Zero Hunger BRAZIL
National food misuse and, sometimes, purposeful misuse, doesn’t have to happen. Or more specifically, when it happens, it can be corrected. With the best results coming from a coordinated, purposeful campaign geared for change that not only addresses underling health but poverty, care and local farming/agricultural fair interests. What’s even better, it turns out it might well get the best results when the money for change is quite literally given to the women of the families in need.
At least that’s what the findings seem to be following the first decade (almost) of the nation of Brazil’s internationally recognized Fome Zero campaign, which translates into Zero Hunger. While the target for effective food change in the nation is 2015, when they expect to eliminate malnutrition and poverty-associated food inequities, the successes have been impressive. And, what’s even more impressive is the finding that for at least one reviewer, several political generations of rulers have managed to both support and grow this campaign without contaminating its soils with monetary or political corruption – in no small part because those who receive the money to help those in need are the women of the struggling families.
Lest think this is a project that works because it is unique to Brazil, we recommend you take a look at these three studies. One, undated, provides an overview from those inside Brazil. The others come from the outside, one might say, as researchers look at what prospects this approach might offer other nations and perhaps the world in need.
Here are links to the papers. They are both in English:
- http://www.social-exclusion-housing.com/anti-poverty-plans.pdf (Undated)
- http://south-south.ipc-undp.org/library/major-lessons-from-fome-zero-background-paper-for-a-video-conference-between-bolivia-brazil-chile-colombia-guatemala-peru-and-venezuela.html (March 2010)
- http://indiagovernance.gov.in/files/FomeZero_India-pdf.pdf (May 2010)
Later we’ll review some of the specific findings. Right now suffice it to say that the majority of results came about at a cost of an amount roughly equal to 5% of the country’s GDP.
Which might well be considered a different type of nickel on the dollar thinking.