In times of crisis, choosing the right kind of aid
When Food Isn’t the Answer to Hunger
By TINA ROSENBERG
When the Indian Ocean tsunami hit in December 2004, killing more than a quarter-million people, the great global humanitarian machine sprung to life. First on the list of donations, of course, was food — bags of food began arriving by airlift and sea, especially into Aceh, the hardest-hit region.
But was it the right kind of aid? The Acehnese who lost their livelihoods needed food, but there was actually plenty of food to be bought. Indonesia’s foreign minister told the world not to send rice. The coast had been devastated, but not far inland life was normal— in fact, harvests had been excellent. What was disrupting the food market was not the tsunami, but the sacks of rice that were coming in. So many people were getting rice for free that local markets couldn’t sell it. Farmers were undercut and supply chains fell apart.
“It seemed counterproductive to ship in commodities and undermine local producers,” said Gawain Kripke, director of policy for Oxfam America. “Shipping in food was doing more harm than good.”
So several aid organizations working locally decided to try something different. They bought local food to distribute to the people to whom they would have otherwise donated food. Save the Children and CARE gave those in need cash or vouchers they could use to get food the way they always had: by going to the market and buying it. Mercy Corps paid residents to clear debris. The Swiss Development Corporation provided cash grants to families hosting the displaced.
(More here.)
By TINA ROSENBERG
When the Indian Ocean tsunami hit in December 2004, killing more than a quarter-million people, the great global humanitarian machine sprung to life. First on the list of donations, of course, was food — bags of food began arriving by airlift and sea, especially into Aceh, the hardest-hit region.
But was it the right kind of aid? The Acehnese who lost their livelihoods needed food, but there was actually plenty of food to be bought. Indonesia’s foreign minister told the world not to send rice. The coast had been devastated, but not far inland life was normal— in fact, harvests had been excellent. What was disrupting the food market was not the tsunami, but the sacks of rice that were coming in. So many people were getting rice for free that local markets couldn’t sell it. Farmers were undercut and supply chains fell apart.
“It seemed counterproductive to ship in commodities and undermine local producers,” said Gawain Kripke, director of policy for Oxfam America. “Shipping in food was doing more harm than good.”
So several aid organizations working locally decided to try something different. They bought local food to distribute to the people to whom they would have otherwise donated food. Save the Children and CARE gave those in need cash or vouchers they could use to get food the way they always had: by going to the market and buying it. Mercy Corps paid residents to clear debris. The Swiss Development Corporation provided cash grants to families hosting the displaced.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
In addition to not destroying local agriculture economies, key to minimizing the problems of natural disasters is to have a strong economy brought about by free individuals that have private property rights, equally applied rule of law and a government that does not meddle with the currency.
Post a Comment
<< Home