Swiss Policies for more Food Security

Resource-poor yet blissful Switzerland is also one of the most food-secure countries in the world: there are abundant food supplies, relatively low retail prices in terms of purchasing power parity, with few poverty traps. Domestic production covers 70% of net domestic consumption. A vast and efficient food reserve scheme insures against import disruptions. Nonetheless, the food security contribution by the four sectoral policies involved is mutually constrained: our agriculture is protected by the world’s highest tariffs. Huge subsidies, surface payments, and some production quotas substitute market signals with rent maximisation. Moreover, these inefficiencies also prevent trade and investment policies which would keep markets open, development policies which would provide African farmers with the tools to become more competitive, and supply policies which would work against speculators. The paralysing effect of Swiss agricultural policies is exacerbated by new “food security subsidies” in the name of “food sovereignty” while two pending people’s initiatives might yet increase the splendid isolation which in effect reduce Swiss farmer competitiveness and global food security. Is there a solution? Absent a successful conclusion of the Doha Round (WTO) or a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement (TTIP) further market openings and a consequent “recoupling” of taxpayer support to public goods production remain highly un-likely. To the very minimum Switzerland should resume the agricultural reform process, join other countries trying to prevent predatory behaviour of its investors in developing countries, and regionalise its food reserve.

Ethiopia's Food Reserve Policies and Practice

Ethiopia has for a long time been one of the world’s most food-insecure countries. Efforts by the government and a multitude of sponsors including NGOs have developed an array of institutions and instruments to mitigate the negative impact of production and supply disruptions. Public stockpiles are one such tool, the use of which is rapidly increasing worldwide. This brief field study examines the Ethiopian policies and practice in context, including various instruments operated by farmers, processors and traders. The study finds that the multiple objectives assigned to food reserves as well as the present management structure may not be well-suited at a time of high world market prices and when international food aid is dwindling, and as the international regulatory trade and investment environment remains a matter of unfinished business from a global food security perspective. A comprehensive study of various options for improvements would lay out policy alternatives for public authorities and stakeholders.

Foreign Direct Investment in Agriculture: Land Grab or Food Security Improvement?

“Large-scale acquisition of land by foreign investors” is the correct term for a process where the verdict of guilt is often quicker than the examination. But is there something really new about land grab except in its extent? In comparison with colonial and post-colonial plantation operations, should foreign investors today behave differently? We generally accept coffee and banana exports as pro-growth and pro-development, just as for cars, beef and insurance. What then is wrong with an investment contract allowing the holder to buy a farm and to export wheat to Saudi Arabia, or soybeans and maize as cattle feed to Korea, or to plant and process sugar cane and palm oil into ethanol for Europe and China? Assuming their land acquisition was legal, should foreigners respect more than investment contracts and national legislation? And why would they not take advantage of the legal protection offered by international investment law and treaties, not to speak of concessional finance, infrastructure and technical cooperation by a development bank, or the tax holidays offered by the host state? Remember Milton Friedman’s often-quoted quip: “The business of business is business!” And why would the governments signing those contracts not know whether and which foreign investment projects are best for their country, and how to attract them? This chapter tries to show that land grab, where it occurs, is not only yet another symptom of regulatory failures at the national level and a lack of corporate social responsibility by certain private actors. National governance is clearly the most important factor. Nonetheless, I submit that there is an international dimension involving investor home states in various capacities. The implication is that land grab is not solely a question whether a particular investment contract is legal or not. This chapter deals with legal issues which seem to have largely escaped the attention of both human rights lawyers and, especially, of investment lawyers. I address this fragmentation between different legal disciplines, rules, and policies, by asking two basic questions: (i) Do governments and parliaments in investor home countries have any responsibility in respect of the behaviour of their investors abroad? (ii) What should they and international regulators do, if anything?

Discussion: Food security and sustainable food systems: The role of soil

There is a general consensus that healthy soils are pivotal for food security. Food production is one of the main ecosystem services provided by and thus dependent on well-functioning soils. There are also intrinsic connections between the four pillars of food security: food availability, access, utilization, and stability; with how soils are managed, accessed and secured, in particular by food insecure and vulnerable populations. On the other hand, socio-political and economic processes that precipitate inequalities and heighten vulnerabilities among poor populations often increase pressure on soils due to unsustainable forms of land use and poor agricultural practises. This has often led to scenarios that can be described as: ‘poor soils, empty stomachs (hungry people) and poor livelihoods.' In 2015, in particular, as we head towards approval of the ‘Sustainable Development Goals' (SDGs), the role of Financing for Development is debated and agreed upon and a new climate pact is signed – these three political dimensions define how a new post-2015 agenda needs to be people-smart as well as resource-smart. For proposed SDG 2 (Food Security and Hunger), there can be so resolution without addressing people, policies and institutions.