Richard G. Lugar, United States Senator for Indiana

U.S. Sen. Dick Lugar today made the following speech today at the annual meeting of the Alliance to End Hunger:

I appreciate so much the introduction of my close friend Jim Morris. Few people in the world speak with more knowledge, credibility, and passion about the global food crisis than Jim. He has contributed greatly to my thinking on food security and on numerous other issues, and he continues to provide tremendous leadership in this critical area. I would like to thank Jack Taylor, David Beckmann, and all the Directors and Members of the Alliance to End Hunger for this invitation to speak. I also am pleased to be joined today by Representative Jim McGovern, whose unwavering advocacy on behalf of the hungry I greatly admire.

As we contemplate the policies of the next administration and Congress in a time of extreme economic uncertainty, we must remind ourselves that hunger has its own timetable. It does not wait for convenient political circumstances. In fact, it usually strikes when times are most difficult. Frequently, it arrives on the heels of drought, flood, war, or disease. But as we have experienced recently, it can also follow from less dramatic economic circumstances that increase the price of food for those least able to afford it.

We live in a world where nearly one billion people suffer from chronic food insecurity. The World Food Program reports that 25,000 people die each day from malnutrition-related causes. Ensuring that people are fed, therefore, must be a baseline humanitarian imperative.

But it is also a strategic issue. If we fail in our response to hunger, numerous other priorities - both at home and abroad - are at risk. Hungry children learn less in school and are more vulnerable to a range of diseases. If young children suffer sustained malnutrition, they often develop serious cognitive deficiencies, with dire consequences for society’s future. In a global context, our diplomatic efforts to maintain peace will be far more difficult wherever food shortages contribute to extremism and conflict. Our hopes for economic development in poor countries will continually be frustrated if populations are unable to feed themselves. In short, overcoming hunger should be one of the starting points for both U.S. domestic and foreign policy.

The growing urgency to achieve food security presents the United States with special responsibilities and unique opportunities. We are the indisputable world leader in agricultural production and technology. A more focused effort on our part to join with other nations to increase yields, improve food distribution, and broaden agricultural knowledge could contribute to a new era in U.S. diplomacy. In the best case, the cause of ending hunger worldwide would become a pillar of U.S. foreign policy, and it would be recognized as such by nations around the world. Such an effort could build relationships with nations where, up to now, we have had few mutual endeavors. It could help solidify our global image, improve our trade relations, and serve as a model for similar efforts in the areas of energy and scientific cooperation.

World leaders must understand that over the long term, satisfying global demand for more and better food cannot be achieved on a stop-gap basis. We will solve this problem only by increasing yields per acre, broadening access to agriculture knowledge and technology, and reducing trade barriers that constrict the movement of food.

In the 1930s, my father, Marvin Lugar, produced corn yields of approximately 40 to 50 bushels per acre. This year, the Lugar farm produced about 155 bushels per acre on the same land in Marion County, Indiana. The Green Revolution, from 1965 to 1985, saw the introduction of high yield seeds and improved agricultural techniques that resulted in a near doubling of cereal grain production per acre over twenty years. But yields may have to be doubled or tripled again. We need a second Green Revolution that will benefit developed and developing nations alike. Yet progress toward these productivity gains has slowed, even as demand for food in nations with rapidly growing middle class populations, like China and India, has skyrocketed.

Despite the hard work on behalf of food security by many scientists, economists, development workers, and others, the global community has not embraced the political and social changes that are necessary to alleviate food insecurity. Unless we do so soon, we could experience a slide toward increasing global food insecurity as demand for food outruns our productive capacity. The unpredictable impact of climate change enhances the risks of delay, especially for developing nations.

The dilemma of food security is reflected in the case of Zambia in southern Africa. Zambia, a country of almost 12 million people in an area slightly larger than Texas is blessed with significant water resources and abundant arable land, unlike many countries where water and land conservation issues are the most important constraints on agriculture production. It can grow a wide variety of crops, ranging from maize and wheat to cassava and sugar cane. Zambia has benefitted from a stable government, and last week conducted a generally peaceful Presidential election. It has avoided the type of debilitating conflict that has contributed to severe food insecurity in countries like Sudan, Liberia, and Somalia. And Zambia shares a border with seven neighbors in southern Africa who could be potential customers for agriculture products.

Yet despite these advantages, large areas of Zambia are food insecure due to a combination of poor infrastructure, distortional government policies, a lack of agricultural research and extension, low levels of agriculture investment, a rejection of genetically modified technology, and other man-made factors. This is not to say that developing the Zambian agriculture sector is simple. Its people contend with droughts and floods and more than half of Zambians exist on a dollar a day or less. But ultimately, there is no reason that Zambia could not achieve food security, boost its own rural development, and contribute to food stabilization in southern Africa.

We have to help unlock farm productivity in Zambia and numerous other nations that are struggling far below their full agricultural potential. There is a pressing need to devote a greater portion of development assistance to agriculture and rural development. U.S. foreign assistance for agriculture has declined by nearly 70 percent since the 1980s. Globally, only four percent of official development assistance from all donors is allocated for agriculture. This reflects neglect of one of the most vital sectors in the alleviation of poverty.

With these dynamics in mind, Senator Bob Casey and I have introduced, the Global Food Security Act of 2008. This five-year authorization bill, which will be re-introduced in the next Congress, creates a Special Coordinator for Global Food Security and puts that person in charge of developing a food security strategy. We call on the development of that strategy to take a whole-of-government approach and to work with other international donors, the NGO community, and the private sector. The bill increases funding for agricultural productivity and rural development by $9.75 billion over five years. By some estimates, funds spent in agriculture can be up to four times more beneficial to economic growth than spending in other areas.

In thinking about how to approach agricultural productivity, we tried to draw from the experience of U.S. land grant colleges. The bill creates a new program that would strengthen institutions of higher education in the areas of agriculture sciences, research, and extension programs. Investments in human capital and institutional capacity are important to developing a robust agricultural sector.

Finally, the bill improves the U.S. emergency response to food crises by creating a separate Emergency Food Assistance Fund that can make local and regional purchases of food, where appropriate. We intend to encourage growth of local cash markets to stimulate local farm production. The Government Accountability Office reports that it can often take four to six months from the time a crisis occurs until U.S. food shipments arrive. We want to provide USAID with the flexibility to respond to emergencies more quickly, without supplanting other food programs such as P.L. 480.

There is no good reason why nearly a billion people should be food insecure or the world should have to endure the social upheaval and risks of conflict that this insecurity causes. I thank all of you for your focus on this issue. I look forward to working with you to expand the U.S. and global commitment to agriculture and nutrition, which will help to feed many people and enrich the lives of all who serve others.

###