1. Development Assistance—We will propose in our 1982
budget submission a strategy to focus increased attention and resources, not
only on meeting world hunger as the first priority, but also on targeting
agricultural development assistance where it can be used with maximum
effectiveness and efficiency, as the Hunger Commission proposes.
This strategy will be consistent with the Hunger Commission’s finding that to
relieve world hunger and malnutrition we must attack world poverty and build
effective demand for food as well as increasing food production and supply.
A key element of this strategy will be assisting developing countries to
increase food production. It will also include complementary efforts in
energy and health/family planning which will permit us to address the
broader poverty issue.
2. Public Education—As the Commission recommends,
increased public attention must be focused on the importance of the United
States’ cooperation with developing nations generally and on hunger
particularly. We are involved in a number of efforts on this front. We hope
you will assign that matter a high priority. Your personal leadership will
be essential.
Attachment
Paper Prepared in the International Development
Cooperation Agency5
Washington, April 15, 1980
INTER-AGENCY REVIEW OF THE HUNGER COMMISSION REPORT
REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT
The central recommendation of the Commission is that “the United States
make the elimination of hunger the primary focus of its relationships
with the developing countries, beginning with the decade of the 1980s.”
The Commission concludes that the problem of world hunger is not limited
to intermittent or particular geographic crises. It is, instead, a
problem of chronic under-nutrition. The Report finds that the solution
lies in attacking world poverty and in raising the incomes of poor
people throughout the Third World. Thus the Commission finds a hunger
strategy must address, not only food production and security, but also
increased purchasing power for food through employment and higher income
for the world’s poor and more equitable income distribution policies in
the Third World. In the Commission’s words, “a nation’s nutritional
needs cannot be effectively addressed in isolation from broader social
and economic programs that increase overall productivity and the incomes
of the poor.”
The interagency review found strong support for the Commission’s view
that world hunger is an integral part of the broader problem of Third
World development and for focusing on the eradication of hunger through
an attack on world poverty as the first priority concern in terms of
United States development cooperation. You have endorsed those positions
on numerous occasions. Under your Administration, the elimination of
hunger is a primary focus of the United States’ relations with many
(though certainly not all) developing coun
[Page 921]
tries, and our partnership efforts with those
countries to combat hunger should expand during your second term.
Public Education—The Commissioners also conclude
that a strong and concerted program to address world hunger requires
broadly based public support in the United States and that a major
public education effort is needed to gain that support. They recommend,
in addition, that federal laws should be changed in order to permit the
use of federal funds in world hunger-related public education.
We have already taken a number of steps, in association with Anne Wexler and in coordination with
other agencies, to increase our efforts to educate the public in
general, and key private organizations in particular, of the importance
of our economic relations with developing nations. These steps include
establishment of the high level private sector working group on foreign
assistance that you have directed be formed, an increased emphasis on
foreign assistance in public statements by key officials in your
Administration, and specific steps to attract the interest of potential
new constituencies, such as labor, business, and the financial
community. We hope you will assign the effort to gain public support a
high priority. Your personal leadership will be essential.
General Analysis—The Commission’s charter was to:
define the causes and scope of the hunger and malnutrition problems
domestically and internationally; evaluate United States programs and
policies affecting domestic hunger and malnutrition; focus public
attention on the problems; recommend actions to reduce hunger and
malnutrition; publicize and assist in implementation of its
recommendations.6 The Commission did not achieve full
consensus in its report. Seven Commissioners filed additional
statements; four of these expressed disappointment with the Commission’s
evaluation of existing U.S. policies and in the progress made by the
Report toward a specific plan for a national food policy.
Our review found the major strength of the report to be the analysis of
the causes of hunger and malnutrition and the focus on the urgency of
addressing the problem. The recent Global 2000
Report7 issued by the
Council on Environmental Quality and the Department of State provides
evidence of the urgency of taking action now if we hope to reduce the
prevalence of malnutrition by the year 2000.
The Commission undertook a difficult task. Having concluded that the
elimination of hunger and malnutrition lies in the eradication of world
poverty, the Commission made recommendations across a
[Page 922]
broad array of issues—ranging from how to
distribute foreign assistance to changes recommended in trade and
investment policies. We believe some areas, which the Commission did not
emphasize, should be stressed in such an effort. For example, the
Commission mentions, but we would stress, the need for health and family
planning programs to accompany food production lest population outstrip
gains made by increasing food supply. We also believe attention to
energy use and supply is vital—both to reducing world poverty generally
and to food production. Some agencies believe the Commission should have
stressed more the importance of developing countries’ own domestic
policies on food production and income distribution and the limits to
U.S. ability to affect such policies.
The Development Coordination Committee’s review of the Brandt Commission
Report,8 on which you will be
receiving a memorandum shortly, reviews the work of your Administration
on a range of efforts to address world poverty. IDCA, in consultation with other
agencies, is preparing a broad strategy for U.S. economic relations with
Third World Countries—one designed to effectively reassert U.S.
leadership in responding to the development needs of Third World
countries.
The following is brief summary of: key Hunger Commission recommendations;
interagency reactions to those recommendations; and information on
Administration action thus far.
Development Assistance—One set of recommendations
urges increasing development assistance and targeting it to those poor
nations strongly committed to meeting basic human needs and human
rights. These are, we know, your own goals, though budget constraints
have limited your ability to urge the substantial increases in
development assistance that you might otherwise have endorsed. We will
propose in our 1982 budget submission a strategy to focus increased
attention and resources, not only on meeting world hunger as the first
priority, but also on targeting agricultural development assistance
where it can be used with maximum effectiveness and efficiency, as the
Hunger Commission proposed. This strategy will be consistent with the
Hunger Commission’s finding that to relieve world hunger and
malnutrition we must attack world poverty and build effective demand for
food as well as increasing food production and supply. A key element of
this strategy will be assisting developing countries to increase food
production. It will also include complementary efforts in energy and
health/family planning which will permit us to address the broader
poverty issue.
Currently, we are taking a number of actions in the development
assistance program that accord with Commission recommendations.
[Page 923]
Some of these were mentioned
in the Venice communiqué.9
IDCA and AID are now working on an agricultural development plan for
your next term aimed at achieving important increases in food production
in key countries, and significantly reducing chronic malnutrition in a
wider group of nations. AID has just
completed an analysis of its agriculture staffing and is now considering
ways to reverse the five year decline in these skills.
We hope to increase support for international scientific and
technological research on food and nutrition, using the particular
comparative advantage the United States has in this area. We have been
supporting efforts for land tenure reform in some countries through
AID and through our participation
in the multilateral development banks.
As the Commission recommends, IDCA has
given explicit attention to the importance of development and
dissemination of capital saving technology. AID has launched a new program initiative focusing on
small-scale enterprises. IDCA is
urging the multilateral development banks and the UN agencies to give higher priority to
increasing productive employment opportunities—with capital saving
technology at low cost per job—in their development assistance
projects.
The Commission recommends—and you have supported—extending the statutory
authority that permits the least developed countries to place amounts
owed to the United States into local currency accounts for development
purposes to all non-oil developing nations. The U.S. Congress has thus
far not appropriated funding for this purpose, even for the poorest
countries.
With regard to the multilateral development banks (MDBs), the Report
urges U.S. support for: Bank activities that address basic needs;
restraint from restrictive amendments on types of loans and recipient
countries in Bank authorizing and appropriation legislation; and
increased contributions to the MDB
concessional windows. These recommendations are consistent with the
policies of your Administration. In congressional consideration of
MDB legislation, we have not always
been successful in avoiding restrictive amendments or in gaining support
for the full funding needed to meet negotiated replenishments. In your
next term, we will be negotiating the seventh replenishment of IDA, the
World Bank concessional window, as well as presenting to the Congress a
proposal for a general capital increase for the World Bank, and we will
be negotiating replenishments for the regional banks.
Trade—The Report emphasizes the importance of
trade to the world economy, and developing country growth in particular,
and
[Page 924]
makes a series of
recommendations on trade and commodities. Its major recommendations are:
an early reopening of the Multilateral Trade Negotiation (MTN) with a
view of reducing tariffs on labor intensive products from developing
countries; extension of the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), which allows developing countries to
ship many products to the U.S. duty free, on a fixed term, multi-year
basis with an expanded list of products; an active U.S. role in the
continuing General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) negotiations on limiting
quantitative restrictions on imports; and Administration support for
H.R. 1543,10 which
would make certain changes in the current trade adjustment assistance
program. These recommendations are aimed toward additional
liberalization of the existing international trading system that would
allow developing countries to increase their exports.
It is premature to suggest reopening MTN at this time. Much was
accomplished in the MTN to benefit developing countries; for the
present, we need to concentrate on effective implementation of these
gains, especially the terms under which developing countries can be
encouraged to join and benefit from its non-tariff codes. We should,
however, attempt to use the very limited tariff reduction authority you
have to negotiate bilateral tariff agreements with the developing
countries by the end of 1981. In your next term, we should investigate
the feasibility of seeking broader authority to negotiate
tariff-reducing agreements with developing countries.
We are not yet ready for a full consideration of the GSP extension—the program does not expire
until 1985. During your next administration, however, we should develop
a strategy for extending GSP benefits
and for further improving the program’s benefits for developing
countries. For the present, we need to implement your pledge to Congress
to use your existing authority to improve GSP benefits for the lesser developed beneficiaries.
As the Commission recommended, the U.S. is taking an active role in
multilateral efforts to negotiate a safeguards code strengthening
international discipline over actions to restrict imports. The U.S.
position on safeguards is closer to that of developing countries than
are the positions of the European Community (EC). Differences between the EC and developing countries continue to be the major
obstacles to progress on this issue.
The Administration has not actively promoted the adjustment assistance
reform bill because of budget limitations. This is an issue to be
considered in your next term.
[Page 925]
The Commission Report supports international efforts to create price
stabilizing agreements for products of particular interest to developing
countries. As you know, negotiations on the Common Fund11 have just been completed,
and we expect implementing legislation will be prepared and submitted to
the Congress in your next term. Attempts to renegotiate the
International Tin Agreement have begun, and the U.S. Senate recently
ratified U.S. participation in the International Rubber Agreement.12 The U.S. is also a member of the International Coffee
and the International Sugar Agreements and is participating in efforts
to negotiate a new international cocoa agreement. A reaffirmation of our
willingness to negotiate economically sound and mutually beneficial
commodity agreements would also be appropriate at the outset of your
next term.
The Food for Peace Program and Food
Reserves—Another set of recommendations focuses on the PL 480 program and making that program
developmentally more effective. You have endorsed that objective and the
Departments of Agriculture and State are working with us to achieve it.
The Commission calls for a complete revision of the program. At this
point, we are not convinced that such a revision is either needed or
politically feasible. We do have underway, however, a number of steps to
strengthen the program without legislation and will be reviewing the
range of more extensive changes that might be undertaken. We are also
taking steps to strengthen our substantive involvement in the operations
of the United Nations programs and agencies working in the hunger
field—particularly the FAO and its
World Food Program.
Many of the Commission’s specific recommendations on measures to improve
world food security are being implemented or negotiated. The United
States has, for example, pledged 4.47 million tons of grain to the new
Food Aid Convention and has encouraged new and increased contributions
from other donor governments.13 Under
the auspices of the International Wheat Council, the United States is
working to develop a basis for a new international wheat agreement. We
have actively supported efforts by the World Food Council to promote
food sector strategies in developing countries. More than thirty food
priority countries have indicated an interest in developing these
strategies and have approached donor countries, including the United
States, for tech
[Page 926]
nical
assistance in preparing them. We are also playing an active role in
negotiations to replenish the International Fund for Agricultural
Development. Further, Congressional approval of the Food Security Act,
which will establish a food security reserve of up to four million tons
to backstop our food aid commitments, is expected before the end of the
year.14
Other Recommendations—The Commission recommends
U.S. support for the U.N. negotiations on a code of conduct for
transnational corporations and for adding appropriate sections to U.S.
law. The U.S. has actively participated in the U.N. negotiations for
four years. From the current state of negotiations, it is doubtful that
code provisions will lend themselves to being incorporated in U.S. law,
but the final code will give a basis for that determination.
Several recommendations in the Report are aimed at domestic issues. The
Department of Agriculture has commented directly to the Domestic Council
on these matters.
Several other recommendations include increased involvement by the
private sector in assisting developing countries to alleviate world
hunger. We know this is a matter you endorse strongly, and we have
efforts underway to meet this recommendation. The recently completed
private sector agricultural mission to the Caribbean Basin is one
important example.
