Giving Compass' Take:

• Food Tank's Chris Coxon explains how GAFSP works to combat food crises through agricultural programs throughout the world. The primary funder of GAFSP - the United States - is planning to end financial support for the program.

• How can private funders fill the gap? Is replication of this funding model a good idea? 

• Learn about food insecurity in 2018.

In total, 93 percent of available GAFSP programs go into grants to the world’s poorest countries, making it one of the most efficient multi-stakeholder funds and able to reach the local farmers that produce the majority of the world’s food. But despite the successes in Nepal, the future of the GAFSP is uncertain. It was set up at the 2009 G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh in response to the global food price crisis, when world leaders recognized that investment in local agriculture in countries where food insecurity was highest was urgently needed to tackle global hunger.

Despite having supported projects in more than 30 countries across Africa, Asia, and the Americas, the U.S. Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs announced in November 2017 that the U.S. is not expecting to make any future contributions to GAFSP. As the main investor in the fund, the U.S. withdrawal will significantly impact efforts to fight poverty in some of the world’s poorest countries.

Given the right support, local communities know what is needed to reduce hunger and poverty. But the number of people going hungry around the world has increased in the past couple of years and fears are being raised about a new food crisis. It’s vital that funds like the GAFSP that give local farmers more control over how the money is spent can continue.

Read the full article about GAFSP by Chris Coxon at Food Tank.