Hunger Map 2011 infographic

Title map Number of undernourished people by region, 1990–2010 Other

South East Asia

3%

Africa

9%

2%

30%

9%

2%

27%

13%

20% 32%

1990-92

South Asia and India

38%

7%

6%

6%

Latin America and Caribbean

39%

26% 2006-08

17%

2010

14%

East Asia and China

Hunger Map 2011

Undernourished

< 5%

5-9%

10-19%

20-34%

≥ 35%

Extremely low

Very low

Moderately low

Moderately high

Very high

Incomplete data

Undernourishment in the world: two very different trends after the crises 600

ASIA

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

590 580 570 560 550 540 530 520 510

Millions

500 490 480 470 460 450 440 430 420 410

400 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310

AFRICA

300

200

Proportion of undernourished people in developing countries, 1969–2010

MILLIONS

290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210

Number of undernourished people in the world, 1969–71 to 2010

900

880

860

840

820

800

780 1969-71

1979-81

1990-92

1995-97

2000-02

2006-08

...

Percentage of undernourished MDG Goal 2015

1969-71

1979-81

1990-92

1995-97

2000-02

2006-08

2009

2010

2011

Title map www.fao.org/hunger/en/

Small countries, especially in Africa, were deeply affected by the food and economic crises. Some large countries were able to insulate themselves from the crisis through restrictive trade policies and functioning safety nets, but trade insulation increased prices and volatility on international markets.

Large short-term price changes can have long-term impacts on development. Changes in income due to price swings can reduce children’s consumption of key nutrients during critical development phases, leading to a permanent reduction of the earning capacity of the poor and thus a slowing of the economic development process. Price volatility is likely to continue in the future due to a higher frequency of extreme climate events and stronger linkages between agricultural and energy markets.

Price volatility makes both smallholder farmers and poor consumers increasingly vulnerable to poverty. Because food is a large share of farmer income and the budget of poor consumers, large price changes have large effects on income.

Thus, even short episodes of high prices for consumers or low prices for farmers can cause productive assets – land and livestock, for example – to be sold at low prices. In addition, smallholder farmers are less likely to invest in measures to raise productivity when price changes are unpredictable.

High food prices worsen food insecurity in the short-term, but they present an opportunity for increasing long-term investment in the agricultural sector; they can thus contribute to improved food security in the longer term. High food prices benefit farmers with access to sufficient land and other resources, but the poorest of the poor are unlikely to reap such benefits. In addition to harming the urban poor, high food prices also harm many of the rural poor, who are typically net food buyers. Domestic food prices increased substantially in most countries during the world food crisis at both retail and farmgate levels. Despite higher fertilizer prices, this led to a strong supply response in many countries. It is essential to build upon this shorterm supply response with increased investment in agriculture.

Safety nets are crucial for alleviating food insecurity in the short term, as well as for providing a foundation for long-term development. In order to be effective at reducing the negative consequences of price volatility, targeted safety-net mechanisms must be designed in advance and in consultation with the most vulnerable people.

Over the longer term, a food-security strategy that relies on a combination of increased productivity and general openness to trade will be more effective than a strategy that relies primarily on the closure of borders. Restrictive trade policies can (and did, in some large countries) protect domestic prices from world market volatility, but can harm poor people in other countries by increasing instability on world markets. These policies can also result in increased domestic price volatility as a result of domestic supply shocks. Government policies that are more predictable and that promote participation by the private sector in trade will generally decrease price volatility.

Investment in agriculture remains critical to sustainable longterm food security. Such investment will improve the competitiveness of domestic production, increase farmers’ profits and make food more affordable for the poor. For example, cost-effective irrigation and improved practices and seeds developed through agricultural research can reduce the production risks facing farmers, especially smallholders, and reduce price volatility.

Private investment will form the bulk of the needed investment, but public investment has a catalytic role to play in supplying public goods that the private sector will not provide.