ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM Bruno Palombini Gastal

COMPARATIVE PUBLIC POLICY (4182) October 2021

THE OTHER
EMERGENCY:
Rising food
insecurity in Brazil

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Covid-19 pandemic is already, by far, the deadliest event in
Brazil’s history, where it caused over 600,000 deaths. But there
is another public health calamity demanding urgent attention:
food insecurity, which was already creeping back to many
Brazilian households since some years ago, rose drastically in the
last two years, now affecting more than half of the Brazilian
population. This policy brief is an attempt to raise awareness
about, make sense of, and think of possible solutions to this
alarming situation. After briefly introducing the problem, it
enumerates its main causes and it analyzes current policies.
Based on that, policy recommendations are presented.
 1 Setting food security back onto the
agenda
In 2020, 55% of the households in Brazil were facing
food insecurity, among which 9% are experiencing
severe food insecurity. In other words, around 117
million Brazilians do not have stable access to
adequate and sufficient food, of which 19 million are
experiencing hunger. This staggering data is from a
study by the Brazilian Research
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2004 2009 2013 2018
To be sure, data alone is not capable of bringing a
topic onto the political agenda: the public perception
must also shift accordingly. Many people only
“discovered” the problem of food insecurity when
increased media coverage made it more visible. A
noteworthy example was a frontpage of newspaper
Extra showing three men scavenging discarded
animal carcasses for edible parts, which had wide
repercussion. Bearing this in mind, Rede PENSSAM
and its partners also launched a website and a
manifesto called “Don't turn away from hunger: the
challenge is ours”, in order to publicize the findings of
their study. Social movements and some political
parties have also been struggling to increase the
visibility of the problem.
Thus, the first intention of this report is to contribute
to this rising “coalition” of academics, social
movements, media outlets and politicians
Network on Food and Nutritional Sovereignty and
Security (Rede PENSSAM), which surveyed 2,180
households in all Brazilian regions in December 2020
[i]. These figures had been growing since 2013, but
they worsened quickly in the last couple of years, as
showed in the graph below.
Food security
Mild food insecurity
Moderate food insecurity
Severe food insecurity
Source: Adapted from
Rede PENSSAM (2021)
2020
that share the conviction that addressing food
insecurity must be a priority in the political agenda.
To support that, we will provide a synthetic
exposition of the causes of the current situation,
followed by an analysis of the policies that are
currently in force and by recommendations on how to
improve them, with some indications of how these
can be implemented.
It is our hope that the content will be useful to
policymakers in Congress and in state and city
governments, as well as to actors from the civil
society in a broader sense. Also, it is worth stressing
that combatting hunger is not only a necessity in
itself: it is also a constitutional obligation of the
Brazilian state. Therefore, we urge public actors at all
levels to deal with it as such.
2
 2 Why is hunger haunting Brazil again?
Although shocking, the current spike in food
insecurity in Brazil is not exactly a surprise. It is
mainly a result of three broad sets of factors:
2.1. The deteriorating economic scenario
The primary cause of the recent rise in food
insecurity in Brazil is without doubts the economic
decline perceived in Brazil since 2014, which the
pandemic aggravated harshly.
Unemployment, for instance, went up from 6.5% in
2013 to 14.6% in 2020 [ii]. Since the pandemic,
average earnings shrank by around a fifth of their
previous levels, with particularly severe impacts in
the case of informal workers (which are 40% of the
Brazilian workforce) [iii]. Naturally, this compromised
the capacity of the affected families to make ends
meet: 20% of the households that lost jobs due to
the pandemic were facing severe food insecurity [iv].
On the supply side, inflation has also made things
more difficult for families, and it was particularly high
in the case of food products, whose price rose by
14% in 2020 (more than three times the average)
[v].
2.2. Logistic obstacles posed by public health
protocols
This has had a particularly serious effect on the food
security of small-scale farmers, which in many cases
were unable to sell their products and generate
income. Also, solidarity networks needed to face
extraordinary challenges to operate among public
health considerations, with impacts on people living
in extreme poverty [vi].
2.3. Policy gaps or weakening of previous policies
Lastly, the current food crisis can also be explained
in part by policy decisions, particularly the weakening
of previously-successful policies, which will be
analyzed in the next section.
3
 3 Evaluation of current policies
The current situation is even more appalling if one
recalls the impressive results that recent policies
had in diminishing food insecurity in Brazil, part of the
overarching policy strategy called “Zero Hunger”. As
the graph above shows, the food-secure population
increased from 65% to 77% from 2004 to 2014
[vii]. In this period, combatting hunger was a clear
political priority that had wide support among the
population, which celebrated Brazil’s removal from
the WFP’s Hunger Map, in 2014, as a collective feat.
Also, its strength as a social choice can be inferred
by the fact that even when opposition governments
took over in 2016, they kept most of the policies in
place, albeit with significantly less resources. The
table below summarizes these considerations based
on Fischer’s model for policy evaluation.
Program verification Food security indices
Situational validation Removal from Hunger Map
Societal vindication Program's popularity
Social choice Endurance of policies
Based on Fischer (2003a), cited in Bekkers et al., op. cit.
There are two main groups of policies that relate to
food security: basic income policies (BIP), and those
directed to food and agriculture in particular.
The “Family Grant” Program (PBF) is the most famous
example of those in the first group, and it had indeed
patent effects on diminishing food insecurity [viii].
Although the program was managed by the federal
government, “street-level bureaucrats” such as
social workers and nurses, were key in its
implementation, which is generally viewed as fairly
effective. The number of benefitted families, though,
has been decreasing since 2014, at the same time
as the economic situation started to deteriorate —
that is, when it was needed the most [ix]. When the
pandemic hit, the Congress proposed and approved
an emergency relief (ER) for informal workers and
unemployed people, which had a tremendous effect
in curbing the income effects
of the shutdown: it took extreme poverty down from
6.6% to 2.4% [x]. Considering the high levels of
informality in Brazil, this measure probably had a
greater effect on sustaining the overall income than
if the government had only pursued other
alternatives, such as payroll subsidies. However, it
was suspended in the first months of 2021, then
downsized, and it is supposed to be terminated in
November as of the writing of this report, leading to
an upsurge in poverty.
To fill this vacuum, the government created a new
BIP to “succeed” [xi] both the PBF and the ER, called
Brazil Assistance (AB). There are still great
uncertainties surrounding it, but, as it is now, the
coverage and the size of the allowance will be larger
than those of the PBF. However, there is a
considerable number of individuals who received the
ER that are not eligible for the new program, so that
they will be soon even more vulnerable to extreme
poverty and, thus, to food insecurity — moderate
and severe food insecurity were three times the
national average among people that received the ER
[xii].
In the second group, the main representative is the
Food Acquisition Program (PAA). It consists of a
federal program of guaranteed purchases of
products from small-scale farmers, which are
distributed by local governments in schools, public
canteens or in public stockpiles. Apart from the
individuals who receive the food, the farmers
themselves are the target, as the program ensures
them a stable income, with positive effects on
consumption and well-being. Studies found that it
contributes to economic growth in the regions where
it reaches, to product diversification (which
contributes greatly to nutrition quality both of
farmers and of end-consumers) and to curbing
inequalities. But this program also suffered severe
cuts: in the last three years, its budget decreased to
a third of what it was in 2014, severely reducing its
reach [xiii].
34
 4 Policy recommendations
Based on the evaluation above, and on the relative
success of previous policies, schematized in the
table above, we argue that it is not necessary to
“reinvent the wheel” in order to mitigate the current
food crisis in Brazil: there is already a valuable set of
policies, which, if strengthened and/or adapted, may
be more effective than proposing new measures
from scratch. They benefit, for example, from the
fact that they already have mechanisms for
implementation and that beneficiaries already know
how to access them.
That being so, this report’s main approach is to
recommend measures that build upon preexisting
policies, either addressing their gaps,
complementing or expanding them. In this sense,
some of them consist of incremental policy changes
[xiv].
4.1. Addressing gaps in basic income policies
It is urgent to somehow assist the millions of low-
income individuals that will not be attended by the
AB program, such as by extending the ER for this
group of people. As the Congress will need to
approve the supplementary funds required by the AB
anyway, it will be in a politically favorable position to
push for this initiative, which could have an important
effect in mitigating food insecurity for many people.
The implementation would be pretty straightforward,
mainly based on the screening of applications
previously done for the ER.
Although they have more limited resources than the
federal government, state and city governments
could also play a part here. Let alone temporary basic
income programs to face the pandemic, such as
those by São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, Maricá
provides a successful example of long duration BIP
at the local level. It was created in 2013 and now
includes around a quarter of the citizens. By
distributing the benefit in its own local social
currency, which is only valid within the city, the
program also stimulates the local economy, “paying
for itself” to some extent [xv].
Focusing on the individuals that received the ER and
will not be included in the AB (easily identifiable
through public databases, such as Portal da
Transparência) may be a good and affordable way to
experiment a policy like this, with immediate effects
on food insecurity. Also, this is an unambiguous
criterion of easy implementation. By calling upon
local businesses to be co-implementers of the
program, moreover, this process could be somewhat
participative and more consensual, albeit its
relatively centralized, “top-down” nature. Apart from
offering political support, these stakeholders could
also be key in the monitoring and later evaluation of
the policy, to which other actors such as universities
or NGOs can be of great help.
4.2. Scaling up the PAA
As outlined above, the PAA has a wide range of
impacts. Increasing investments on it, thus, could
directly help achieving many complimentary goals,
including rural and urban food security, rural
development and more sustainable food chains.
Also, it could serve to replenish public food
stockpiles, which have been virtually eliminated, with
short-term effects on prices of products such as
rice (which went up by 76% in 2020).
As the PAA has existed for more than a decade and a
half, involving many actors at all levels, its potential
reach is great, and it could be easily expanded with
more resources. Raising its budget to only R$1 billion
(roughly US$180 million), it could already benefit
around 12 million consumers and 208,000 farmers in
over 3,000 municipalities [xvi]. Despite the current
fiscal constraints, this is a relatively low amount in
the federal budget. That being so, it is a “low-hanging
fruit” policy that could directly reduce food insecurity
in rural and urban settings.
35
However, it can go even further than that if
significantly expanded: it could be the basis for a
lasting transformation of food systems in Brazil, in
line of what has been proposed by specialists in the
discussions surrounding the UN Food Systems
Summit, stimulating sustainable and resilient short
circuits, strengthening low-scale agriculture, and
fostering product diversification [xvii].
4.3. Linking basic income to local agriculture for
territorial development
There is an interesting potential to explore in
combining local BIP and local agriculture as a tool for
local development. It could involve social
Basic income policies
Addressing AB gaps Local BIP
Boosting rural/urban income
Reducing food insecurity in the short-run
Dynamizing local economies
Developing food-secure cities, towns, regions
5 Final remarks
As daunting as it may be, the current upsurge in food
insecurity in Brazil is not a "wicked" policy problem.
Existing policies provide a pathway through which
the country can regain the "lost ground" to hunger,
with the potential to be
currency-denominated bonuses for consumers to
buy products from local farmers, such as those
participating in the PAA, and cooperation between
municipalities. The case of Belo Horizonte can be an
inspiration of how food and social policies can rewire
productive relations between urban, rural and
periurban areas, with sensible effects on social
indices, including food security [xviii]. A set of
policies of this kind can also the basis for a collective
narrative around the importance of having a “food
secure” community, town, city or state, by involving a
constellation of actors such as farmers,
businesspeople and consumers in general — all of
which would be benefitted by them. This sense of
common purpose may be a key ally in making policy
outcomes durable.
Food Acquisition Program
Stabilizing food prices
Increasing access to food in
schools and public canteens
More sustainable food systems
developed further. For food insecurity to stay in
the past, however, policies will need to be followed
consistently, and in this process they can also
contribute to Brazil's sustainable development.
36
References
[i] Rede PENSSAM (2021). VIGISAN: National Survey of Food Insecurity in the Context of the Covid-19
Pandemic in Brazil. Instituto Vox Populi; ActionAid Brasil; Fundação Friedrich Ebert - Brasil; Instituto
Ibirapitanga; Oxfam Brasil.
[ii] Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) (2021). PNAD continua, Séries históricas, Taxa de
desocupação. <https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/trabalho/9173-pesquisa-nacional-por-amostra-
de-domicilios-continua-trimestral.html?=&t=series-historicas>.
[iii] Bridi, M. A. (2020). A pandemia Covid-19: Crise e deterioração do mercado de trabalho no Brasil. Estudos
Avançados, 34(100), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-4014.2020.34100.010
[iv] Rede PENSSAM (2021), p. 16.
[v] CEPEA. (2021). A Inflação nos preços dos alimentos em 2020 e 2021 e
perspectivas.https://cepea.esalq.usp.br/upload/kceditor/files/Infla%C3%A7%C3%A3o%2020-21-set21.pdf
[vi] Valadares, A. A. et al. (2020). Agricultura Familiar e Abastecimento Alimentar no Contexto do Covid-19:
Uma Abordagem das Ações Públicas Emergenciais. Nota Técnica IPEA, 69, 30.
[vii] Vasconcelos, F. de A. G. et al. (2019). Public policies of food and nutrition in Brazil: From Lula to Temer.
Revista de Nutrição, 32, e180161.
[viii] Souza, A. A. de, & Heller, L. (2021). Programa Bolsa Família e saneamento: Uma revisão sistemática dos
efeitos na diarreia e na desnutrição. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 26(8), 3087–3098.
[ix] Ibidem.
[x] Nassif-Pires, L .et al.. Gênero e raça em evidência durante a pandemia no Brasil: o impacto do Auxílio
Emergencial na pobreza e extrema pobreza. Nota de Política Econômica nº 010. MADE/USP.
[xi] Hogwood and Peters (2013), cited in Bekkers, V., et al. (2017). Public Policy in Action. Edward Elgar
Publishing; eBook Collection (EBSCOhost).
[xii] See: <https://fdr.com.br/2021/10/22/excluidos-fim-do-auxilio-emergencial-vai-deixar-20-milhoes-sem-
ajuda/>.
[xiii] Sambuichi, R. et al. (2020). O Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos (PAA) como estratégia de
enfrentamento aos desafios da COVID-19. Revista de Administração Pública, 54(4), 1079–1096.
[xiv] Bekkers et al., op. cit.
[xv] See: <https://www.maricabasicincome.com/pt/sobre-a-pesquisa>.
[xvi] Sambuichi et al. (2020), op. cit.
[xvii] Almeida, A. F. C. S., et al. (2020). O Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos (PAA)- um caso de Big Push
Ambiental para a sustentabilidade no Brasil.pdf. CEPAL.
[xviii] Global Alliance for the Future of Food. (2020). Systemic Solutions for Healthy Food Systems: Approaches
to Policy & Practice. Global Alliance for the Future of Food.
37