The Second World Food Congress (2WFC) was designed as the first of the planned “periodic updates” to the Freedom From Hunger Campaign (FFHC), but unfortunately it was also the last. In 1974 the United Nations (UN) convened the first UN Food Conference and the possibility of further food congresses was effectively eliminated. However, 2WFC was the launch of the Indicative World Plan for Agricultural Development (IWP), it oriented the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations  (FAO) as it entered the Second Development Decade, and it offered youth a coherent voice on the world stage.

​
On 16 June, 1970, Queen Julianna of the Netherlands gave a keynote address to open the congress. In her remarks, Her Majesty reminded participants that the objective of the congress was to improve the condition of each human being; for this purpose, idealism and realism are identical.[1] She said that

"For this purpose which unites us here, it is essentially of no importance which form of national structure or international institution tries to attain it. They are but means subservient to that goal."[2]

A central theme of her remarks was the role of youth as efforts in coming decades would unfold.

"The younger generations of all the countries represented here naturally are critical as well as dynamic. May they carry their full share and in time take their places in this crusade for the preservation of each and all.
For some day they will be its leaders. May they, now the pioneers, add their impetus to the experience of those who are now their elders. It is a joy to realize that so many want to give themselves to this crusade — with a dynamic and critically positive mind, or with experience and persevering idealism."[3]

At the congress, and at the first UN Food Conference in 1974, youth would play an important role, and organizers at both events made great efforts to invite and accommodate youth participation. In advance of the congress, youth were given their own three-day preparatory conference facilitated by the host government and FAO. In addition, youth were afforded use of a former military base located adjacent to the congress facilities; this became known as the “New Earth Village” and was popular among youth and other participants — including FAO Director-General Adekke Boerma.

The congress was not itself a youth-oriented event, and organizers recognized that youth participation was a potentially disruptive event, but it also represented an opportunity and a resource. This is why youth were given the pre-congress conference, New Earth Village, and why officials accepted (tolerated) some unusual behavior by youth representatives during the opening proceedings.

At the opening of the congress, members of the youth delegation who had participated in the preparatory conference were invited to make a presentation to the congress assembly. The presentation was unusual, and it helped set the tone for the meeting. Milton Gregg, President of the Canadian Council for International Cooperation and participant at the Congress, described the event:

"The plenary session on “the role of youth in development” started off in quite a different atmosphere in the Congress assembly auditorium. A screen was hung at the back of the stage and slide projection set up. Tables and chairs were whisked off the stage, the lights turned out and the moderator sat cross-legged in the aisle. A number of pictures were flashed on the screen to give atmosphere. For example a large picture of Jack Kennedy, while a recorder reproduced the speech he had made at the opening of the first World Food Congress in Washington in Washington in 1963.
​
After a brief statement by the Moderator, a series of young people, from both the developed and developing countries, [with] microphones, under spot lights in various sections of the hall made brief dramatic contributions. The theme was: “WE WANT ACTION NOT WORDS”. Some listed the sins of their own countries. Chief amongst these was the lad who poured forth all the crimes that his country (USA) has perpetrated since it ‘had stolen the land from the Indians.’

​After this series, the lights went up and the participants at large were requested to intervene. The shock treatment had been so strong that at first there was very little response. However a team of young people, each with a portable microphone, roamed the hall and interviewed likely adults with questions; e.g.: ‘What did you think of this programme? The responses as could be expected were not wholly complimentary, and for the rest of the session the discussion was very lively and very much down to earth. Some of the oldsters reaction could be summed up as something like this ‘We’re glad Youth is out to put new life into the effort, but don’t let your contribution be just ‘words, words, words.’ Whatever can be said of the content of the youth plenary, no one could complain of boredom [or] lack of opportunity for participation."[4]

Harnessing the Youth Voice

Since the launch of the Freedom From Hunger Campaign, FAO had been cultivating a youth voice on international development throughout the First Development Decade. The Second World Food Congress was meant to highlight the role of youth, encourage other organizations to look to youth as a resource, and to draw more young people into volunteer or professional interest in development efforts. A key result of the First World Food Congress (1WFC) was that youth emerged as an important voice in international development. This was in part a result of the humanitarian movement of the late 1950s and 1960s, and in part as a result of a deliberate effort by organizations such as FAO. After 1WFC, there were several important youth-oriented initiatives that helped identify youth as a coherent voice and that set the stage for youth participation at the congress, and later at the UN Food Conferences. Important examples of these were:

·         The Young World Mobilization Appeal (YWA) 1965-1966
·         The Young World Assembly (Rome, 1965); this produced the Young World Manifesto
·         And The Young World Food and Development Project (1967); this enjoyed significant support from Massey   Fergusson Inc.

By the time of the Second World Food Congress, FAO had gained a great deal of experience working with youth, and youth organizations had gained experience working in the context of structures of international development and international politics. The Young World Mobilization Appeal and the Young World Food and Development Project had been largely focused on reaching youth and establishing a coherent voice for youth in international development, and in this way FAO “helped invent youth” as an identifiable group.[5] Unlike the First or Second World Food Congresses, the Appeal, the Young World Assembly and the Young World Development Project were designed as youth oriented events and programs.

It was in part because of the presence of youth at the 2WFC that FFHC itself was able to continue into the 1970s. The new Director-General of FAO, A.H. Boerma, had intended to kill FFHC early in his first term, but it was in part his experience at the congress that helped persuade him to keep it going.[6] Boerma maintained two somewhat contradictory positions on the role of youth at the congress. On the one hand, the Director-General did not want to separate youth as a distinct group by including a special panel or commission on youth; in planning for the congress he noted that

"I am particularly anxious that young people should play a major role in the Congress and I attach great importance to the arrangements that will make this possible. I do not want youth simply as youth – there will be no ‘Commission for Youth.’ I want young people to play their part in every stage and in all the commissions of the Congress. In this way, youth will participate as citizens, with all the rights and responsibilities of citizens and not as a separate group with separate needs."[7]

On the other hand, Boerma feared the youth movement and its possible impact on congress proceedings. Prior to the congress, organizers became aware of rumours that “left-wing radicals” planned to take over the proceedings.[8] The response by FAO was an effort to undermine the potential for disruptive protest. The Advisory Group for 2WFC[9] felt that these elements could either be suppressed or absorbed and took the decision to adopt the latter alternative. To encourage youth participation FAO invited, subsidized, and housed youth participants, included youth on the congress steering committee, and youth were given the three day conference noted above.[10] The New Earth Village was the main gathering point for youth participants. There were in excess of 500 youth participants (out of a total congress participation of 1800) from all over the world — though the majority came from Western Europe.[11] Boerma himself had spent a great deal of time personally interacting with youth at the New Earth Village[12] and it was in part this experience which began to impress upon him both the success of the Congress and the value of FFHC.[13]

The FFHC Secretariat was well aware that Boerma was looking for justification to close down FFHC and that youth activism at the Congress could provide such an opportunity, so they looked for a means to anticipate Boerma’s reactions to youth at the Congress. Members of the FFHC secretariat secretly approached a friend at the Dutch Institute of Social Studies, and, as Charles H. Weitz recalled, “We told him we needed a mole…someone to infiltrate the youth groups and feed us daily as to what was really going on so we could anticipate Boerma.”[14] The individual FFHC/FAO selected was Jan Pronk, who later became the Netherlands Minister of Development cooperation, Minister of Environment and who held several other important posts, whom Weitz characterized as brilliant in his role as mole. Pronk was able to gain insight on the issues concerning the youth delegates and their possible activities, and then to share that information with the FFHC Secretariat. The result was that youth action was anticipated, understood and harnessed. The strategy worked. Boerma frequented the New Earth Village, as did other senior ministers, in an effort to engage with “radical” and other youth. The Village was the most popular feature of the Congress and participants of all kinds came together in large gatherings and “tremendous discussion groups” each evening.[15] The Director-General had a very positive experience with youth at the Congress, and it was in part this experience which ameliorated his desire to close FFHC.

After the Second World Food Congress, and in part because of it, youth were accepted as an important and ubiquitous presence in the international development and humanitarian landscape. May of those young people who were involved in the early movements went on to enjoy careers as development professionals, government officials and activists. The congress was important because of the approach organizers adopted with regard to the youth constituency. It was understood that youth represented a potential for positive engagement as well and disruptive protest. This helped set the tone for later international gatherings, notably the 1974 UN Food Conference, and was an influence on later efforts to engage with youth as a resource and as a means to influence policy makers and other stakeholders.

Final Declaration of the Second World Food Congress

Food is the first need of every human being — a fundamental human right. But for hundreds of millions throughout the world that need is not met and that right is denied. This is intolerable.

We come to the Second World Food Congress determined to unite in an all- out attack on the scourge of hunger and poverty. Recent technological advances have stirred our hopes but inadequate pace of economic and social development has deepened our frustration.

Men and women of many countries, age groups and professions, with deep and often conflicting convictions, we have confronted each other in complete frankness. The dominant theme was immediate action. We value the opportunity for this unique dialogue.

Our overriding and unanimous conclusion is positive. The battle against hunger and underdevelopment can be won. A green revolution is underway in many developing countries. Everywhere groups begin to attack public apathy toward development. The Indicative World Plan shows the contribution that agriculture can and must make.

But victory depends on a massive effort by the entire world community. It is not enough to think only of food. The development of every man, woman and child is at stake. It is thwarted by injustice, exploitation, discrimination and all manifestations of human selfishness. Many believe that this scandal can only be ended by a radical transformation of contemporary power structures, international economic relations and social values.

We cannot wait for these problems to solve themselves. They are so vast and intricate that their solution requires active participation of every single person. We must act now.

We will urge support for our governments in all authentic efforts to build a worldwide partnership for progress to which people aspire, but we can no longer tolerate empty pledges.

All governments must drastically increase the supply of resources for development and channel an increasing proportion through an improved system of international cooperation. Is it not insane to spend such vast sums on armaments when resources for development are so deeply needed?

Governments must ensure that the knowledge of different population policies is available to all, and that people are free to follow the mandates of their own conscience in the matter of family size.

We urge governments to transform inequitable trade arrangements which are a barrier to development. Increased export opportunities must be provided for developing countries.

We urge governments to provide farmers and fishermen with the means, services and incentives required to meet growing food needs. Is it not absurd that the men and women provide our food are so often the object of contempt and neglect? Above all, governments must not shirk any agrarian reform needed to enhance the status and dignity of rural people, improve their incomes and release their energies for increased production. Since insufficient numbers can find productive employment in urban occupations, employment opportunities in rural areas must be increased by all possible means.

FAO and other international agencies should reorient their policies and programmes in line with thie findings of this congress. They must be provided with the necessary means and resources.

We urge FAO and other international agencies to marshal their resources to alleviate the growing threat of contamination and destruction of the environment.

In addition to the assistance they give to governments, FAO and other international agencies must do more to provide national and community groups with the information and other support the require for their development efforts. We urge private investors to give preference to undertakings which make the maximum contribution to an economic growth which is geared to the basic needs of the people.

We urge voluntary organizations whose aim is community service to adapt their structures and free their resources for development according to the principals set for in the findings of this Congress.

We urge producer groups, labour unions, trade organizations and other influential private groups to accept the imperatives of development as a major factor in determining their policies.

The dialogue initiated at this Congress must continue. Food and development are too important to be left only to the experts.

[1] Report of the Second World Food Congress, Volume I. 8.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid, 68.

[4] Milton Gregg, “Notes on the Second World Food Congress’” (National Archives of Canada, MG 28, I-395, Vol 52, 52-4, FAO – Second WFC, July, 1970), 6.

[5] Charles H. Weitz, Interview, 5 October, 2005.

[6] Boerma was also persuaded to keep FFHC when Weitz convinced the Director-General to appoint a high level committee of inquiry to evaluate the future of FFHC; half would be appointed by the Director-General and half by the International Coordinator. Weitz recalled that FFHC staff “stacked the deck” with strong supporters of FFHC (two of Boerma’s choices for the committee were strong supporters of FFHC) and that the “genius” was in appointing Albert Van den Heuval of the Netherlands, a top official in the World Council of Churches and later Bishop of the Reform Church in the Netherlands, as the chair of the committee. Vanden Heuval ran the committee with skill and the secret assistance of Weitz and other FFHC staff, and the result was that the committee’s decision to continue and improve FFHC was virtually unanimous. Weitz and Hans Dall, International Coordinator for FFHC Charles Weitz, recalled that Boerma, whose heart was never in FFHC and who never really understood the program, was therefore forced to capitulate to the committee’s decision, and he wanted to put his personal stamp on FFHC; this was a part of the reason that “Action for Development” was added to the FFHC moniker. Charles H. Weitz, Hans Dall and Victoria Bawtree, Interview by Author, October 5, 2005.; Charles H. Weitz, email, 6 July, 2006.

[7] FAO, Report of the Second World Food Congress, Volume 1, 3.

[8] Don Paarlberg, “Notes on the Second World Food Congress,” (FAO: WF 1/1, Advisory Group, July
1970), 1-2.

[9] The Advisory Group for 2WFC consisted of R.I Jackson (chairman), K.C. Abercrombie, V. Andersen,
A. Archer, A.C. Janssen, M. Autret , J. Stordy, D. Tweedle, and C.H. Weitz . FAO, “Advisory Group on
World Food Congress” (FAO: WF 1/1, Advisory Group, 15 September, 1969).

[10] Ibid., 1-2.

[11] Paarlberg noted that the youth participants were: “(i) idealistic young people sincerely intent on
alleviating world hunger; (ii) adventurous young people interested in being where the action was; (iii) a
relatively small number of hard-core left-wing radicals, a conference going cadre, some of whom may
show up at the UN meeting in New York.”The document goes on to outline youth ideology (Marxist), youth philosophy (existentialist, nihilistic), youth theology (atheism), the youth objective at the Congress (radical transformation of governmental and institutional forms), the youth strategy at the Congress (to profess humanitarianism and democracy), and the youth tactics at the Congress (attack Western powers, especially the U.S. – for militarism, exploitation and the capture of FAO and its conversion into “an agency of Western
Imperialism”). This document also notes friction between youth groups; youth from less developed
countries were interested in food and agriculture, youth from developed countries were politically oriented,
the Europeans sought intellectual leadership, and there was bickering between the various Marxist groups.
Don Paarlberg, “Notes on the Second World Food Congress,”, 2

[12] The Report of the Congress includes a picture of the Director-General sitting cross-legged on the ground
in the New Earth Village as he conversed with a group of the youth participants.

[13] Charles H. Weitz, Interview, 5 October, 2005; Email to Author, 6 June, 2006.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

The First World Food Congress
 
The poet John Donne wrote that “One man’s hunger is every man’s hunger — one man’s freedom from hunger is neither a free or secure freedom until all men are free from hunger.” In Washington D.C., 1963, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) convened the First World Food Congress (1WFC) to discuss the growing problem of hunger and malnutrition. The research that supported the congress amounted to the most accurate assessment of the economic and social condition of humanity ever compiled, and it revealed the scope and urgency of the problem for the first time.


In his opening remarks at the Congress, President John F. Kennedy echoed Donne and urged action:
So long as freedom from hunger is only half achieved — so long as two-thirds of the nations of the world have food deficits — no citizen, no nation can afford to feel satisfied or secure. We have the ability, we have the means, and we have the capacity to eliminate hunger from the face of the Earth. We need only the will.

In his remarks, Kennedy also noted that revolutionary changes were affecting the fight against hunger and malnutrition. Better technologies and resources offered hope, but growing population and ecological crisis compounded existing problems.

As it turned out, we had the will. Over the course of the First Development Decade (1960-1970), a humanitarian movement emerged; by the Second Development Decade (1970-1980) international development programs were undertaken by the governments and civil society in many countries, and international development assistance was a ubiquitous component of both international affairs and public awareness. However, before 1963 there was no movement, there was no organized, global response — governmental or otherwise. The World Food Congress would change that.
 
Why a Food Congress?
 
In 1963 conditions were highly favourable to an international humanitarian movement. FAO Director-General Binay Ranjan Sen recognized that FAO could piggy-back on the growing wave of popular support for development, and it could act as a catalyst for action. FAO had the opportunity to compose a coherent message and act as an organizational organ for efforts around the globe. FAO was uniquely situated to engage with a host of actors in developed and developing countries, and had the capacity to undertake research and education efforts. To take advantage of the opportunity, Sen conceived the Freedom From Hunger Campaign.

Launched in 1960, the Freedom From Hunger Campaign (FFHC) acted to support and encourage the fight against hunger and malnutrition. FFHC stood on three legs: research, information/education, and action. It was the first, and largest ever, global campaign to raise awareness of the problem of hunger and malnutrition and possible solutions to that problem. The campaign brought together governments, governmental agencies, NGOs, private industry, religious and community groups and millions of individuals in common cause. The World Food Congress was designed as the culmination of the campaign. However, Director-General Sen arrived at the congress with a plan for an expanded and renewed FFHC fully developed in his mind. Sen and FFHC organizers pitched the congress as the peak of the Campaign, but he/they correctly expected that FAO member states and other campaign participants would support a renewed mandate for FFHC and periodic food congresses to review progress and plan future efforts.

To support FFHC and the Food Congress, FAO and other UN Specialized Agencies were tasked with a massive research effort to gain an understanding of the state of global agricultural development and the economic and social condition of humanity. FAO undertook a series of Basic Studies, compilation of the Third World Food Survey and other research efforts, and the resulting body of knowledge represented the greatest scientific understanding of the condition of humanity ever compiled. In 1960, nobody knew how many people there were in the world, never mind how many of them were hungry. Information gathered for 1WFC was more complete, by far, than any earlier assessment. The picture was dire and the situation was urgent. The Congress was convened to review this information, publicize it, and based on what was learned from it, develop a plan for action.

Sen came to FAO from the Indian Civil Service (ICS) — the largest bureaucracy the world had ever known — and understood how an international organization like FAO could me moved to affect a global effort and transform itself in the process. Before Sen’s arrival, FAO was a technical organization dedicated, as FFHC International Coordinator Charles H. Weitz observed, to making fatter cows and better pigs. By initiating FFHC and the research and information efforts to support it,  Sen forced FAO to cooperate more with other UN Agencies, governments and non-governmental organizations — and for FAO departments to cooperate more with each other. The combination of a renewed mandate, the collection and analysis of new information, and greater public engagement resulted in the transformation of FAO from a technical organization into a modern development agency.

The First World Food Congress (the second was at The Hague in 1970) remains unique. Participants received a personal invitation from the Director-General, and were asked to attend in their capacities as individuals and not as representatives of governments or organizations. As Weitz noted, the result was that “…you had a student from Canada at the table with the Prime Minister of India, you had heads of NGOs sitting with ministers and statesmen, African mothers with Swiss businessmen…it was remarkable.” Many of the attendees, though they were not representative of governments or organizations, were selected because of these affiliations; the expectation was that they would carry the ideas and spirit of the Congress with them when they returned home. They did. In addition, the participation of individuals from developing countries was crucial, and marked a break from a model where development was imposed by developed countries on developing countries. The process was now more cooperative and inclusive.

The Congresses were unprecedented, but their uniqueness is best understood when they are compared to the United Nations World Food Conferences. After the first UN-sponsored World Food Conference in 1974, the possibility for another congress was effectively eliminated. Sen’s successor, Adeke Boerma, was not as enthusiastic about the Congresses (though his actions at the Second World Food Congress indicated his interest in engaging public support — of youth in particular), and the interest and resources of UN member nations were focussed more on official events where participation and contribution could be quantified. Unlike the Food Congresses, at official UN conferences member states were constrained by national interests and foreign policy objectives; outside participation was limited to a handful of NGOs that had observer status only. By the time of the 1974 UN Food Conference, Charles Weitz was head of the FAO office in New York; he observed that at the conference, when NGOs took the floor to speak, that is when country delegates went to the bathroom. It would be years before NGOs enjoyed more official participation.
 
The results of the World Food Congress
 
The First World Food Congress was a success in several ways. Most importantly, it was a collection of firsts. There had never been a meeting of such a broad group of stakeholders, the information they reviewed was the most accurate ever, and it was there that FAO pioneered engagement with informal and unofficial participants. Like FFHC itself, the very existence of the Congress was a kind of success, and like FFHC, it was a forum where there was a very real, free exchange of information and ideas. The event was conducted in an environment where heads of state and policy makers of all kinds engaged directly with NGOs and other individuals with appropriate backgrounds. It became the platform for further action that Sen had hoped for.
The moment of the Congress marked the beginning of a new era of international development. More accurate data and the inclusion of a broad association of actors in the promotion of modern agricultural development characterized the humanitarian movement that began in the 1960s. FAO didn’t invent it, but as Sen had expected, the organization was an effective catalyst for it.

The achievements of the Congress were very much in line with the three supporting “legs” of FFHC (research, information/education and action). It informed and educated the participants (and the world) on the actual state of the problem, it debated new data, methodology and areas of concern, and it identified possible lines of action. Results can also be measured in very specific ways: the renewal of FFHC by FAO Council and ECOSOC; the resolution adopted by the First World Food Congress referring to periodic Food Congresses (below); and the establishment of FAO programs such as the Indicative World Plan for Agricultural Development (IWP) and the Industry Cooperative Program (ICP). The Congress inspired the initiation of dozens of new FFHC national committees, the transformation of many national committees into independent development NGOs, and new cooperation between FAO and other UN Specialized Agencies with each other and with NGOs and private industry. Outside of FAO, the event inspired countless groups and organizations to join the fight against hunger, and global awareness rose dramatically.
 
A Third World Food Congress?
 
There has not been a third world food congress, but in recent years advancements in technology and continued public support have continued and grown the humanitarian movement that had emerged in the First Development Decade. Most recently, the Global Goals for Sustainable Development are targeting governments and peoples alike, and are supported by continued research and information sharing. But in five decades there has not been a meeting like the Food Congress. Perhaps a Third World Food Congress could act as a new marker for our progress in the fight against hunger and malnutrition, and, with all of the publicity tools we have at our disposal, motivate renewed action and dedication to this cause.

By way of conclusion, I include below the full text of the declaration of the World Food Congress; the issues it highlights, and the action it calls for are as salient today as they were in 1963.
 
Declaration of the World Food Congress, 18 June, 1963
 
WE, THE PARTICIPANTS OF THE WORLD FOOD CONGRESS

ASSEMBLED at Washington under the Freedom from Hunger Campaign to take the measure of the problems of hunger and malnutrition, and to explore the means for their solution,

HAVING IN MIND that freedom from hunger is man’s fundamental right and that all human beings — without distinction of any kind — are entitled to its realization through national effort and international cooperation;

CONSCIOUS that today, in spite of twenty years of effort since the Hot Springs Conference which led to the foundation of FAO, the curse of hunger, malnutrition and poverty still afflicts more than half of mankind;

ALARMED by the extent to which the explosive growth of population, at a rate unmatched by adequate increases in productivity, is intensifying human needs and is giving still greater urgency to the attainment of freedom from hunger;

PROFOUNDLY AWARE that the recent attainment of political independence by many hundred millions of the world’s population gives a new urgency and a new dimension to the aspiration for higher levels of living, of which freedom from hunger is the first prerequisite;

CONVINCED THAT THE SCIENTIFIC and technological progress now make it possible to free the world from hunger, but that such freedom can only be accomplished if all the available human and natural resources of the world are mobilized to this end through balanced economic and social development;

HEREBY DECLARE

THAT the persistence of hunger and malnutrition is unacceptable and morally and socially, is incompatible with the dignity of human beings and the equality of opportunity to which they are entitled, and is a threat to social and international peace;

THAT the elimination of hunger is a primary task of all men and women, who must recognize their duties as well as their rights as members of the human race, and must fight to achieve freedom from hunger in every corner of the earth; this obligation being also inherent in the pledge of the nations under the U.N. Charter to take joint and separate action, to achieve higher standards of living, full employment and conditions of economic and social progress and development as indispensable elements of peace;

THAT the responsibility to free the world from the scourge of hunger lies jointly
With the developing countries themselves who must take all measures within their power which are necessary to achieve this objective;

With the developed nations who must cooperate with the developing countries in their efforts, realizing that freedom from hunger cannot long be secure in any part of this interdependent world unless it is secure in all the world;
With the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies who must intensify and coordinate their efforts to assist the nations in this task;

With other international organizations and with nongovernmental organizations, e.g. religious, youth, women’s organizations and other voluntary groups, agricultural and labour organizations and associations of trade and industry, who must inform and stimulate the people so that they can play their part with understanding and vigor:

THEREFORE URGE

THAT the task of elimination of hunger from the face of the earth should be conceived in the framework of a world-wide development dedicated to the fullest and most effective use of all human and natural resources, to ensure a faster rate of economic and social growth, and

THAT to this effect speedy and decisive action be taken:
​

1. By all governments of the developing countries

(a)    For a planned and integrated use of resources which at present are largely underutilized;
(b)   For the adaptation of their institutions to the requirements of economic and social progress; and, more specifically, to secure the most effective administrative machinery, to give incentives to increased production through ensuring just and stable prices, and to reform, where required, unjust and obsolete structures and systems of land tenure and land use so that the land might become, for the man who works it, the basis of his economic betterment, the foundation of his increasing welfare, and the guarantee of his freedom and dignity;

1. For the maximum utilization of the stock of scientific and technical knowledge and the promotion of short- and long-term adaptive research suited to the conditions and requirements of the developing countries;
2. For the massive and purposive education of the rural populations, so that they will be capable of applying modern techniques and systems, and for universal education to expand opportunities for all.

FURTHER URGE
That to assist national efforts, and allow speedier implantation of development programs within a world-wide framework, international cooperation be strengthened, in particular so that
​

1. Present adverse and disturbing tendencies in the trade of the developing countries be reversed and that for that purpose adequate and comprehensive commodity agreements be devised, development plans be coordinated and other appropriate measures taken, and
2. The volume and effectiveness of financial, material and technical assistance be increased, and
3. There be a more equitable and rational sharing of world abundance, including an expanded and improved utilization of food surpluses for the purpose of economic and social development.

EXPRESS THE HOPE

THAT the current efforts for bringing about universal disarmament will succeed and that the vast sums now being spent on instruments of destruction will become increasingly available for the elimination of hunger and malnutrition and the promotion of human well-being.

THEREFORE PLEDGE OURSELVES AND HIGHLY RESOLVE

TO TAKE UP the challenge of eliminating hunger and malnutrition as a primary task of this generation, thus creating basic conditions for peace and progress for all mankind;

TO MOBILIZE every resource at our command to awaken world opinion and stimulate all appropriate action, public and private, national and international, for this overriding task, and to this end
GIVE our wholehearted support to the Freedom from Hunger Campaign until its final goal is achieved.

The Global Goals for Sustainable Development (www.globalgoals.org), also known as the Global Goals or SDGs, succeeded the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (www.unmillenniumproject.org/goals) beginning on January first, 2016. The Global Goals do not replace the MDGs, but build on them. The MDGs were adopted in 2000 and were designed to eradicate poverty and hunger by 2015, and were moderately successful. The MDGs were created in order to set specific targets and to provide a coherent framework for disparate and heterogeneous humanitarian movement. This was not the first time that this approach had been adopted. In 1960, under the leadership of Binay Ranjan Sen, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) launched the Freedom From Hunger Campaign (FFHC) to raise awareness of the problem of hunger and malnutrition and possible solutions to that problem. This was the first attempt at mobilizing a global effort in common cause to fight hunger and poverty, and was the first comprehensive effort to gather and disseminate accurate information on the social and economic condition of all the world’s peoples. The model established by FFHC shaped the development movement and foreshadowed the model adopted for the MDGs and Global Goals.

The inaugural international coordinator for the Freedom From Hunger Campaign (FFHC), Charles H. Weitz, told me that he thought the Freedom From Hunger Campaign had been a failure. Mr. Weitz shared this view with me in 2005, almost 50 years since the launch of the campaign in 1960 and 25 years after the campaign was formally shut down. I maintain that the adoption of the MDGs and Global Goals is proof that he was wrong.

The campaign was originally conceived with a five-year mandate but was renewed repeatedly until the early 1980s. It was largely an information/education initiative designed to raise awareness about the problem of hunger and malnutrition, and stimulate action. It successfully mobilized governments, UN and governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), private industry, groups and organizations of all kinds, and millions of individuals in common cause to fight hunger and poverty. Immediate results included an exponential proliferation of development NGOs and the development of sophisticated, long-term foreign aid and agricultural development programs by state and non-state actors.

FAO Director General Binay Ranjan Sen perceived the urgency and scale of global development problems and created FFHC to initiate coherent, broad-based action. He further understood that persuading the majority of FAO member countries to agree on a singular approach to development would be difficult, so his proposal for the campaign included a limited duration (five years) and relatively limited engagement by FAO. Meanwhile, Sen used FFHC as a tool to transform FAO from a technical agency into a development organization, and he guessed (correctly) that FFHC would be renewed in order to achieve its mandate. The original plan for the campaign included a world food congress that would gather to reflect on information and formulate a plan of action. The congress, held in Washington, D.C. in 1963, was unique in that it was a forum for discussion that included heads of state, UN and government officials as well as private individuals — all of whom attended in their personal capacities and not as representatives of governments or organizations. To support the congress, FAO undertook what became known as the Basic Studies — these established the first scientific data on specific areas of health, social and economic status, demographics and other aspects of the human condition — which became the basis for the Third World Food Survey. It was in conducting the Basic Studies, composing the Food Survey and engaging more broadly with governments, other UN agencies, private industry and non-governmental organizations that FAO was necessarily transformed into the organization we see today. A result of the Basic Studies, the Third World Food Survey and the First World Food Congress was the Indicative World Plan for Agricultural Development that identified targets for development and a road map to achieve them.

The Freedom From Hunger Campaign was a part of a movement toward humanitarian internationalism that began to emerge after the cataclysm of the Second World War, and Sen successfully built on this movement and offered and organizational framework that was global in scale and applicable at a national and local level. After FFHC and the First and Second World Food Congresses (1963 and 1970, respectively) it was generally understood that FAO and other UN agencies depended on NGOs, private industry other actors to implement programs, and action must include broad public support and engagement. In the 1970s, the UN began a series of food conferences, and though these included observers from NGOs and the private sector, they depended on state actors and consensus within the UN framework. Similarly, popular efforts such as those undertaken by religious, philanthropic and private humanitarian organizations, and more recently celebrity lead initiatives such as Live8 and, more recently, numerous social media campaigns engage the public directly. These however, often lack effective coordination with governmental and intergovernmental actors. The UN and related agencies, including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the World Bank and International Monetary Fund held conferences and produced reports on subjects related to food security, human rights and agricultural development, but since FFHC there had been a lack of a broad-based approach that mobilized all aspects of global society. This approach has been repeatedly called for as it is generally recognized that only a truly global, comprehensive effort can ensure equitable and sustainable development for all.

Mr. Weitz suggested to me that FFHC was failure because the problem of hunger and malnutrition had not been solved in the first development decades. Similarly, there has been criticism of the recently expired MDGs because, like FFHC, these had not succeeded in ending hunger or eradicating poverty. Now the Global Goals propose that these and other problems can be solved by 2030. There are already critics of the SDGs and serious skepticism of the likelihood of their success; in my view, this is good and necessary. Unfettered optimism is important, but it must be translated into thoughtful, effective action, and criticisms must he heard and carefully considered. Many ideas, projects and initiatives to fight hunger and poverty fail, sometimes spectacularly — examples are easy to find — but this often leads to better understanding and better practices.

In 1960 no one knew how many people there were in the world, never mind how many of them were hungry. FFHC changed that. By 1963, under the auspices of the campaign, the Basic Studies and the Third World Food Survey comprised the first comprehensive account of the social and economic condition of the world. It was also at this point that it was generally recognized that population growth was imminent and would be exponential. Information since then has become increasingly accurate and detailed, as has the response to socio-economic malaise and food insecurity. Today, modern media and new technologies are cheap, ubiquitous and able to bring information and understanding of the condition of peoples and societies to ordinary individuals in all parts of the world. The MDGs and the Global Goals, like FFHC, depend heavily on the spread of information to create a common point of reference and to emphasize both the problems and possible solutions in order to stimulate action.
 
The Freedom From Hunger Campaign, as Mr. Weitz lamented, did not end hunger and poverty. However, when pressed on the subject, he acknowledged that the campaign was important because of its legacy as much as its existence. He was disappointed that FFHC was allowed to end; its repeated renewal into the 1980s signalled its success and the continued need for the kind of effort it represented. However, despite its continued contributions, the campaign secretariat at FAO became increasingly isolated from the office of the Director General and more independent in character; early in his mandate FAO Director General Edouard Saouma undertook specific action to have FFHC dismantled and the records buried in an obscure archival facility in Rome.

The campaign was instrumental in stimulating and shaping the modern international development movement, but its impact is difficult to quantify. Not so with the MDGs. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon convened a high-level panel of eminent persons to report on the development agenda post-2015. The result was the report “A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty And Transform Economies Through Sustainable Development” (see http://www.post2015hlp.org/). The report noted that

"The Panel came together with a sense of optimism and a deep respect for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The 13 years since the millennium have seen the fastest reduction in poverty in human history: there are half a billion fewer people living below an international poverty line of $1.25 a day. Child death rates have fallen by more than 30%, with about three million children’s lives saved each year compared to 2000. Deaths from malaria have fallen by one quarter. This unprecedented progress has been driven by a combination of economic growth, better policies, and the global commitment to the MDGs, which set out an inspirational rallying cry for the whole world."

The Global Goals for Sustainable Development are designed to carry the effort forward for the next 15 years, and whether or not the goals are met in whole or in part, it is very likely a new regime will replace them post-2030. The connective tissue between FFHC, MDGs and the Global Goals is strong; each was designed to engender broad, global support and action, and each had a limited mandate. Moreover, these global efforts are iterative. The Freedom From Hunger Campaign began with a very clear purpose (to generate information and stimulate action where there was none) and as global efforts progressed the problems and their solutions were better understood. The Millennium Development Goals were designed to address very specific problems and their solutions. As the high level panel observed, the MDGs were generally successful, but there were many oversights, shortcomings and limitations. The new set of global goals continue in the same direction, but also act to correct shortfalls while engaging with a wider scope of problems. 
​
The population of the world doubled between 1950 and 1980 (from about 2.5 billion to 4.5 billion) and will double again by 2030. Inequality, conflict and environmental challenges continue to frustrate development efforts, and though the Global Goals offer significant hope for solutions, I think efforts must and will continue beyond 2030. What initiatives such as FFHC, the MDGs and the Global Goals offer is a means for all of humanity to perceive with increasing clarity the scope and urgency of global development problems and to stimulate a collective approach to solving them.

Today, December 10, 2015 is Human Rights Day. Of the many rights that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) outlines, the access to food and decent living conditions are specifically identified.
​
Article 25, section one, reads:  

(1)    Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

In assuring these rights to all peoples, we have failed. However, the effort to reach this objective has, since the adoption of the UDHR, become a permanent feature of the better part of human society. Similarly, the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations made the welfare of any individual a matter of international law. In 1957, less than a decade after the adoption of the UDHR, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) commissioned a report on the role of that organization in guaranteeing the social welfare on individuals. The report, authored by Hernán Santa Cruz of Chile, titled FAO’s Role in Rural Welfare (1959), pointed out that the UN Specialized Agencies, such as FAO, the World Health Organization (WHO), and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), are strictly mandated to guarantee the welfare of any individual. Any country that was a signatory to the Charter or UDHR, or that is a member of the UN or its specialized agencies, is bound by international law to act to protect the human rights and social welfare of all human beings. Of course, achieving this is a difficult prospect and the conditions interfering with this goal are complex and dynamic, but the fact of the legal commitment remains.

The failure to guarantee food or personal security, however, must be considered in the context of human history and artificiality of the organization of the human species into a coherent state system. It was not until 1963 that anyone knew how many people there were in the world, never mind how many of them were hungry or disconsolate. The Charter and UDHR were conceived in the shadow of the first truly global conflagrations and the knowledge that all societies and peoples are interrelated; the second half of the twentieth century represented a departure from any earlier collective human consciousness — if such a thing existed — that divided humanity into races, tribes and unconnected empires. After 1948, we understood that a human was a human was a human, and that all of us shared the same needs, and deserved the same rights. Soon an unprecedented population explosion, the effects of 500 years of colonization and its dissolution combined with the impact of human activity on the planet had combined to challenge and undermine the goals enshrined in the Charter and UDHR. But the Charter and the ideals enshrined in the UDHR persisted.
​
Contemporary events demonstrate that we still have a long way to go before humanity can claim a victory over hunger and poverty or before human security is a norm for all peoples. However, we are as a global people more aware of conflict and underdevelopment than we have ever been in the past, and we are aware that some of us are experiencing unprecedented levels of violence and intolerance. There is debate as to whether the world is less violent or less secure that it has been in the past, but there is little debate on whether all peoples have a right to peace and security. Or a right to food and shelter. The adoption of the UDHR in 1948 provided a framework for the measure of the human condition, and it meant a responsibility for all that signed that declaration to adhere to its principles. It has been 67 years since the UDHR came into being, and we have not succeeded in implementing it in full. However, when measured against human history, the UDHR is still in its infancy and the very fact that it continues to provide a minimum measure for the human condition is laudable and remarkable. But we must keep our shoulder to the wheel if we are to make human rights a reality for all humans.