Dealing with the global food crisis

Soaring prices for staple foods are creating political tensions from North Africa to Southeast Asia, and the world is scrambling for solutions. Last week, wealthy countries pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in crops, seeds, vouchers and funds for "food security." That may help to stave off the current emergency, but what are the long-term solutions?

Managing Globalization's regular experts from Columbia University have chimed in with their ideas. Here are excerpts from short articles by Jagdish Bhagwati, author most recently of "In Defense of Globalization," and Jeffrey Sachs, whose new book is called "Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet." The full articles are online at blogs.iht.com/globalization.

Jeffrey Sachs: The fundamental reason for soaring food prices is that growing global demand is outstripping global supply. The tight supply conditions have four elements: (1) chronically low farm productivity in many regions, notably sub-Saharan Africa; (2) the increasing diversion of U.S. and European food output into biofuels; (3) the increasing frequency and vulnerability to climate shocks; and (4) the increasing squeeze on water availability and new arable land for expanded crop production. Each of these should be addressed.

African farmers lack financing to buy critical inputs such as fertilizers and high-yield seeds. The donor countries would do Africa and the world a load of good by focusing less on shipping expensive food aid from Europe and the United States and focusing much more on helping African farmers to gain access to the inputs they need for higher productivity. A good model is Malawi's voucher program for smallholder farmers, which gives impoverished farmers in Malawi the access to a modest amount of fertilizer and improved seeds per household, at an affordable price.

At the same time, the rich countries should stop diverting their food crops, such as maize in the United States and wheat in Europe, and their food-growing land (such as the shift in Europe from wheat and maize to rapeseed) for biofuel production. Using food for biofuels is actually bad for the environment (through the high-energy inputs used to grow the crops and to convert them to biofuels) and is disastrous for global food balances.

A third step, to address the increasing climate shocks, water scarcity, and land scarcity should be much stepped-up research and investment to "climate proof" the food system and further raise yields.

Jagdish Bhagwati: The current food crisis raises questions concerning the appropriate responses in the short term, to take care of the immediate problems, and then in the long term. To understand both issues, it is useful to go back to the food crisis, no less alarming, that broke out after the failure of Indian, Chinese, Russian and other harvests simultaneously and dramatically in 1972.

The current crisis is less a result of droughts (except for Australia) and more a result of diversion of crops such as corn to biofuels production. The growth in demand from the developing countries such as China and India, with their dramatic growth rates, has also increased demand sharply. As before, hoarding has followed, as has the proliferation of export restrictions.

The present crisis reflects long-run factors which will likely not disappear. It needs to be addressed differently. For the short-term, it is practically impossible to tell governments not to hold back supplies. On the other hand, for the importing countries, the International Monetary Fund can provide short-term assistance for balance-of-payments support, so imports can be financed at higher prices. The permanent loss of income from paying more for imports can be offset by enhanced aid flows from multilateral and bilateral agencies for the poor countries.

For the long-term, the measures to moderate the prices of food grains will require attention to at least three policies where we will have to rethink matters: (1) a moderation of the planned reliance on biofuels and turning to nuclear energy instead; (2) the acceptance of genetically modified foods which promise to continue the green revolution in the modern age; and (3) the shift in governmental investment priorities to agriculture.

Mutharika must not abet Mugabe

Reminiscent of the movie "Blood Diamonds"; the Malawi Government has decided to meddle in Zimbabwean internal affairs by sending its intelligence officials to clear on Mugabe's behalf the contraband from China, in Luanda-Angola, despite the international calls not to allow the ship carrying the arms to offload anywhere in the world except in China, writes Nyakuchena Ganda in the Nyasa Times.

Mutharika must be criticised for pursuing a grotesque foreign policy, which is sacrificing Malawi's credibility in the international arena and jeopardising the safety of Malawians living in Zimbabwe.

It is intriguing that while the President is advocating the rule of law, dialogue and patience, he is at the same time behaving in a manner that suggests that he is supporting Robert Mugabe's Adolf Hitler-like grip on the nation of Zimbabwe.

Well if the president thinks that these virtues can apply in Zimbabwe, he should also make the same effort to practice them here. For before we even start talking about how other countries should handle their business we should remove the huge planks in our eyes. Mutharika knows that.

It is unbelievable that Human Rights are again being trampled on in Zimbabwe, where the dictatorial geriatric has unleashed an untold fear campaign on his people and he is so far being allowed to get away with it.

The so-called "Chimurenga-Veterans" [ironically some of whom are as young as 20 years old] are methodically pushing back the country to the era of Ian Smith, when the ruthless colonial forces subjected the nationals to so many traumas for aiding and abetting the genuine Chimurenga War guerrillas.

The current serial molesters choose their victims indiscriminately; their attacks serve a clear and sanitised philosophy; an astonishing package of political values and objectives that are malevolent and extremely cold blooded.

The will to oppress and intimidate the whole nation of Zimbabwe into submission is unmistakable.

Therefore, Mutharika's cheap political advertising through his recent Press Release is a desperate attempt at blunting the international ridicule his government is experiencing now.

Isn't it true that our government's mediocre foreign policy is failing dismally to respond to the disgraceful campaign of terror in Zimbabwe?

Again, we have seen the feeble attempts and headless chicken antics of a government that does not care about Zimbabweans, trying to bogusly play philanthropist just because the rest of the SADDC region is tightening the screws on Robert Mugabe.

Some day in future, both Malawians and Zimbabweans will look at this period of betrayal as the turning point in our history. We will remember a once prosperous country driven to destitution by a sadistic Octogenarian.

We will have visions of a country crying for help from the international community but literally abandoned to fend for itself by even those short-sighted and selfish people who have in-laws and property in that country.

We will remember the Malawian president who upon his arrival from Red China, declared that Malawians had no business asking him why he was supporting the rogue government in Zimbabwe, and later expelled lies at a mass rally in Thyolo that it was the private traders selling maize to ZANU-PF in Zimbabwe and not his disgraced 21st century "Maoist" government.

Is it not true that the government in Malawi has always had the capacity to stop the export of maize abroad? Whom is Mutharika trying to fool here by lying to the poor masses that he was not exporting their Maize to Zimbabwe, when officials from the same government admitted having received maize from this country?

It's lies, lies, lies, shameful lies and out-and-out treachery! Can somebody please stop him from making a cartoon of his person this way?

The current situation in Zimbabwe is very exceptional for Malawi. Moreover, the misfortune running through the Zimbabwean political blood stream is likely to rear its ugly head, in Malawi, in May 2009, if we are not watchful by making our leaders take responsibility of their actions and what they say.

The post-election horror offensive in Zimbabwe and the Malawi Government's indulgence in its nefarious activities in Luanda, Angola should serve notice to Malawians that Mutharika has the propensity to "pull a Mugabe" if not monitored closely. He may decide to recycle the same playbook to cling to power.

It is not too late though for Bingu to reposition Malawi's doctrine of contact and dialogue in our relations with peoples of the world. Mutharika can support dialogue between the conflicting parties in Zimbabwe by serving as a decent emissary. That will be far more award winning than his current malice laden involvement in Zimbabwe's affairs