World Food Board Proposal

MAC/WFY

Page-26

0230_553559_07_cha03

194570. Early Attempts: FAO's Pioneering Work

The WFB proposal was described as `one of the boldest and most imaginative

plans for international action ever put forward' (Sinha, 1976). Boyd Orr was a
passionate and tireless advocate of the WFB approach to the world's food and
economic problems and to world peace. `If the nations cannot agree on a food
programme affecting the welfare of the people everywhere', he said many times,
`there is little hope of their reaching an agreement on anything else'. If, on the
other hand, they agreed to co-operate in bold measures, `the people will have
hope that the resources of the earth will be developed to provide adequate food,
clothing, and shelter.

Hope for tomorrow will make them better able to bear

the hardships of today' (Boyd Orr and Lubbock, 1953).

His `bold aim' was discussed in an appropriately impressive location at the

second FAO conference in Copenhagen, Denmark in September 1946. The Danes
had turned over a large part of the Rigsdagen, that portion of Christiansborg
Castle where the Danish Parliament met, for the conference. (They were also
hoping that FAO, which was temporarily located in Washington, DC, would make
its permanent headquarters in Copenhagen.) At the start of the conference, the
feeling seemed to be on the side of Boyd Orr's proposals. The head of UNRRA made
a rousing speech before a plenary session. Generally favourable statements came
from a number of delegates. The debate was opened by the leader of the United
States delegation, Norris E. Dodd, then US Undersecretary of Agriculture who later
became director-general of FAO after Boyd Orr. Dodd served as chairman of the
conference commission that dealt with the broad subject of world food policy. He
said that his government gave general approval to the proposals and to the setting
up of a commission to work out the plan in greater detail, adding:

I believe

farmers generally can have fair prices and the world can have

better nutrition but we will have to devise better methods

to make it

possible.

The solution to this problem will be essential to securing lasting

peace and greater wellbeing. We in the United States therefore strongly favour
the general objectives laid down by Sir John Boyd Orr. (FAO, 1946b)

The British Minister of Food, John Strachey, quoted the epitaph, `Here lies

the body of Farmer Pete, who starved from growing too much wheat'. He said
that no one wanted to see that situation occur again, but did not say that his
government was prepared to co-operate. The chairman of the committee that
actually considered Boyd Orr's proposal, (Herbert Broadley, a member of the UK
delegation), summed up the prevailing opinion when he said:

This Conference

accepts the general objectives of the proposal.

It does

not say

that a World Food Board shall be set up forthwith. What it does

say is that there is a necessity for international machinery for achieving those
objectives.

So the WFB proposal was approved in principle, with no country dissenting, and

it was decided to set up a commission as Boyd Orr had requested. But from the

Home

eBook	World Food Security: A History since 1945


Useful links	World Food Board Proposal MAC/WFY Page-26 0230_553559_07_cha03 26 194570. Early Attempts: FAO's Pioneering Work The WFB proposal was described as `one of the boldest and most imaginative plans for international action ever put forward' (Sinha, 1976). Boyd Orr was a passionate and tireless advocate of the WFB approach to the world's food and economic problems and to world peace. `If the nations cannot agree on a food programme affecting the welfare of the people everywhere', he said many times, `there is little hope of their reaching an agreement on anything else'. If, on the other hand, they agreed to co-operate in bold measures, `the people will have hope that the resources of the earth will be developed to provide adequate food, clothing, and shelter. Hope for tomorrow will make them better able to bear the hardships of today' (Boyd Orr and Lubbock, 1953). His `bold aim' was discussed in an appropriately impressive location at the second FAO conference in Copenhagen, Denmark in September 1946. The Danes had turned over a large part of the Rigsdagen, that portion of Christiansborg Castle where the Danish Parliament met, for the conference. (They were also hoping that FAO, which was temporarily located in Washington, DC, would make its permanent headquarters in Copenhagen.) At the start of the conference, the feeling seemed to be on the side of Boyd Orr's proposals. The head of UNRRA made a rousing speech before a plenary session. Generally favourable statements came from a number of delegates. The debate was opened by the leader of the United States delegation, Norris E. Dodd, then US Undersecretary of Agriculture who later became director-general of FAO after Boyd Orr. Dodd served as chairman of the conference commission that dealt with the broad subject of world food policy. He said that his government gave general approval to the proposals and to the setting up of a commission to work out the plan in greater detail, adding: I believe farmers generally can have fair prices and the world can have better nutrition but we will have to devise better methods to make it possible. The solution to this problem will be essential to securing lasting peace and greater wellbeing. We in the United States therefore strongly favour the general objectives laid down by Sir John Boyd Orr. (FAO, 1946b) The British Minister of Food, John Strachey, quoted the epitaph, `Here lies the body of Farmer Pete, who starved from growing too much wheat'. He said that no one wanted to see that situation occur again, but did not say that his government was prepared to co-operate. The chairman of the committee that actually considered Boyd Orr's proposal, (Herbert Broadley, a member of the UK delegation), summed up the prevailing opinion when he said: This Conference accepts the general objectives of the proposal. It does not say that a World Food Board shall be set up forthwith. What it does say is that there is a necessity for international machinery for achieving those objectives. So the WFB proposal was approved in principle, with no country dissenting, and it was decided to set up a commission as Boyd Orr had requested. But from the back to top Next page
© 2009