Meat: How the Next Agricultural Revolution Will Transform Humanity’s Favorite Food and Our Future

As people get wealthier, historically, they eat more meat even though it is inefficient.  the new book, “Meat” by Bruce Friedrich, examines the implications of the world’s dietary choice.  He lays out how six calories going into a chicken result in 1 calorie in chicken meat.  He calls this “fantastically inefficient.”

Friedrich articulates why the world cannot continue its current system of animal-based meat production because it is environmentally damaging, inefficient, and risky for health and food security.

Friedrich recognizes that asking people to eat less meat has not made a difference.  Instead, he says the future of meat lies in alternative proteins (plant-based and cultivated meat) that can match or exceed conventional meat in taste, cost, nutrition, and sustainability.  Increasingly, the world has available new Plant-based meats (made from plants) and cultivated meats (grown from animal cells but without raising/ slaughtering animals) become indistinguishable from traditional meat.

In his interview on the PBS Newshour on television, he problems growing meat entails:  8 times the water, herbicides, pesticides, shipping, operations, gas consumption, pollution compared to plants.

The author believes that transition to non-animal meat will occur when the taste and affordability matches the legacy meat.  He advocates plant-based and cultivated meat.  “Meat” quotes 30 plant-based and cell-based cultivation scientists about the rapid progress.  Once parity in taste with real food is achieved, markets will rapidly shift much like with cars replacing horse-drawn travel or the adoption of smartphones.

In her review of this book, Jane Goodall wrote before she died this year: “Today billions of animals are raised to provide us with meat. This harms the environment and is often unspeakably cruel to farmed animals, yet for many the idea of a main meal without meat is unthinkable. The good news, as Meat explains, is that you can now enjoy real meat that was made without killing any animal. Please read this book: it is engaging, informative, and gives us hope for a kinder future.”

For further information, see the PBS Newshour, Feb 3, 2026

A Troubling Forecast: Early Warning Systems Signal Deepening Global Hunger in 2026

Real-time food insecurity forecasting is critical. Early warning systems identify emerging risks, such as conflict, climate shocks, and price spikes, months in advance, enabling humanitarian actors to mobilize resources and intervene before food insecurity escalates into widespread malnutrition or famine. The FAO-WFP (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations – World Food Programme) Hunger Hotspots[1], is one such early warning analysis which highlights contexts where food insecurity is likely to significantly worsen over the next seven months.  The report does not include all countries that may be facing high levels of acute food insecurity, but, rather, focuses on those with deteriorating conditions over the near-term period.

In the latest edition of Hunger Hotspots. FAO–WFP Early Warnings on Acute Food Insecurity: November 2025 to May 2026 Outlook, acute food security is expected to worsen in 16 countries and territories: Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad, Somalia, Kenya, West Bank, Syrian Arab Republic, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, with Sudan, Palestine (Gaza), South Sudan, Haiti, Mali, and Yemen among the hotspots of the highest concern. The projections underscore that without timely action, millions could face crisis or worse food security conditions by mid-2026.

The FAO-WFP divides hunger hotspots into three categories:

  • * Hotspots of the highest concern – hotspots facing famine or risk of famine, populations already in Catastrophe (IPC/CH Phase 5)[2], or those in IPC/CH Phase 4 facing worsening conditions.at
  • *  Hotspots of very high concern – large populations are estimated or projected to be facing Emergency (IPC/CH Phase 4) levels of acute food insecurity, or severely food insecure according to the WFP CARI[3] method AND the number of people in Emergency (IPC/CH Phase 4) or severe food insecurity is expected to increase during the period,
  • *  Hotspots – this category includes other countries or contexts where food insecurity is likely to significantly worsen during the outlook period

The FAO-WFP identifies countries falling into these categories by convening an expert panel of food security, conflict analysts, and economists from all levels of the FAO and WFP who use a consensus-based approach in analyzing specific quantitative and qualitative data. These are forward-looking indicators which may cover a 6- to 12-month forecast window, rather than retrospective annual data.[4]

Fourteen of the sixteen countries face conditions of armed conflict and violence, making this the most significant driver of acute food insecurity. Across all regions, conditions are worsening due to climate variability causing droughts, floods, and erratic seasons, economic conditions (debt burdens, food inflation, economic fragility), and funding shortfalls as humanitarian assistance budgets are critically under-resourced means less capacity to intervene early, driving food insecurity across all regions.

For the countries categorized as “hotspots of the highest concern” specific factors leading to the deterioration of conditions include:

  • Sudan: Acute food insecurity is worsening due to ongoing armed conflict that has displaced millions, disrupted markets and agricultural production, and severely restricted humanitarian access amid shrinking funding.
  • Gaza:  Livelihoods have deteriorated as violent conflict, restrictions on movement, and damage to infrastructure severely limit food availability, market access, and humanitarian assistance.
  • South Sudan: Persistent conflict, recurring flooding, economic fragility, and high levels of displacement are undermining food production and access, while reduced humanitarian funding limits the scale of response.
  • Haiti: Escalating gang violence, political instability, and economic shocks have disrupted supply chains and markets, driving food price inflation and severely restricting access to food and humanitarian assistance.
  • Mali: Insecurity linked to armed conflict, population displacement, climate shocks, and economic pressures are eroding livelihoods and food access, with insufficient funding are limiting humanitarian and resilience efforts.
  • Yemen: Prolonged conflict, economic collapse, restricted imports, and reduced humanitarian funding are driving high levels of food insecurity, leaving millions dependent on declining levels of food assistance.

The report urges that actions be taken immediately across all hotspot areas to prevent the deepening of the crises and to save lives, calling for increased humanitarian funding and emergency and anticipatory actions. Contextualized, specific emergency and anticipatory recommendations are listed for each hotspot country/territory.

It explains:  “Famines are never inevitable – they are almost always foreseeable, preventable and driven by human actions. Famine is considered a failure of the humanitarian system.” [5]

As the quote above articulates, early warning data does not need to be a predictor of disaster, rather it can be an opportunity for coordinated and targeted interventions that can save lives if funded and implemented in a timely manner.

Read the full report here https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/fc67d706-e568-4de9-ad59-0a053506994f.

[1] Hunger Hotspots. FAO–WFP Early Warnings on Acute Food Insecurity: November 2025 to May 2026 Outlook available at https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/fc67d706-e568-4de9-ad59-0a053506994f

[2]https://www.ipcinfo.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ipcinfo/manual/IPC_Technical_Manual_3_Final.pdf

[3] https://vamresources.manuals.wfp.org/docs/the-consolidated-approach-for-reporting-indicators-of-food-security-cari

[4] Full details of the quantitative and qualitative indicators as well as the process are provided in detail in the Appendices of the Hunger Hotspots. FAO–WFP Early Warnings on Acute Food Insecurity: November 2025 to May 2026 Outlook

[5] pg vii

Essentials of Public Health Communication: A Valuable Book and Curricula

Around the world, a key shift during the past few decades in combatting malnutrition has been the adoption of social marketing, communications and “behavior change” to improve diets, caretaker behavior,  and recognition of failures in child growth.  The technical book, “Essentials of Public Health Communication” summarizes the state of the art in applying these tools in public health and nutrition.  Written by Claudia Fishman Parvanta, David Nelson, Sarah Parvanta, and Richard Warner.

Chapters walk the reader through implementation, with examples.  One example is the “Folic Acid First Campaign,” convincing women to take a multivitamin with folic acid (or a folic supplement) before they get pregnant.  Television, radio and print messaging should convey a sense of good health, warmth and energy to reduce the chances of birth defects in newborns.

Claudia Parvanta’s background in designing and evaluating health and nutrition social marketing programs in over 20 countries informs the text’s emphasis on using communication to influence dietary behaviors and address hunger-related issues.  The book references other nutrition-related initiatives, such as the Bangladesh Nutrition Education Project, to illustrate how strategic communication plans are developed and implemented in real-world settings.  It walks the reader through formative research methods, such as focus groups, to understand barriers to diet choices.

This 416-page text (published by Jones & Bartlett Learning) is divided into four major sections: Section One: Overview. Chapters 1, 2, and 3 provide an overview of public health communications, the planning, and informatics. Section Two: Informing and Educating People about Health Issues. Chapters 4 through 7 describe communication challenges and methods to provide information in a clear and unbiased manner.

The book analyzes how anti-vaccine content thrives online using emotive narratives and false expertise. It then contrasts this with proactive, empathetic communication strategies from health agencies, such as “pre-bunking” (inoculation theory) and engaging trusted community influencers (e.g., pediatricians, local mothers) as messengers.

The authors frame communication as a core public health function essential for prevention, behavior change, and policy advocacy.  Introduces behavioral and social science theories that guide message design (e.g., risk perception, social norms, diffusion of innovations).  The book includes discussion of media and channel selection and emphases  the 4 “P”s of Social Marketing, namely Product (the idea of being active), Price (reducing social/access barriers), Place (where tweens gather), Promotion (cool, aspirational ads).

Other case examples include the 2009 H1N1 Influenza Pandemic, the 2014 Ebola scare, and tobacco.  The “Truth” Campaign is described as an anti-tobacco campaign to illustrate audience segmentation and theory application. It didn’t target smokers with health warnings but segmented a new audience  i.e., teenagers, and used the Theory of Reasoned Action/Planned Behavior and empowerment models. The campaign framed tobacco use as a manipulation by big corporations, making rebellion synonymous with not smoking. This showcases moving from “knowledge-attitude-practice” to more sophisticated socio-ecological models.  A full chapter is dedicated to public health informatics which highlights how data systems, surveillance, and digital tools support communication planning and evaluation.

Apropos to its subject, the book reads easily for students and professionals and communicates its messages very well, using a mix of steps, examples, cautions and context.  The book has received very positive reviews, with a 4.5 out of 5-star rating on Amazon.  Reviewers praised it as an excellent resource for nutrition communications and for various types of public health communication work.  It remains the best learning resource in its category.  It is particularly required reading for anyone planning a public health campaign anywhere in the world.

The Tallest Man: William Foege in Memoriam

February 1, 2026    William (Bill) Foege’s achievements for the health of humanity tower above almost everyone.  He passed away this past week.  Born in 1936, his many diverse achievements include:

  • * Eradicated smallpox. Working with DA Henderson and J Michael Lane, he was a key innovator in the global campaign against this highly fatal communicable disease, the only human disease ever eradicated entirely.  He promoted the successful ring vaccination strategy, using surveillance and containment.  Further reading:  Foege’s book House on Fire, the Fight to Eradicate Smallpox (2011)
  • * Directed the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) from 1977-1983 where he led the expansion of CDC’s work in maternal/child health, HIV/AIDS, environmental health and strengthened CDC’s leadership as a voice for science. He was a proponent of population-level prevention of disease.  He began at CDC in the Epidemic Intelligence Service in 1962.  During his tenure, CDC promoted nutrition programs around the world.  In 1979, he convinced First Lady Rosalynn Carter to visit Thailand at the time of the Cambodian refugee crisis.
  • * Served in the 1990s on the board of CARE USA, at its peak, which has fed upwards of 400 million people during its history. CARE was the premier NGO providing immediate and long-term solutions to malnutrition in famines, crises and failed states.
  • * He was a key early and pivotal Senior Advisor to Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation (as of 1999), influencing their programs for child survival, micronutrients and vaccines.
  • * Served eight years on the board of directors of the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, including serving on the committee that selected which charities would win the foundation’s annual Humanitarian Prize often given to NGOs reaching homeless people in far corners of the globe. Foege said “We must keep promoting the idea of global citizenship, to erase the divisions between nations, cultures, religions, and races.””
  • * Helped to set up the Carter Center and served as its Executive Director from 1986 to 1992.  He collaborated with President Carter to shape the Center’s early vision and helped to establish its reputation for rigorous, principled engagement in global health, such as its campaign to eradicate Guinea worm disease.
  • He created the Task Force for Child Survival with President Jimmy Carter’s support. It was later renamed the Task Force for Global Health.
  • He was known for making other people feel listened to and important. As one colleague said, “you always had the impression that all of his attention was on you and what you were saying.”
  • *  He reframed how a very effective disease-control program was delivered.  He realized that with Onchocerciasis (river blindness), transmission matters more than perfect treatment.  In the late 1980s, the pharmaceutical company, Merck, discovered that ivermectin (also known as Mectizan) suppresses the parasite causing Onchocerciasis affecting millions of people in West Africa.     control program. Foege worked with Merck, saying that if Merck donated the drug, public health agencies would ensure its usage.  As of 2025, the Mectizan Donation Program has delivered 5 billion treatments and saved between 15 and 20 million disability adjusted lifeyears.
  • * He was an amazing public speaker, who really knew how to tell a story. Patrick O’Carroll said of him:  “Whenever he spoke, his vision and compassion would reawaken the optimism that prompted us to choose this field and re-energize our efforts to make this world a better place.”
  • He was an accomplished author and professor at Emory University School of Public Health. He is remembered for many aphorisms, such as “vaccines are the tugboats of preventive health.”  He encouraged his colleagues to practice ” consequential epidemiology.”

Dr. James Merchant wrote the following memory online:  “To confront famine among children in villages freed from the Biafran blockade, in 1968 Bill designed a famine surveillance program to direct nongovernmental organization food distribution to villages most in need.  … I learned from Bill an early public health lesson, the importance of using systematic surveillance … Using normative data from a survey of western Nigerian children’s height and arm circumference, a volunteer Quaker medical team had designed bamboo sticks marked with 75th- and 80th-percentile scales. …we documented the validity of this method to measure the prevalence of malnutrition among village children. It became the model used to direct the distribution of food by organizations that hasten relief from famine already receding when I served there in the summer of 1969.”

In 2016, Foege’s commencement speech at Emory University was titled “Every Day we Edit our Obituaries.”  He advised the students, “it’s not until you get to be my age that you know how good a life has been. But consciously, daily edit your obituary so you realize that sooner. Edit with care and gusto.”  He added “We like to feel we are civilized.  How do we measure that?… Every measure fails, except one.  But there is one measure of civilization and it comes down to how people treat each other.  Kindness is the basic ingredient.”  Quoting Albert Einstein, he also encouraged the graduates to “be good ancestors.”

Emory professor and colleague Kenneth Castro remembers “He reminded us to be generous with sharing credit during collaborative efforts and to practice “ego subordination””

Bill Gates recalls, in his online GatesNotes how “late in life, Bill spoke openly about his own mortality. “I feel so enthusiastic every day about seeing the newest thing in science and health,” he told an interviewer. “The part that’s going to be hard about dying is not dying but not being able to see what’s happening next.””

Foege was the third of six children growing up in Decorah Iowa   He is survived by his wife, Paula, two sons, Robert and Michael, three sisters,  four grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren.

One story Foege liked to tell often was from his days organizing vaccinations in West Africa, where the village leaders brought everyone from the fields to get vaccinated.  The village leaders beat their drums and everyone came.  Foege, who stood 6 feet 7 inches tall, asked, “what message did you send?”  The reply:  ‘come quick if you want to see the tallest man in the world.”

Other testimonials:

https://www.who.int/news/item/25-01-2026-in-memoriam-dr-william-h.-foege-(1936-2026)

https://www.cdcfoundation.org/stories/honoring-legacy-health-hero-dr-bill-foege

https://www.taskforce.org/bill-foege-tribute/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/madhukarpai/2026/01/25/lessons-from-william-h-foege-a-global-health-legend/

https://www.gatesnotes.com/home/home-page-topic/reader/remembering-bill-foege

https://www.statnews.com/2026/01/25/william-foege-obituary-smallpox-cdc-vaccination/

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/legacyremembers/william-foege-obituary?id=60632713

Further reading:

A vignette:  https://www.gatesnotes.com/Story-of-A-Hero-Bill-Foege

Collected speeches:  https://muse.jhu.edu/resource_group/167

Life:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Foege

Confronting emerging infections:  https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/15522

 

A Promising Model to Predict Rates of U.S. Food Insecurity

As  covered in a September 20 Hunger Notes article, the USDA announced that they would no longer be collecting the annual data measuring household food insecurity and cancelling the Household Food Security Reports. This means that the 2024 report will be the last under the current format. However, at the same time, food insecurity has been on the rise in the U.S. for the past two decades, 17% from 2001 to 2023.  Ending this annual data collection and report will result in a critical gap in the ability to understand and address food insecurity in the U.S.

Sophie Collyer, Director of the Center on Poverty and Social Policy, at Columbia University, in a brief published Oct 22, 2025, outlines a model to predict food insecurity rates at the population level, adult, and child levels, in the absence of the USDA’s annual data set.  The model uses secondary data of poverty, unemployment, specific food inflation rates, all of which are highly correlated with food insecurity. When the model was tested against the past 14 years of historical food insecurity rates, it was shown to align closely.  The model was also used to predict food insecurity rates for 2024, which at the time the brief was published, the USDA report was still unavailable.

Figures 1 (above) and 2 (below) are taken from Collyer’s report and demonstrate how close the model’s predictions are to the USDA official rates among the share of all individuals, adults, and children, living in food-insecure homes.

For the results shown in Figure 1 (share of all individuals living in food-secure homes), in all but four of the years, the model was within 0.4 percentage points of the official USDA rate, with the largest difference in those four years 0.7 percentage points.

For the prediction of rates of adults, shown in Figure 2, in all but three years, the model is within 0.4 percentage points or less of the official USDA rates.

The model’s prediction of rates among children was within 0.4 percentage points in half of the years, with the largest difference 1.2 percentage points, the lowest performing among the three predictions.

Collyer indicates that the model will continue to be refined.

With the 2025 cancellation of the USDA’s historic, official household food insecurity dataset, this model offers a promising substitute for providing credible estimates of food insecurity for policy and program planning.

Reference:  https://povertycenter.columbia.edu/sites/povertycenter.columbia.edu/files/content/Publications/Predicting-National-Rates-Food-Insecurity-CPSP-2025.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details?pubid=109895

CSIS Reviews Implications of the Final U.S. Hunger Report

A new Jan. 6 report from the think tank, CSIS, reviews the recent U.S. Government study about hunger in America, noting that this until-now annual food security or hunger report will no longer be conducted by the US Government which deemed it political and inducing fear.

Caitlin Welsh, the author of this review observes that “the end of the report represents a rupture in long-standing data on food security among Americans, as there is no report that provides the same information to the public and policymakers today.”  This survey had been created with bipartisan support and helped advise Congress about anti-hunger programs.

The USDA Household Food Security in the US publication looks back at 2024 found that roughly 1 in 7 Americans were food insecure, and that “5.4 percent of households experienced very low food security.”  Hunger was not uniform everywhere in the U.S.  For example, 36% of families in the Washington DC area experienced food insecurity in 2024 and “the Greater Boston Food Bank found that in 2024, 37 percent of Massachusetts households faced food insecurity in 2024.”

Welsh writes that food insecurity in the US has in the past tracked the health of the U.S. economy.  In recent years, hunger has increased, in significant part because of increasing retail food prices.  Welsh says alongside elevated food prices, experts may be right to assume a continued rise in food insecurity in 2025.  In 2026, cuts in the SNAP program enacted in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, were estimated to eliminate SNAP assistance for millions of Americans, may further increase food insecurity among U.S. families.”

CSIS is the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an independent, non-partisan think tank based in Washington, DC.  See:  https://www.csis.org/analysis/last-us-hunger-data-what-we-lose-termination-usdas-household-food-security-united-states

For the full US Department of Agriculture report, published on Dec. 30, 2025, see:  https://ers.usda.gov/sites/default/files/_laserfiche/publications/113623/ERR-358.pdf?v=89918  authored by Matthew P. Rabbitt, Madeline Reed-Jones, Laura J. Hales, Shellye Suttles, and Michael P. Burke who are economists in the Economic Research Service of USDA.

See also, the related Hunger Notes article on this issue by Kathy Goss:  https://www.worldhunger.org/united-states-cancels-household-food-security-report/

Death from Malnutrition in the United States

Deaths among Americans caused by malnutrition and hunger have increased 600% according to the Washington Post and data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as reported by Andrew van Darn on Jan. 5, 2026, who finds that the increase is seen “across the board. Every state, every education level, every race, every gender.”  One risk factor in particular is evident:  “Americans 85 or older die of malnutrition at around 60 times the rate of the rest of the population, and such deaths are rising about twice as fast among that group.”

The Post article further explores the data, noting that malnutrition among the elderly is noticed and reported more than in past decades.  In the past, emaciation and poor nutrition was taken for granted as a part of decline from other causes and not recorded as malnutrition.  The Post examines how professional nutrition societies began promoting, a decade ago, better diagnosis by health professionals, to look for:  “not just for weight loss, but also for factors such as muscle loss, loss of under-the-skin fat pads, fluid retention and simply not eating enough. They held awareness weeks, tons of trainings and — perhaps most.”  The Post article reports, “As a rule of thumb, multiple experts told us that at least 1 in 5 hospital patients probably suffer from some kind of malnutrition. In 2010, about 3 percent were diagnosed with it. By 2018, it hit 9 percent.”

The Post further explores how the health system in America increasingly gives incentives for diagnosing malnutrition among the elderly.  “We’ve seen very little growth in malnutrition deaths in hospitals in recent years. The increase has been sharpest at nursing homes and long-term care facilities, where some residents may arrive with nutrition issues, followed by deaths at home or hospice. Similarly, almost no patients who had an autopsy got malnutrition listed as a cause of death.”

More generally, malnutrition is measured among children via “growth monitoring”, at WIC Clinics, and in sample surveys that repeat over time called the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, or “NHANES”, which looks at physical, biochemical and dietary measures of children and adults.  See:  NHANES at CDC;

see:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/12/29/why-are-malnutrition-deaths-soaring-america/;

and The Predictive Validity of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Indicators to Diagnose Malnutrition Tool in Hospitalized Adults:  a Cohort Study

and, the Malnutrition Care Score for IQR Quality Improvement Initiative .

 

Book Classic: The Challenge of Famine, Recent Experience and Lessons Learned by John Osgood Field

The anthology edited by John Osgood Field, The Challenge of Famine, Recent Experience Lessons Learned” remains one of the premier books about predicting and measuring famine ever published.  Field, until his retirement a professor of food studies at Tufts University School of Nutrition, published this in 1993 with Kumarian Press, arrayed a dozen key scholars of famine who including Joel Charney, Mary Anderson, Dirk Stryker, Peter Cutler, Jack Shepard and others.  Field wrote the introduction, the first chapter, and the final summary chapter.  The book is as appropriate to read today as when it was published as it hones in on the ambiguity of when to say that there is a famine.

Field writes that when in full bloom, famine is dramatically clear to the naked eye.  However, he writes, how to recognize famine before it becomes obvious is the dilemma around which much of the book revolves. This is relevant at a time when there are hot debates over which parts of Sudan may or may not be in famine, which parts of Gaza may or may not be in famine with data sets pointing in different directions as to the answer.

Field clarifies that famine is a slow onset disaster, which does not happen suddenly, but has a lengthy gestation. He makes the key point that notwithstanding the complexity of famine and the multiple factors underlying it, the principal indicators are few and manageable. In other words, famine may be caused by different processes, but there are fewer cases, but the data for recognizing famine are fewer. The dilemma facing early warning is that it is very difficult, perhaps impossible to be definitive, clear and compelling about something that does not yet exist. Ambiguity is inherent in famine prediction.

This means that political decision making will come into play. Early warning does not eliminate the role of politics. Both political early warning and administrative early warning have better track records in inducing early decision making and response than early warning systems that are purely technical.

Writing about the famine codes in India, Field dissects detection and response with responsibility of the same individuals who typically were district level officials.

Contributor William Torrey reflects on community famine surveillance in Sudan, which is very timely in 2025.  Torrey dives into Darfur, including about participation by locals in Al-Fasher who were also involved in relief work, early warning, and famine response.

In his chapter about Oxfam America’s disaster response, Joel Charney mentions that honest reflection and self-evaluation are not exactly hallmarks of the voluntary agency community.  “According to their own public relations pieces, it seems that the agencies always do well regardless of the grave mistakes in judgment that journalists and other independent investigators continually uncover.”  He reviews the 1978 famine in Cambodia.

Mary B. Anderson and Peter Woodrow draw on their extensive case studies of disasters in many countries for key lessons, such as how disaster victims have important capacities which are not destroyed in disaster and therefore should be built on.  They argue that outside aid to these victims must be provided in ways that recognize and support these capacities.

In his chapter, Jack Shepard summarizes his research into American assistance to Ethiopia during the 1981-1985 famine period.  He recounts hos U.S. food aid became an important part of foreign policy in the 1970s and 1980s at a time of increasing American food production and increasing malnutrition around the world.  Shepherd recounts the evolution of aid policies including destabilizing Marxist regimes.  “Nowhere is the Reagan policy more clear than in its treatment of Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the official relief and development agency of the American Roman Catholic Community.  From 1982 through 1984 the administration deliberately delayed its response to emergency food aid requests for Ethiopia by CRS.”  In time, US food aid ramped up largely cross-border through Sudan into Tigray and Eritrea (fighting against the government of Ethiopia).

The most distinctive chapter was by Peter Cutler:  “Responses to Famine and Why They Are Allowed to Happen.”   Among Cutler’s observations is that rural famine victims are likely to become a political issue only if their case is taken up by influential urban elites, such as university students or the press.  He catalogs various contradictions in our aid system.

For instance, NGOs are in a contradictory position with regard to famine control.  On the one hand, their field staff are among the best informed of all actors operating in a famine zone, yet at the same time they are the least likely to challenge the system or influence governments. This is because NGOs are highly vulnerable. Cutler concludes the professional relief and development agencies will avoid the risks of challenging donors and the host governments when famine breaks out among unpopular groups of victims.

Publisher:  Kumarian Press, West Hartford Connecticut.  ISBN:  1-56549-019-3

Key U.N. Updates Show Alarming Hunger Trends

Recent UN annual reports and updates about global hunger highlight several important issues and trends as we move into 2026:

WFP will prioritize feeding 110 million in 2026 despite larger need: Declines in global humanitarian funding are forcing WFP to prioritize food assistance to roughly one-third of those in need. In 2026, the agency aims to reach 110 million of the most vulnerable at an estimated cost of $13 billion, but current funding forecasts indicate WFP may only receive close to half that goal. (Source: here)

318 Million People Acutely Food Insecure: WFP also tried to explain updated statistics about hunger such as “Across 68 countries where WFP operates and data is available, it is estimated that 318 million people will be acutely food insecure in 2025.” (Source: here)

Malnutrition in Darfur: There are no WFP humanitarian partners left on ground and no verified reports that any community kitchens are operating, and WFP assisted around half a million people in the Tawila in November. Across Darfur we have consistently reached around two million people per month – half of whom are in North Darfur, in areas surrounding El Fasher.” (Source: here)

Myanmar faces rising displacement and unacceptable hunger levels in 2026: The people of Myanmar already face dire levels of hunger; a place where mothers cannot afford enough food to sustain their health, and malnutrition has become a new reality for thousands of children. More than 400,000 young children and mothers with acute malnutrition are surviving on nutrient-deprived diets of plain rice or watery porridge.  “Conflict and deprivation are converging to strip away people’s basic means of survival, yet the world isn’t paying attention,” said Michael Dunford, WFP Country Director in Myanmar. “This is one of the worst hunger crises on the planet, and one of the least funded. We cannot allow this level of suffering to remain invisible. The scale of need is far outpacing our ability to respond.” (Source: here)

Drought conditions are intensifying in Somalia: UN OCHA finds that Because of funding shortfalls, the number of people receiving emergency food assistance in Somalia has plummeted from 1.1 million in August to just 350,000 in November. Puntland authorities report that 89 supplementary feeding sites and 198 health and stabilization centers are experiencing severe shortages of supplies. Forecasts indicate the situation could worsen further. In a forecast covering 13 to 18 November, the FAO Somalia Water and Land Information Management (SWALIM) program projected that dry conditions will persist across much of Somalia, with isolated light rains in southern regions. Central and northern regions will remain mostly dry and hot.   The drought comes in the midst an already dire humanitarian situation. At least 4.4 million people—more than one-fifth of Somalia’s population—are projected to face high levels of acute food insecurity between October and December. An estimated 1.85 million children under 5 are expected to suffer acute malnutrition through July 2026. (Source: here)

Surging conflicts, rising hunger, global funding cuts, and collapsing basic services are driving humanitarian needs for children to extreme levels worldwide: UNICEF’s Dec. 10 annual Humanitarian Action for Children 2026 (HAC) appeal launched asking for US$7.66 billion is urgently required to provide life-saving assistance to 73 million children – including 37 million girls and over 9 million children with disabilities,  across 133 countries and territories next year.  Global humanitarian funding has deteriorated dramatically in 2025. Announced and anticipated funding cuts by donor governments are already limiting UNICEF’s ability to reach millions of children in dire need. Severe shortfalls in 2024 and 2025 are forcing UNICEF to make impossible choices. Across UNICEF’s nutrition programming alone, a 72 per cent funding gap in 2025 forced cuts in 20 priority countries – reducing planned targets from more than 42 million to over 27 million women and children. (Source: here)

FAO’s new Global Emergency and Resilience Appeal seeks $2.5 billion to support 100 million people in 54 countries: FAO’s December Global Emergency and Resilience Appeal for 2026 finds that acute food insecurity has tripled since 2016, even with high levels of humanitarian funding. The current model simply does not keep pace with today’s realities” the Director-General said. “Supporting farmers to maintain production is critical to ensure food availability. When farmers can keep producing, communities stabilize and the path to resilience becomes real.”  Around 80 percent of people facing acute food insecurity live in rural areas, relying on farming, herding, fishing or forestry. Yet only 5 percent of humanitarian food-sector funding supports agricultural livelihoods—a persistent imbalance that traps families in a cycle of crisis and dependence. Strengthening local food production improves food availability, supports markets, creates jobs, and stabilizes communities—especially in countries such as Sudan, South Sudan, Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Source: here)

Classic Publication from 1995: Bittersweet Harvests, by Ann Thrupp

A classic publication about food insecurity that is still worth a read today to understand how aid has developed in Latin America is “Bittersweet Harvests for Global Supermarkets: Challenges in Latin America’s Agricultural Export Boom” from 1995 by Lori Ann Thrupp, Gilles Bergeron, and William F. Waters Published: published by the World Resources Institute in Washington, D.C.

The authors give background about how the USG focused aid in the Central America region at the time toward export promotion of food products.  Yet, a  central lesson in it is that hunger and malnutrition can worsen even during increased agricultural production.

Much of the text addresses non-traditional agricultural products (NTAEs) such as vegetables, flowers and nuts, as opposed to coffee, bananas, cotton and sugarcane.  Underlying the regional boom in NTAE exports were national and donor policies.  These crops generate a lot of jobs and a large proportion are women.

Agricultural exports do not automatically translate into improved food security for local populations. Research cited in the book showed that despite gains in income and agricultural productivity from non-traditional export crop adoption, there were “no visible positive effects on nutrition” among farming households.  The authors present a balanced analysis, highlighting both the “sweet” benefits—such as billions in revenue, hundreds of thousands of jobs, and year-round availability of exotic produce in global markets—and the “bitter” drawbacks, including economic volatility, environmental degradation, and social inequities. Drawing on empirical research, interviews with farmers, workers, and policymakers, and case studies, the book argues for more sustainable and equitable approaches to agroexport policies to prevent long-term harm.

Latin America’s export boom prioritized cash crops for international markets over staple foods for domestic consumption. This can lead to food dependency” where producing countries import basic grains while exporting high-value items, driving up local food prices and reducing access for vulnerable populations.  In 2025, this dynamic persists in Latin America and other regions, contributing to food insecurity amid rising global demand for fresh produce.

The authors call for direct action for poor farmers to overcome marketing barriers.  They note the gaps in understanding of market conditions.

Strategic recommendations at the end include:  “promote participatory approaches, including poorer farmers in decision-making;” “promote sustainable agricultural technologies and practices, including integrated pest management, organic practices and crop diversification;” and “balance policy attention … on alleviating hunger and fulfilling local food security needs.”