Renegotiating the food aid convention

The current global agreement governing food aid—the Food Aid Convention (FAC)—will expire in 2007. It has come under heavy criticism as has the diffuse set of broader food aid governance institutions that has emerged in the last 50 years. These institutions are characterized by overlapping mandates,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoddinott, John F., Cohen, Marc J.
Formato: Brief
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: International Food Policy Research Institute 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/160224
_version_ 1855514482280759296
author Hoddinott, John F.
Cohen, Marc J.
author_browse Cohen, Marc J.
Hoddinott, John F.
author_facet Hoddinott, John F.
Cohen, Marc J.
author_sort Hoddinott, John F.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description The current global agreement governing food aid—the Food Aid Convention (FAC)—will expire in 2007. It has come under heavy criticism as has the diffuse set of broader food aid governance institutions that has emerged in the last 50 years. These institutions are characterized by overlapping mandates, differing degrees of authority and legitimacy, varied levels of transparency in decisionmaking, and problematic representation of the major stakeholders. A number of issues are likely to arise during the course of negotiations over a new FAC. These include its objectives; the nature of commitments—whether to express them in tonnage, value, or nutritional terms; the level of commitments and their distribution among donor countries; monitoring and enforcement of commitments; representation on the FAC governing body among food aid donor- and recipient-country governments and civil society organizations; and the institutional “home” of the FAC. More specifically, there is debate over such questions as whether the new FAC should have an “instrument focus”—food aid—or a “problem focus” such as “food security” or “hunger.” If the focus is on addressing hunger, should food aid under the FAC be restricted to emergencies only or should it pertain to broader food security issues? Should the FAC be a low-key forum for exchange of information or should it have some meaningful ways of monitoring commitments and encouraging compliance by both donors and recipients? Debates such as these will reflect views on the purposes of food aid itself. Conversely, debates regarding these broader questions carry consequences for the formation of views on the issues involved in the FAC negotiations. This paper’s purpose is solely to outline issues and options; hence it does not advocate for particular positions.
format Brief
id CGSpace160224
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2007
publishDateRange 2007
publishDateSort 2007
publisher International Food Policy Research Institute
publisherStr International Food Policy Research Institute
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1602242025-11-06T04:20:41Z Renegotiating the food aid convention Hoddinott, John F. Cohen, Marc J. food aid international agreements international organizations human rights trade agreements needs assessment The current global agreement governing food aid—the Food Aid Convention (FAC)—will expire in 2007. It has come under heavy criticism as has the diffuse set of broader food aid governance institutions that has emerged in the last 50 years. These institutions are characterized by overlapping mandates, differing degrees of authority and legitimacy, varied levels of transparency in decisionmaking, and problematic representation of the major stakeholders. A number of issues are likely to arise during the course of negotiations over a new FAC. These include its objectives; the nature of commitments—whether to express them in tonnage, value, or nutritional terms; the level of commitments and their distribution among donor countries; monitoring and enforcement of commitments; representation on the FAC governing body among food aid donor- and recipient-country governments and civil society organizations; and the institutional “home” of the FAC. More specifically, there is debate over such questions as whether the new FAC should have an “instrument focus”—food aid—or a “problem focus” such as “food security” or “hunger.” If the focus is on addressing hunger, should food aid under the FAC be restricted to emergencies only or should it pertain to broader food security issues? Should the FAC be a low-key forum for exchange of information or should it have some meaningful ways of monitoring commitments and encouraging compliance by both donors and recipients? Debates such as these will reflect views on the purposes of food aid itself. Conversely, debates regarding these broader questions carry consequences for the formation of views on the issues involved in the FAC negotiations. This paper’s purpose is solely to outline issues and options; hence it does not advocate for particular positions. 2007 2024-11-21T09:50:18Z 2024-11-21T09:50:18Z Brief https://hdl.handle.net/10568/160224 en Open Access application/pdf International Food Policy Research Institute Hoddinott, John F.; Cohen, Marc J. Renegotiating the food aid convention. IFPRI Discussion Paper brief. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/160224
spellingShingle food aid
international agreements
international organizations
human rights
trade agreements
needs assessment
Hoddinott, John F.
Cohen, Marc J.
Renegotiating the food aid convention
title Renegotiating the food aid convention
title_full Renegotiating the food aid convention
title_fullStr Renegotiating the food aid convention
title_full_unstemmed Renegotiating the food aid convention
title_short Renegotiating the food aid convention
title_sort renegotiating the food aid convention
topic food aid
international agreements
international organizations
human rights
trade agreements
needs assessment
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/160224
work_keys_str_mv AT hoddinottjohnf renegotiatingthefoodaidconvention
AT cohenmarcj renegotiatingthefoodaidconvention