Sustainability

Let markets play their part in feeding the world

June 11, 2012

Africa

June 11, 2012

Africa
Dougal Thomson

Former head of programmes, EMEA

Dougal Thomson is Head of Communications at The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Switzerland. His role involves leading a cross-functional team producing digital, social media and print content, as well as a large number of live events. Prior to this Dougal worked as the Head of Programmes EMEA for Economist Events. In this role he advocated for the power of debate to generate insight and add value through a number of conferences in Europe, the Middle East and Africa on issues such as trade, innovation, sustainability, urban development, energy and sport. From 2005 to 2007 Mr Thomson worked for research group Datamonitor, developing its events programmes.

Barack Obama's announcement of a 'New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition', a partnership between G8 nations, African countries, and businesses to boost African agriculture, promises to raise 50 million people out of poverty in 10 years. Oxfam have criticised it for focusing too heavily on the private sector, but they're missing the point.

The alliance will invest in projects across six African nations: Ethiopia, Tanzania, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Mozambique and Burkina Faso. Forty-five private-sector firms, including Cargill, DuPont, Rabobank, Unilever and SABMiller,  have committed to invest more than $3 billion throughout the agricultural value chain: in irrigation, processing, trading, financing and infrastructure.

The money is certainly needed. We live in a world where a billion people go to bed hungry and 170 million children suffer from chronic malnutrition, where government efforts to alleviate these problems have continually failed to deliver.  For example, the G8 Aquila meeting in 2009 committed to investing $22 billion in food security by 2012.  Time's up, but only half of the money has been disbursed.

The Chicago promise is sounder than the Aquila version for a simple reason: it relies less on stretched/shrinking international aid budgets and more on private sector money/leadership. Yet there’s a caveat. Multinationals, African governments and not-for-profit agencies are uneasy bedfellows. Understandably, charities harbour deep suspicions about the private sector's role/motivation in national food security plans: whatever they say about CSR, agribusinesses exist to make a profit.

But here’s the point: the only way the world can feed seven billion mouths nutritiously is by forming cross-stakeholder alliances (governments, private sector, agencies, charities, donors) that reconcile a multinational's need for profit with a smallholder's need for income, a mother's need to feed her baby and a nation's need for food security. Partnerships that develop Africa's agricultural base, which help rural communities by creating stable markets for smallholders, can do just that.

Here’s an example: in Ethiopia, Pepsi are partnering with the World Food Program and USAID to fund better seeds and drip irrigation systems so farmers can improve their yield of chickpeas. It’s a project that makes business sense (creating a stable supply chain for Pepsi), while helping smallholders and giving the WFP excess chickpeas to fight famine. Creating a sustainable chickpea market benefits all, from shareholders to consumers to the most vulnerable.

EthioPEA is a good start but the world needs many more collaborations that harness the skills and capacities of the profit and not-fot-profit sectors. The challenge of building trust and commitment between strange bedfellows is one we'll be exploring at The Economist's Feeding the World conferences in Johannesburg and Singapore

But let’s start the debate here. If you have a view on how to create partnerships with impact, please share it.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited (EIU) or any other member of The Economist Group. The Economist Group (including the EIU) cannot accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this article or any of the information, opinions or conclusions set out in the article.

Enjoy in-depth insights and expert analysis - subscribe to our Perspectives newsletter, delivered every week