16. The lack of action in the fight against hunger may havearisen, in part, from a widely held perception that success in povertyreduction, resulting from market-driven economic development, would"automatically " take care of the problem of hunger. However, this thinking doesnot take into account three points: first, poverty reduction takes time, whilethe hungry need immediate relief; second, in contrast to many diseases for whichcures are either unknown or unaffordable, the means to feed everyone are readilyand cheaply available; and third, hunger is as much a cause as an effect ofpoverty. Unless hunger is reduced, progress in cutting poverty is bound to beslow. A direct attack on hunger will greatly improve the chances of meeting theother Millennium Development Goals, not only for poverty reduction, but alsothose related to education, child mortality, maternal health anddisease.
17. Hungry children cannot grow and learn to their fullpotential. Hungry adults cannot perform hard physical labour; they fall sickmore often and are more likely to die young. They are also unwilling toundertake potentially profitable but riskier investments for fear of theconsequences of failure. Even worse, hunger perpetuates itself whenundernourished mothers give birth to smaller babies who start life with ahandicap. A vicious cycle of hunger and poverty is thus created, from which itis difficult for the poor and the hungry to escape without externalhelp.
18. However, if the cycle were broken, the benefits would beenormous. A rough measure of these benefits is given by the value of the longerand healthier lifespan that would be enjoyed by those who were no longerundernourished, as well as by the general population because it would be betternourished. Preliminary estimates suggest that, if the WFS goal of 408 millionundernourished people by 2015 is achieved, instead of the 610 million that willresult if "business as usual"[1]continues, the value of the extra years of healthy life should be morethan US$120 billion per year. This is a conservative estimate of the fulleconomic benefits of meeting the goal. In other words, agricultural and ruraldevelopment in support of hunger reduction has important overall beneficialeffects on the economy by creating demand for goods and services, bothdomestically produced and imported. Similar calculations in the report of theWorld Health Organization (WHO) Commission on Macroeconomics and Health suggestgains from improved nutrition and health of hundreds of billions of dollars peryear if the goal can be met. Thus, fighting hunger is not only a moralimperative, it also brings large economic benefits.
19. Success in reducing hunger is also likely to produce largebenefits in terms of sustainable development. The economic prosperity resultingfrom hunger reduction should create demand for sustainable use of theenvironment and of common property resources. This point takes on addedresonance in the context of the World Summit on Sustainable Development held inJohannesburg.
20. Finally, while few would dispute that hunger reductionbenefits poor countries, the rich countries also stand to gain, as their ownwelfare is closely linked to that of the less fortunate countries. Betternourishment in the poor countries is likely to increase their incomes, therebycreating a new source of demand for the products of the developed countries.Better nourishment may also reduce the likelihood of conflict. Lifting peopleout of hunger, the most extreme form of poverty and deprivation, makes it lesslikely that they will be easy prey for those who seek to promote their ownself-interest through conflict and civil strife. Apart from contributing toglobal stability, hunger reduction may also reduce the worlds expenditureon conflict prevention and rehabilitation of war-torn areas.
21. Therefore, halving hunger is not only a valid goal initself, but is also closely linked to the achievement of other key goals set bythe international community, most of which are reflected in the MillenniumDeclaration.
[1] The term "business asusual" refers to the best estimates available to FAO of the likely evolution infood availability, agricultural output, population, incomes and a host of othervariables related to nutrition under the baseline scenario of FAOsperspective study World agriculture: towards 2015/2030. This assumes,inter alia, that no extra effort is made to meet the World Food Summit(1996) target.
