“Regional Initiates on Food Security: The Case of Southeast Asia.”

JOBNAME: Rayfuse & Weisfelt PAGE: 3 SESS: 10 OUTPUT: Tue Aug 14 10:21:30 2012

The Challenge ofFood SecurityInternational Policy andRegulatory Frameworks

Edited by

Rosemary RayfuseUniversity of New South Wales, Australia and Lund University,Sweden

Nicole WeisfeltUniversity of New South Wales, Australia

Edward ElgarCheltenham, UK +Northampton, MA, USA

Columns Design XML Ltd / Job: Rayfuse-Weisfelt_Challenge_of_Food_Security / Division: Chap00Prelims /Pg. Position: 1 / Date: 13/8


© The Editors and Contributors Severally 2012

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in aretrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanicalor photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of thepublisher.

Published byEdward Elgar Publishing LimitedThe Lypiatts15 Lansdown RoadCheltenhamGlos GL50 2JAUK

Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.William Pratt House9 Dewey CourtNorthamptonMassachusetts 01060USA

A catalogue record for this bookis available from the British Library

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012939104

ISBN 978 0 85793 937 1

Typeset by Columns Design XML Ltd, ReadingPrinted and bound by MPG Books Group, UK



Contents

List of figures viiList of tables viiList of contributors viiiPreface xList of abbreviations xiiList of treaties xvii

PART I INTRODUCTION

1 The international policy and regulatory challenges of food security:an overview 3Rosemary Rayfuse and Nicole Weisfelt

PART II ACCESS TO FOOD

2 A fresh look at the roots of food insecurity 19Craig Pearson

3 Food security in the Great Lakes region: reconciling tradeliberalisation with human security goals 44Anagha Joshi

4 Right to food, sustainable development and trade: all faces of thesame cube? 70Elisabeth Bürgi Bonanomi

PART III SUSTAINABILITYAND FOOD SECURITY

5 Crop disease, management and food security 95Rebecca Ford

6 The contribution of plant genetic resources to food security 112Bert Visser and Niels Louwaars

7 Water and food security 128Colin Chartres

v



PART IV FOOD, TRADEAND INVESTMENT

8 The WTO and food security: What’s wrong with the rules? 149Christian Häberli

9 The financialisation of agricultural commodity futures trading:the 2006–08 global food crisis 168Nicola Colbran

10 Food security, sustainability and trade distortions: fisheriessubsidies and the WTO 190MargaretYoung

11 ‘Land grabbing’in the shadow of the law: legal frameworksregulating the global land rush 206Lorenzo Cotula

PARTV FOOD GOVERNANCE

12 Global food security governance: the Committee on World FoodSecurity, the Comprehensive Framework forAction and theG8/G20 231Matias Margulis

13 Regional initiatives on food security 255Saidul Islam and Iris Carla De Jesus

14 Food security in the era of retail governance 275Doris Fuchs, Katharina Glaab, Agni Kalfagianni andRichard Meyer-Eppler

Index 293

vi International law in the era of climate change



Contributors

Elisabeth Bürgi Bonanomi, Attorney at Law; Researcher, World TradeInstitute (WTI) and the Centre for Development and Environment (CDE),University of Bern, Switzerland

Colin Chartres, Director General, International Water Management Insti-tute, Sri Lanka

Nicola Colbran, law and justice specialist

Lorenzo Cotula, Senior Researcher, International Institute for Environ-ment and Development, United Kingdom

Iris Carla De Jesus, Researcher, Division of Sociology, Nanyang Tech-nological University, Singapore

Rebecca Ford, Associate Professor and Reader, Department of Agricultureand Food Systems, Melbourne School of Land and Environment Universityof Melbourne, Australia

Doris Fuchs, Professor, Institute for Political Science, WestfälischeWilhems-University Münster, Germany

Katharina Glaab, Research Fellow, Institute for Political Science, West-fälische Wilhems- University Münster, Germany

Christian Häberli, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre of Com-petence in Research – Trade Regulation, World Trade Institute, Universityof Bern, Switzerland

Saidul Islam, Assistant Professor, Division of Sociology, Nanyang Tech-nological University, Singapore

Anagha Joshi, Attorney-General’s Department of Australia

Agni Kalfagianni, Assistant Professor, Institute for Environmental Studies,Free University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Niels Louwaars, Centre for Genetic Resources, Wageningen Universityand Research Centre, the Netherlands

viii



Matias Margulis, Assistant Professor of International Studies, Universityof Northern British Columbia, Canada

Richard Meyer-Eppler, Research Fellow, University of Köln, Germany

Craig Pearson, Professor and Director of Melbourne Sustainable SocietyInstitute, University of Melbourne, Australia

Rosemary Rayfuse, Professor of International Law, Faculty of Law, Uni-versity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia and Conjoint Professor ofInternational Environmental Law, Faculty of Law, Lund University,Sweden

Bert Visser, Director, Centre for Genetic Resources, Wageningen Univer-sity, the Netherlands

Nicole Weisfelt, Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, Sydney,Australia

Margaret Young, Associate Professor, Law School, University of Mel-bourne, Australia

Contributors ix



13. Regional initiatives on food security

Md Saidul Islam and Iris Carla De Jesus*

13.1 INTRODUCTION

While the concept of food security is not new to humanity, the importanceof redefining the concept in favour of improving and strengthening thesecurity of our food systems, and the availability, accessibility and sustain-ability of food sources to feed the world, has come to light in recent years. In1996, the World Food Summit was held in Rome to respond to the growingnumbers of undernourished and impoverished people in the world and tofind ways of reaching the goal of food security.1 This goal was againreiterated at the Millennium Summit held in New York in 2000. At thismeeting, members of the United Nations adopted the Millennium Declar-ation, which contains the goals and targets for, among other important areasof human development, eradicating extreme poverty and hunger.2 Real-ization of these targets requires, among other things, effective regionalinitiatives to encourage government bodies, and regional and global fora, toimplement policies in a practical way to improve their food security.

* This chapter is a product of a research project funded by a Start-Up Grant(SUG) from Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. For crucial support invarious stages of the project, the authors are indebted to Prof. Kwok Kian Woon,Prof. Lorraine Elliot, Prof. Paul Teng, Sir Rajaratnam School of InternationalStudies (RSIS), and the Southeast Asian office of International DevelopmentResearch Centre (IDRC).

1 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), ‘Food Comes First’ (2010) <http://www.fao.org/mdg/22417–0c56b91e357c66fad721be8d55841a98d.pdf>.

2 FAO, The State of Food Insecurity in the World: Addressing Food Security inProtracted Crises (2010) <http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1683e/i1683e.pdf>.See also, Vijay S. Vysas, ‘From elimination of hunger to food and nutritionalsecurity: Performance, prospects and policy options in selected Asian countries’ inVisay S Vysas (ed.), Food Security in Asian Countries in the Context of MillenniumGoals (New Delhi: Academic Foundation, 2005).

255

Columns Design XML Ltd / Job: Rayfuse-Weisfelt_Challenge_of_Food_Security / Division: Chap13 /Pg. Position: 1 / Date: 13/8


Today, food insecurity is a serious global problem that only exacerbatesexisting global, national and local income disparities. Food insecurity formsa vicious cycle. With food insecurity, comes poverty; and with povertycomes economic disintegration, which, in turn, increases the number ofhungry people. This chapter examines the policy and regulatory responsesto food security that have been adopted by some Southeast Asian states andthe challenges they face in ensuring long-term regional food security. Afterthis brief introduction, the chapter describes the need for regional initiativesfor food security. Before examining the regional initiatives, we examinecountry-specific initiatives to better capture the state of food security andinsecurity in some Southeast Asian nations. The chapter concludes byproviding some crucial insights that have significant implications forregional policies.

13.2 FOOD SECURITY AND THE NEED FORREGIONAL INITIATIVES

In 2010, the total number of undernourished people globally was 925million, with Asia and the Pacific accounting for 578 million, or some 62per cent of the total. Sub-Saharan Africa accounted for 26 per cent of theworld’s undernourished, while Latin America and the Caribbean accountedfor 6 per cent, the Near East and North Africa for 4 per cent, and developedcountries accounted for just 2 per cent of the world’s undernourishedpeople. In this context, it is easy to see that regional initiatives to tackle foodinsecurity are crucial to the developing world. First, a regional initiative canbetter regulate the regional food markets amid volatile global markets.3 Inthis way, regional initiatives for food security provide stability and depend-ability in terms of food prices for imports and exports.

Second, the role of a regional framework for food security is veryimportant because the global supply chain is a very fragile system due to thevolatility of food prices and also because of the control of major multi-national corporations over the global food commodities trade.4 SoutheastAsian countries have generally similar food staples, such as rice, corn and

3 Robert Paarlberg, ‘Governance and Food Security in an Age of Globalization’2020 Brief 72, (International Food Policy Research Institute, 2002), <http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/brief72.pdf>.

4 Centre for Non-Traditional Security (NTS) Studies, ‘Public Forum and Work-shop on Securitizing Food Futures in the Asia-Pacific‘(6–9 October, 2010), Report,Singapore.

256 The challenge of food security



wheat, which are socially acceptable in most Asian diets. Hence, participat-ing countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) cansupply these essentials to regional food markets to suit existing Asianconsumption patterns, for a reasonable price.

Third, a regional initiative allows for the achievement and assurance ofgood Security Sector Governance (SSG) in stakeholders. This, according toKraft, means, ‘ensuring that the security sector is inclusive in its decision-making; impartial in performing its mandated functions and is not corrupt;responsive to public demands and concerns; coherent, efficient and effect-ive in the performance of its mandated tasks; and accountable to the publicit is supposed to serve’.5 According to the Organisation for EconomicCooperation and Development (OECD), international cooperation isneeded to establish a common ground for everyone by promoting a multi-level concept of security. Hence, a transfer and sharing of knowledge andexpertise between development agencies and diplomatic professionals willtake place. This concept can thus be applied to and be beneficial for foodsecurity in Southeast Asia. The establishment of the ASEAN Charter andthe ASEAN Political–Security Community (ASPC) are examples of thepractice and the enhancement of SSG within the region.

Fourth, a regional initiative is important to ensure food security formarginalized communities who are more vulnerable to internal socialconflicts. Many ethnic groups and minorities have been displaced due toprolonged racial, ethnic or political conflicts that have left these groupsunprotected by their governments.6 Refugee crises due to conflict in Roh-inga, Myanmar and Mindanao, Philippines are examples where regionalinitiatives are of paramount need to ensure food security.

Finally, a regional food security framework is of crucial importancebecause investments in agriculture in Southeast Asian countries are declin-ing, as countries in the region become ever more industrialized thus makingthem more reliant on food imports. With the number of food exportingcountries on the decline, supply is diminishing in the face of increasingdemand. A regional framework for food security can help to direct foodresources to keep up with changing patterns of food consumption caused byeconomic and sociocultural factors.

5 Herman Joseph Kraft, ‘Establishing Good Security Sector Governancein Southeast Asia’ Working Paper No. 14, (RSIS Centre for NTS Studies, May2011), 1.

6 Ibid.

Regional initiatives on food security 257



13.3 LOCAL INITIATIVES ON FOOD SECURITY

SoutheastAsia is one of the most favourable regions in the world. Located inthe tropical zone, soils are rich in minerals and the rainfall is evenly spread.There are also several major rivers flowing through this region, such as theMekong River, which divides Thailand, Cambodia and Laos. These naturaltreasures provide countries with reliable water sources that would be valu-able for agricultural production. In the early part of the twenty-first century,Southeast Asia has experienced significant economic growth. However,demographic pressure on agricultural land is high and the issue of foodsecurity can thus not be taken lightly. Southeast Asia’s poverty is concen-trated in both rural and urban areas. In the former there has been a steadydecline in agricultural production and high illiteracy rates. In the latter, highunemployment rates and the cost of living and social inequality exacerbatethe problem of urban poverty.7 The countries in the Southeast Asian regionhave adopted a number of policies and programs aimed at fighting povertyand food insecurity, both on their own initiative and as a result of pressure topromote better programs and food policies. Before turning to initiatives atthe regional level it is important to examine what these countries are doingindividually to deal with their own food insecurity issues.

13.3.1 Thailand

Thailand, also known as the ‘Rice Bowl of Asia’, has been experiencingmajor economic growth at an annual GDP growth rate of 10 per cent, withits agricultural sector experiencing a 12 per cent rate of GDP growth in2010. Major agricultural products that have contributed to this bountyinclude rice, tapioca, rubber, corn, sugarcane, coconuts and soybeans.8 As amajor exporter of rice (with over 32 million tons of exported rice since2008), it welcomed soaring food prices with open arms. However, a goodeconomic growth rate does not always translate to better food security. In2000, 55 per cent of the poor (5 million) were farmers and approximately 70per cent of the country’s poor were concentrated in the agricultural sector.In 2006, a study by the Graduate School of Kasertkart University reported

7 FAO, Poverty Alleviation and Food Security in Asia: Lesson and Challenges(Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, 1998)<ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/004/ab981e/ab981e00.pdf>.

8 U.S. Department of State, ‘Background Note: Thailand’, accessed 28 January2011, <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2814.htm>.




that the highest rate of food security in the rural, agricultural population wasonly 26 per cent. Nevertheless, overall, food security has improved inThailand. Between 1990 and 2002, the incidence of poverty dropped from27.2 per cent to 9.8 per cent and the nutritional status of the Thai peopleimproved markedly. As of 2011, 29 million, out of the 63 million people,made up the agricultural labour force, while 17 per cent of the populationwere undernourished with a per capita calorie intake of 2490 Kcal com-pared to 1751 Kcal in 1995.

To ensure food access and combat soaring food prices, the governmenthas applied domestic price controls to certain products to ensure fair tradeand consumers’access to basic and necessary commodities. The Ministry ofCommerce supervises the list of these commodities. In addition, the BlueFlag Discount Project launched in 2009 offers food and consumer productsat a discount on a temporary basis if prices rise.9 This project is expected tohelp people to cut expenses by 35–40 million THB per year.

Food safety is also related to food security and to ensure this, the Ministryof Public Health launched the National Food Safety Program to improvecoordination between government agencies through the National FoodSafety Committee. The Committee was tasked to oversee food safety undernormal circumstances, and during emergencies. Linkages between farmproduction and food safety were also recognized at the policy level only inthe 2000s. In 2006, a strategy paper formulated by the Ministry of Agricul-ture and Cooperatives proposed three major transformations in agriculturalproduction known as the From Farm to Table Policy.10 Other significantinitiatives of the government are summarized below:

+ In 2001, the National Food and Nutrition Plan 2002–2006 envisionedThailand to enjoy food security and safety, Thai children to have goodnutrition and growth with full capacity for development, and Thaipeople to have the good health, talent and self-reliance, which willlead to sustainable development. The cabinet resolution on 3 April2001 suspended a project to import and cultivate GMO for commer-cial purposes, except under laboratory and greenhouse conditions

9 Thai News, ‘Blue Flags fair helps cut people’s cost of living by 180 millionTHB’, Thailand News (Online), July 10, 2011 <http://siamdailynews.com/business-news/2011/07/10/blue-flag-fairs-help-cut-peoples-cost-of-living-by-180-million-thb/>.

10 UNESCAP, Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security in Asia and thePacific, ST/ESCAP/2535 (2009) 46 <http://www.unescap.org/65/documents/Theme-Study/st-escap-2535.pdf>.




+ In 2002, jointly supported by the Department of Health and the WHO,the National Strategic Plan on Food Security was proposed andlaunched

+ In 2003, the government concluded the first Foreign Trade Agreementwith China to eliminate import and export tariffs on fruit and vegeta-bles

+ The government launched the Food Safety Year in 2004. A set ofhuman security indicators, including a component on food security,was launched by the Ministry of Social Development and HumanSecurity. In the same year, the National Health Assembly adoptedagriculture and food for health as its thematic focus

+ In 2007, the Ministry of Science and Technology proposed to estab-lish the National Organic Agriculture Committee to oversee strategiesrelated to organic agriculture, to be implemented between 2008 and2011

+ In 2008, the Cabinet adopted food and energy security as part of thenational agenda. Strategies to ensure food and energy security weresubsequently developed and implemented. The First National OrganicAgriculture Development Strategy (2008–11) was adopted by theCabinet to coordinate the work of several agencies promoting organicfarming. The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives started itsfive-year plan to enhance the productivity of palm oil, sugarcane andcassava cultivation in response to demands for alternative energy. TheNational Food Commission Act was enacted.11

13.3.2 The Philippines

Dubbed the leading implementer of the ‘Green Revolution’ in the 1970s, thePhilippines consists of 7107 islands lying between the Pacific Ocean andthe South China Sea. Its terrain ranges from flat and undulating to hilly andmountainous with 40 per cent of its land being arable. Agriculture plays amajor role in generating income and employment in the rural areas of thePhilippines, accounting for 14.6 per cent of its GDP. However, foodproduction is not keeping pace with population growth. Moreover, a largepart of Philippine agriculture operates at subsistence level and is vulnerableto erratic climate changes. About six out of ten people in rural areas dependon agriculture for their livelihood. The average farm is 2.5 ha in size, and

11 Sajin Prachason, ‘Food Security in Thai Society: a report submitted to UNDPThailand’ (2009) 45 <http://sathai.org/story_thai/043-FOOD_SECURITY.pdf>.




rice, coconut and corn are the principal crops and staple diets. In Mindanao,almost one third of the land is devoted to agriculture, and the islandaccounts for 40 per cent of the Philippines’ food requirements, contributingto more than 30 per cent to the country’s food trade. According to the FAO’sstatistics on the Philippines, as of 2007, the proportion of undernourishmentwas 15 per cent (13.2 million), compared to the 24 per cent in 1990,signifying the increasing strength of food security. However, 25.1 per centof its population is still living in poverty with 36.9 per cent of those peopleliving in rural areas.12

While food security has improved in the Philippines, there is stillconsiderable room for improvement in terms of the policies and programsthat the government has undertaken to improve food security. One of themain constraints on government action has been the instability of thegovernment, stemming primarily from corruption, and the policies thatfavour foreign investors instead of its constituencies. Furthermore, most ofthe country’s economic resources are used to pay for national debt, insteadof funding agricultural agencies to enhance their agricultural programs andincrease food security. By the end of 1980s, the government’s investmentsin agriculture had dropped by over 50 per cent, causing rice imports to risesteadily in the 1990s. The Philippines now, ironically, is the world’s largestrice importer. It has also negative agricultural trade balances with almost allASEAN countries.13

One of the Philippines’ key initiatives on food security is the recentlyestablished collaboration between The Philippine Department of Agricul-ture & Rice Research Institute (DA-PhilRice). This project aims to achieveself-sufficiency in rice production by 2013. The project addresses climaticdifferences, and biological, physical and socioeconomic production con-straints. The focused interventions include integrated crop management,high quality rice seeds, R&D, capacity enhancement, irrigation systemrehabilitation, post-harvest and mechanization assistance, farm-to-marketroads, marketing assistance, program monitoring and evaluation, incentive

12 FAO, ‘Country Profile: Food Security Indicators, The Philippines’ (2010)<http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ess/documents/food_security_statistics/country_profiles/eng/Philippines_E.pdf> accessed July 25, 2011.

13 Randall Arnst, ‘Business as Usual: Response within ASEAN to the FoodCrisis’, Report for Focus on the Global South Occasional Papers 4, (February2009), 11.




systems, policy analysis and advocacy regulatory services, and databasemanagement.14

The second initiative is the Philippine Department of Agriculture FoodSecurity Programs. The Department of Agriculture has implemented pro-grams according to crop type to strengthen the agricultural sector in thePhilippines, including the Rice program, the Corn program, the Livestockprogram, the Fisheries program, the Sugar Cane program, and the Coconutprogram. Basically, these programs focus on increasing productivity andyield through training programs, the promotion of productivity-enhancingtechnologies, financial loans, educating farmers and providing all theopportunities the government can give. For example, the rice program aimsto promote and intensify the inbred rice seed technology15 in the rain-fedand irrigated areas, while the sugar program aims to adopt appropriatetechnological innovations and world class technologies for sugar produc-tion and processing that could support a continuing interest amongstproducers and millers in enhancing sustainable sugar cane and sugarproductivity. These programs also seek to enhance the sustainability of allthese agricultural yields to improve the Philippines’ self-sufficiency andfood security.16

The Department of Agriculture has another initiative on food securitycalled the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). It undertakesland tenure improvement and development of program beneficiaries. Theprogram conducts land surveys in resettlement areas. It undertakes landacquisition and distribution, and land management studies. It also orches-trates the delivery of support services to farmer-beneficiaries and promotesthe development of viable agrarian reform communities. Currently threeprograms are in operation: the Land Tenure Improvement Program; the

14 Philippine Rice Research Institute, ‘Rice Self-Sufficiency Eyed in 2013’ (9August 2011). <http://www.philrice.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=1&Itemid=103>.

15 Ordinary or inbred rice seed is produced when the egg inside the ovary isfertilized by pollen grains shed from anthers borne in the same spikelet as well asanthers from other spikelets of the same plant, and from the spikelet of another plantof the same variety. When farmers plant an entire field to a single variety, theyare producing inbred seed. For details, visit: http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/extension/hybridricereproductive-parts-of-the-rice-plant/hybridriceinbred-rice-seed.html.

16 Department of Agriculture of the Philippines, ‘Programs’ (2011) <http://www.da.gov.ph/> accessed July 25, 2011.




Program Beneficiaries’ Development Program; and the Agrarian JusticeDelivery program.17

13.3.3 Vietnam

As a result of the decimation of Vietnam’s agricultural base during its warwith the United States, Vietnam became a net food importer. However,Vietnam weathered the Asian financial crisis well and it is now the world’ssecond largest exporter of rice, sending 4–5 million tons abroad annually inrecent years. However, over 500,000 Ha of farmland has been lost tourbanization and industrial zones and the rate of loss is now more than73,000 ha per year, with 80 per cent of it being rice land. For each hectare ofland lost, 15 people lose their livelihoods. In response to rampant foodinsecurity, in 2009 the government banned the signing of all new rice exportcontracts, thereby limiting exports to 3.5–4 million tons per annum.18

Some of the key initiatives taken by the Ministry of Agriculture and RuralDevelopment (MARD) on food security are as follows:

+ MARD has a target to increase rice production by 1 million tonnes in2011 by expanding rice cultivation by 100,000 ha in southern prov-inces; and maintaining 3.8 million ha of rice farming land

+ MARD intends to increase the productivity of the agricultural sectorand organize public auctions of agricultural land to introduce trans-parency and check widespread abuses

+ MARD has approved a project on bird flu vaccine inoculation for2011–2012 to combat the highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 inpoultry. Total investment was more than 310 million VND

+ MARD has organized a workshop by the Committee for EthnicMinorities on solutions for hunger eradication and the poverty reduc-tion policy

+ The Prime Minister has approved a development strategy for Viet-nam’s fishing industry, which is expected to be completed by 2020

+ Aided by the Asian Development Bank, the Prime Minister hasapproved a project on Northern Mountainous and Rural InfrastructureDevelopment

+ Through its rural clean water and environmental hygiene program

17 Ibid.18 Arnst, ‘Business as Usual’, above n 13.




MARD has allocated an extra 54,000 billion VND for clean water andsanitation in rural areas19

13.3.4 Indonesia

Although agriculture represents a relatively small portion of Indonesia’smonetary economy, it provides a livelihood to nearly half of its people.20

Despite the global economic crisis, the country rose to lower middle-income status in 2009, with overall poverty falling from 16.7 per cent in2004 to 14.15 per cent in 2009. However, 13 per cent of the country’spopulation still lives below the national poverty line. In 2008, 87 millionpeople were classified as food insecure, and 25 million of them were furtherclassified as severely food insecure. The agricultural sector has a growthrate of only half that of the overall economy, with agriculture contributingless than 14 per cent of total GDP.21

One of Indonesia’s key initiatives on food security is targeting the ethnicminorities through a program called ‘Programs on Social Safety Net.’ Thisprogram was implemented following the national crisis in 1997, which waslargely caused by the Southeast Asian financial crisis and it was targeted atindigenous and ethnic minorities, groups that are usually below the povertyline. Its aim was to encourage economic recovery by creating productive jobopportunities for the jobless, increase people’s income and willingness topay, improve social welfare, and coordinate various programs thataddressed the impact of the crisis and poverty education. This program alsoinvolved increasing food security in these communities by enabling theoperation of rice markets, the development of seedlings and chicken rearingin villages, as well as the development of small-scale fisheries. Thisprogram became the initial undertaking of various poverty reduction andsocial protection programs implemented by successive governments in thepost-crisis period.22

19 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Strategy and Plans (2011)<http://www.agroviet.gov.vn/en/Pages/news.aspx?CategoryId=15> accessed July26, 2011.

20 Arnst, above n 13, 9.21 IFPRI Food Security Portal, ‘Indonesia’<http://www.foodsecurityportal.org/

indonesia> accessed 27 July 2011.22 Asian Development Bank, Environment & Social Safeguard Division, Indig-

enous Peoples/Ethnic Minorities and Poverty Reduction Indonesia (2002) Ch. 4,<http://www.adb.org/documents/reports/indigenous_peoples/ino/indigenous_ino.pdf>.




The second initiative was the rice subsidy program called OPK (OperasiPasar Khusus), introduced at the same time as the economic crisis and thedrought in 1998. This program aimed to enable the poor to have access torice, their main food staple. Eligible households were allowed to buy 20kgof rice at a subsidized price one-third of the normal market price. The OPKprogram expanded very quickly, reaching an average of 110.5 millionhouseholds in 2000. In that time, the program was launched in major urbanslums with support from NGOs and the UN’s World Food Program(WFP).23

In 2001, the Indonesian government launched another program similar tothat of the OPK. The Raskin program was undertaken as compensation forthe reduction of fuel subsidies. The government allocated 500 million IDRto support this program in 2002. The beneficiaries were mainly the poor. In2008, the number of poor households in Indonesia amounted to 19.1 millionand the number of recipients of this program were slightly more than thatnumber – 19.13 million households. In addition, 3.13 million tons of ricewas subsidized and the budget allocated for that particular year was 11.66billion IDR. In 2009, this program distributed 3.1 million tons of rice to itsbeneficiaries.24

13.3.5 Cambodia

In the past decade, Cambodia has achieved economic growth of over 10 percent but this only reflects the economy of the capital Phnom Penh. Nearly60 per cent of the population is engaged in agriculture and 60 per cent ofthose are landless, or own less than a hectare of land. During the 2007–08food crisis, the price of most foods increased by 20–70 per cent whileCambodia’s food staple, rice, doubled. The Cambodian DevelopmentResearch Council believed that the increased cost of rice was due to ‘tradefactors’ such as local speculators and world markets, while other reasonswere higher input costs especially for fertilizers and fuel, which are allimported with no subsidies. Just less than 80 per cent of the population livesin rural areas while 66 per cent of them depend on agriculture for theirlivelihoods. Hence, it is not surprising that people in those areas were hit thehardest during the food crisis. As of today, around 3 million people in the

23 Vijay S Vyas, Food Security in Asian Countries, above n 2.24 Asep Suryahadi et al., Review of Government Poverty Reduction Strategies,

Policies, and Programs in Indonesia (Research Report, SMERU Research Institute,2010), 15.




country are facing undernourishment due to the fact that people spend morethan 70 per cent of their income on food, and hence downgrade both thequantity and the quality of their diets to be able to afford other necessities.In addition, Cambodia has some of the highest malnutrition rates in Asia,with 44 per cent of children under five years of age stunted and 15 per centwasted. In response to the food crisis, like its neighbour Vietnam, the RoyalGovernment of Cambodia (RGC) banned the export of rice in 2009, butlifted it soon after to take advantage of high international prices, as well asbecause of the lack of local milling and storage capacity.25

Cambodia is known for being highly dependent on international insti-tutions for food and agricultural aid. For instance, the RGC recognized theFAO’s Special Program for Food Security (SPFS) as the country’s firstpriority to strengthen food security. Currently, the RGC is using the SPFSfor implementing the national strategy for boosting agricultural productionand improving food security in the country. However, Cambodia has also ahandful of self-initiated programs to cater to the country’s food security,funded either by the government, or by international banks such as theAsian Development Bank.26

Among the initiatives on food security, the Cambodian Nutrition Invest-ment Plan (CNIP) is significant. This program was a product of a two-yearstudy coordinated by the Ministry of Planning with the involvement ofseveral government ministries, UN agencies and NGOs. The plan providesfor a long-term strategy to implement the nutrition aspects in three maindocuments: The Second Five-Year (2001–05) Socio-Economic Develop-ment Plan; the 3-Year Rolling Public Investment Plan (PIP); and theNational Nutrition Plan of Action (NNPA). Although these programs areout-dated, the government is planning to continue them for the periodbetween 2008 and 2013. The Ministry of Health has also recently developeda Nutrition Strategic Plan for 2008–15 to outline a long-term strategy for theNational Nutrition Program as part of the health sector strategy. Suchchanges in the new CNIP for 2008–2012 include the promotion of appropri-ate infant, young child, and caring practices, and the implementation of themicronutrient nutrition measures.27

25 Arnst above n 13.26 Vyas, above n 2.27 Ibid.




The Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition in Cambodia2008–12 (SFFSN) is another initiative. This SFFSN is a reference docu-ment on cross-cutting issues of food security and nutrition. There are 5SFFSN objectives for 2008–12

+ Food-insecure households should increase food availability from theirown agriculture and livestock production and from common propertyforests and fisheries

+ Food-insecure households should increase their food access byincreasing household income

+ Food-insecure households should improve the use and utilization oftheir food resulting in reduced malnutrition, morbidity and mortality,particularly among women and children

+ Improved social safety nets and enhanced capacities for food insecurehouseholds to cope with risks and shocks should increase the stabilityof their food supply

+ The institutional and policy environment for achieving improved foodsecurity and nutrition in Cambodia should be enhanced28

13.4 INITIATIVES BY REGIONAL FORUMS

As noted at the beginning of this chapter, food insecurity is not only a localproblem but also a regional one. Hence, it requires effective policyresponses that are supported by regional governance arrangements. Accord-ing to Elliott, the rationale for a regional initiative is driven by an assump-tion that regions are a logical and natural location for policy responses andgovernment issues that cannot be addressed easily by individual countries.Collective regional responses are also perceived to confer efficiency advan-tages.29 For Southeast Asia, some regional initiatives are adumbrated below.

13.4.1 Association of Southeast Asian Nations

The aims and purposes of ASEAN include facilitating the acceleration ofeconomic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region. It

28 CARD, and TWG-FSN, Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutri-tion in Cambodia 2008 – 2012 (SFFSN) (2008).

29 Lorraine Elliot, ‘Securitising Food Futures in the Asia-Pacific: HumanSecuritising Regional Frameworks’ (Working Paper No. 15 RSIS-NTS, 2011), 7.




also promotes regional peace and stability and active collaboration andmutual assistance on matters of common interests in different fields.30

ASEAN has been developing and implementing programs and policies tostrengthen food security in the region. One such initiative is the ASEANIntegrated Food Security Framework (AIFS). This framework was createdin response to the food crisis in 2007–08 and the urgent need to develop apolicy framework comprising the strategic pursuit of measures, actions, andcommitments from member states to ensure food security in the region. Theframework was developed to address long-term food security in theASEANregion and to provide scope and joint pragmatic approaches for cooperationamong ASEAN member states. The AIFS comprises six strategic thrusts

+ Strategic Thrust 1: Strengthen food security arrangements through,first, (a) strengthening national food security programs and activities,including through promoting diversification of food sources andscaling up community-based food security initiatives; (b) supportingcapacity building to strengthen national food security programs,including management of national food stockpiles, planning of poten-tial land use for agriculture, and technical support for preparing anational food balance sheet; (c) promoting exchange of informationand experiences among ASEAN Member States through networkingand regional consultations in the formulation and implementation ofnational food security programs and activities; and (d) enhancing foodassistance programs for the targeted vulnerable groups. The secondaction program is to develop regional food security reserve initiativesand mechanisms by reinforcing the ASEAN Food Security ReserveBoard (AFSRB) and its secretariat in: the compilation, managementand dissemination of statistics and information on food and foodsecurity as a basis for effective planning of food production and tradewithin the region; supporting the establishment of a long-term mech-anism for the ASEAN Plus Three emergency rice reserve; and inconducting a study on the possibility of establishing an ASEAN Fundfor Food Security

+ Strategic Thrust 2: Promote conducive food market and trade throughpromoting initiatives supporting sustainable food trade. Activitiesinclude full compliance and implementation of the ASEAN Trade inGoods Agreement (ATIGA) provisions with respect to trade in food

30 ASEAN, ‘About ASEAN’ (2009) <http://www.asean.org/about_ASEAN.html> accessed July 30, 2011.




products, and a review and analysis of international and regional tradeinformation, including prices, quantities traded, distribution andlogistics

+ Strategic Thrust 3: Strengthen integrated food security informationsystems to effectively forecast, plan and monitor supplies and utiliza-tion of basic food commodities by reinforcing the ASEAN FoodSecurity Information System (AFSIS) project and making it a long-term mechanism. Activities include (a) conducting a food securityassessment and identifying underlying causes of food insecurity; (b)collecting and periodically updating and sharing information onsupply and demand/utilization for the main food commodities such asrice, corn, soybean, cassava and sugar, and maintain food securityrelated baseline data for each Member State in a regional database;and (c) developing an early warning, monitoring and surveillanceinformation system as a basis for sound development planning andpolicy decisions to address food security, including a sharp rise infood prices

+ Strategic Thrust 4: Promote sustainable food production throughimproving agricultural infrastructure development to secure produc-tion systems, minimize post-harvest losses, and reduce transactioncosts. Activities include promoting the development of supply chainsystems in member states through establishing demonstrated modelsand sharing knowledge, as well as promoting public and private sectorpartnerships to promote efficient and sustainable food production,food consumption, post-harvest practices and loss reduction, market-ing and trade

+ Strategic Thrust 5: Encourage greater investment in food and agro-based industry. Key activities include encouraging public investmentin food and agro-based industry and strengthening capacity buildingfor the adoption of international standards for food safety, as well asquality assurance and certification systems

+ Strategic Thrust 6: Identify and address emerging issues related tofood security through addressing the development of bio-fuels in thecontext of food security.31

31 ASEAN, ASEAN Integrated Food Security Framework and Strategic Plan ofAction on Food Security in the ASEAN Region 2009–2013 (2009) <http://www.asean.org/22338.pdf>.




Following these strategic thrusts, ASEAN has generated a number of foodsecurity arrangements established through a variety of declarations, pro-grams, frameworks, and plans. Below is a list of those that ASEAN hasimplemented since the year 2000, including the AIFS referred to above:

+ the ASEAN Food Security Information System (AFSIS) in October2002;

+ the ASEAN Plus Three Cooperation Work Plan in November 2007;+ the Strategic Plan of Action on Food Security in the ASEAN Region

(SPA-FS) in February 2009;+ the ASEAN-FAO Regional Conference on Food Security in May

2009;+ the ASEAN Multi-sectoral Framework on Climate Change and Food

Security in September 2009;+ the Cha-am Hua Hin Statement on ASEAN Plus Three Cooperation

on Food Security and Bio-energy Development in October 2009;+ the ASEAN Plus Three Roundtable on Food Security Cooperation

Strategy in October 2009; and+ the 31st meeting of the ASEAN Ministers on Agriculture and Forestry

in 2009.32

13.4.2 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) was established in 1989 tofurther enhance economic growth and prosperity in the region. Currently,APEC has four working groups on food-related issues: the AgriculturalTechnical Cooperation Working Group; the High Level Policy Dialogue onAgricultural Biotechnology (HLPDAB); the Sub-Committee on Standardsand Conformance (SCSC); and the Food Safety Cooperation Forum(FSCF).33 While APEC’s role as a driver of food security initiatives in theAsia-Pacific region generates strong interest, it also causes at the same timesignificant concerns. However, it can certainly act as a buffer betweendeveloping member countries and institutions such as banks and multi-national corporations (MNCs), and bring in new forms of partnership in thebroader context of economic development. It is, however, hard to find anyassessment as to how APEC helps increase food security.

32 Elliot, ‘Securitising Food Futures in the Asia-Pacific’, above n 29.33 Kraft, ‘Establishing Good Security Sector Governance in Southeast Asia’,

above n 5.




13.5 GLOBAL INITIATIVES FOR REGIONAL FOODSECURITY

13.5.1 The Special Program for Food Security

The SPFS was launched in 1994 by the FAO and is a flagship program toboost food and agricultural production in order to strengthen food security.In retrospect, the program was initially launched to focus on helpingcountries promote and disseminate simple, low-cost technologies toimprove the yields and income of poor farming households. However,experience proved that it was possible to engage very large numbers of ruralpeople in identifying and applying locally-specific solutions involving theuse of simple and improved technologies in agriculture. The aim of theSPFS is to improve food security within poor households through NationalPrograms for Food Security (NPFS) and Regional Programs for FoodSecurity (RPFS), and thereby achieve the Millennium Development Goals,including the goal of halving hunger. The governments that participate alldevelop FAO programs and the FAO acts as a catalyst and facilitator whosemain role is to help countries identify, formulate and implement nationaland regional food security programs. After the World Food Summit in 2002,the FAO shifted the focus of the program towards active advocacy andsupport to large-scale, multi-component NPFS and RPFS for food security.Hence, it is no longer a pilot program, but an evolving, fully-pledgedinitiative to fight hunger and malnutrition.34

One of the relative success stories, and the only Southeast Asian countrythat FAO features in their website, is Cambodia. The SPFS commenced in2004 in Cambodia and it has 5063 beneficiaries from 6 provinces. In 2002,the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries had successfully imple-mented the SPFS in collaboration with other ministries. The FAO providesmanagerial and technical support for this program. The program used theFarmer Field School concept and community approach to identifying theneeds of the poor farmers and then developed a suitable learning curricu-lum. Hence, farmers are educated regarding new agricultural technologiesand techniques. Given the success of the implementation, a total of 346savings groups in 179 villages have been developed to finance income-generating plans to apply whatever the farmers have learnt. In addition,community micro projects were also initiated and managed by advisory

34 FAO, Special Program for Food Security (FAO, 2010) <http://www.fao.org/spfs/about-spfs/mission-spfs/en/> accessed July 30, 2011.




committees elected by the community. These committees identified asuitable food security related project and hence, 73 rice banks, 106 fertilizerbanks and one well construction unit were formed.35

13.5.2 World Food Program

The WFP is currently the world’s largest humanitarian agency fightinghunger in the world. It provides immediate emergency relief to societies orcountries that have experienced, or are experiencing natural calamities,social and civil unrest, or to put it plainly, hunger. Basically, the WFP usesfood to rebuild shattered lives. In 2010 the WFP aimed to reach more than90 million people with food assistance in more than 70 countries. The WFPis currently working in some of the Southeast Asian countries implementinga few projects and providing immediate food relief, especially to those inthe rural areas.36

13.5.3 International Fund for Agricultural Development

The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is a special-ized agency of the UN and was established as an international financialinstitution in 1977. This organization is dedicated to eradicating ruralpoverty in developing countries by focusing on country-specific solutions,which can involve increasing access by the rural poor to financial services,markets, technology, land and other natural resources. The objectives ofIFAD’s 2011–15 strategic framework are to ensure that poor rural peoplehave better access to natural resources, improved agricultural technologies,a broad range of financial services, transparent and competitive markets foragricultural inputs and produce, opportunities for rural off-farm employ-ment and enterprise development, and local and national policy and pro-gramming processes.37

Specifically in Asia and the Pacific region, the IFAD has a separatestrategy for development interventions and it focuses on three main pur-poses: sustainable resource management; transformation of rural econo-mies; and post-crisis rehabilitation These approaches are for long-term

35 FAO, Success Stories: Cambodia (FAO, 2010) <http://www.fao.org/spfs/about-spfs/success-spfs/cambodia/en/> accessed July 30, 2011.

36 WFP, ‘Fighting Hunger Worldwide’ (WFP, 2011) <http://www.wfp.org/about> accessed July 30 2011.

37 IFAD, ‘About IFAD’ <http://www.ifad.org/governance/index.htm> accessedJuly 30, 2011.




developments, unlike WFP’s short-term food emergency relief. Wherepossible, the IFAD promotes land reform policies and has a key role to playin enhancing agricultural production and enhancing the locals’ ability tomake full use of the resources available to them. Since 1978, the IFAD hasfinanced 185 loan initiatives in 21 countries in Asia for a total of 3 billionUSD. They have also introduced the Performance-Based Allocation System(PBAS) and the Debt Sustainability Framework to ensure a broader distri-bution of resources based on performance. These interventions particularlytarget areas inhabited by ethnic groups and indigenous peoples and otherminorities that are marginalized. Some of the groups that the IFAD prior-itizes are Vietnam, and the Philippines, where the IFAD-funded CordilleraHighland Agricultural Resource Management Project was implemented. Itboasted major achievements vis-à-vis the target indigenous population.There has been a significant reduction in poverty and increase in foodsecurity in the area and the IFAD has helped the government providecertificates of access rights to more than 100,000 hectares of ancestral landfor indigenous tribes. The project successfully integrated the lapat localknowledge system for forest management into its reforestation activities. Asa result of this pilot exercise, the lapat system will become integrated intonational policy.38

13.6 CONCLUSION

The discussion shows that along with country-specific governmental initia-tives on food security, a regional initiative is indeed imperative in order tostrengthen food security, especially in Southeast Asia. However, althoughthere is a plethora of sector-specific literature on food security, there hasbeen very little systematic research that assesses the extent of coherence orfragmentation of regional responses. Multiple regional arrangements maynot be able to function as partnerships in innovation, as they may remaindisaggregated and disconnected from each other. Those regional efforts thatare characterized by duplication and overlap may increase, rather thandecrease, total transaction costs. Hence, there is a strong need for theestablishment of a centre for the coordination of food security activities in

38 IFAD, ‘Rural Poverty In Asia and the Pacific Region’ <http://www.ifad.org/operations/projects/regions/pi/index.htm> accessed July 30, 2011.




Asia. This could be done through an existing institution such as the regionaloffice of FAO and ADB.39

Another perspective that regional initiative advocates and institutionsshould take into consideration is what Elliott calls the Human SecuritizingFood Security Framework. This framework is a people-centred humansecurity approach that recognizes that the vulnerability of people can takemany different forms. In addition, regional food security frameworksshould recognize and facilitate community-based responses to the chal-lenges associated with food security. Furthermore, policies and initiativesshould be sensitive to equity concerns at local levels as well. This wouldmean that there is a need to enhance both access to food sources by themarginalized minorities, including women, ethnic communities, and poorrural inhabitants, who often lack social benefits, such as social safety nets;and enhance the policies that have failed to include them. Although coun-tries have increased food production, it does not mean that the poor haveequal access to food. In this respect, an emphasis on equity changes fromfood security to food sovereignty, championing a bottom-up approach toinfluence food security policies. Lastly, regional food security frameworksshould recognize the environmental dimensions of food security and insti-tute governance arrangements that are transparent and accountable, andwhich address trade, markets and investments in a way that recognizessocial responsibility and equity.40

39 Elliot, ‘Securitising Food Futures in the Asia-Pacific’, above n 29.40 Ibid.



Date post:	07-Feb-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nanyang
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

“Regional Initiates on Food Security: The Case of Southeast Asia.”

Documents