Naomi Hossain, Participation Team IDS, based on work with partners in BRAC Development Institute, Rural Community Network, SMERU, Oxfam GB, University of Manchester, University of Sussex, and colleagues and partners in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Kenya, Northern Ireland, Jamaica, Yemen, the UK and Zambia, funded by DFID, Joseph Rowntree Foundation &Oxfam GB
Presentation to Future Agricultures Consortium workshop Financial Markets and Food Price Volatility February 6 2012, IDS
What FPV means, why it matters and for whom: what we have learned from qualitative crisis monitoring since 2009
Qualitative ‘crisis’ monitoring, 2009 -
- Initial aim: to gather evidence of the human impacts of the FFF ‘crisis’
- Approach 2009-11:- Selected community ‘listening posts’, repeat visits to 8 since 2009 (2
each in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Kenya, Zambia)- Not only poorest communities- Qualitative & participatory - Focus on social impacts (neglected
by quantitative measures) - From 2012
- 10 countries with Oxfam’s GROW campaign- sharper FPV focus- sharper focus on impacts on
informal social protection & unpaid care
Research participants in Notun Bazaar, Dhaka and Bekasi, near
Jakarta
Some headline reflections on FPV:
Food price spikes more of a ‘shock’ than the financial crisis - although second round financial crisis impacts were felt- & people felt the effects of commodity price falls
Living with FPV is the distinctive new mark of the globalisation of poverty
The numbers lie because people on low incomes adjust, but poverty and nutritional estimates ignore
- the decline in people’s wellbeing - the increased effort needed to provide nourishment - because this is (mainly women’s) unpaid care work & adjusting to food crises is just part of women’s natural altruistic instincts ...
FPV has had incredibly powerful effects on popular politics
Rubber farmers in South Kalimantan in Indonesia have
been enjoying high rubber prices
Food shopping(recall food basket method)
February 2010
2011
February 2011
Dhaka
Lower right: In 2011, Mrs Banu’s weekly food shop contained no lentils or soap, less tasty fish, but more rice. The 2011 basket cost her Tk 185.50 (US$1.56); the same items in 2010 would have cost Tk 134 (US$1.13). But if she had not adjusted her weekly food shop, her 2010 food basket would have cost Tk 280.50 (US$3.85) in 2011 prices.
FPV matters to all, but take particular note of:
The urban poor, who are rapidly growing in number globally- time to revisit questions of urban bias?
Unpaid workers in the care economy - what does FPV mean for women’s empowerment?
Informal sector workers- formal social protection fails this group in particular
Low-paid formal sector workers - hence all the industrial unrest
Who benefits - ?- no evidence that small farmers benefit- widespread popular perception that speculators and
grain dealers do well because they hoard and profiteer
Why FPV matters:
Some enduring poverty, nutritional and human development impacts, more so when prices remain highBut also unmeasured effects of volatility per se: on- The burden of the unpaid work of nourishing hhs
- Women work longer, harder hours with a range of knock-on effects- It is only ‘resilience’ because women don’t complain or show up in the
official statistics- Social cohesion, sociality, social support- Raised stress levels, loss of pleasure in everyday life- The sense of social mobility, of making progress
All of which combines to build:A powerful popular grievance against Governments that fail to protect people against food price volatility