Acroecology and the right to food 2011, para. 37

Paragraph
Paragraph text
Agroecological practices require the supply of public goods such as extension services, storage facilities, rural infrastructure (roads, electricity, information and communication technologies) and therefore access to regional and local markets, access to credit and insurance against weather-related risks, agricultural research and development, education, and support to farmer's organizations and cooperatives. While this requires funding, the investment can be significantly more sustainable than the provision of private goods, such as fertilizers or pesticides that farmers can only afford so long as they are subsidized. While many efforts have been made since 2008 to reinvest in agriculture, too little attention has been paid to the differences between the various types of investment required and to understanding their impacts on the reduction of rural poverty. This has led World Bank economists to note that "underinvestment in agriculture is […] compounded by extensive misinvestment" with a bias towards the provision of private goods, sometimes motivated by political considerations. Research based on the study of 15 Latin American countries over the period 1985-2001 in which government subsidies for private goods was distinguished from expenditures in public goods indicated that, within a fixed national agriculture budget, a reallocation of 10 per cent of spending to supplying public goods increases agricultural per capita income by 5 per cent, while a 10 per cent increase in public spending on agriculture, keeping the spending composition constant, increases per capita agricultural income by only 2 per cent. In other words, "even without changing overall expenditures, governments can improve the economic performance of their agricultural sectors by devoting a greater share of those expenditures to social services and public goods instead of non-social subsidies." Thus, while the provision or subsidization of private goods may be necessary up to a point, the opportunity costs should be carefully considered.
Legal status
Non-negotiated soft law
Body
Special Rapporteur on the right to food
Document type
Special Procedures' report
Means of adoption
N.A.
Topic(s)
  • Economic Rights
  • Food & Nutrition
  • Governance & Rule of Law
  • Poverty
Person(s) affected
  • All
  • N.A.
Year
2011
Paragraph type
Other
Reference
SR Food, Report to the HRC (2011), A/HRC/16/49, para. 37.
Paragraph number
37