---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:51:17 -0600
From: "Emilie F. Nichols" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: World Bank Brief on Hunger and Sen

(http://www.worldbank.org/html/dec/publications/briefs/db28.html)

Development Brief Number 28
January 1994

Hunger is political economy

Food output per head is important, but so is democracy---which can result
in wider availability of food

Trends in food supply and population growth since Malthus have not given
much comfort regarding his harsh criticism. Population has risen sharply
since his time, yet the supply of food per head has grown rather than
fallen by large magnitudes. Average longevity has increased to levels that
only a few could enjoy in the past, and birthrates have come down with the
spread of education (especially female education) and economic development.

Malthus thought that populations would grow inexorably with prosperity and
had to be kept down by misery. Yet population growth rates are low in
countries with robust economic and educational development and remain high
mainly in regions of misery and underdevelop- ment (such as Sub-Saharan
Africa and parts of South Asia). There are, of course, many problems still
connected with population growth, but they do not arise from issues
stressed by Malthus.

Why does hunger persist?

According to Amartya Sen of Harvard University, hunger is best seen in
terms of the failure of people to establish command over an adequate amount
of food and other necessities (known as the entitlement theory).[1] A
person may have few means of commanding food if he or she has no job, no
other sources of income, and no social security. The hunger that will
result can coexist with a plentiful supply of food in the economy and the
markets. Famines have, in fact, occurred in situations of high food
availability---sometimes even peak food availability.

Famine prevention and science

Effective famine prevention depends on three essential requirements. First
is understanding the real causes of famine, which requires recognition that
famines arise within particular sections of the population, as with a
sector of the work force that suffers from unemployment, falling real
wages, and so on. The Malthusian focus on food supply per head can be
misleading---it can generate a false sense of security based on the belief
that so long as food output per head is high enough, no threat of hunger
exists.

While we have tended to debate the merits and flaws of Malthusian
pessimism, what may be called Malthusian optimism has killed millions:
policymakers sticking to a false theory of famines have seen no need to
take preventive action when food output per head is high and there is
plenty of food in the market, while large sections of the population have
been forced to starve because of their failure to command a part of the
food that is there.

The entitlement theory does not deny the importance of food output---many
people command food by growing it themselves, and the price at which others
can buy food is favorably affected by a larger food output. Scientific
advances and changes in public policy to promote food production,
especially in regions where it has stagnated or declined (such as
Sub-Saharan Africa), can be an extremely significant tool for protecting
the entitlements of potential famine victims. Also, it is terribly
important for famine relief to have some food available in public hands for
distribution among victims or for release in the market to break spirals of
food price rise. One of the practical problems relief organizations face
today is the decline in food available for international relief---a result
of programmed cutbacks in food production in Europe and America. The
production of food and its availability in crucial areas are indeed
important for any entitlement-based analysis of famines. Yet concentrating
only on food output and availability is not enough. Sensible famine
prevention policies depend on a fuller economic understanding of the
process of commanding food.

Economics of famine prevention

In preventing famines, the economic policies needed to recreate the lost
entitlements are easy to identify, according to Sen. While direct food
distribution has tended to be favored in some regions (often with good
justification), public jobs programs could be used more widely to generate
income and security. Offering paid jobs to destitutes in an area threatened
by famine can economically empower the potential famine victims to command
food. Their wages enable them to buy food in the market and to resume
growing their own food. Job creation can be combined with increased food
supply from elsewhere, but a more equal sharing of the available food
itself---as a result of the newly regenerated purchasing power of the
potential victims---tends to prevent famines.

Such policies have been attempted with great success in many countries,
including India. This kind of strategy involves a combination of state
intervention and market forces. It arises out of an informed analysis of
what causes famines and how these causes can be overcome by effective
public programs.

Such programs need not be too expensive even for very poor countries. The
proportion of people threatened by famines rarely exceeds 5% of the total
population of a country, and their share of the national pie would
typically be no more than 2% or 3% (because they are normally quite poor,
even before the threatened famine). To restore their lost income and to
offer them their normal share of the national food supply does not,
therefore, require inordinate economic resources, even for a very poor
country. This is, of course, not an argument for other, richer countries to
refrain from helping. But it is certainly an argument for the poor
countries threatened by famines not to wait helplessly for aid from abroad.

Politics of famine prevention

In addition to the economic aspects of famine prevention, there is a
political aspect. A government may be capable of undertaking an effective
famine prevention policy and yet not act. Thus, another factor is the
political influences that make famine prevention imperative. Sen argues
that democracy and a free press are great forces in that direction, since a
government must respond quickly and convincingly if it has to face
reelection, if it cannot censor out the terrible facts of starvation,
disease, and death that go with famines, and if it has to face strong
criticism from opposition parties and newspapers. It is not surprising that
no famine has ever occurred in a democratic country with a relatively free
press.

This applies not only to the richer countries, but also to poor ones that
have a democratic state and a largely uncensored press. The contrast
between India's avoidance of famines since independence in 1947 (the last
famine there, which killed between 2 and 3 million people, was in 1943) and
famines in Sudan, Ethiopia, and other nondemocratic countries since the
1940s is illustrative. Similarly, democratic Botswana and Zimbabwe have had
critical food problems due to droughts in the early 1980s but have
nevertheless avoided famine through quick public action.


Reply via email to