184 posts categorized "Foreign Aid"
Martha Togdbba of Kpaytno, Liberia, grows vegetables, including tomatoes and chili peppers. She irrigates her small farm with water from a nearby stream that she walks back and forth to with a watering can. (Laura Elizabeth Pohl/Bread for the World)
By Robin Stephenson
In a recent interview with Devex, Roger Thurow says a key ingredient to global food security is the smallholder farmer. “Smallholder farmers haven’t been at the center of agriculture development efforts.” We have programs today that can change that.
Thurow is a senior fellow on global agriculture and food policy at The Chicago Council on Global Affairs and author of The Last Hunger Season: A Year in an African Farm Community on the Brink of Change.
Thurow says reversing the pattern of neglect is a major challenge of our time if we want to face a food-secure future. “These smallholder farmers who have been so badly ignored and neglected by a kind of collective us… [they] are now really indispensible to our future of feeding the planet.” Deficiencies in global agriculture become even more urgent when factoring in climate change and population growth, which will put increasing pressure on global food resources in the future.
Evidence suggests that agriculture-led growth is a key to ending hunger and poverty. Faustine Wabwire writes that the missing link is women. In A Global Development Agenda: Toward 2015 and Beyond, Wabwire, senior foreign assistance policy analyst at Bread for the World Institute, takes a closer look at the composition of smallholder farmers, the majority of which are women. In sub-Sahara Africa, women produce up to 70 percent of the food for their households and markets. She writes, “An estimated 12 percent to 17 percent reduction in global malnutrition could come from enabling female farmers to match the yields of male farmers by allowing them equal access to resources.”
USAID has been leading the charge with a new kind of development that addresses smallholder agriculture and women as change agents. Programs like Feed the Future are already charting a course toward self-sufficiency. Investing in and reforming U.S. food aid to allow flexibility, improve nutrition, and build long-term resilience is also critical to a future free from hunger.
Congress must make these investments a priority in their 2015 spending bills if we are to end global hunger. However, appropriators in the Senate have approved a $100 million cut to Feed the Future in the State-Foreign Operations bill. Investments in food aid reform, although minimal, have been proposed for House and Senate Agricultural appropriation bills and pushed through with the help of persistent urging on the part of anti-hunger advocates. We will continue to support amendments that allow U.S. food aid to reach more people.
The nightly news shows us we face daunting problems: children fleeing poverty and violence in Central America, Somalia on the brink of famine, the incomprehensible human suffering of refugees in South Sudan – the list goes on. At the root of each of these crises is hunger and poverty. Solutions that address root causes are solutions that last. Looking at smallholder farmers as the engine for poverty reduction can help end what Thurow calls a medieval affliction of our time – child malnutrition. He asks, “Why in the fourteenth year of the 21st century are we still afflicted by all these problems?” Why indeed.
Robin Stephenson is national social media lead and senior regional organizer, western hub, at Bread for the World.
Jane Sebbi, left, is a farmer with 12 acres of land in Kamuli, Uganda and a mother of seven children. In this photo she works in her field with her sister-in-law. (Laura Elizabeth Pohl/Bread for the World)
By Kimberly Burge
In Africa, faith leaders are claiming a greater role in advocacy for people who are poor, based in the belief that “if one [part] body of the whole suffers, the whole body is unwell.” Partnerships are vital as we build on progress already made against global poverty and hunger. It’s also crucial that we hear from and include the voices of people in developing countries.
Bread for the World President David Beckmann traveled to Uganda at the beginning of July to attend the African Faith Leaders’ Summit in Kampala. This unprecedented interfaith gathering brought together Christian, Muslim, Baha’i, and Hindu leaders from across the continent. Beckmann was one of only three faith representatives from outside Africa invited to attend the summit. He was invited to demonstrate to the African faith community that they have allies in the United States who stand in solidarity with them on development issues.
The group came together to discuss a development agenda that will follow up the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Endorsed by 189 countries in 2000 the MDGs are an unprecedented global effort to achieve development goals that are identified collectively, achievable, and measurable. Globally, substantial progress has been made toward many MDG targets—including cutting in half the proportion of people living in poverty. Every major region of the world made progress. The MDGs carry through December 2015. Bread for the World is an active participant in efforts to craft a post-2015 successor to the MDGs. The chair of the summit planning committee and secretary-general of the Organization of African Instituted Churches (OAIC), Rev. Nicta Lubaale, spoke at Bread’s National Gathering in June.
The African faith leaders developed and adopted a statement on the post-2015 goals. As they noted in a position paper that came out of the summit: “We recognize that the current global development framework, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), greatly improved coordination of global development priorities and have helped to shape thinking and action on the priorities for the well-being for a majority of developing countries. We also recognize that the MDGs were created through a top-down, closed door process with the consequence that they failed to engage and respond to the structural realities of people living in poverty. We are gratified that the process to define the post-2015 framework has been more participatory, inclusive, and attentive to the voices of those who live in poverty and are marginalized. This process is very important to us as it calls to conscience solidarity amongst our one human family, and challenges a growing peril in the globalization of indifference.”
Their concerns focused specifically on poverty and hunger; agriculture and nutrition; increased attention to women, youth, and people with disabilities; and governance issues and the need to fight corruption. The conference also stressed interfaith harmony at a time when violence in the name of Islam and Christian-Muslim conflict present major problems in several African countries.
Two heads of state addressed the summit: President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda and President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia. The faith leaders were encouraged to become advocates on poverty and human need issues with their own governments. Conference organizers hope that this new network will encourage stronger faith-based advocacy on social justice issues over the years to come.
“It’s very gratifying to see the commitment and progress that OAIC and other faith partners are making,” Beckmann said. “For a long time in Africa, the church and faith community have focused mainly on charity. This unprecedented conference is a step toward increased efforts to shape policies that are important to poor and marginalized people.”
Kimberly Burge is the interim associate online editor for Bread for the World.
Poverty and violence are push factors that have caused a surge in child migration to the U.S. from countries like Guatemala, which has the highest child malnutrition rate in the Western Hemisphere. (Joseph Molieri/Bread for the World)
By Bianca Brown
When Angelica* was eight years old, she lived with her mother in a small village in Guatemala, where hunger and poverty were rampant. Angelica’s mother had heard of opportunities in America for better jobs and schools for her child. Gathering all of her savings, she paid a man to bring her family across the border to the United States.
Angelica and her mother were separated once they reached the States. Four years later, Angelica found herself abused, beaten, and prostituted by the man who had brought her across the border. Once, she managed to speak with a caseworker at an immigration assimilation office, where I heard her story.
Angelica is one of the many unaccompanied immigrant children who are victims of human trafficking as a result of hunger and poverty in their home countries. More than 60,000 children are in danger of becoming victims of abuse and trafficking. We can’t afford to ignore the root causes of this mass migration: hunger and poverty. Without addressing the causes of immigration from Latin America, U.S. immigration policy will be ineffective in stemming the flow of unauthorized immigrants.
Angelica’s account shares how constructive immigration reform is beneficial to those seeking citizenship—especially unaccompanied minors. Kept in the shadows, these people live on the margins of society hoping for change. Angelica’s caseworker begged her to tell them if she wanted help out of her situation, the law preventing action otherwise. Angelica replied, “No one will want to help me…who would want to help an alien?”
These families live in fear of their undocumented status, sometimes going hungry in the United States. The current system relegates unauthorized immigrants to the bottom of the U.S. socioeconomic system. U.S. immigration policy does not enable immigrants to break the cycle of poverty by allowing them opportunities to improve their lives and those of their families by advancing professionally, pursuing further education, and fully integrating into their communities.
Comprehensive immigration reform will allow families to make a better life for themselves and their children.
Call (800-826-3688) or email your U.S. representative and your U.S. senators! Simply say: I urge you to respond to the surge of unaccompanied children crossing the border. Please pass legislation that addresses the conditions of poverty, hunger, and violence in Central America that are forcing them to leave.
*Child’s name changed to remain confidential.
Bianca Brown is an intern in Bread for the World's communications department and a senior at Georgia's Wesleyan College.
Poverty and violence are push factors that have caused a surge in child migration to the U.S. from countries like Guatemala, which has the highest child malnutrition rate in the Western Hemisphere. U.S. food aid assistance help Catarina Pascual Jiménez find a path out of hunger. (Joseph Molieri/Bread for the World).
See Bread's new fact sheet: Why Children are Fleeing Central America
By Eric Mitchell
Emilio is a 16-year-old boy from Honduras.
A fifth grade dropout, Emilio has no job and often goes hungry. "When we were hungry, we endured it ... Some days, you would eat. Other days, you wouldn't," he says.
A smuggler promised to help Emilio get into the United States. However, during the journey, he and two companions were sold to a man who locked them inside a house in Guatemala, threatening to kill them unless their families each paid $2,000. The journey is dangerous, and some children die on the way, but conditions in his home country are so desperate that Emilio says he will try again.
Emilio is one of tens of thousands of children from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador attempting to flee violence and extreme poverty. We as people of faith must act to address the root causes of this humanitarian crisis.
There are two things you can do right now to help.
- Pray. Pray for these children, their parents, and the often poor and violence-stricken communities they have left behind. And pray for the children who still remain in Central America, many of whom, like Emilio, go without enough food for days on end. You can use these prayers or your own.
- Call (800-826-3688) or email your U.S. representative and your U.S. senators! Simply say: I urge you to respond to the surge of unaccompanied children crossing the border. Please pass legislation that addresses the conditions of poverty, hunger, and violence in Central America that are forcing them to leave.
The Bible tells us that Jesus has a special concern for children who belong to the kingdom of God (Mark 10:14). Christians must speak up for children like Emilio.
Tens of thousands of unaccompanied children are crossing the border, fleeing unspeakable conditions in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador. Since October, over 52,000 unaccompanied children have crossed our borders. By year’s end, we are expecting that number to grow to between 70,000 and 90,000.
Emilio’s story isn’t unique, considering what he is fleeing. More than half of the citizens of Honduras live on less than $4 a day, and violence is rampant.
While the debate raging in Washington focuses on detention centers and how fast the government can send these children back, few members of Congress are asking: What are we sending these children back to? Solutions to this crisis must look beyond the border.
If we support successful development programs in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, we can help ensure children like Emilio will not have to risk their lives to escape poverty and hunger.
The situation is urgent. Please call (800-826-3688) or email now.
See Bread's new fact sheet: Why Children are Fleeing Central America
Eric Mitchell is the director of government relations at Bread for the World.
Recently, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees passed their annual funding legislation for the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and other related agencies, known as the State-Foreign Operations (SFOPs) bill.
Each year, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees meet to determine funding levels for vital programs that affect hungry people here in the United States and abroad. On the international front, Bread for the World specifically follows the parts of the budget known as poverty-focused development assistance (PFDA) accounts, which includes funding for various programs related to food and nutrition security, global health, basic education, water and sanitation, maternal and child care, refugee assistance, and emergency humanitarian response, to name just a few.
While the House and Senate decided to recommend the same overall funding level for PFDA programs ($21.9 billion), this funding is slightly lower than current levels ($22.3 billion). Both the House and Senate made recommendations to cut global health programs, which includes funding for maternal and child health, nutrition, family planning, vaccines for malaria, tuberculosis, and tropical diseases, and HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention.
The Senate specifically approved a $100 million cut to Feed the Future. In the House, a 21 percent cut to International Organizations and Programs was also made. Funding in this account is used to support U.S contributions to international organizations like the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the United Nations Development Program.
Thanks in large part to Bread for the World members and their advocacy efforts, we have helped prevent even more severe cuts from being recommended, but we continue to call on Congress to provide additional funding for PFDA programs before finalizing funding levels for the next fiscal year.
Additional resources will help us support humanitarian aid efforts in places in conflict like Syria, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic. Looking beyond emergency aid, we hope to not backtrack on the many investments we have made to long-term development programs over the years, such as with child survival.
These programs save lives. Due in part to American commitments, the number of deaths of children under five has dropped by half since 1990. In the past 12 years alone, 700,000 fewer children have died from pneumonia, 300,000 fewer children from malaria, and 100,000 fewer children from AIDS.
As these children grow into adults, their survival has the potential to translate into even greater stories of improved economic and social well-being, with benefits felt far beyond their households and country borders—even back on American shores. Congress must continue its vital role in ensuring this becomes a reality by increasing PFDA funding levels in the upcoming fiscal year.
Producing High Quality Seeds (USAID).
We often use the phrase “an act of God” to describe natural catastrophes. Would it not be more appropriate, however, to refer to the work we do to mitigate hunger before and after disaster hits as an act of God? In the United States, we have a set of programs categorized as poverty-focused development assistance (PFDA) that is doing just that. When we help our neighbors build resilience against future crises in poor countries, we are acting out God’s compassion for humanity.
Recent reports on climate change indicate we are facing an increase in global food-insecurity, which makes programs that build resilience even more critical. Currently, both chambers of Congress are writing spending bills that determine fiscal year 2015 funding for foreign assistance. The Senate plan could cut funding by 7 percent from current base funding levels.Such cuts would hinder our ability to continue making progress against worldwide hunger.
In “Morality of preparation,” a piece published in The Hill this week, Rev. John L. McCullough, president and CEO of Church World Service, and Rev. David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World, urge Congress to fund programs at levels comparable to, or higher than, those enacted in the previous year. They also call funding foreign assistance a moral imperative.
“We don’t believe there is a choice here," they write. "How can we stomach the desperate looks on children’s faces and refuse to help when we know we are able?” McCullough and Beckmann stress that advocates must reach out to Congress and show their support for foreign assistance. “Each of us, citizens and elected representatives, reflect the priorities of this great nation and among the most important is hope and compassion for all God’s children.”
U.S. programs addressing long-term solutions to poverty have been instrumental in making progress against global hunger over the last decade. The reduction in child mortality rates are evidence that smart nutrition investments work. Increases in global literacy rates are a result of injecting aid into primary-school education.
These small investments have huge returns. Increases in a country's literacy rate correlate with increases in its economic productivity. Sixty years ago, South Korea, now an example of the power of effective aid, was one of the world’s poorest countries. U.S. foreign assistance helped South Korea become Asia’s fourth-largest economy, as well as a major consumer of U.S. goods.
In May 2009, a cyclone devastated Bangladesh. In the village of Sutarkhali, Mohammad Mofizul Islam Gazi saw his livelihood disappear when the small plot on which he grew rice to support his family was ruined. “Cyclone Aila nailed the last pin in the coffin,” he tells USAID Frontlines. “There was nothing left.” In 2012, as the village was struggling with malnutrition, a U.S. funded program supplied Gazi and other farmers with a special rice seed that could withstand future cyclones. Today, the community produces 50 percent more rice than before the disaster.
In urging our members of Congress to fully fund PFDA, we are moving toward the sacred vision of a world where everyone has enough. Helping neighbors escape hunger and poverty – helping when we are able – is a true act of God.
By Alyssa Casey
Since the crisis in Syria began more than three years ago, nearly 9.5 million people—almost half of Syria's population—have fled their homes. More than 2.5 million Syrian refugees have relocated to neighboring countries, including Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, and Iraq. Their needs—for shelter, food, medical care, education, and employment opportunities—are great. At this critical time, what Syrians do not need is reduced support and assistance from the international community, including the United States. Unfortunately, under the budget proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), this would likely be the case.
Ryan’s fiscal year 2015 budget resolution, released this week, proposes deep cuts to programs that provide relief to those affected by conflict in Syria, and other parts of the world. Ryan’s proposal cuts the International Affairs budget by a devastating 11 percent. As the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition points out, this funding level would mean a 24 percent decrease in the total International Affairs budget since 2010.
We all acknowledge the current tough fiscal environment, but we cannot let the poor and hungry bear the largest burden during these difficult times, as they so often do. As Bread for the World has previously noted, sequestration has already cut funding for life-saving international efforts, such as child and maternal health and international food aid. Now is not the time for additional cuts.
The International Affairs budget funds poverty-focused development assistance programs that provide emergency relief to those affected by conflict and disasters, saving countless lives. Last month, the World Food Program reported that food aid is now reaching previously inaccessible areas of Syria, providing much-needed relief to tens of thousands. The U.S. Agency for International Development helps fund critical programs that provide immediate needs such as food, water, shelter, and vaccinations to Syrian refugees. This funding also achieves longer-term goals such as education, psychological care, and job training to help refugees rebuild their lives.
Unfortunately, Syria is not unique. Crisis and conflict continue to fan the flames of hunger and poverty in South Sudan, Ukraine, Venezuela, and other countries across the globe. Fortunately, we can help. As a nation, we must continue to offer life-saving assistance, and as individuals, we must continue to urge our members of Congress to support robust funding levels for international humanitarian and poverty-focused development accounts.
At a time when U.S. foreign assistance is saving lives every day, we cannot risk the progress that has been made by abandoning the funding that makes it possible. Rep. Ryan’s budget resolution is not the solution.
Alyssa Casey is a government relations intern at Bread for the World.
Here in Washington, D.C., safely secured in a Smithsonian museum, is the supposedly cursed — but still famous — Hope Diamond, valued as high as $350 million. But today there is a newer gem in the capital city, worth even more. This gem is buried in the thousands of pages and in the trillions of dollars that comprise the fiscal year 2014 federal budget and is a victory for Bread for the World and its members.
Despite gradual cuts to the overall international affairs budget in the last three years, poverty-focused development assistance (PFDA) accounts grew in FY 2014 by more than $800 million. In fact, PFDA funding has steadily increased over the past few years. This year, Congress appropriated more than $24.1 billion for PFDA programs, adding $800 million since last year.
The increases come at a time when Congress has been trying to cut the federal budget. We would not have been able to keep a circle of protection – much less increase it – were it not for the persistent advocacy of Bread members and partners.
In general, the dollar amounts for PFDA funding have more than tripled since FY 2000. Despite these increases, the overall PFDA funding by the United States still stands at less than one cent for every dollar the government spends.
Bread measures poverty-focused development assistance by examining the International Affairs Budget of the U.S. government (called the 150 Account). In addition, we include appropriations for the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Agriculture Departments. They include funding for such programs as the Millennium Challenge Account, the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative, Enterprise for the Americas, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the Food for Peace Program, and the McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program.
Photo: Khato Rana plays with her daughter Rita, 2, at the Nutrition Rehabilitation Home in Dhangadhi, Nepal. The facility, run by Nepali NGO Rural Women's Development Unity Center (RUWDUC), restores malnourished children back to health. (Laura Elizabeth Pohl/Bread for the World)
Watch Bill Nye, the Science Guy, dispel more poverty myths in this short Gates Foundation video.
By Robin Stephenson
- The United States does not send "all" of its money overseas.
- We invest a small amount of our budget in international poverty-focused development assistance (PFDA) programs.
- That investment does not increase poverty in America.
Programs categorized as poverty-focused development assistance, or PFDA, help alleviate hunger and poverty abroad, and also support trade, national security, and job creation here in the United States.
In the fiscal year 2014 budget spending bill, overall PFDA got a modest boost over last year's funding levels, although some programs saw reductions. The increase is good news, but PFDA remains mired in misunderstanding, where the general public is concerned. PFDA myths must be debunked in order to support continued investments in global hunger and poverty reduction.
One PFDA myth I've previously written about was recently addressed by Joe Cerrell of the Gates Foundation on Devex, in the piece, "It's our responsibility to #stopthemyth on foreign aid." Cerrell, like most anti-hunger advocates, has defended PFDA investment in response to the false belief that we send all our money overseas while America's poor go without. It's simply not true.
Cerrell thinks the myth's persistence is due to public misunderstanding of the size of overseas investment and what it provides. In a recent survey, a large number of Americans said they believe 28 percent of the U.S. budget goes to foreign aid, which is a gross inflation of the actual number. PFDA comprises less than one percent of the federal budget, and has a tremendous impact.
With benchmarks such as the Millennium Development Goals and program design that includes country participation and partnership, more progress was made against hunger and poverty in the 2000s than during any other decade in history. With smart investments, we will continue to see a global exodus from hunger — unless we pit domestic and international investments against one another and reduce PFDA funding.
"Quite simply," Cerrell writes on Devex, "if 1 percent of the budget was redirected back to domestic issues in a donor country, it would only be a drop in the bucket — but invested in the developing world, it is helping to spur historic progress and prosperity."
In our churches and communities, faithful advocates must remove the shroud of misunderstanding surrounding PFDA. A study commissioned by Bread for the World in 2013 makes it clear that ending world hunger is something Americans care about. In fact, 37 percent of Americans think the U.S. government is doing too little to end hunger in developing countries around the world. Only one in five of those polled believe we are doing too much.
“Americans want to help their brothers and sisters end hunger, and become self-sufficient," said Rev. David Beckmann at the time of the study's release. "Congress should embody and reflect this compassionate spirit as it deliberates on our federal budget.”
As we move forward in addressing 2015 funding levels for PFDA, we must focus on development assistance programs in particular. Through faithful advocacy, we can ensure these programs are robustly supported, thereby ensuring thousands of people throughout the world have the opportunity to enjoy a more prosperous future.
Robin Stephenson is Bread for the World's national lead for social media and senior organizer, Western hub.
Produce from 1 in 3 acres on American farms is exported to foreign consumers. Of the top 50 consumer nations of U.S. agricultural products, 43 of those countries have been recipients of foreign assistance (Photo of a farmer in the Mississippi Delta by Todd Post).
By Robin Stephenson
As an anti-hunger advocate, I often hear this sentiment: "We should not be sending all our money overseas when people are hungry here." This statement sets up a false one-or-the-other scenario: the fact is, in proportion to our overall budget, we send very little money overseas to help hungry people. That little bit does a tremendous amount of good— it invests in peace and goodwill, promotes trade and job creation at home and abroad, and saves lives. What that investment doesn’t do is take food off of American tables.
I wasn’t surprised to read about a new Kaiser Poll, mentioned on the WonkBlog last month, reporting that Americans believe that about 28 percent of our budget is spent on foreign aid. I often conduct a similar poll when I speak in churches. The responses I get usually range from 15–50 percent. Jaws drop in shock when I tell audiences that the international affairs budget comprises about 1 percent of our federal budget, and aid for poverty-focused development assistance (PFDA) is half of that.
I asked Bread's international policy analyst, Beth Ann Saracco, how she responds when presented with the "either-or" scenario. “When the argument is made that we must choose between feeding our fellow Americans and our brothers and sisters abroad, clearly we fail as a people morally," she said. "But equally as important, we are choosing short-sighted public policy, as well, which gravely threatens America’s economic and national security interests, both in the short and long term.”
PFDA has helped cut extreme poverty in half over the past decade. But knowing what foreign aid does isn't always enough to deter its detractors from pitting international against domestic investments — a false choice that shows a lack of understanding about the root causes of poverty and hunger. PFDA is an investment that helps the U.S. economy. The best defense against hunger is a good job, and jobs that help put food on American tables are often directly, or indirectly, tied to the global economy.
Businesses rely on consumers to buy their products, and owners add to their workforce as demand increases. Ninety percent of consumers live outside of the United States, and one in three manufacturing jobs depends on exports. Farmers need foreign consumers—one in three acres of their produce is exported. Of the top 50 consumer nations of American agricultural products, 43 of those countries have been recipients of foreign assistance. Statistics show fifty percent of our domestic exports currently go to developing nations. These numbers show that the vitality of the U.S. job market requires foreign consumers, and foreign assistance helps build a foundation for the development of future trade partners.
Since 2010, foreign aid has been reduced by 19 percent. These cuts to PFDA jeopardize the lives of our brothers and sisters abroad and our economic stability at home. As Congress continues to work on a 2014 budget deal, we must tell our representatives and senators to protect poverty focused foreign assistance for the good of all.
Robin Stephenson is national social media lead and senior regional organizer, western hub, at Bread for the World.
Get updates on issues and actions to take on behalf of hungry people.