Family Survival Course: March 2013

Survival Storehouse launches emergency products for boating and aviation in ... - Virtual-Strategy Magazine (press release)

(1888PressRelease) Lightweight long term food and water supplies for specific verticals drive sales for Australian survival supplies company.

Working with our customer base built up over 3 years of supplying Australians with Mainstay long term shelf life food and water supplies has lead SurvivalStorehouse.com to target specific industries within the Australian market to revolutionise the supply and storage of emergency survival supplies.

"The 5 year shelf life of all our products provide a significant saving for our customers. Only having to replace their emergency supplies every 5 years instead of 1 - 3 is a great way to control the costs of providing a product that will hopefully never be used", Survival Storehouse was quoted.

The lightweight nature of Mainstay food products, coupled with the Mainstay 5 year shelf life water sachets makes these packs perfect for aircraft and boats where weight is always a top priority. The Mainstay range was perfected and approved by the US Coast Guard making it a great resource for any boating owner or associated company.

The Mainstay 2400 bar only weighs in at 446 grams and has enough vitamins and minerals to sustain a person in a difficult situation for 2 days.

For boating and aviation enthusiasts, having a 5 year shelf life emergency food and water kit is a mandatory requirement and has never been easier to source and store.

###

View the original article here

Central African Republic: Looming Food Crisis in Country

Bangui — Humanitarian agencies are warning of a looming food crisis in parts of the Central African Republic (CAR), a result of the insecurity that has displaced thousands of people and disrupted cultivation and trade.

Clashes between government and rebel forces in December and early January left some parts of CAR - and an estimated 800,000 people - under the control of the rebel Séléka coalition.

"Between July and September, there will be serious food shortages in the most affected areas. So the first priority is to restart programmes that have been disrupted in these areas," Jean Martin Bauer, an analyst with the UN World Food Programme (WFP), said.

Food prices are increasing, according to the findings of a recent assessment by WFP and its partners.

"Since December 2012, trade has been interrupted between the area held by the Séléka coalition and the rest of the country, bringing transactions to a halt and leading to sharp price increases.

The cost of a food basket has increased by 40 percent in the area under the control of the Central African armed forces. Some of the zones under the control of the Séléka are experiencing food deficits due to price increases," stated a 15 February statement by WFP.

Humanitarian officials expressed concern over the upcoming cropping season. "We are very concerned about prospect for the 2013 growing season, which is due to start in just a few weeks. Land preparation, which should have begun, is behind schedule in many places due to insecurity," said Rockaya Fall, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) representative in CAR.

The disruption of trade has caused income sources to decline, adds the statement: "The marketing season of the annual cotton crop, a lifeline for the northern part of the country, has yet to start in the Séléka zone, depriving farmers [of] their main income source."

An estimated 80,538 people in the Séléka zone are at risk of food insecurity in the May-September lean season.

The situation in CAR remains unpredictable despite an 11 January ceasefire, added a report released by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) on 18 February, which noted that a lack of humanitarian access due to insecurity, especially in the east, and poor roads are hindering the provision of assistance.

Access

Aid officials are calling for access to Séléka-held areas.

"The main problem is to open a humanitarian corridor in the Séléka-held areas. Once free to move, we will be able to bring the affected population together so as to provide the necessary assistance," said Kaarina Immonen, the UN deputy special representative for CAR.

Other main humanitarian needs include healthcare and education.

"We must go to those who are suffering. But first we would like to know and to understand the health situation on the ground before we respond to the needs of the population in the areas of conflict," said Honorat Ouilibona-Cockciss, the chief of staff in the ministry of health.

The number of patients seeking medical care is on the rise. In the area of Damara, 75km from the capital Bangui, for example, health centres are recording up to 200 consultations each day despite inadequate staff.

Almost all of the schools in the Séléka-held areas have been closed, with at least 166,000 children out of school, according to OCHA. Some teachers have also fled, according to Henry Sylvain Yakara, a national humanitarian affairs officer with OCHA.

The Séléka-rebels also destroyed some school facilities and were using some schools buildings as their bases, added Yakara.

Attacks continuing

Despite the 11 January peace accord, and the later formation of a government of national unity integrating the Séléka rebels, attacks are continuing.

In early February, for example, 2,300 people fled the southeastern CAR region of Mobaye for the neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) area of Mobayi-Mbongo after a Séléka attack. Some 4,500 people had previously fled to DRC in the past weeks, with hundreds of others seeking refuge in Chad.

The Séléka rebels comprise militias from the Union des forces démocratiques pour le rassemblement (UFDR), the Convention Patriotique pour le Salut Wa Kodro (CSPK) and Convention des patriotes pour la justice et la paix (CPJP), who were seeking to overthrow the CAR government.

[This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations.]

View the original article here

WEP voices concern over food crisis in Sahel

New York, Feb 21 : A year after the international community launched a massive humanitarian response to the food crisis affecting Africa's Sahel region, millions of people there are still affected by drought and require assistance, according to the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP).

"This year, some nine million people across the Sahel will still require food assistance from WFP, through emergency food assistance, rural development, nutrition and education activities," said Ertharin Cousin, WFP Executive Director.

Cousin was the host of a high-level event in Rome bringing together leaders of humanitarian agencies, government representatives from affected countries and major donors to review the effectiveness of the assistance provided to the region.

Last year the international community helped to avert a humanitarian catastrophe by providing $1.2 billion in assistance to around 10 million people across eight countries in the Sahel, noted a news release issued by WFP.

"However, millions of people in the region are still affected by drought, with close to 1.5 million children under the age of five at risk of severe acute malnutrition," said the agency.

Cousin emphasized that boosting food security and building resilience lies at the heart of the collective efforts to change the pattern of recurring drought and continue on the path towards a better future.

WFP says that crop prospects are currently encouraging, but there is a high risk of future shocks, due to increased rates of poverty and undernourishment, extreme weather, environmental degradation, low investment in agriculture, high prices and vulnerability to market volatility.

Also, the conflict in Mali has triggered widespread displacement in the region, uprooting half a million people and placing pressure on communities still recovering from drought.

The western part of the Sahel region, which stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea, and includes Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, and parts of Sudan, Cameroon and Nigeria, is facing a swathe of problems, which are not only political but also involve security, humanitarian resilience and human rights.

Last September, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed former Italian prime minister Romano Prodi as his Special Envoy for the Sahel and tasked him with shaping and mobilizing an effective UN and international response to the multiple crises facing the region.

"The focus of the United Nations strategy for the Sahel is on the people of the region, to help them address the root causes of instability, with special emphasis on marginalized communities," said Prodi. "My role is to bring the best minds and all the resources possible around key long-term development issues that critically affect the peoples of the region."

Wednesday's event also featured a short documentary film, "The Human Chain," which chronicles the humanitarian response to last year's Sahel crisis, illustrates various forms of assistance - including cash and vouchers, special nutrition programmes to prevent severe cases of malnutrition as well as support for smallholder farmers to improve their self-reliance in the face of difficult climatic and economic conditions.

--IBNS Post your comment

View the original article here

'A Place at the Table' makes a persuasive case for why millions are going without food

In a country with an overabundance of food, why are there an estimated 49 million Americans who do not know where their next meal is coming from? “A Place at the Table,” a documentary directed by Kristi Jacobson and Lori Silverbush, seeks answers by going directly to the people involved – Washington lawmakers, authors, economists, and, above all, the people who are hurting.

Skip to next paragraph Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of
The Christian Science Monitor
Weekly Digital Edition

We first meet Rosie, a grade-schooler in rural Colorado whose family of seven, because its income exceeds the annual limit of $28,000 per family of four, doesn’t qualify for food stamps. Her teacher is at first perplexed as to why she is so unresponsive in class until the obvious hits home: Although Rosie does not appear markedly malnourished, she is chronically hungry.

The film makes the point that in America we don’t think a child is severely hungry unless he or she looks like a skin-and-bones sub-Saharan sufferer. But all body types can qualify. In fact, as Raj Patel, the author of “Stuffed & Starved,” says, hunger and obesity, so often founded on cheap carbohydrates, are closely linked. “They are both signs of insufficient foods you need to be healthy.” (A staggering statistic: By one estimate, 1 in 3 children born in America in the year 2000 will develop Type 2 diabetes.)

Many of the hungry are too proud to talk about it. A Colorado policeman, whose job can’t fully support him, describes his experience procuring necessities at a food bank. Rosie’s mother, who waitresses, can’t afford vegetables for her family.

The filmmakers make a persuasive case that the lack of availability of fruits and vegetables in these “food desert” communities is a direct result of corporate greed. Why incur the cost of shipping these nutritious, perishable foodstuffs to outlying regions when you can maximize your profits selling to the big chains?
Nearly $20 billion in corporate farm subsidies are awarded by the US Department of Agriculture annually, of which 70 percent goes to the largest and most centralized farms – the ones with the most clout and the ones that, thanks to cheap subsidies, produce the corn, soybeans, and wheat that underlie so much of the junk food we eat. Much of this argument was elaborated in an earlier documentary, “Food, Inc.,” also a production of Participant Media.

In addition, “A Place at the Table” attempts to provide an overview of the history of hunger in America. The survey is simplistic and scattershot: We are told that farm subsidies came about in response to the Great Depression; that the 1968 CBS documentary “Hunger in America” put the crisis on the map; and that by the late 1970s, with the introduction of food stamps and the school lunch program, hunger in American had been “virtually eradicated.”

Then came the big bad ’80s and hunger returned with a vengeance. The culprits: tax cuts, the rise of corporate welfare for agribusiness, the decline in social programs, and the rampant belief that the hungry did this to themselves – and that the churches and the charities and the genius of the free market system could right these wrongs.

Obviously the situation is far more complex than this précis suggests. (Anybody who thinks hunger in America was “virtually eradicated by the late ’70s” wasn’t looking very hard.) And yet the central thesis holds. As actor Jeff Bridges, who is interviewed extensively in the film, says, “We don’t fund our Department of Defense through charity.” Bridges, who has been active since at least the early ’80s in the anti-hunger movement, is the national chairman of the Share Our Strength/No Kid Hungry campaign. He gives a good name to celebrity activism.

“If another country was doing this to our kids, we’d be at war,” he says. For those who do not respond to the moral arguments for ending hunger through greater governmental involvement, he also echoes the sentiments of so many other commentators in this film: A malnourished population is a security risk. “It’s about patriotism,” he says. One thing is clear from “A Place at the Table”: You cannot answer the question “Why are people hungry?,” without also asking “Why are people poor?” Grade: B+ (Rated PG for thematic elements and brief mild language.)

View the original article here

Insurgency threatens food crisis in Central African Republic - WFP

GENEVA (Reuters) - Insecurity in Central African Republic threatens a severe food crisis this year, the U.N. World Food Programme said on Friday, citing a doubling of prices for staples such as corn after a month-long insurgency.

Some 800,000 people live in the central third of CAR, an area still held by the Seleka rebel coalition.

Widespread looting had reduced household production as well as stocks of food, seed and animals, and insecurity was preventing farmers from going about their work, it said. Food in CAR comes mainly from subsistence farming and market gardening.

The mineral-rich former French colony signed a ceasefire deal with Seleka on January 11 after an insurgency that swept to within striking distance of the capital.

Humanitarian access to that area must be ensured to avoid a crisis, WFP said. Farmers in the northern part of that area were being deprived of their main income source because they cannot get their already-harvested cotton crop to market, it said.

Citing a food security assessment by the United Nations and non-governmental organisations, WFP said food looked set to become especially short in the May to September rainy season.

WFP had been distributing aid to 200,000 people in the area controlled by Seleka before the insurgency and says at least 80,000 people now faced a severe risk of food shortage.

Seleka, a coalition of five separate rebel groups, launched its insurgency in early December, accusing President Francois Bozize of reneging on a 2007 peace deal supposed to provide jobs and money to insurgents who laid down their weapons.

"The cost of a food basket has increased by 40 percent in the area under the control of the central African armed forces. Some of the zones under the control of the Seleka are experiencing food deficits due to price increases," WFP said.

Central African Republic, with a population of about 4.5 million, remains one of the least developed countries on the planet despite rich deposits of gold, diamonds and uranium.

The country is one of a number in the region where U.S. Special Forces are helping local soldiers hunt down the Lord's Resistance Army, an unrelated rebel group that has killed thousands of civilians across four nations.

(Reporting by Tom Miles; Editing by Louise Ireland)

View the original article here

How Food Companies Trick Consumers Into Eating Their Unhealthy Products

According to Michael Moss, the Pulitzer prizing-winning reporter and author of the new book Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us, executives at the major food behemoths – Kraft (KRFT), General Mills (GIS) and Nestle – have known for years that the sugar, salt and fat added to their cereals, soups, tomato sauces and hundreds of other food products have put millions of individuals’ health at risk. But the quest for bigger profits and a larger share of the consumer market has compelled the processed food industry to turn a blind eye to the dangers and consequences of eating those very products.

Moss’ book exposes the inner workings of the food industry and details how these food giants spend millions of dollars to make the food we eat more addictive. After reading his book, which took Moss four years to write and report, one may never want to consume another Cheez-It cracker or Lunchable again.

How do the food giants trick consumers? Moss gives several examples:

“At Cargill, scientists are altering the physical shape of salt, pulverizing it into a fine powder to hit the taste buds faster and harder, improving what the company calls its ‘flavor burst.’”“Scientists at Nestle are currently fiddling with the distribution and shape of fat globules to affect their absorption rate and, as it’s known in the industry, ‘their mouthfeel.’”“To make a new soda guaranteed to create a craving requires the high math of regression analysis and intricate charts to plot what industry insiders call the “bliss point,” or the precise amount of sugar or fat that will send consumers over the moon.”

Moss says the food companies profiled in his book understand that salt, sugar and fat “are their pillars, their holy grail.” These companies employ cadres of scientists “who specialize in the senses” and the industry “methodically studies and controls” the use of salt, sugar and fat.

Even though consumers may think food companies are trying to help their waistlines by offering “low fat” or “low sodium” items, that’s not actually the case. Companies will add extra sugar to “low fat” products and “low sodium” offerings tend to have both higher quantities of sugar and fat.

Processed foods are designed “to make people feel hungrier,” Moss writes. “The processed food industry has helped foster overconsumption. Salt, sugar and fat are the foundation of processed food.”

Rising obesity rates are a global problem. In the U.S. alone, two-thirds of adults are either obese or overweight. The Centers for Disease Control estimate that nearly half of American adults will be obese by 2030. One in six American children is obese today.

Related: Obesity to Cost Taxpayers 'Billions of Dollars': Weight Watchers CEO

Overeating and lack of exercise are the two culprits blamed for weight gain. But cheap food and the general convenience and availability of it have also contributed to the obesity crisis.

Moss provides startling evidence of just how much food people are consuming these days:

The average American eats 33 pounds of cheese every year, triple what we ate in 1970.Americans ingest 8,500 milligrams of salt a day, double the recommended amount.We consume 71 pounds of caloric sweeteners each year, equivalent to 22 teaspoons of sugar per person, per day.

The addiction to salt and sugar does not end with consumers. The food giants' “relentless drive” to reach maximum profits at the lowest possible cost has given these companies no incentive to use real, wholesome ingredients. Sugar, for example, not only sweetens but “replaces more costly ingredients, like tomatoes in ketchup to add bulk and texture,” according to Moss.

“It costs more money to use real herbs and spices,” Moss says. "Economics drive companies to spend as little money as possible in making processed foods. That’s the dilemma.”

Related: Why We’re Fat: It’s the Government and Wall Street’s Fault: Marion Nestle Says

But food executives need to seriously start examining the consequences of their actions, Moss warns.

“They’re coming under increasing pressure from consumers,” he argues. “We care more and more about what we’re putting into our mouths and bodies. The food industry is...where tobacco was in the 1990s – at the verge of losing the public trust. That’s a very dangerous spot for the food industry to be in.”

More from The Daily Ticker

Coke's Obesity Ad: A "Brilliant Defensive" Move, NYT's Bittman Says

Coke and Pepsi Join War on Obesity: "Calories Count"

Why New York's Soda Ban Won't Help Obesity

Disney To Ban Junk-Food Ads For Kids As America Struggles With Its Fat Problem

View the original article here

Fact vs. Fiction in Food Crisis Management - AgWired

Sue Borra and Eric Mittenthal Crisis management. We hear a lot about it and any company wants to be ready to handle one if it should happen. How do you deal with fact vs. fiction, especially in the food industry? At today’s Annual Meat Conference we heard from Sue Borra, Senior Vice President of Communications, Food Marketing Institute and Eric Mittenthal, Vice President, Public Affairs, American Meat Institute, on this topic.

When it comes to food retail Sue says food safety is the number one concern. They place extremely high value on what their customers think. So if a crisis breaks out they want to be able to communicate rapidly, effectively and with as much information as possible. Both Sue and Eric emphasized the importance of planning ahead and being ready to be proactive. Their organizations are constantly looking ahead and prepare information that is readily available to their members.

I brought up social media since we’ve seen both fact and fiction explode overnight on some issues, including in the food world. Sue says that most retailers are now active in social media and they monitor what is being said about their companies. It’s about trust and transparency! Very important words.

Listen in to my conversation with Sue and Eric to learn more about their thoughts on this subject here: Interview with Sue Borra & Eric Mittenthal

View the original article here

Food crisis needed for Europe to accept GM: US government adviser - FoodManufacture.co.uk

GM food ‘will be accepted only after food crisis’ Breaking News on the Food and Drink Manufacturing Sector Headlines Business News World News People Regulation NPD Ingredients Manufacturing Food Safety Packaging Supply Chain Sectors Healthy foods Ambient foods Bakery Beverages Chilled foods Confectionery Dairy Fresh produce Frozen Meat & poultry Seafood All articles Videos Audios Galleries Features Opinions March 2013 February 2013 Previous months Products All Products Ingredients & Additives Equipment / Services Supplier Webinars Videos & Audio Technical Papers Product Brochures Suppliers Jobs Food Jobs - UK Food Jobs - Europe Food Jobs - USA Events All events FoodManufacture events Waste Not Want Not: Agri-Food Waste Solutions for a Hungry World 11th Annual World Food Technology and Innovation Forum Global Food Safety conference SOFHT Training Academy ‘Internal Auditing’ The Future of Food Conference 2013 The International Food & Drink Event The International Materials Handling Exhibition (IMHX) Pest Elimination the Sustainable Way Food Vision IFST spring conference: Securing the future supply of food:challenges and opportunities The Total Processing & Packaging Exhibition Soup & Information, Hand Hygiene & Technology Conference & Exhibition International Dairy Show 2013 Partner events Other industry events Archive Related sites FoodManJobs FoodNavigator.com FoodNavigatorJobs FoodProductionDaily.com NutraIngredients.com Bakeryinfo.co.uk Meatinfo.co.uk FoodQualityNews.com DairyReporter.com BeverageDaily.com ConfectioneryNews.com BakeryAndSnacks.com eLearning Food Safety Level 1 Food Safety Level 2 Food Safety Level 3 Health and Safety Course Industry Awards Food Manufacturing Excellence Awards Headlines Business News World News People Regulation NPD Ingredients Manufacturing Food Safety Packaging Supply Chain Headlines > World News Text size Print Email

Food crisis needed for Europe to accept GM: US government adviser Post a commentBy Mike Stones , 01-Mar-2013

It will take a food security crisis to make European consumers recognise the need for genetically modified (GM) food, warns a senior US government adviser.

A hungry planet cannot afford to turn its back on GM producton, said Jack Bobo, US government biotechnology adviser

Jack Bobo, senior biotechnology adviser to the US State Department, told a Chartered Institute of Marketing seminar in London yesterday (February 28): “It will take a crisis to make everyone [in Europe] see the point of GM."

“There will be a move from not liking GM [food technology] to requiring it. That was the worst possible outcome but, unfortunately, it was also the most likely outcome.”

In his lecture – Can agriculture save the world before it destroys it? – Bobo argued that GM food technology was vital to safeguard food security, economic security and national security.

GM techniques could deliver improved yields and nutrition while reducing the use of pesticides, greenhouse gas emissions, water use and soil erosion, he said.

‘Peak child’

As the global population was predicted to reach more than 9bn by 2050, the benefits of GM could no longer be ignored in an increasingly hungry world. “Since the world had now reached ‘peak child’ [the highest number of children there will ever be], the decisions made between now and 2050 would be the most important [food] decisions that will ever be taken. Either we cut down more forest, or do it [agriculture] in a more sustainable way than at present.”

Feeding up to 9bn people will require the world to produce as much food as in the previous 10,000 years, he said. To do that will require the best of different technologies, including organic techniques such as minimum cultivations to save water, plus conventional farming and GM, he said.

But such an eclectic approach to food production would require more effective dialogue between people with opposing views, he added.“We need to move from protest to conversation.”

No single technology supplied all the answers to meeting the challenge of increased food production. For example, biotechnology “isn’t going to solve climate change or food security by itself”.

‘No exportable surplus food’

But adopting solely organic farming would severely limit yield, he said. “If the US were all organic, we would have no exportable surplus food. We would have enough food for the US, but there would be repercussions.”

For example, Europe depended on food imports – particularly from Brazil. While Europe had the right to decide its own food policy – such as to reject GM production – it should be aware of “the consequences of those choices” both at home and for trade partners, he said.

“The extra land mass [outside the continent] needed to feed Europe is about the size of Germany. This is the consequence of technology choices.”

Bobo also highlighted the need to understand that agricultural exports involved not just food but the water used to produce it. “When we ship steak to Europe, we also ship the embedded water used to make it,” he said. “70% of all the world’s fresh water goes to agriculture.”

Meanwhile, Nestlé boss Paul Bulcke, speaking earlier this week at the City Food Lecture, urged industry, government and other stakeholders to act decisively to mitigate the massive food shortages. “It is anticipated that there will be up to 30% shortfalls in global cereal production by 2030 due to water scarcity,” said Bulcke. “This is a loss equivalent to the entire grain crops of India and the United States combined.”

Don’t miss Bobo’s US perspective on horsemeat, GM and British supermarkets next week on FoodManufacture.co.uk.

Jack Bobo in quotes

Demographics: “The number of children in the world today will never be greater than it is now. We have reached 'peak child'.”Organic: “In general, organic agriculture produces about one-third less than conventional agriculture. But it can produce more of some products [such as fruit]”Trade: “European [food] choices affect agriculture in Brazil, because it’s the biggest exporter to Europe. Europe has the right to make its own food choices but it must be aware of the consequences of those choices.”Science: “Science and technology are considered to be bad but they have helped us reach where we are today.”US food production: “The goal is not for the US to feed the world but for the world to feed itself. Not for us to give food to Africa forever but to help farmers before food crises happen.” This content is copyright protected However, if you would like to share the information in this article, you may use the headline, summary and link below:

Food crisis needed for Europe to accept GM: US government adviser

It will take a food security crisis to make European consumers recognise the need for genetically modified (GM) food, warns a senior US government adviser.

http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/World-News/Food-crisis-needed-for-Europe-to-accept-GM-US-government-adviser

Keywords: US agriculture, Food trade, GM, Food exports

UN assessment warns of potential food crisis in Central African Republic - UN News Centre

Food drop over Sikikédé, Central African Republic, in response to the food and nutrition crisis in the western Vakaga region in September 2012. Photo: OCHA/L. Paletta

15 February 2013 – An assessment conducted by the United Nations and its partners has found that the recent conflict in the Central African Republic (CAR) could trigger a food crisis in the country, the world body said today.

“We are very concerned about prospects for the 2013 growing season, which is due to start in just a few weeks,” said the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Representative in Bangui, Rockaya Fall. “Land preparation, which should have begun, is behind schedule in many places, due to insecurity.”

The CAR has a history of political instability and recurring armed conflict. The country saw renewed fighting in December, when an alliance of rebel groups – known, collectively, as ‘Séléka’ – launched a series of attacks and took control of major towns before agreeing to start peace talks under the auspices of the regional group known as the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS).

According to the assessment, trade has been interrupted between the area held by the Séléka coalition and the rest of the country, bringing transactions to a halt and leading to sharp increases in food prices.

The cost of a food basket has increased by 40 per cent in the area under the control of the Central African armed forces, while zones under the control of the Séléka, where some 800,000 live, are experiencing food deficits. Looting has become widespread, and is affecting food and seed stocks as well as animals and livestock. The resulting insecurity is also limiting farmers from working their fields.

The World Food Programme (WFP) warned that food deficits will be highest during the lean season from May to September. Added to that, as food prices increase, the population’s resources will further dwindle. Whereas a Central African labourer could purchase as much as six kilogrammes of cassava with a day’s wages a year ago, he or she can only purchase three kilogrammes this year, due to lower wage rates and higher prices.

“Although the situation in the field has yet to reach crisis proportions, there is risk that it might during the approaching lean season,” said WFP Representative in the CAR, Housainou Taal. “Humanitarian access to the Séléka zone must be ensured to avoid a crisis.”

View the original article here

Getting food aid right - IRINnews.org

Collaboration between agencies in the Horn of Africa crisis in 2011-2012 helped (photo taken in 2008)JOHANNESBURG, 1 March 2013 (IRIN) - Despite early warning information about the Horn of Africa’s impending drought crisis in 2011, humanitarian responses were slow to mobilize, leading to tens of thousands of deaths in the region and famine in parts of Somalia.

Now, a research team led by food aid expert Daniel Maxwell, a professor at Tufts University’s Feinstein International Centre (FIC), has released a paper, Response Analysis and Response Choice in Food Security Crises: A Roadmap, describing the factors that underlie how aid agencies respond to food crises. The paper, released this week, highlights the need for reliable analysis to inform aid agencies’ and policymakers’ decisions, not only in responding to these crises but also in preventing their recurrence.

However, the authors - Maxwell, Heather Stobaugh and John Parker from FIC, and Megan McGlinchy of Catholic Relief Services - point out, “There remains little in the way of an evidence base about what works best under what circumstances.”

Analysis for prevention

Response analysis should not simply ensure that aid is delivered in time to those who need it; it should also play a role in addressing chronic food insecurity, helping to end the vicious cycle of aid dependency.

“Response analysis is appropriate and necessary whether you are talking about an acute emergency or longer-term resilience programming - the range of options may be different, but the analysis processes are similar,” Maxwell told IRIN via email.

"the authors find there often remains a 'disconnect' between the information provided and kind needed to inform humanitarian responses" Laura Taylor, policy head at the NGO Tearfund, said, "Smarter analysis before emergencies, such as cyclical droughts and food crises that we can often predict from warning signs - up to nine months in advance - will ground plans with a good understanding of the risks and underlying causes of vulnerability. This has been proven in the case of chronic hunger situations in regions such as the Sahel.”

Graham Farmer, global coordinator of the new Food Security Cluster - the UN’s mechanism to coordinate the food responses of humanitarian agencies - agrees.

He told IRIN via email, “Response analysis is a key element of preparedness and contingency planning… Such preparedness will allow us to respond faster, more effectively and in a more targeted manner.”

The study’s authors suggest various kinds of information should be collected before a crisis, such as market analysis. This information would include: the number and types of food traders in an area; historical commodity prices; production trends; consumer demand; access to markets; food quality; government policies; and weaknesses or bottlenecks in the food supply chains. The agencies should also be aware of traditional coping mechanisms and details of how households function.

All this information would help agencies analyse which communities to target and what kind of interventions would best ensure people are resilient to shocks.

Disconnect

Although a lot of effort has recently gone into improving assessments, the authors find there often remains a “disconnect” between the information provided and kind needed to inform humanitarian responses.

For instance, assessments often provide a snapshot of the current needs in a food security crisis, but humanitarian requirements change with seasons. Ideally, an assessment should include some projection of the conditions expected in the immediate future so programmes can be designed to address them.

The study also found that analyses often fail to take into account recipients’ preferences. When they do, recipients’ preferences are typically noted to justify an agency’s mode of response, rather than driving decision-making.

Additionally, the authors note, aid agencies do not base their responses solely on evidence and analysis. Other factors come into play, including agencies’ capacities, the personal experiences of staff, and funding and policy constraints.

“As a result, they often have to rely on assumptions - rather than analysis - when choosing emergency food-security interventions. This makes the need for more evidence-based decision-making processes more urgent than ever,” the authors say.

Aid recipients' preferences still not taken on boardIn most instances, agencies’ capacities determine their responses - for example, an agency’s nutritional assessment will lead to nutrition programmes - which can result in narrowly focused responses to complex emergencies.

Coordination is key

The report stresses that, while conducting response analysis, agencies must be mindful of how their work will affect the broader humanitarian context, taking into account what other agencies, governments, and local communities are doing to address food insecurity.

For example, an agency might roll-out a cash-transfer programme based on an assessment that concludes one such programme would not affect local markets. But if a number of agencies roll-out similar programmes, the cumulative effects could prove disruptive.

The authors say some collaborative work resulted from the response to the Horn of Africa crisis in 2011-2012, “but in practice, such approaches remain the exception rather than the rule”.

A coordination mechanism is necessary to ensuring all parties are aware of what is being done - the new Food Security Cluster aims to fill this role.

“Much of what we advocate is that this kind of analysis should be done at the cluster level, so that the response follows an overall strategy,” Maxwell told IRIN.

Collaborations across institutions help draw on the strengths of different organizations, Farmer says. “The cluster approach… should provide a safe environment - devoid of interference from external factors such agency agendas - for the development of evidence-based analysis and programming,” he said.

“That then increases efficiency and, through the efforts of national cluster partners, increases delivery and accountability to affected populations.”

Integrating programmes

Ideally, food and nutrition interventions and programmes that target livelihoods should be integrated, reckoned Maxwell.

Farmer says the aid community is moving in that direction. “At the global level, we have created a working group between the Food Security and Nutrition Clusters, looking at how to avoid duplication and increase synergy. At the country level, there are clear examples of benefits from clusters working together.”

Farmer says there is also dialogue taking place at the Inter-Agency Standing Committee “about reshaping our perspective on… cross-cutting issues such as gender, age, environment and so on. One potential push coming from the work is a focus on better targeting based on strong assessment.”

Tearfund’s Taylor says a key element would be for “donors to be more flexible with funding for budgets. Programmes shouldn’t be set in stone. This ensures that if a crisis develops over time, NGOs can adapt their responses based on the latest analysis from the affected region and avoid being locked into pre-determined budgets.”

View the original article here

Horsemeat scandal: Scottish Government sets up expert group to learn from food ... - Scottish Daily Record

28 Feb 2013 16:58 THE group will examine what lessons can be taken away from the horsemeat revelations.

Michael Matheson

AN expert group has been set up by the Scottish Government to consider what can be learned from the recent horse meat scandal.

The group was established as a consultation is launched on the responsibilities and functions of a new independent food safety body, Public Health Minister Michael Matheson said.

He made the announcement as he updated Holyrood on progress made into uncovering the extent of the horse meat scandal in Scotland.

Local authorities were asked to withhold use of all frozen beef products pending further investigation after a frozen burger supplied to Cumbernauld High School in North Lanarkshire was found to contain horse DNA last week.

Mr Matheson told MSPs that by the end of the day all but one inspection of premises manufacturing meat products would be completed, with no evidence to date of horse meat food fraud discovered.

A group led by former chief vet Professor Jim Scudamore will consider any lessons learned from the scandal before the establishment of the food safety body, Mr Matheson said.

The group will include representatives from consumer protection, the meat industry, food retail and enforcement. It has been asked to recommend improvements in the food safety regime that can be made quickly, and will report before summer recess.

"We have the opportunity to learn from the present situation. The expert group I have announced today will identify any lessons we have learned from this horse meat scandal so that we can improve the food safety and standards regime in the future," Mr Matheson said.

A 12-week consultation on the new safety body has been launched.

The body, announced in June last year, will cover food safety and standards, nutrition, labelling and meat inspection following the UK Government's decision to reduce the scope of the UK-wide Food Standards Agency.

Mr Matheson said: "The scandal has made clear that a single independent public body should have clear responsibility for all aspects of food safety and standards. Our vision for Scotland's new food body is that its primary focus will be consumer protection. It will make sure food in Scotland is safe to eat and it will improve the diet and nutrition of the people of Scotland.

"The Government has considered carefully the implications of the horse meat scandal as part of the development of this consultation. Creating a new body and passing legislation takes time. People in Scotland rightly want to see improvements now."

Mr Matheson said a second expert group, to be led by Scotland Food and Drink chairman Ray Jones, has also been set up by Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead.

This will explore traceability, provenance and assurance associated with primary red meat production, and will also provide recommendations to Parliament before the summer recess.

Labour's Richard Simpson welcomed the establishment of a new body separate from Government and from the food industry.

But he questioned why it took so long to bring forward a consultation on the body, given that its establishment was recommended in a report published in April last year, and that Mr Matheson stated in June that it would be taken forward.

The minister's statement last year "only now led to the consultation for another 12 weeks, and two expert groups", Mr Simpson said.

"One is left with the firm impression that action is only now occurring with a great deal more speed because of the fact we have a crisis. Can the minister guarantee that the public can have confidence in the intervening period (before the new body is established)?"

Mr Matheson said: "I think the public can have great confidence in the way the Food Standards Agency in Scotland have performed over the last couple of weeks in relation to the horse meat scandal, and they can continue to have confidence as we move towards creating the new body. That is why we should take our time to do that in a managed way."

Conservative MSP Nanette Milne welcomed the expert group to learn from the scandal.

In order "to avoid this episode happening again, and in terms of food safety, we have to share the outcomes of group's findings with all the nations affected by the scandal", she said.

Green MSP Alison Johnstone said: "Three years after changes to the UK-wide FSA, we're finally seeing the Scottish Government getting to grips with the need to create a joined-up food agency with a wide remit and real powers.

"Today I suggested to ministers that the experts they seek advice from include organisations like Nourish, Fife Diet and the Federation of Small Businesses.

"There is a danger we continue to allow our food supplies to be controlled by supermarkets and big business whose traditional focus has been profit rather than nutrition or provenance."

View the original article here

A serious food crisis is brewing in Haiti – here's how to stop it - The Guardian

A Haitian farmer works on a field in an area outside Port-au-Prince, January 2013. Photograph: Swoan Parker/Reuters

As well as exporting cash crops such as coffee, cocoa, mangos, breadfruit and potatoes, Haitians rely on 40% of the food produced in the country for local consumption. With this in mind, it's easy to see why last year's dramatic weather patterns and global economic meltdown produced aftershocks as significant and devastating as those of the 2010 earthquake.

In 2012, there were five events – separate, but intrinsically linked – that Haiti did not handle well, in my opinion. First, severe drought meant farmers failed to maintain a good harvest for the spring season from April to August, resulting in overall losses reaching staggering levels – 42-60% of Haiti's overall food production. Second, spiralling global food prices made it increasingly difficult for those still recovering from the myriad effects of the earthquake to buy basic foodstuffs.

Third, hurricane Isaac hit Haiti in August, swiftly followed by hurricane Sandy in October and extreme flooding in the north of the country in November. These natural disasters not only wiped out swaths of crops and many farms but generated a loss of more than $250m (£159m), excluding the huge damage inflicted on infrastructure and livestock.

In short, the overall combination of events in Haiti has created the perfect storm for a genuine food crisis. For example, in 2011, 8% of Haitians (about 800,000 people) were living with chronic malnutrition; now, that number has leapt to 1.52 million. This sharp increase is very worrying.

Since October, there have been demonstrations against high living costs and some families have been forced to eat less. Instead of two meals a day, they now have one. Some cut trees for charcoal to sell to local businesses such as bakeries, while others migrate to cities and towns, as well as to the Dominican Republic or other islands. Sadly, I have heard stories of desperate families sending their children to work as domestic helpers – a job in which living conditions are notoriously bad.

In certain areas, there have been some direct responses from NGOs and the government to help people access food and short-term jobs. The government directive to reduce the price of some basic foodstuffs such as rice is welcomed, even if, legally, they are supposed to supply their systems with local products.

However, one of the biggest challenges for this year is to make sure that we help Haiti's farmers to sell their produce. The government and private businesses are taking far too much time to take the right decisions. A case in point: the Haitian government was meant to inject 5bn gourdes, the equivalent of more than $10m, into the agricultural sector following the storms at the end of last year but I have never seen any real plans – or any big rush – to make this happen.

On the other hand, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation and the Haitian government set up a joint appeal to donors for more than $70m; by the end of December, they had received less than 5%.

Another issue is that we don't have a seed bank in Haiti. Having one would change lives – it would mean there would always be a place for farmers to sell seeds while making them available for those who need them. Instead of importing all kind of goods, surely it would be better to invest in Haiti itself, at grassroots level. We could have strategic seed banks all around the country, with silos in communities and at family level, and we could advise investors to buy local produce in advance, to give farmers incentives. These investors could advertise local produce and sell it at a good price. It's a win-win.

Finally, the Haitian government needs to realise that, although we have enough water for both agriculture and drinking, we desperately need to know how to manage this precious resource properly. We could have dams for irrigation and electricity, for example. These are all ideas for the future. Right now, though, if farmers don't receive appropriate support over the next few months in terms of seeds, livestock, fishing – and if agricultural infrastructure, such as irrigation canals and roads, aren't repaired – Haiti will miss the spring cultivation season.

This can only make a bad situation worse. With global food prices set to remain high, Haiti desperately needs to address what is fast becoming a crisis. If this is not done, it could destabilise the already tense political situation and throw us all into yet another emergency, with programmes that simply cannot provide long-term solutions.

Yes, we need to build Haiti back better – but to do this we need some medium- and long-term solutions, and a little more lateral thinking about how we can utilise the wonderful resources we already have.

View the original article here

Food Crisis To Continue - Financial Advisor Magazine (blog)

If you are invested in commodities or have positions in Big Ag then listen up -- or listen to, as I do, the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University. (I used an abundance of their material in my book, The Big Handout, about the corrupt subsidy system that ensnares politicians, lobbyists, farmers and ultimately our food bills.)

The institude engages in fine work that showcases the link -- dare I say impact -- between investments, policies and food (among other things). Its work can be found here: Food Crisis Blog. And I have exacted a summary of the latest research, findings and opinions by GDAE scholars Timothy Wise and Sophia Murphy below.

This research is a must read if you believe, as famed investor and hedge fund manager Jim Rogers does, that farmers are the future. Here is a point in kind: "Last year, international food markets suffered their third price spike in five years. The trigger was a terrible drought in the United States -- a major agricultural producer and exporter. An unstable climate met low levels of international grain reserves, while U.S. ethanol gobbled up maize supplies. The resulting high and volatile prices struck yet another blow at the world’s already fragile food systems," according to Wise and Murphy.

They note that this is exactly the scenario they warned of last year when they published “Resolving the Food Crisis,” a comprehensive assessment of the international community’s response to the global food price crisis. "High and volatile food prices in international markets will continue until structural reforms to trade, finance and agriculture are put in place to address the real drivers of the food crisis," they wrote.

Wise and Murphy now say it’s time for "meaningful limits on financial speculation, reformed mandates for biofuels made from food crops, a system of internationally coordinated public food reserves, and strong regulation on land investments." They believe donors should continue to invest in developing-country agriculture, respecting their commitment to recipient country leadership. "If the private sector engages, it, too, must respect the rights of the people it engages with," say Wise and Murphy.

I couldn't agree more. If we can't connect the dots of something as close to us as our stomachs, then what can we? And when can we demand change? Not anytime soon if the GDAE is to be believed.

Here is Wise and Murphy's review of progress on these issues in 2012:

Funding for agricultural development: Instead of renewing their 2009 L’Aquila commitment to invest significant aid money in agriculture, the G-8 group of powerful nations rolled out the “New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition.” Most of the funding comes from private-sector partners like Monsanto and Yara, a global fertilizer company. The aid comes with strings: To qualify, governments must, “refine policies in order to improve investment opportunities.”

Reforming biofuels policies: Developed countries improved their biofuel policies some, but the industry boom continued, still supported by government-mandated minimum use policies. The United States ended its tax credit and tariff on imported ethanol, but refused to waive the minimum-use mandate for biofuels during the drought. The government even proposed raising the allowable percentage of ethanol in petrol from 10 percent to 15 percent. The European Union proposed to halve from 10 percent to 5 percent the amount of transportation fuel that can be sourced from food/feed crops, a valuable reform, but failed to impose a firm cap.

Regulating financial speculation on agricultural commodities: The United States and the European Union both introduced regulations to bring over-the-counter (OTC) trading on commodity futures markets onto regulated exchanges and to impose stricter “position limits” on the scale and scope of any one trader’s holdings. But the financial industry spent the year lobbying hard, and it successfully delayed and weakened approved reforms, in part through legal challenges. The E.U. is unlikely to implement the Market in Financial Instruments Directive before 2015. Much more encouragingly, a Financial Transaction Tax will be implemented in 11 European countries, a bold and important step to raise needed revenues while reducing incentives for financial speculation.

Building public food reserves: World stocks-to-use levels remain dangerously low for major grains. Several G-20 countries remain hostile to public stockholding and have resisted international discussion of how to coordinate grain reserves. Meanwhile, many developing countries are rebuilding domestic food stocks. In West Africa, the initiative to create a regional emergency food reserve continues to take shape.

Stopping land grabs: Large-scale land acquisitions in developing countries continue at an alarming pace. The World Bank rejected Oxfam’s call for the bank to support a moratorium on land deals. Yet global efforts to slow and regulate them made important progress in 2012. The U.N. Committee on World Food Security (CFS) adopted the Voluntary Guidelines on Land Tenure in May, while Tanzania has announced it will limit how much land foreign investors can acquire.

Addressing climate change: Drought and storms wreaked unusual havoc in 2012, reminding all of the reality of climate change. But global climate talks in Doha achieved little. The attempt to include agriculture in the formal negotiations stalled, and developing countries’ urgent plea for policies and funding to focus on adaptation went unheeded. More hopeful, climate negotiators approved a mechanism to address "loss and damage" from slow onset impacts of climate change.

Wise and Murphy note that none of these issues is insoluble, but change will require political commitment and international agreement.
And we all know how easy those two things are to procure.

View the original article here

Bosses caused the food crisis, not poor people - Socialistworker.co.uk

More countries have become embroiled in the scandal of adulteration of food. The discovery of horsemeat in products labelled as beef began in Ireland last month and swiftly spread.

Horsemeat in “beef” ready meals has now been confirmed in products found in Britain, France, Austria, Finland, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden.

Councils in Britain claim they are stepping up testing for horsemeat in beef products served at schools and hospitals.

But councils in Bolton, Solihull, Wigan, Brent, Lambeth and Kensington & Chelsea are among those that took no samples of meat for testing last year.

Some seven million people live in areas where meat is not being tested for anything at all.

That means chicken isn?t being tested for salmonella and lamb that is meant to be halal isn?t being tested for beef.

Some supermarket bosses have moved to reassure us and keep us buying.

Philip Clarke, Tesco?s chief executive, promised to “open up” its supply chain.

Meanwhile, ironically, Malcolm Walker, chief executive of Iceland, moaned about the risks of processed food. More hypocrisy came from the government.

The Tories are set to drop plans to opt out of European Union regulations requiring producers and retailers to state what is in their?mincemeat.

They had previously claimed that the regulations inhibited business.

Underlying this is the fact that bosses make far more money from processed food than from non-processed food.

The more things they can add and the more fancy ways they can package it, the higher the prices they can charge.

There is an indigestible snobbery running though the food debate. At every opportunity, the desire is to blame us for what we eat.

The proposal that caught the most headlines is a 20 percent tax on all sugary soft drinks.

The presumption is that, left to their own devices, people will eat and drink the wrong things.

But schools and hospitals have fed people rotten food because of privatisation and profiteering.

And poor people buy cheap food because low wages and benefits don?t give them the choice of buying more expensive food.

None of this is the fault of ordinary people. It?s the fault of the bosses?and governments that back them.

The government is slashing the bodies that could keep food safe and deregulating further to help keep the cut of profits thick.

We need more regulation of food and more inspections?immediately.

But we also need to fight for a food industry run for need not profit to stop the stampede of food scandals.

View the original article here

Pages