Consequences for number of hungry poeple of using prevalence versus numbers
BASED ON FIGURE 1, PAGE 8 SOFI 12Policy makers might want to note that in 1996 at the World Food Summit in Rome, 186 governments pledged to cut the “number of undernourished people to half their present level no later than 2015.” (cite) But in 2000 the Millennium Development Goals shifted the definition of success from halving the number to halving the proportion of undernourished people in the developing countries. Given population growth there, this shift made progress easier to demonstrate. Thus today SOFI 12 celebrates the decline in hunger, showing that we are nearly three-quarters of the way to cutting its prevalence in half in the developing countries.(8) If, however, the numerical goal had been retained, developing countries would instead be only about one quarter of the way to cutting hunger in half.(8)NUMERICAL decline p. 8 SOFI 12 graph1990-02 980 million hungry to 852 million in 2010-12– 128 million DIFFERENCE = 13% decline PREVALENCE:23.2% down to 14.9 %8.3% DIFFERENCE = 36% decline Numbers from Figure 1 “Undernourishment in the Developing World,” FAO State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012, p.8 Note: Numbers relate to developing world only, where, of course, most hunger is; and what MDGs relate to, not to the world. NUMERICAL MEASUREMENT:In 1990-02: 980 million hungry; in 2010-12: 852 million hungry= 128 million DIFFERENCE = 13% decline (compared to original 50% goal)RESULT: We are only about quarter of our way to meeting the goal of cutting hunger in half.PREVALENCE MEASUREMENT:In 1990-02: 23.2%; 2010-12: 14.9 %=8.3% DIFFERENCE = 36% decline (compared to 50% goal)RESULT: We are almost 3/4rds of the way to meeting the MDG goal.Frances Moore Lappe calculated 2.13 from figures in State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012