4 ms·

We might not relocate it though. Dumping massive amounts of international sourced food typically drives down prices so much that the local producers can't make

We might not relocate it though. Dumping massive amounts of international sourced food typically drives down prices so much that the local producers can't make enough money to keep their operations going, and close up shop. Then when the food aid is turned off, the population has both grown to the level that aid could support, and the local production capacity is less than it originally started, meaning more famine related conflict.

Someone1234 7y ago
That's an absolutely fantastic point and I thank you for raising it. This is another example of where infrastructure pays more dividend than simply dropping aid onto areas. You truck in concrete and build a water-way, a region could eat for one hundred years, whereas if you bus in aid they can eat until the aid runs out (and it competes/undercuts local food). This is why China's effort to build infrastructure (on loan) in this regions[0] is kind of a double-edged sword. While China's motivations may be anything but pure (regional influence/military supply lines/indebting poor countries) the side-effort could be reduced hunger/famine regardless. [0] https://africacenter.org/spotlight/implications-for-africa-china-one-belt-one-road-strategy/ https://africacenter.org/spotlight/implications-for-africa-c...
simonsarris 7y ago
You don't even have to do the dumping. Venezuela gov's own program for better food allowed Venezuelans to purchase food from neighboring countries for 'cheap.' The result is that a lot of Venezuelan farmers closed shop during these good times. Alas, cue hard times, and you have today (or these past ~3 years). (This is a terrible simplification of Venezuela's ills, I only say it because it is an interesting case where internal food aid did the same destructive thing. It seems if you want lasting food aid, you should always try to make the aid bottom up, from the farmers.)
sixplusone 7y ago
Give a man a fish, and you fed him for a day. Some ancient wisdom being ignored.

Someone1234 7y ago

That's an absolutely fantastic point and I thank you for raising it. This is another example of where infrastructure pays more dividend than simply dropping aid onto areas. You truck in concrete and build a water-way, a region could eat for one hundred years, whereas if you bus in aid they can eat until the aid runs out (and it competes/undercuts local food). This is why China's effort to build infrastructure (on loan) in this regions[0] is kind of a double-edged sword. While China's motivations may be anything but pure (regional influence/military supply lines/indebting poor countries) the side-effort could be reduced hunger/famine regardless. [0] https://africacenter.org/spotlight/implications-for-africa-china-one-belt-one-road-strategy/ https://africacenter.org/spotlight/implications-for-africa-c...

simonsarris 7y ago

You don't even have to do the dumping. Venezuela gov's own program for better food allowed Venezuelans to purchase food from neighboring countries for 'cheap.' The result is that a lot of Venezuelan farmers closed shop during these good times. Alas, cue hard times, and you have today (or these past ~3 years). (This is a terrible simplification of Venezuela's ills, I only say it because it is an interesting case where internal food aid did the same destructive thing. It seems if you want lasting food aid, you should always try to make the aid bottom up, from the farmers.)

sixplusone 7y ago

Give a man a fish, and you fed him for a day. Some ancient wisdom being ignored.