This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-08-1007R 
entitled 'Food Insecurity Persists in Sub-Saharan Africa despite 
Efforts to Halve Hunger by 2015' which was released on July 18, 2008.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

GAO-08-1007R: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

July 17, 2008: 

Congressional Requesters: 

Subject: Food Insecurity Persists in Sub-Saharan Africa despite Efforts 
to Halve Hunger by 2015: 

At the 1996 World Food Summit (WFS) in Rome, the United States and more 
than 180 world leaders pledged to halve the total number of 
undernourished people worldwide from the 1990 level[Footnote 1]--a 
commitment that they reaffirmed in 2000 when they established the 
Millennium Development Goals (MDG), which included a target to halve 
the proportion or the percentage of the world's population that is 
undernourished by 2015. More than a decade later, however, the number 
of undernourished people has not decreased significantly, and about 850 
million people, including 170 million children, remain undernourished, 
according to the United Nations (UN) Food and Agriculture Organization 
(FAO). Furthermore, the number of undernourished people in sub-Saharan 
Africa has increased from about 170 million in the period of 1990 to 
1992 to over 200 million in the period of 2001 to 2003.[Footnote 2] 

Since early 2007, food-related riots have occurred in 15 countries, 
including 7 in sub-Saharan Africa, leading both the UN Secretary- 
General and the head of the World Food Program (WFP) to express concern 
about the impact of chronic undernourishment, or food insecurity, on 
world peace and security.[Footnote 3] In January 2008, world leaders 
meeting in Davos, Switzerland, for the World Economic Forum predicted 
that food insecurity would be among the top potential threats to the 
world economy this year and for decades to come. In April 2008, the 
President of the World Bank called for a New Deal for a Global Food 
Policy that would involve a combination of long-term efforts to boost 
agricultural productivity in developing countries and short-term 
emergency aid to address immediate food crises. 

We recently examined (1) factors that contribute to persistent food 
insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa and (2) the extent to which host 
governments and donors, including the United States, are working toward 
halving hunger in the region by 2015. In May 2008, we reported on these 
issues[Footnote 4] as follows: 

* Chronic undernourishment (food insecurity) in sub-Saharan Africa 
persists primarily due to low agricultural productivity, limited rural 
development, government policy disincentives, and the impact of poor 
health on the agricultural workforce. Additional factors, including 
rising global commodity prices and climate change, will likely further 
exacerbate food insecurity in the region. 

* The efforts of host governments and donors, including the United 
States, to achieve the goal of halving hunger in sub-Saharan Africa by 
2015 have thus far been insufficient. 

- Some host governments have not prioritized food security as a 
development goal. 

- Donors have reduced the priority given to agriculture and their 
efforts have been further hampered by difficulties in coordination and 
deficiencies in measuring and monitoring progress. 

- Limited agricultural development resources and a fragmented approach 
have impaired U.S. efforts to reduce hunger in Africa. U.S. Agency for 
International Development (USAID) funding to address food insecurity in 
Africa has been primarily for emergency food aid, which has been 
crucial in helping to alleviate food crises but has not addressed the 
underlying factors that contributed to the recurrence and severity of 
these crises. The United States' principal strategy for meeting its 
commitment to halve hunger in Africa, the Presidential Initiative to 
End Hunger in Africa (IEHA), is limited to some of USAID's agricultural 
development activities and does not integrate other U.S. agencies' 
agricultural development assistance to the region. 

In our May 2008 report, we recommended that the Administrator of USAID 
(1) work in collaboration with the Secretaries of State, Agriculture, 
and the Treasury to develop an integrated governmentwide U.S. strategy 
that defines each agency's actions and resource commitments toward 
achieving food security in sub-Saharan Africa, including improving 
collaboration with host governments and other donors and developing 
improved measures to monitor and evaluate progress toward the 
implementation of this strategy, and (2) report on progress toward the 
implementation of this recommendation as part of the annual U.S. 
International Food Assistance Report submitted to Congress.[Footnote 5] 

We provided drafts of our May 2008 report to USAID and the Departments 
of Agriculture, State, and Treasury. USAID concurred with the first 
recommendation but expressed concerns about the vehicle of the annual 
reporting, asserting that the International Food Assistance Report 
(IFAR) is not the appropriate vehicle for reporting on the progress of 
the implementation of our first recommendation. USAID suggested that a 
report such as the annual progress report on IEHA (which is not 
congressionally required) would be more appropriate. We disagreed 
because we believe that the congressionally required annual IFAR would, 
in fact, be an appropriate vehicle for reporting on USAID's and other 
U.S. agencies' implementation of our first recommendation. Public Law 
480, section 407(f) (codified at 7 U.S.C. 1736a(f)) requires that the 
President prepare an annual report that "shall include. . .an 
assessment of the progress toward achieving food security in each 
country receiving food assistance from the United States Government." 
The IFAR is intended to contain a discussion of food security efforts 
by U.S. agencies. 

The Departments of Agriculture and the Treasury generally concurred 
with the findings, while State identified additional issues for 
consideration, which we addressed in our report as appropriate. 

To examine the factors that contribute to food insecurity in sub- 
Saharan Africa, we analyzed U.S. and international agency documents and 
conducted structured panel discussions with experts and practitioners 
in four African countries and Washington, D.C. To examine the extent to 
which host governments and donors, including the United States, are 
working toward halving hunger in the region by 2015, we reviewed data 
on official development assistance to developing countries, government 
expenditure data, and USAID data on the Presidential Initiative to End 
Hunger in Africa. We conducted this performance audit from April 2007 
to May 2008 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit 
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable 
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for 
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

We are sending copies of this report to the co-chairs of the House 
Hunger Caucus and interested congressional committees. We will also 
make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report 
will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-9601 or melitot@gao.gov. Contact points for our 
Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 
the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to 
this report are listed in enclosure II. 

Signed by: 

Thomas Melito:
Director, International Affairs and Trade: 

Enclosures: 

List of Congressional Requesters:
The Honorable JoAnn Emerson:
Co-Chair:
The Honorable Ray LaHood:
Co-Chair:
The Honorable James P. McGovern:
Co-Chair:
The Honorable Jerry Moran:
Co-Chair:
The Honorable Earl Pomeroy:
Co-Chair:
The Honorable Hilda Solis:
Co-Chair:
House Hunger Caucus:
House of Representatives: 

Enclosure I: Briefing for Congressional Requesters: 

Food Insecurity Persists in Sub-Saharan Africa Despite Efforts to Halve 
Hunger by 2015: 

GAO-08-1007R: 

July 17, 2008: 

Objectives: 

To answer the following questions: 

* What factors have contributed to persistent food insecurity in sub-
Saharan Africa? 

* To what extent are host governments and donors, including the United 
States, working toward halving world hunger by 2015? 

Scope and Methodology: 

* Analyzed data, reviewed documents, and interviewed officials from 
USAID, USDA, State, Treasury, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation 
(MCC). 

* Reviewed professional literature on food security issues. 

* Conducted fieldwork in four countries: Kenya and Tanzania (East 
Africa) and Mozambique and Zambia (southern Africa). 

* Convened structured group discussions of nongovernmental 
organizations (NGO), donors, experts, and practitioners during 
fieldwork and in Washington, D.C. 

* Conducted work in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards from April 2007 to May 2008. 

Background: 

* About 850 million people are undernourished, according to the Food 
and Agriculture Organization. 

* Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest proportion of undernourished 
people in the world. 

* Since early 2007, food-related riots have occurred in 15 countries, 
including 7 in sub-Saharan Africa. 

* In January 2008, the World Economic Forum predicted that food 
insecurity would be among the top potential threats to the world 
economy. 

* In April 2008, the President of the World Bank called for a New Deal 
for a Global Food Policy. 

Prevalence of Undernourishment in the World (2001-2003) and Progress 
Needed to Halve Hunger in Selected Sub-Saharan African Countries by 
2015: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure contains a map of the world with shading indicating 
countries where the percentage of population that is undernourshed 
falls into the following categories: 
Under 5%; 
5-15%; 
15-25%; 
25-35%; 
35-50%; 
More than 50%; 
No data. 

Number and proportion of undernourished people in 2001-2003 in selected 
countries: 
Kenya: 9.7 million (31%); 
Tanzania: 16.1 million (44%); 
Mozambique: 8.3 million (45%); 
Zambia: 5.1 million (47%). 

Number of undernourished people in selected countries compared with the 
MDG and WFS 2015 targets (in millions): 

Country: Kenya; 
1990-1992, MDG: 9.5; 
1990-1992, WFS: 9.5; 
1995-1997, MDG: 10; 
1995-1997, WFS: 10; 
2001-2003, MDG: 9.7; 
2001-2003, WFS: 9.7; 
2015 target, MDG: 7.6; 
2015 target, WFS: 4.7. 

Country: Tanzania; 
1990-1992, MDG: 9.9; 
1990-1992, WFS: 9.9; 
1995-1997, MDG: 15.7; 
1995-1997, WFS: 15.7; 
2001-2003, MDG: 16.1; 
2001-2003, WFS: 16.1; 
2015 target, MDG: 8.5; 
2015 target, WFS: 4.9. 

Country: Mozambique; 
1990-1992, MDG: 9.2; 
1990-1992, WFS: 9.2; 
1995-1997, MDG: 9.5; 
1995-1997, WFS: 9.5; 
2001-2003, MDG: 8.3; 
2001-2003, WFS: 8.3; 
2015 target, MDG: 7.4; 
2015 target, WFS: 4.6. 

Country: Zambia; 
1990-1992, MDG: 4; 
1990-1992, WFS: 4; 
1995-1997, MDG: 4.6; 
1995-1997, WFS: 4.6; 
2001-2003, MDG: 5.1; 
2001-2003, WFS: 5.1; 
2015 target, MDG: 3; 
2015 target, WFS: 2. 

MDG: Millennium Development Goals: 

WFS: World Food Summit: 

Source: GAO analysis of Food and Agriculture Organization data; Map 
Resource (map). 

[End of figure] 

Multiple Factors Contribute to Persistent Food Insecurity in Sub-
Saharan Africa: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure contains four background photographs and is an illustration 
of the following data: 

Selected factors contributing to persistent food insecurity: 

Agricultural productivity: Examples of some interventions to address 
food insecurity: 
* Develop and improve markets; 
* Conduct and disseminate research; 
* Increase access to inputs; 
* Improve farm management and capacity; 
* Improve risk management. 

Rural development: Examples of some interventions to address food 
insecurity: 
* Strengthen rural communities and economies; 
* Invest in and improve infrastructure; 
* Increase access to credit. 

Governance: Examples of some interventions to address food insecurity: 
* Strengthen sector policies; 
* Improve emergency preparedness and risk management practices; 
* Improve tax policies. 

Health: Examples of some interventions to address food insecurity: 
* Ensure access to health care and nutrition. 

Additional factors: 
* Rising global commodity prices; 
* Biofuels; 
* Climate change. 

Source: GAO analysis of literature review and structured discussions; 
GAO (photos). 

[End of figure] 

Food Insecurity Persists in Sub-Saharan Africa Due to Several Factors, 
Including Low Agricultural Productivity: 

* Limited agricultural productivity: 
Example: Grain yield in sub-Saharan Africa has increased by only 1 
percent annually while it has increased by 2.5 percent annually in the 
rest of the world. By 2006, the yield in sub-Saharan Africa was only 
about 40 percent of that of the rest of the world’s developing 
countries. 

* Limited rural development: 
Example: Rural development in sub-Saharan Africa has suffered from weak 
infrastructure, such as lack of rural telecommunications, electricity, 
and roads, as well as farmers’ lack of access to credit. 

* Government policy disincentives: 
Example: Tanzanian farmers must pay about 55 taxes, levies, and fees to 
sell their agricultural products, equivalent to 50 percent of the 
products’price. 

* Poor health: 
Example: The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has taken a heavy toll 
on the population, workforce, and agricultural production of sub-
Saharan Africa; two-thirds of those in the world who have HIV live in 
that region. 

Rising Commodity Prices and Climate Change Will Likely Exacerbate Food 
Insecurity in Sub-Saharan Africa: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a multiple line graph depicting the following data: 

Changes in Commodity Prices, 2000 to 2008 (Index 2000 = 100): 

Year: 2000; 
Crude oil: 100; 
Vegetable oil: 100; 
Grain: 100. 

Year: 2001; 
Crude oil: 86.17; 
Vegetable oil: 98.63; 
Grain: 104.58. 

Year: 2002; 
Crude oil: 88.36; 
Vegetable oil: 116.49; 
Grain: 119.48. 

Year: 2003; 
Crude oil: 102.33; 
Vegetable oil: 142.2; 
Grain: 120.95. 

Year: 2004; 
Crude oil: 133.73; 
Vegetable oil: 167.83; 
Grain: 130.62. 

Year: 2005; 
Crude oil: 188.96; 
Vegetable oil: 140.91; 
Grain: 126.83. 

Year: 2006; 
Crude oil: 227.64; 
Vegetable oil: 156.75; 
Grain: 153.84. 

Year: 2007; 
Crude oil: 251.91; 
Vegetable oil: 227.31; 
Grain: 201.33; 

Year: 2008 (forecast); 
Crude oil: 338.23; 
Vegetable oil: 284.24; 
Grain: 274.76. 

Additional factors that will likely exacerbate food insecurity: 
* Rising global commodity prices; 
* Increased demand for biofuel; 
* Adverse impacts of climate change. 

Source: GAO analysis of International Monetary Fund World Economic 
Outlook Database (April 2008) data. 

[End of figure] 

Host Government Efforts Hampered by Limited Prioritization, Low 
Agricultural Spending, and Weak Capacity of Government Institutions: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure contains four line graphs and four vertical bar graphs 
depicting the following data: 

Annual agricultural spending (2002-2005) as a percentage of total 
government spending compared with CAADP goal: 

Country: Kenya; 
CAADP goal: 10%; 
2002: 4.99%; 
2003: 4.58%; 
2004: 4.22%; 
2005: 3.83%. 

Country: Mozambique; 
CAADP goal: 10%; 
2002: 17.1%; 
2003: 1.2%; 
2004: 9.1%; 
2005: 9.1%. 

Country: Tanzania; 
CAADP goal: 10%; 
2002: 4.5%; 
2003: 6.8%; 
2004: 4.22%; 
2005: 3.83%. 

Country: Zambia; 
CAADP goal: 10%; 
2002: 1.8%; 
2003: 2.3%; 
2004: 4%; 
2005: 8%. 

2004 agricultural spending compared with annual spending required to 
halve hunger by 2015 (constant 2000 dollars in billions): 

Country: Kenya; 
Actual agricultural spending in 2004: $0.339; 
Optimistic estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet MGD-
1 by 2015: $3.313; 
Conservative estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet 
MGD-1 by 2015: $4.318. 

Country: Mozambique; 
Actual agricultural spending in 2004: $0.216; 	
Optimistic estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet MGD-
1 by 2015: $0.413; 
Conservative estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet 
MGD-1 by 2015: $0.463. 

Country: Tanzania; 
Actual agricultural spending in 2004: $0.042; 
Optimistic estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet MGD-
1 by 2015: $0.118; 
Conservative estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet 
MGD-1 by 2015: $0.156. 

Country: Zambia; 
Actual agricultural spending in 2004: $0.072; 
Optimistic estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet MGD-
1 by 2015: $0.324; 
Conservative estimated annual agricultural spending required to meet 
MGD-1 by 2015: $0.665. 

Source: GAO analysis of International Food Policy Research Institute 
data; Nova DEvelopment (Art Explosion). 

Host governments: 
* Limited prioritization; 
* Low agricultural spending; 
* Weak capacity of government institutions. 

Note: In 2003, the African Union endorsed the implementation of the 
Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP), a 
framework to guide countries’ agricultural development efforts, and 
agreed to allocate 10 percent of government spending to agriculture by 
2008. 

[End of figure] 

Donor Efforts Limited by Declining Resources, Difficulties in 
Coordination, and Deficiencies in Undernourishment Estimates: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a multiple line graph depicting the following data: 

Actual ODA to agriculture for Africa (constant 2006 U.S. dollars in 
millions: 

Year: 1974; 
Bilateral assistance: $396; 
Multilateral assistance: $526; 
Overall assistance: $922. 

Year: 1975; 
Bilateral assistance: $496; 
Multilateral assistance: $721; 
Overall assistance: $1218. 

Year: 1976; 
Bilateral assistance: $486; 
Multilateral assistance: $1170; 
Overall assistance: $1656. 

Year: 1977; 
Bilateral assistance: $719; 
Multilateral assistance: $931; 
Overall assistance: $1651. 

Year: 1978; 
Bilateral assistance: $542; 
Multilateral assistance: $1008; 
Overall assistance: $1550. 

Year: 1979; 
Bilateral assistance: $947; 
Multilateral assistance: $757; 
Overall assistance: $1704. 

Year: 1980; 
Bilateral assistance: $961; 
Multilateral assistance: $1287; 
Overall assistance: $2248. 

Year: 1981; 
Bilateral assistance: $1261; 
Multilateral assistance: $1266; 
Overall assistance: $2527. 

Year: 1982; 
Bilateral assistance: $1215; 
Multilateral assistance: $1624; 
Overall assistance: $2839. 

Year: 1983; 
Bilateral assistance: $1233; 
Multilateral assistance: $1051; 
Overall assistance: $2283. 

Year: 1984; 
Bilateral assistance: $1378; 
Multilateral assistance: $1332; 
Overall assistance: $2709. 

Year: 1985; 
Bilateral assistance: $1391; 
Multilateral assistance: $1181; 
Overall assistance: $2572. 

Year: 1986; 
Bilateral assistance: $1669; 
Multilateral assistance: $700; 
Overall assistance: $2369. 

Year: 1987; 
Bilateral assistance: $1775; 
Multilateral assistance: $1406; 
Overall assistance: $3180. 

Year: 1988; 
Bilateral assistance: $2389; 
Multilateral assistance: $1649; 
Overall assistance: $4039. 

Year: 1989; 
Bilateral assistance: $1559; 
Multilateral assistance: $1639; 
Overall assistance: $3197. 

Year: 1990; 
Bilateral assistance: $1765; 
Multilateral assistance: $1140; 
Overall assistance: $2905. 

Year: 1991; 
Bilateral assistance: $1147; 
Multilateral assistance: $666; 
Overall assistance: $1813. 

Year: 1992; 
Bilateral assistance: $1209; 
Multilateral assistance: $668; 
Overall assistance: $1877. 

Year: 1993; 
Bilateral assistance: $1077; 
Multilateral assistance: $631; 
Overall assistance: $1708. 

Year: 1994; 
Bilateral assistance: $907; 
Multilateral assistance: $569; 
Overall assistance: $1476. 

Year: 1995; 
Bilateral assistance: $844; 
Multilateral assistance: $932; 
Overall assistance: $1776. 

Year: 1996; 
Bilateral assistance: $1134; 
Multilateral assistance: $390; 
Overall assistance: $1524; 

Year: 1997; 
Bilateral assistance: $773; 
Multilateral assistance: $331; 
Overall assistance: $1104. 

Year: 1998; 
Bilateral assistance: $772; 
Multilateral assistance: $516; 
Overall assistance: $1287. 

Year: 1999; 
Bilateral assistance: $790; 
Multilateral assistance: $585; 
Overall assistance: $1375. 

Year: 2000; 
Bilateral assistance: $824; 
Multilateral assistance: $609; 
Overall assistance: $1433. 

Year: 2001; 
Bilateral assistance: $656; 
Multilateral assistance: $571; 
Overall assistance: $1227. 

Year: 2002; 
Bilateral assistance: $674; 
Multilateral assistance: $347; 
Overall assistance: $1021. 

Year: 2003; 
Bilateral assistance: $584; 
Multilateral assistance: $750; 
Overall assistance: $1334. 

Year: 2004; 
Bilateral assistance: $739; 
Multilateral assistance: $518; 
Overall assistance: $1257. 

Year: 2005; 
Bilateral assistance: $716; 
Multilateral assistance: $438; 
Overall assistance: $1154. 

Year: 2006; 
Bilateral assistance: $873; 
Multilateral assistance: $932; 
Overall assistance: $1805. 

Over the last three decades, bilateral contributions of ODA to 
agriculture for Africa have exceeded multilateral contributions. The 
United States has provided the largest share of bilateral ODA to 
agriculture for Africa, while the World Bank has provided the largest 
share of multilateral ODA to agriculture for Africa. 

Multilateral: 46%; 
World Bank (International Development Assistance): 44%; 
African Development Bank: 18%; 
International Fund for Agriculture Development: 11%; 
Other: 27%. 

Bilateral: 54%; 
United States: 27%; 
France: 15%; 
Japan: 12%; 
Germany: 9%; 
Netherlands: 8%; 
Other: 34%. 

ODA: Official Development Assistance. 

Source: GAO analysis of Organization for Economic Cooperation and 
Development (Development Assistance Committee) data. 

[End of figure] 

U.S. Efforts to End Hunger in Africa Impaired by Limited Agricultural 
Development Resources and a Fragmented Approach: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a multiple line graph depicting the following data: 

The United States: 

* USAID funding for emergency food aid versus development food aid; 

* Presidential Initiative to End Hunger in Africa (IEHA). 

Constant 2007 dollars in millions. 

Year: 1992; 
Emergency: $395.289; 
Development: $115.782. 

Year: 1993; 
Emergency: $362.294; 
Development: $131.858. 

Year: 1994; 
Emergency: $509.408; 
Development: $102.652. 

Year: 1995; 
Emergency: $514.344; 
Development: $94.73. 

Year: 1996; 
Emergency: $400.572; 
Development: $105.963. 

Year: 1997; 
Emergency: $288.022; 
Development: $138.018. 

Year: 1998; 
Emergency: $383.145; 
Development: $165.105. 

Year: 1999; 
Emergency: $308.078; 
Development: $177.192. 

Year: 2000; 
Emergency: $353.76; 
Development: $195.515. 

Year: 2001; 
Emergency: $359.609; 
Development: $196.823. 

Year: 2002; 
Emergency: $430.878; 
Development: $181.028. 

Year: 2003; 
Emergency: $1105.3; 
Development: $220.969. 

Year: 2004; 
Emergency: $1112.28; 
Development: $224.857. 

Year: 2005; 
Emergency: $1171.44; 
Development: $179.948. 

Year: 2006; 
Emergency: $1071.63; 
Development: $161.179. 

Year: 2007; 
Emergency: $1065.51; 
Development: $167.446. 

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Agency for International Development data. 
GAO (photos). 

[End of figure] 

Recommendations: 

We recommended that the Administrator of USAID take two actions: 

* work in collaboration with the Secretaries of State, Agriculture, and 
the Treasury to develop an integrated governmentwide U.S. strategy that 
defines each agency’s actions and resource commitments toward achieving 
food security in sub-Saharan Africa, including improving collaboration 
with host governments and other donors and developing improved measures 
to monitor and evaluate progress toward the implementation of this 
strategy, and; 

* prepare and submit, as part of the annual U.S. International Food 
Assistance Report, an annual report to Congress on progress toward the 
implementation of this recommendation. 

Agency Comments and Report Issuance: 

* USAID, USDA, and State provided written agency comments. USAID 
concurred with our first recommendation but expressed concerns about 
the vehicle of the annual reporting. The Department of Agriculture 
generally concurred with our findings, while State identified 
additional issues for consideration. 

* FAO, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), 
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), MCC, Treasury, 
UNDP, the World Bank, and WFP provided technical comments. 

Report issued May 29, 2008 (GAO-08-680). 

Report available at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

[End of enclosure] 

Enclosure II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Thomas Melito, (202) 512-9601 or melitot@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the person named above, Phillip J. Thomas (Assistant 
Director), Carol Bray, Ming Chen, Debbie Chung, Martin De Alteriis, 
Leah DeWolf, Mark Dowling, Etana Finkler, Katrina Greaves, Joy Labez, 
Julia A. Roberts, and Kendall Schaefer made key contributions to this 
report. 

[End of enclosure] 

Footnotes: 

[1] The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) defines 
"undernourishment" as the condition of people whose food consumption is 
continuously below a minimum dietary energy requirement for maintaining 
an acceptable minimum body size, living a healthy life, and carrying 
out light physical activity. While we recognize that there are 
different technical definitions for "chronic undernourishment," "food 
insecurity," and "hunger," we use these terms interchangeably in this 
report. 

[2] In its report entitled The State of Food and Agriculture (2006), 
FAO reported undernourishment estimates for 39 countries in sub-Saharan 
Africa: 6 countries in Central Africa, 8 in East Africa, 11 in southern 
Africa, and 14 in West Africa. FAO makes a composite estimate for 
countries for which it lacks country-level data and uses that estimate 
in developing its overall undernourishment estimates for sub-Saharan 
Africa. FAO uses the average of the period of 1990 to 1992 as the 
baseline in measuring progress toward the WFS goal, and its most recent 
official statistics available for undernourishment are for the period 
of 2001 to 2003. 

[3] Between January 2007 and April 2008, 15 countries reported food 
riots and protests, according to WFP. These countries are Burkina Faso, 
Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, Egypt, Guinea, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Italy, 
Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Senegal, and Yemen. 

[4] GAO, International Food Security: Insufficient Efforts by Host 
Governments and Donors Threaten Progress to Halve Hunger in Sub-Saharan 
Africa by 2015, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-
680] (Washington, D.C.: May 29, 2008). 

[5] Pub. L. No. 480, section 407(f), states that "the President shall 
prepare an annual report concerning the programs and activities 
implemented under this law for the preceding fiscal year." The U.S. 
International Food Assistance Report, which USAID prepares and submits 
to Congress annually, provides a report on USAID and U.S. Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) international food assistance programs that are 
aimed at reducing food insecurity. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Mail or Phone: 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room LM: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

To order by Phone: 
Voice: (202) 512-6000: 
TDD: (202) 512-2537: 
Fax: (202) 512-6061: 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: