Prior to the G8 summit held in June there was much hope - and concern - for the issues to be discussed in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland. Amongst them was the so called ‘new alliance’ for food security and nutrition. Some anticipated this to be the next phase of a ‘shared commitment’ by the G8 members and African leaders to “achieve sustained and inclusive agricultural growth and raise 50 million people out of poverty over the next 10 years” (Office of Global Food Security). It aims to “increase domestic and foreign private investments in African agriculture, take innovations that can enhance agricultural productivity to scale”. On the face of it, this can be seen as a positive push to put African agriculture on the agenda by ‘unleashing the power of the private sector’ and address the issue of hunger and nutrition by re-focusing on agricultural production and the food system as a whole.

Or is it? Many have been expressing their concerns, even dismay, at the underlying agenda of the ‘New Alliance’.  While most acknowledge the role of the private sector in supporting small-scale enterprises and local and regional food security strategies, there is growing concern that the main purpose of the Alliance “risks serving primarily as a vehicle for market access by multinational companies, paving the way for them to extend their reach into African market and exert control over African resources”. Far from being ‘new’ this Alliance is in danger of slipping into familiar patterns of multinationals clutching control over regional markets.

An article on the Guardian website takes a closer look at the Alliance. It highlights that, for example, in a co-operation framework with Mozambique it is committed to “systematically ceasing to distribute fee and unimproved [non-commercial seed to farmers]” effectively forcing them into buying increasingly expensive, and often Genetically Modified (GM) seeds over traditional and local varieties. Many have pointed out that the Alliance’s call for refining land law to encourage “long-term land leasing” in countries such as Ethiopia and Cote d’Ivoire, is a dangerous guise for legitimising land grabbing – a phenomenon that many UK organisations such as Oxfam UK and Action Aid have been campaigning hard against.

Furthermore, it is argued that the New Alliance frames the issue of food security in terms of market orientation, and regresses from the recent progress being made to recognise food security as a human right (CIDSE & EAA, May 2013). By emphasising private sector investment, it fails to address the massive potential of investments made by small-holder farmers, and the importance of supporting local and sustainable livelihood systems. Instead, business-as-usual capital investment, conducted on the terms of the investors and not the recipients seems to dominate the high-level debate.

But along with some of the somewhat disappointing outcomes of the G8 summit was there has also been widespread and outspoken public awareness to bring issues of transparency, tax and land to the forefront. Indeed with 45,000 people gathering at Hyde Park in London as part of the enough food IF campaign during the summit highlights the importance of engaging with the political issues that affect food and hunger, to bring them into the public eye and the political agenda. 

-  G8 Action of Food Security and Nutrition, Office Global Food Security Fact Sheet, White House,  May 18^th 2012 [http://www.state.gov/s/globalfoodsecurity/190282.htm]

- Whose Alliance? The G8 and the Emergence of a Global Corporate Regime for Agriculture, Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance & CIDSE, May 2013 [http://www.cidse.org/content/publications/just-food/food-governance/whose-alliance-_the_g8_new_alliance_for_food_security_and_nutrition_in_africa.html ]

-  G8's new alliance for food security and nutrition is a flawed project Kirtana Chandrasekaran, Friends of the Earth, 7th June 2013 [http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2013/jun/07/g8-new-alliance-flawed-project]

- Enough Food IF[http://enoughfoodif.org/]