Editor's note: The Domestic and Global Marshall Plan proposed by the Network of Spiritual Progressives calls for the elimination of povery, homelessness, hunger, inadequate education, inadequate health care and repair of the global environment--all to be achieved by transforming global trade arrangements and having the advanced industrial countries dedicating 2-5% of GDP each year for the next twenty to achieve this goal. Yet we leave open some of the specifics of how to achieve these goals.The article below represents one example of the kind of thinking, already taking place, that can provide specific answers to how to proceed.

 'Business as Usual' Will Not Solve Global Hunger
Crisis
Food First
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 16, 2009
Posted April 17th, 2009 by admin
http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/2419

G8 Urged to Reject Another 'Green Revolution' U.S.
working group on the food crisis urges G8 to reject
failed green revolution policies for Africa

WASHINGTON - April 16 - The U.S. Working Group on the
Food Crisis, a group representing anti-hunger, family
farm, community food security, environmental,
international aid, labor, food justice, consumers and
other food system actors, urges the G8 at the upcoming
Agricultural Ministerial in Treviso, Italy to reject the
failed policies of the Green Revolution. A recent
landmark report backed by the UN and World Bank argues
for agroecological and sustainable agriculture, rather
than reliance on chemical-intensive practices and
genetic engineering.

The U.S. Working Group is deeply disappointed by the
U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee's hasty passage
of the Global Food Security Act (S. 384) on March 31.
This bill would mark a significant shift in U.S. policy
by specifically mandating foreign agriculture research
for genetic engineering. Previously, we had criticized
the Committee's March 24 hearing on "Alleviating Global
Hunger" that relied on testimonies from "Green
Revolution" advocates for the industrial agriculture
system. We urge the G8 summit to resist pressure from
the biotech industry and embrace genuine solutions to
the food crisis.

The U.S. Working Group on the Food Crisis's vision for
reforming agriculture policy to help end the global food
crisis calls on governments to:

* Re-regulate commodity futures markets to end excessive
speculation * Halt expansion of industrial agrofuels in
developing countries * Stabilize commodity prices
through international and domestic food reserves *
Establish fairer regional and global trade arrangements
* Direct farm policy, research, education and investment
toward agroecological farming practices.

The United States should reject the approach of the
Global Food Security Act, sponsored by Senators Richard
Lugar (R-IN) and Bob Casey (D-PA), and instead bring our
agricultural research and foreign aid strategy in line
with the findings of the acclaimed International
Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and
Technology for Development (IAASTD), backed by United
Nations agencies, the World Bank and over 400
contributing scientists from 80 countries. The IAASTD
found that the most promising solutions to the world's
food crisis include investing in agroecological
research, extension and farming.

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, Senior Scientist at Pesticide
Action Network and a Lead Author of the IAASTD report
said, "Today's global food crisis demands immediate
action. But the Lugar-Casey Global Hunger Bill takes us
in exactly the wrong direction. As numerous scientific
reports from the UN have confirmed, African productivity
can be most effectively increased through investment in
organic and agroecological farming." Ishii-Eiteman
further cautioned the G8 not to focus simply on
production: "The bigger, more fundamental challenge
today is about restoring fairness and democratic control
over our food systems. It is about increasing the
profitability, well-being and resilience of small-scale
and family farmers in the face of massive environmental
and global economic challenges."

Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy has
released a policy brief on "Why the Lugar-Casey Global
Food Security Act Will Fail to Curb Hunger"
http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/2412 Eric Holt-Gimenez,
Executive Director of Food First, said, "The Global Food
Security Act, while commendable for its renewed focus on
investing in agricultural development in Africa,
mandates funding for genetically modified (GM) crop
research. Past public-private partnerships on GM crops
for Africa have proven to be colossal failures. The
failed GM sweet potato project between Monsanto, USAID
and a Kenyan research institute is a good example of 14
years' worth of wasted money and effort. The G8
Conference should focus on solutions that actually
work."

Anti-hunger groups also criticized the Global Food
Security Act's approach and warned about the effects of
promoting biotechnology on the poor. Bill Ayres,
Executive Director of World Hunger Year, said, "The
recent Global Food Security Act to improve the U.S.
response to the world food crisis starts from a flawed
premise. Indeed, the world - and the U.S. in particular
- must refocus antihunger efforts to support aid and
agricultural research for small farmers throughout the
world. But the emphasis on genetically modified crops is
misplaced. We saw Germany this week ban genetically
engineered maize based on health and environmental
grounds. GM maize has also been banned in France and
Greece. We should focus on helping African farmers
maintain control over their land and seeds, earn a
living wage, and enhance - not degrade - the quality of
their land and water."

Faith groups also recommended a new approach to
eliminating global hunger and warned that the G8 should
not emphasize biotechnology. Andrew Kang Bartlett of the
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) said, "While the intentions
behind the Global Food Security Act may be laudable, the
question is whether poorer farmers left behind by the
last Green Revolution will again be swept aside by a
top-down approach that benefits mostly transnational
corporations." Dave Kane, of Maryknoll Office for Global
Concerns, a Catholic missionary organization with
priests, brothers, sisters and lay people working in
Asia, Africa and Latin America, added, "We have found GM
technology to be disastrous for small farmers and rural
communities. Our missioners in Latin America and Asia
have seen farmers get deeper and deeper into debt as
they struggle to pay for all the seeds, fertilizers and
herbicides that GMO technologies require. The result:
farmers lose their land and with it, the ability to feed
themselves and their families."

The National Family Farm Coalition, a North American
member of La Via Campesina, the international peasants
movement, will be pressing the G8 to reconsider policies
that advocate for food sovereignty. Ben Burkett, a
Mississippi farmer and president of NFFC said, "Farmers
both here and in Africa know that the current industrial
agriculture model-and the push to fast-track trade
liberalization-has failed to alleviate global hunger and
denied family farmers a sustainable livelihood. A
recently released report this month by Union of
Concerned Scientists titled "Failure to Yield:
Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered
Crops," showed that despite 20 years of research and 13
years of commercialization, genetic engineering has
failed to significantly increase U.S. crop yields while
only driving up costs for farmers. In comparison,
traditional breeding continues to deliver better
results. The G8 needs to move away from Green Revolution
monoculture practices and instead implement the IAASTD's
most promising options: support ecologically sound
practices, more equitable trade rules and local food
distribution systems to empower family farmers."

###

The US Working Group on the Food Crisis is an ad hoc
group of organizations from around the US, representing
various sectors of the food system, including anti-
hunger, family farm, community food security,
environmental, international aid, labor, food justice,
consumer, and other groups. We do not view the food
crisis as an unexpected, sudden emergency of the last
year, but as the inevitable consequence of the
development of a long list of misguided agricultural and
food policies over the last 30+ years.