Sustainable Development, Talk about the good work being done to meet both the present and future needs of people and the planet.

25837 Followers

Follow Justmeans editorial on:

Share this on:

End Petitions to End Hunger

Sara Wolcott | Friday 13th November 2009

Today, I was going to write about the upcoming World Summit on Food Security hosted by the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), the major UN organization concerned with food, hunger, nutrition, agriculture, etc etc etc, and highlight the rising role of business in ending hunger. Then I checked out their website. And I, with a great deal of respect for FAO's ongoing struggle to contribute to sustainable development, got rather pissed off.

What got me was the call on the website for a global petition to end hunger, a problem that effects over 1 in 6 people around the world. It's a serious problem in sustainable development. Those numbers have only gone up in recent years, due largely to domestic food prices, lower incomes and increasing unemployment - a result in part to the financial crisis slowly rippling down and around the world.

Why are people hungry? They can't afford to buy food or are not able to produce their own. Solution? Various solutions can (and have) included: lower food prices, enable them to produce their own food (or produce higher quantities/better yields), enable them to buy food (cash transfers, for example), increase their income/spending power, end extreme poverty, food programs (giving out food during certain periods/for specific groups of people), improving access/transportation/distribution (so that the food we have goes to the people who need it.

And in my experience of having watched the number of hungry people grow, petitions are not going to do anything. They may even make the situation worse. People will think that if they sign a petition to 'end hunger', that counts as doing something that addresses the serious systemic challenges that are at the heart of why people continue to starve when we, at least theoretically, produce enough food to feed everyone. It's not as if if everyone suddenly said, oh, this is bad, it's gonna stop. I don't know anyone who says, hungry people is good. This is the same reason that I get frustrated about movements such as the 'end poverty now' campaign. Does it raise awareness? Yes. Does that awareness do anything to create sustainable change for sustainable development? Sometimes - right now, I'm not convinced. Do we need massive public action? Maybe. The critical question is, action to what effect, and to what impact? I think there is a recognition that this is a scandal, but I would not say this is a time for mobilization. It's a time to assess which actions will be most useful, and how are we going to address the systemic causes of malnutrition. There is, historically, real resistance to looking at the root causes of hunger. And it is that which we must do.

Instead, the UN Secretary General is going to go on a fast - part of FAO's going 'hungry to protest hunger'. I'm a fan of direct action, including fasting, where it is appropriate, and I always respect those who choose to deny themselves in hopes of furthering the public good. But will his fast tackle the systemic problems? Will it change the way people see this issue? Or will he just arrive on Monday rather tired and hungry, and not able to work well?

Other Great Categories

Other Sustainable Development Articles

Economy, Ecology, and Sustainable Development

Coffee Conundrums

The magic of composting toilets

Dell shares some of their story and others who are leading the competition

Is the Press Release Dead? - and other new media challenges

People-Centered Economic Development 1 December 2009

Sara, It was a fast that provoked me to act when my (now) colleague campaigned fro economic rights from a tent in Chapel Hill. There were two outcomes. First, bringing the social business model to the UK and the influence on the local Senator John Edwards, who soon after created the Center for Poverty work and opportunity there at UNC. In retrospect, in 2003 these were early days to be protesting about capitalism and my efforts to get media on side were futile.

I tend to agree with you in general however. There seems to be something of a presumtion in this connected age, that mere;y signing a petition solves the problem, whereas in fact attention fades while injustice and deprivation continue.

His action now, is getting up close and personal with the corruption that causes so much of the harm. To lift the rock and shine a flashlight as he suggests and send the insects scurrying to find darkness until there are no rocks.

Jeff

Posted By: Jeff Mowatt

Sara Wolcott 17 November 2009

And Becky - both the head of FAO and the UN Sec Gen did a fast over the weekend.

Sara Wolcott 17 November 2009

Great question Emeka. I'll try to find out.

Emeka Egbochuku 17 November 2009

So what happens after the petitions have been signed? Is there going to be some kind of way-forward session?

Raising awareness is one thing, planning the next steps forward is another, IMPLEMENTING the plan is then key...with some monitoring and evaluation to follow.

I want to believe that there is an end game to their activity. Probably the first of many phases to tackle the world's hunger problems.

I believe the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) knows what they are up to because it'll be rather ignorant of them to just stop here.

becky ortiz 14 November 2009

A point of clarification, it is not the UN Secretary General, it is the FAO (United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization) Director General who is fasting this weekend only to show solidarity and commiseration for those who suffer hunger, and as a hunger strike against hunger; it is supposed to be a symbolic gesture. The campaign does not list as one of its objectives the tackling of the systemic problems, it only hopes to achieve some sort of awareness, which I believe you agree it does. Your critical question as to action to what effect and to what impact is exactly why the Summit is being held. Policy makers from all the FAO member countries and experts on the issue get together to decide, among other things, on future actions and goals/impacts.

becky ortiz 14 November 2009

I can see your point, but I don't completely agree with it.

I do understand that by signing petitions people may think they're actually doing something - and they are - just not something seriously significant. We cannot blame the people behind the petition for the incapacity of others to follow through in a significant way. Those behind the petitions are actually taking action and doing something that creates awareness and they are not accountable for the compromise of those signing.

Point of clarification, it is not the UN Secretary General, it is the FAO (UN Food and Agriculture Organization) Director General who is fasting this weekend to show solidarity and commiseration for those who suffer: a hunger strike against hunger; a symbolic gesture. The campaign's objectives are not to tackle the systemic problems, it hopes to achieve some sort of awareness. It is not a Facebookcause, it will have further reach to people who have the means and the power to change things.

Kevin Long 13 November 2009

I could not agree more this with post. Most petitions are like Facebook Causes - just a bunch of people that "think" they did their act of kindness for the day but in reality, nothing changes.