Food as a Human Right

NEWS & VIEWS: What is the human rights agenda as it relates to food security, and why is it becoming an issue now in some development circles?

The basis of the modern human rights agenda began with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" speech in 1941. The third freedom, according to Roosevelt, was the freedom from want. In 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights incorporated this freedom, and in 1966 the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights further strengthened the right to food. It stated that everyone should have an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing, and housing, and that the "fundamental right to freedom from hunger and malnutrition" may require more immediate steps than other rights.

What the right to food means now is driven largely by the 1996 World Food Summit, a meeting of heads of state convened by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). World leaders not only formally renewed their commitment to the right to food, but they specifically reaffirmed "the right of everyone to have access to safe and nutritious food, consistent with the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger." The summit mandated both FAO and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to pursue the matter.

In 1999 the UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (CESCR) further clarified that "right to adequate food" meant that every human being should have physical and economic access to food that is culturally and nutritionally acceptable. The CESCR also spelled out the responsibilities of states and other actors, but these responsibilities are still evolving.

Greater attention is being paid now to the right to food largely because of globalization--both as a result of its more intensive dissemination of information and as a response to its negative, market-based aspects.

NEWS & VIEWS: Who are the key proponents of the human rights agenda, and how have they influenced the dialog on food security?

At this stage a coalition exists between the OHCHR and various food and development agencies (FAO, the World Food Programme, the United Nations Children's Fund, and the United Nations Development Programme). But a growing number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and some states are also giving substance to the agenda.

These actors are pushing for a rights-based approach to development. As a result there is growing understanding that poverty reduction and human rights are inextricable. Requests for poverty reduction activities that reflect a rights perspective are increasing. This is a potentially powerful movement because a rights perspective uses the notion of rights to basic human needs and all the corresponding obligations, as well as remedies in case of noncompliance.

NEWS & VIEWS: What are the key impediments to putting the human rights agenda into practice?

Let me put it this way, the key prerequisites for implementing the right to adequate food are threefold: first and foremost is political will--without political acceptance of the right to food, the human rights agenda cannot make headway. Second, the state must have organizational and managerial capacity at all levels in order to act on political will. Third, it is necessary to allocate and appropriately use the necessary resources for implementing a rights agenda. A case study of the implementation of social security for very poor urban groups in Mozambique has shown that at least the core rights can be secured with very limited resources when political will and appropriate allocation of resources are present.

NEWS & VIEWS: How is the human rights agenda being put into practice? Is the work mainly legislative and done at the governmental and intergovernmental levels?

No. Legislation is only one entry point, and it has meaning only if it facilitates cooperation and coherence of action among many different actors. Other entry points include appropriate action by a professional, independent, and reliable rights-based institution, and the availability of effective remedies in case of noncompliance with the obligations arising from the right to food. But legislation is critical. A number of recommendations recently have urged review of the impediments to a full implementation of the right-to-food agenda. These reviews should be carried out by the states that are parties to the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights as part of their obligations under international human rights law. Reviews should determine whether existing legislation adequately covers the needs and problems of all vulnerable groups when it comes to the right to adequate food; whether legislation contradicts right-to-food obligations; and whether internal contradictions in the law undermine implementation of the right to food. The reviews will also check to see if current laws mandate adequate implementation procedures and if effective remedies exist for everyone whose right to food is violated or neglected.

Based on these findings, states will be able to develop a legislative agenda that strengthens the right to adequate food. In pursuit of this agenda, states should consider adopting a legal framework in line with the CESCR's 1999 recommendation that they recognize the right to adequate food and make a basic commitment to it. The legal framework should explicitly indicate a rights-based purpose, the targets or goals to be achieved, and the time frame for achieving those targets. The means by which the right to food could be satisfied--in particular, through collaboration with civil society, the private sector, and international organizations--should be described, as should the institutional responsibilities for the process and the national mechanisms for monitoring it.

NEWS & VIEWS: Some skeptics who believe that ensuring a right to food is impossible have said that one might as well legislate a right to happiness. What are the mechanisms for monitoring and enforcing the right to food security?

The comparison is utterly nonsensical. There is no inherent difficulty in ensuring the right to food, but there is a need for action at different levels. There is a lot of ideologically inspired misconception as to what the right to food means. It does not mean that the state shall be the provider of food or resources. The state's main task is to create conditions under which people are able to feed themselves, and this is fully within reach if the political will and the organizational and managerial capacity exist.

The right to adequate food, like any other human right, imposes three types of obligations on states: the obligations to respect, protect, and fulfill. The obligation to fulfill incorporates an obligation both to facilitate and to provide.

The obligation to respect has to do with existing access to adequate food: states should not prevent such access. The obligation to protect requires that states ensure that enterprises or individuals do not deprive other individuals of access to adequate food. The obligation to fulfill (facilitate) means that the state must strengthen people's access to and sustainable use of resources and their ability to lead food-secure lives. Finally, states have the obligation to fulfill (provide) the right to food directly, whenever an individual or group is unable to enjoy that right by the means at their disposal. This obligation also applies to persons who are victims of natural or other disasters. Some of these obligations require immediate action, others a longer-term approach.

When all this is properly understood, it eliminates much of the ideological opposition to recognizing the right to food.

NEWS & VIEWS: What are the responsibilities of different groups in realizing the right to food security?

The right to food should not only be seen in the context of state obligations, but also take into account the responsibilities of different actors (parents, families, the local community, private corporations, and international institutions). The obligations I've already described apply to these other actors as well. The concrete implementation of obligations by these different actors should be facilitated and enforced by the national government.

NEWS & VIEWS: How can ethical considerations guide efforts to achieve food security?

Let me take an example from the Panel of Eminent Experts on Ethics in Food and Agriculture, which was set up by FAO and held its first session some months ago. While there are several approaches to ethics, a common ground does exist, i.e., the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Its adoption in 1948 has made available a basic framework of values that spans cultures, religions, and ideologies. The declaration enshrines the right to an adequate standard of living, including food. The declaration also includes the right of everyone to benefit from the achievements of modern science and technology.

Article 1 of the declaration lays the foundation of ethical behavior by stating that everyone is born free and equal in terms of dignity and rights and that everyone is endowed with reason and conscience and should act toward one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Particularly relevant to the ethical concerns of the FAO panel are the inherent value of food, human health, natural resources, and nature itself. Because ethical behavior requires people to go beyond self-interest and to care for one another, it encourages care for the earth and sharing of common resources. Of course, democratic practice must take into account that these values can conflict. But if respect for life is fundamental to ethics, the guarantee of adequate food is among the top priorities in the hierarchy of human values.

Download entire newsletter:
(PDF 255K) Adobe Acrobat 3.0 or above required.