednesday, of the three agreements to come out of the original Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, the U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) is today “the poor relation … Progress towards its goals has been even more elusive than for climate and biodiversity.”

The new U.N. Global Environment Outlook, also released on Wednesday, likewise notes that “combating desertification … has seen little or no progress”, and warns that “deforestation and forest degradation alone will likely cost the global economy more than the losses in the 2008 financial crisis.”

This time around, too, the first draft of the Rio 2012 negotiating text bore little mention of issues of land use.

Several countries, particularly Germany, are currently pushing for the inclusion of a new sustainable goal regarding land, referred to as zero net land degradation. On Jun. 1, the UNCCD released a related policy brief, and Jun. 17, just days before the summit is set to begin, will be marked as the World Day to Combat Desertification.

But as yet there has been no overarching agreement on the issue’s inclusion at Rio.