Fighting Hunger from the Ground Up: Hunger Quiz 2

Food is a human right – so how did it come to be treated as just another commodity like blue jeans or microwaves? Test your knowledge about food, trade and aid in this “genius” edition of our hunger quiz!

U.S. law successfully prevents corporate agriculture conglomerates from building monopolies or acquiring a controlling power in the food industry.

False. Laws against monopolies, known as “antitrust” regulations, have not been successfully enforced in agriculture. Antitrust laws ensure fair competition and prevent any one company from acquiring a concentration of power in an industry. Without adequate implementation of these laws, big corporations can control supply and cost of food. For example, Monsanto now controls 20 percent of the global seed market and holds a monopoly over many commodity crops. This year, Monsanto announced it would increase the price of its corn seed by $100 a bag, or about 35 percent. Monopolies in any sector are dangerous, but when they impede a basic human right, the right to food, the consequences can be deadly. AJWS supports the enforcement of antitrust laws and accountability for agribusiness.

How many Mexican small farmers were displaced from their land due to new trade rules enacted through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) allowing foreign food imports like corn to flood local markets?

Over two million Mexican campesinos were displaced due to the flood of cheap imported U.S. corn allowed to enter the country because of the terms of NAFTA, which lowered tariffs (taxes) on maize. Import tariffs are one policy tool that countries use to level the playing field between foreign agribusiness and local small farmers. For example, if U.S. agri-business corporations can mass-produce subsidized corn, they can sell it at a price that undercuts small farmers – sometimes even cheaper than the cost of production! Import tariffs can level the playing field by making up some of the difference in price. However, free trade agreements often require developing countries to lower or zero-out import tariffs. When this happened in 1994 in Mexico, local farmers could not compete with the flood of cheap U.S. corn and lost their land as a result. AJWS is working to ensure that basic food staples like corn and maize are protected and not treated like just another commodity in trade agreements.

From 2006 to mid-2009, how much farm land in the developing world was sought and bought by foreign corporations and governments?

According to the International Food Policy Research Institute, between 37 million and 49 million acres of farm land has been leased or sold to foreign corporations or governments during this time period. While the land acquired through these transactions is required to be “unused” or “underutilized,” there is considerable debate regarding what land qualifies and where productive land has been sold. The loss of land for small farmers, who may have had traditional but not legal claims to it, infringes on the ability of communities to grow and control their own food and exacerbates the world hunger problem. AJWS promotes international trade and investment policies that protect the land rights of small farmers and safeguards local production of food.

When the U.S. ships actual food as emergency aid to a developing country instead of procuring food from local markets using cash aid, how much longer does it take it to reach communities in need?

Food aid purchased from local markets gets to local communities two to three months faster than food shipped from the U.S to the developing world. Despite this, the majority of U.S. food aid is currently delivered using this inefficient system. Needless to say, the delay in food delivery during emergency or conflict situations can have a devastating impact on local communities experiencing hunger.

How much more expensive is food aid when shipped from the U.S. rather then purchased regionally?

The Government Accountability Office found that U.S. food aid shipped to Sub-Saharan Africa costs 34 percent more than food purchased locally. A primary cause of this difference is that shipping costs account for 65 percent of the cost of food aid. In addition to slowing the arrival of food assistance, shipping from the U.S. drains considerable resources from the U.S. foreign aid budget. AJWS is working to reform the way the U.S. delivers aid so that we can have a more efficient system to meet the needs of local populations during emergency or conflict situations, while supporting sustainable local food systems.
Follow Us:
Facebook Twitter YouTube RSS