This is a debate worth engaging, and a good starting point is another pandemic threat, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI).  When HPAI first appeared in southeast Asia in late 2003, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization in coordination with the World Organization for Animal Health provided the first comprehensive response.  The affected countries had neither the capability nor the resources to deal with the bird flu outbreak without assistance.  FAO and OIE, at the invitation of the countries, stepped in to help develop national strategies for disease control and eradication.  Over the past 5 years these two international organizations have led a sustained effort to prevent and control HPAI based on a global strategy that includes surveillance, emergency preparedness, and capacity building to improve veterinary infrastructures.  

Evaluations of the FAO/OIE response have shown their efforts to be effective, though not perfect.  Would a decentralized response have been speedier, more flexible and more credible?  The answer is almost certainly, no.  Many countries simply do not have the capability to respond to a crisis such as HPAI without external assistance.  Yet, neither do FAO and OIE have either the resources or the authority to take over from national governments the primary responsibility for responding to a disease outbreak.  They cannot, for example, send in a team to provide assistance without an invitation from the national government.  

The international organizations have not been the only ones responding to HPAI.  Many donor countries have provided technical assistance and financial resources to affected and at-risk countries.  Sometimes, though, their assistance is more well-intentioned than effective.  Shortly after HPAI was first reported in Turkey, FAO was invited to send an evaluation team, whose visit was immediately followed by overlapping evaluation teams from two large donors.  Turkish veterinary officials were so overwhelmed with managing visitors that they had little time left to manage the crisis.  Greater coordination of these efforts was clearly warranted, but all too often coordination for the international organizations means “give us the money and we will decide what needs to be done.” 

The lesson to be learned from the HPAI experience is that we need strong international institutions, especially, but not solely, to assist countries with inadequate resources and capabilities to deal with crisis situations that threaten food security.  Technical experts in international organizations can provide neutral, credible advice that government leaders can use to defend difficult decisions, such as destroying a farmer’s livelihood in order to control a disease.  International organizations can and should do much more to coordinate the international response in a crisis.  They operate early warning and reporting networks.  They provide a forum for global planning and strategy development.  These are all crucial roles international organizations can play to support, not diminish, the primary responsibility of national governments to respond to a crisis.  When the stake is a global pandemic, multilateralism serves our self-interests.

• “We call upon the relevant international institutions to examine whether a system of stockholding could be effective in dealing with humanitarian emergencies or as a means to limit price volatility. They should specifically examine   the   feasibility and  the administrative modalities of such a system. In light of this outcome it will be examined whether further steps should be envisaged and whether a consultation process should be established.”  The idea of a global grains stock scheme is fraught with complications, both economic and political.  This won’t be an easy one upon which to reach consensus.  
• The declaration expresses support for the Global Partnership, a concept that first emerged at the Hokaido G8 Summit, but there doesn’t appear to be much progress toward agreement on how the GP would operate and what its objectives would be.
• Overseas investment in farmland has become a hot topic over the past year.  The declaration doesn’t tackle the issue directly, but the Financial Times reports that FAO and the World Bank both indicated they would be taking further action.  FAO wants to hold a meeting on farmland investment during the summer.  The World Bank intends to publish a code of conduct in the near future.

The global food crisis that seized the attention of world leaders, the public and the press in 2008 is a reminder of just how much we take for granted when it comes to our food supply.  The sharp spike in commodity prices increased food import bills for economically distressed developing countries, led to political unrest, and pushed up the number of hungry people in the world from 850 million to 925 million.  If last year’s food crisis demonstrated the world’s food security vulnerabilities to an unsuspecting audience, the economic crisis that shoved it off of the global stage proved how short our attention span can be, especially when it comes to dealing with long-term problems.  Unlike the economic crisis, which hopefully will be only a distasteful memory in a couple of years, the threats to food security will play out over decades.  Even with a decline in commodity prices from their 2008 peaks, the vulnerabilities revealed by the crisis have not disappeared:  The number of people who are food insecure has not declined; climate change still threatens to alter global food production capabilities in ways we do not fully comprehend.; the demand for biofuels as an alternative to fossil fuels continues to grow.  Given these challenges, it would be unwise to view 2008 as an anomaly.  Rather, it should energize us to find solutions to the challenges of food security, both short-term and long-term.

The first lesson we should take away from the global food crisis of 2008 is that food security is a global concern.  Food security has conventionally been perceived as a poverty-related problem endemic to certain parts of the world.  Last year’s crisis demonstrated that economic inter-dependence has advanced to the point that food insecurity anywhere in the world affects us all.  If global food security can be disrupted by supply shortages and price spikes under current conditions, what can we expect as the global population approaches ten billion people by 2050 and climate change affects where, when and how food is produced?  Preparing for this challenge requires long-term investments in science, technology, institutions and people.

The purpose of this forum is to provide a space for bringing together the multitude of disciplines that contribute to feeding the world and for sharing the knowledge, expertise, insights and innovations necessary to ensure an abundant and sustainable food supply for all current and future inhabitants of this planet.