The below facts and figures can be of use for reporting on issues of globalization and rising antiglobalism, and their impact on food systems, food security, and poverty reduction in developing countries. For more information, or to speak with an expert for analysis on these issues, please contact Drew Sample at d.sample@cgiar.org

Food Policy in 2017-2018: Progress, Uncertainty, Rising Antiglobalism

• Global inequality has risen sharply since 1980, with the income of the richest individuals in the world—the top 1 percent—having grown twice as much as that of the bottom 50 percent
• Number of undernourished people globally rose from 777 million in 2015 to 815 million in 2016
• World trade grew by 3.6 percent in 2017, a substantial increase from the 1.3 percent growth of 2016
• While foreign direct investment to developing economies fell by 14 percent, flows to developed economies increased by 5 percent, and flows to transition economies nearly doubled
• Global growth is projected to strengthen to 3.1 percent in 2018, which could translate to improvements in livelihoods, poverty status, and food security

The Global Food System under Radical Change

• Nearly 85 percent of global water use goes to agricultural irrigation, of which 15–35 percent is unsustainable
• Food systems contribute about one-fifth of all greenhouse gas emissions, and agriculture is a primary cause of biodiversity loss
• Healthy diets, increasing production efficiency, and reducing food waste and loss has potential to provide healthy diets for 9.5 billion people in 2050
• Out of the 155 million stunted children globally, 122 million live in conflict areas
• Conflicts continue to displace people—the number of forcibly displaced people doubled between 2007 and 2016, to about 64 million people

The Free Flow of Goods and Food Security and Nutrition

• Over the last 40 years, the share of food, measured in calories, crossing an international border rose from 12.3 percent to over 19 percent
• Trade regimes using high rates of protection, or variable rates of protection across commodities or across time, create much higher costs than low and uniform rates—a 10 percent tariff is 100 times as costly, in terms of welfare, as a 1 percent tariff

International Investment and Local Food Security

• Agricultural production must grow by 70 percent by 2050 to keep 9 billion people fed and healthy
• Current annual investment (private and public) is about US$220 billion, significantly less than the US$480 billion required annually if SDG2 related to hunger and agriculture, is to be realized
• The total cost of ending hunger worldwide by 2030 is estimated to require an additional US$11 billion per year in public spending over and above current public investment levels
• In developing countries, 70 percent of the population has 3G broadband coverage, but only 40 percent uses the internet; in the least developed countries, 50 percent has coverage, but usage is only 13 percent

Tightening Borders and Threats to Food Security

• The influx of Syrian refugees into Turkey, numbering 1.7 million by mid-2015, displaced natives from the informal sector, while increasing formal-sector opportunities among less-educated native men
• Women’s participation in the US labor force over the past 50 years might not have been possible without immigrants available to provide labor for domestic tasks
• Studies in both the United States and the United Kingdom suggest small increases in property crime but no differences in other crime rates because of immigration
• Since 1995, immigrants as a group have made a positive fiscal contribution to the United Kingdom, while natives, on net, cost the government more than they pay in taxes
• 2017 report prepared by the US Department of Health and Human Services, estimated the 10-year net benefit of refugees to the US economy at US$63 billion
• Models of two refugee camps in Uganda suggest that potentially substantial economic benefits arise among households within 15 kilometers of the camps
• In the Kenya and Uganda studies, food aid provided by the World Food Programme factors into the impact of the camps on nearby households; these benefits create employment and therefore increase economic activity among both refugees and locals

Achieving Food and Nutrition Security through Open Access Data

• Information obtained through India’s Right to Information is claimed to have revealed that shopkeepers and food grain officers had siphoned off 87 percent of wheat and 94 percent of rice from a food program meant for the poor—findings that prompted significant reforms
• In collaboration with Banglalink and Grameen Phone, the Katalyst program launched a mobile-based fertilizer information service in the local language, Bangla. Since the program’s inception in 2009, it is claimed that farmers have experienced up to a 25 percent reduction in fertilizer costs and up to a 15 percent increase in crop yields
• Colombia’s Ministry of Agriculture and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture worked together from 2007 to 2013 developed climate-smart tools, giving farmers access to knowledge resources, helping them avoid extreme damage from a subsequent drought and was estimated to have saved farmers about US$3.6 million
• In Africa south of the Sahara, more than 60 percent of the population now has access to mobile phones

Domestic Farm Policy Reform and Global Food Security

• Farm support in the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) exceeded US$228 billion in 2016 and, if support policies in major emerging markets such as China, Indonesia, and Russia are included, support levels topped US$508 billion
• Overall support levels for the United States averaged 9.5 percent of gross farm receipts for 2014–2016, but US sugar support averaged 34.2 percent over the same period.
• Support for US beef producers averaged over 20 percent of receipts in the EU, Japan, and the Republic of Korea, while dairy support was over 40 percent of gross farm receipts in Canada, Korea, and Japan. Rice support remains particularly high in Japan and Korea (over 50 percent of farm revenues) and in the EU (almost 25 percent of farm revenues)
• Low support levels suggest that OECD members could reduce the level of their support bindings by up to 65 percent, though actual levels for countries such as the United States vary with market prices and thus could increase significantly during periods of low prices