Shouldn’t all food aid be locally purchased, therefore stimulating the local economy and pointing the country toward long-term food security?
The nominal amounts of food aid procured locally would create negligible long-term benefit for an economy. Only sustained production and inclusion in emerging regional/global markets will lift a country out of poverty and into food security. The potential for negative market impact is similar for in-kind and local purchase food aid. Commodity prices will be affected both through in-kind distribution and cash purchase. Therefore, a detailed market analysis is required to accompany any injection of “aid” into a country’s economy. This analysis has been required for all U.S. food aid programs over the last 20 years. Secondly, the risk of corruption or mismanagement carried with all aid provision is significantly increased with regard to direct cash compared to food commodities. Using earmarked cash to buy food from rural, smallholder farmers is not as efficient in practice as it is in theory. There is a significant chance that the cash will be appropriated for alternative uses or never ar
Related Questions
- Shouldn’t all food aid be locally purchased, therefore stimulating the local economy and pointing the country toward long-term food security?
- What if the spouse who wishes to work at post or on the local economy is a citizen of the country to which the employee is assigned?
- How does buying local food benefit the local and regional economy?
