“Millions of people will die,” said Andy Harrington.

Governments are drastically slashing their international development assistance budgets to focus on domestic concerns and military spending.

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs warns that global funding for humanitarian aid fell by a third in 2025.

“It’s really quite catastrophic,” said Harrington.

WHY IT MATTERS: Millions of people will die.

Harrington said he was standing outside a childhood malnutrition centre in South Sudan earlier this year where there was a lineup of children suffering from hunger.

“We’re not talking, ‘we missed a meal here;’ we’re talking seriously acute malnutrition with consequences for life,” he said.

As he was taking in that disturbing scene, he was informed that the centre would be shutting down in 24 hours with no prior notice.

It was one of 1,100 centres being shuttered in South Sudan alone, all casualties of budget cuts at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

The Lancet, a medical journal published in the United Kingdom, estimates that 14 million people will die by 2030 because of the USAID belt-tightening.

But it is not just USAID. The UK, Germany, the European Union and many other governments around the world are also chopping their humanitarian aid budgets.

The Canadian government announced in its 2025 budget that it will be reducing foreign aid spending by $2.7 billion between 2026 and 2030.

Harrington has been told that most of the cuts will be to long-term development programs rather than emergency assistance.

In the meantime, global hunger is spreading at a pace not seen in decades.

“Gaza crossed into famine, following Sudan, where famine started in 2024 and grew in 2025,” he said.

“These are stark reminders of the human cost of inaction, and how quickly hunger can escalate when the world chooses to look away.”

The number of acutely food insecure people nearly tripled to 295 million people in 2024 from 105 million in 2016, according to the Global Report on Food Crises.

“We get lost in the numbers, but these are real human beings,” said Harrington.

“These are mothers and fathers with children that they’re watching starve.”

Harrington fully expects that the number of acutely food insecure people grew in 2025 and will only get worse in 2026 as more funding cuts take effect.

He believes it is not too late for Canada to reverse course and drop the looming cuts to its international aid budget.

“Before we make these cuts, we have to question ourselves as a country and say, ‘who do we want to be?’ ” he said.

“When others are stepping back, we need to be stepping forward and standing with the world.”

Future funding

Harrington understands that Canadians are facing a cost-of-living crisis at home, but he noted that the average inflation rate in the countries where the Canadian Foodgrains Bank works is 45 per cent.

That is a harrowing statistic for a family living on a few dollars per week.

He worries what impact the government cuts will have on his organization, which receives about 40 per cent of its funding from Ottawa and the remainder from private donations.

In the 2024-25 budget year, the organization provided $74.6 million of assistance to 1.18 million people overseas.

He doesn’t anticipate much of a funding reduction for the upcoming fiscal year, but he is concerned about future years as the proposed government cuts take effect.

Harrington said it is going to be hard for organizations such as his to fill the massive gaps that have been created in humanitarian aid programs because they are already overstretched.

He is grateful that private donors appear to be stepping up to help fill the void.

However, if governments don’t reverse course in a few short years, people around the world will be asking themselves, “what have we done?” when they turn on their televisions.

“The pictures are going to be horrific,” said Harrington.

He is confident those disturbing pictures will trigger a wave of public empathy and support.

However, it will be far more costly in terms of both money and human lives to address the horror at that stage rather than preventing it from happening today.

The Canadian Foodgrains Bank is a partnership of 15 churches and church agencies that works with local partners in 37 countries.

The post Global humanitarian aid slashed by one-third appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

A new five-year $125-million funding agreement signed between the Canadian Foodgrains Bank (CFB) and the federal government means the Canadian food aid program will continue its quick and early response to global food crisis.

Minister of International Co-operation Beverly Oda announced October 26 that Ottawa will provide the CFB, a partnership of 15 churches and agencies, with $25 million a year in matching funds to continue its food assistance work.

The agreement reflects an ongoing commitment by government to fund the CFB at what s been an increased level of funding received in recent years, said CFB executive director Jim Cornelius. The CFB received an additional $9 million over the past four years to be able to respond more effectively to various global emergency food crisis.

This is a continuation of our current agreement at the same level of funding and we re very pleased with that, said Cornelius.

Our member agencies, global partners, and supporters across the country are deeply appreciative of this continued support.

The funding enables a response timed to emerging needs, before events become crisis and make headlines, he said.

By having money in the bank, as we like to think of it, we re able to move very quickly, before something gets into the news, said Cornelius. We don t have to go out and make an appeal, or to put together a proposal. The funds are there ready for us to respond quickly when and as needed.

For example, the CFB was providing support to those affected by the accelerating drought-related food crisis in East Africa months before media began reporting about it, thanks to agency partner updates about problems brought on by scant or no rainfall and the looming spectre of failed crops.

Likewise, if something happens quickly such as flooding that hit Pakistan, they can get in early and don t have to make emergency public appeals first, said Cornelius.

An estimated 16,000 persons whose farms and livelihoods were devastated in Pakistan have been helped with food assistance by the CFB.

The CFB has committed to 64 projects in 26 countries worth $21 million, including $8.8 million for those affected by the drought in East Africa.

Cornelius said they do expect much of their resources over the next five years to be put toward emergencies.

Much of it will be used to respond to food crisis over the next five years.

The flexibility of this agreement allows for the CFB to do ongoing work where needed, however, including for ongoing projects such as those in Ethiopia, Somalia and Kenya where, through building micro-sand dams they can help drought-proof regions and build up communities resilience.

In 2010 the Canada Foodgrains Bank provided $38 million of assistance for 2.3 million people in 35 countries. Since its founding in 1983, the CFB has provided over $500 million of assistance for people in 80 countries, including 1.1 million tonnes of food assistance.

lorraine@fbcpublishing.com

———

We don t have to go out and make an appeal, or to put together a proposal. The funds are there ready for us to respond quickly when and as needed.

JIM CORNELIUS

Executive director Canadian Foodgrains Bank

The post CFB Signs New $125-Million Five-Year Agreement appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

At a food security conference May 24, Gates called for U.S. leadership in a global campaign to expand food production. Agriculture ministers of the Group of 20 major developing and emerging economies meet in June, with farm and rural development a top issue.

Near-record food prices this year have focused attention on scanty grain reserves amid rising demand from a growing world population that increasingly wants meat on its plate.

Although hunger is a longtime scourge, Gates said he was optimistic it could be eased by a sustained focus on subsistence farmers who account for three-fourths of the poor and malnourished of the world.

Investment in high-yielding seeds, better farming techniques, improved tools and sales outlets “is strikingly effective,” he said.

“It’s proving the point over and over again – helping poor farming families grow more crops and get them to market is the world’s single most powerful lever for reducing poverty and hunger,” said Gates.

In 2009, the G8 group of rich nations pledged $22 billion in public funds to achieve long-lasting global food security, including some $3.5 billion from the United States. About half of the pledged money has been contributed so far.

The United Nations estimates the world population will grow by one-third, to 9.3 billion, by 2050. Per capita demand for meat will double and demand for grain will rise by 70 per cent by then, the International Food Policy Research Institute said May 24.

The $34-billion Gates Foundation, the largest U.S. philanthropy, has made $1.7 billion in grants to agricultural projects in the past five years.

Gates said a common goal of these projects, mainly in Africa and South Asia, is to triple productivity in 15 years.

The foundation helped finance development of a flood-tolerant rice strain that is being adopted in Asia.

The United States will devote some $950 million this fiscal year to “Feed the Future,” the government’s initiative for global agriculture and rural development, said Rajiv Shah, head of the U.S. Agency for International Development and the conference’s opening speaker.

This amount is part of the funds pledged by President Barack Obama in 2009 as part of the G8 effort.

The Chicago Council for Global Affairs, sponsor of the day-long symposium, gave the United States an overall grade of “B-minus” for leadership in agricultural development. Projects such as Feed the Future got a “B-plus” but U.S. lack of progress on removal of barriers to development rated a “D.”

A 2012 overhaul of U.S. farm policy provides an opportunity “to rethink these important issues,” said the council in a report.

Fiscal 2012 funding for the major U.S. food aid program, Food for Progress, would be cut by 30 per cent, to $1 billion, in a bill approved by a U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations subcommittee. A program that provides school meals in the developing world would be cut by 10 per cent, to $180 million.

Subcommittee chairman Jack Kingston, a Republican, said the proposed cuts were part of belt tightening for many Agriculture Department programs amid efforts to contain budget deficits.

The post U.S. Must Lead Fight Against Hunger — Bill Gates appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Bill Lapp, a U.S. market analyst, tossed those statistics out at the annual GrainWorld conference in Winnipeg last week to illustrate the magnitude of his government’s program to convert grain into fuel.

The impact of ethanol on U.S. corn production is staggering, said Lapp, president of Advanced Economic Solutions in Omaha, Nebraska.

ETHANOL MANDATES

Ever since Washington mandated ethanol blends in gasoline and diesel fuel as an oil-saving measure, corn acreage has increased dramatically.

In 2002-03, U.S. demand for corn was 9.5 billion bushels requiring 74 million acres. Ten per cent of that was for ethanol.

This year, the demand base is 13.5 billion bushels, 36 per cent of it for ethanol, requiring 92 million acres of corn, Lapp said.

Virtually all the increase stems from a 2007 federal energy security act decreeing biofuel mandates to produce cleaner-burning fuels and, ostensibly, to reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has mandated 12.6 billion gallons of ethanol (4.9 billion bushels of corn) during 2011, along with 800 million gallons of biodiesel (15 per cent of U.S. soybean oil supply). EPA’s ethanol mandate for 2015 is 15 billion gallons.

As incentives to produce biofuel, manufacturers receive tax credits of 45 cents a gallon for ethanol and $1 a gallon for biodiesel, thus boosting the price of commodities in the bargain.

The U.S. also levies tariffs on biofuel imports, further keeping domestic prices artificially high, said Lapp.

HIGHER CORN PRICES

The increased demand for ethanol has dramatically raised corn prices, dragging other commodities along in their wake. Last year, corn futures had nearly doubled from around $3.50 a bushel to over $7.

Without ethanol, the price of corn today would be $3.20 a bushel, $2.20 lower than it is now, Lapp said.

He said U.S. ethanol policy isn’t the only reason for escalating world food prices. A weaker U.S. dollar also contributes to a bullish commodity market.

But it is a factor, he said during his talk titled “Driving on an Empty Stomach.”

“Creating havoc in the food market is not the way to solve our energy problems,” he told a GrainWorld luncheon audience. “Should we feed the world or should we drive our cars with ethanol?”

During a question period, Stuart Clark, Canadian Foodgrains Bank senior policy adviser, said the U.S. food aid program since its inception in 1954 has been linked to removing surplus commodities from the market.

Now that corn is used to produce fuel, Clarke wondered if the U.S. ethanol program will take food away from hungry people overseas.

“Will commodities go to ethanol instead of food aid?” he asked.

Interviewed later, Lapp said chances of a reversal in U.S. ethanol policy are slim.

WASTEFUL

It’s true that environmental groups, food manufacturers and some livestock producers oppose ethanol policies as costly, wasteful and ineffective, he acknowledged.

But Lapp added the biofuel lobby is so powerful that U.S. politicians are unwilling to oppose it.

Also, the first battleground in the U.S. round of presidential election primaries is Iowa. No presidential candidate would dare campaign against ethanol in the heart of the U.S. corn belt, he said. ron@fbcpublishing.com

———

“Creatinghavocinthe foodmarketisnot thewaytosolveour energyproblems.”

– BILL LAPP

The post U.S. Ethanol Policy Roundly Criticized appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Other countries’ domestic and foreign policies are often at the root of food disasters

What is it about Africa? With its tropical climate and rich soil, it should be able to feed its teeming millions many times over. Yet too often Africa becomes a metaphor for famine and hunger.

In 1984-85 a horrified world responded with a massive aid effort after watching graphic television images of starving Ethiopians. Yet a similar famine occurred again in 2003 with much less response. Chronic food shortages occur below the radar all the time. Today, malnutrition kills more Africans than AIDS and malaria combined. A seemingly endless need for food aid creates a dependency syndrome and perpetuates the commonly held (and often grossly unfair) image of Africa as “a continent of Ol iver Twists holding out their bowls to the world, begging for more.”

Those words are from a new book titled Enough: Why the World’s Poorest Starve in an Age of Plenty. Written by a duo of veteran Wall Street Journal reporters, it is a timely analysis which should be required reading for anyone involved in agriculture and the food business.

Authors Roger Thurow and Scott Kilman take a hard, unblinking look at food security in Africa. Their conclusion: other countries’ domestic and foreign policies are often at the root of food disasters which periodically ravage the continent.

Yes, Africa must itself share in the blame, including corrupt dictators who use starvation as a weapon of war. Yes, civil conflicts and internecine violence destroy food production systems and make people unable to feed themselves. Yes, poverty and natural disasters, such as drought and floods, are also major causes of periodic food emergencies.

But sometimes the real reasons for food shortages, hunger and malnutrition lie beyond Africa’s borders, suggest Thurow, a foreign correspondent for the Journal and Kilman, the newspaper’s agriculture reporter.

A prime example is farm subsidies which enable U. S. and European farmers to dump commodities on the world market at cut-rate prices, undermining local agriculture. Witness U. S. cotton subsidies, which have ruined farmers in Mali, where cotton is a staple crop. The feeling in the U. S. is less than sympathetic. “Maybe the farmers in Africa should be the ones not raising cotton,” says one American cotton industry leader.

What’s sauce for the goose is evidently not sauce for the gander. Thurow and Kilman note the World Bank practically forced African nations to curtail their own agricultural subsidies in order to qualify for loans. Asked why the U. S. can subsidize farmers and Africa cannot, one American bank official says, “Because we can afford to be stupid and you can’t.”

Even food aid itself can be part of the problem. Thurow and Kilman are devastatingly critical of a food aid industry which often puts

its own interests ahead of its recipients.

In the U. S., food aid is often seen as a way to get rid of excess commodities. Amer ica’s government -funded food aid program requires that aid be in the form of food rather than money. As a result, food aid has become big business and a lucrative entitlement to its donors. “It is our right to provide aid in the form of food instead of cash,” says one U. S. milling industry official.

The image of Africa as food deficient is often a false one. Africa’s mainly small-holder farmers can produce bountiful crops. But politics and a lack of infrastructure prevent food from getting to where it’s needed when it’s needed. Meanwhile, local farmers are treated to the maddening sight of trucks loaded with American food aid rumbling past warehouses where their own commodities lie unused and spoiling. “American farmers have a market in Ethiopia but we don’t have a market in Ethiopia,” complains one local grain trader.

At times, an undercurrent of barely controlled fury runs through the narrative at the sheer outrage of starvation in a 21st century world of plenty. But this is far from a pessimistic book.

Thurow and Kilman describe a diverse and sometimes unlikely cast of humanitarians – from rock stars, evangelical Christians and entrepreneurs to everyday American housewives and working stiffs – all dedicated in their own way to fighting hunger in Africa.

The authors also devote a chapter to proposed solutions: creating a global fund for Africa’s small farmers, investing in infrastructure, giving food aid the flexibility for local purchases, eliminating crippling foreign subsidies, developing price discovery mechanisms for domestic agriculture. And more.

This is an on-the-ground book which takes the reader directly to the heart of the story. Thurow and Kilman have been to the front lines and seen things first hand. They’ve visited feeding stations, interviewed local farmers, talked to officials, observed both suffering and promise up close. The book’s crisp prose and crackling immediacy carry the hallmarks of investigative journalism at its finest. Read it. And do something to help. ron@fbcpublishing.com

The post Starvation In An Age Of Plenty appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.