A/HRC/37/61 83. Secondly, in the aftermath of the cold war, donors began to direct their food aid or assistance towards the poorest countries, rather than prioritizing geopolitical considerations. More frequent, more severe and longer-lasting human-made and natural disasters worldwide have refocused food aid on the challenge of feeding emergency victims. By the early 2000s, over 60 per cent of food aid was in response to emergency situations. 88 In recent years, 80 per cent of disasters have been climate change-related extreme weather events, which have severely hit places that already have food insecurity, such as countries in South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and Central America. Yet, those countries’ contribution to global warming is close to zero. Therefore, disaster relief systems and humanitarian aid almost go hand in hand with climate change policies, and should be factored into adaptation and mitigation remedies.89 84. Thirdly, donor countries have gradually moved from direct transfer of commodity surpluses to sourcing food aid on open markets. The United States, as the biggest donor, provides roughly 50 per cent of all food aid worldwide, reaching approximately 50 million people in 56 countries at an average annual cost of US$2 to 3 billion. But in real terms, the food aid budget of the United States is less than a third of what it was in 1965. The United States spends more than half of its international food aid budget transporting life-saving commodities through a complex system that is responsive to special interests and hampered by bureaucratic obstructions. 90 As Oxfam has documented, such a process is outdated and inefficient from the perspective of getting food to people in need. 91 During sudden emergencies such as the earthquake in Haiti and the hurricane in Puerto Rico, delays cost lives. In recent years, several reform efforts have been taking place to correct such situations. 85. As part of the larger humanitarian structure, food assistance intrinsically suffers from more general shortcomings that plague the humanitarian system. Rather than being carefully coordinated and deliberately engineered, the humanitarian structure evolved from fragmentary endeavours and is composed of a multitude of autonomous entities with separate governance and accountability structures — including NGOs, 92 United Nations humanitarian agencies, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, recipient and donor government agencies, humanitarian arms of regional intergovernmental organizations, military forces, religious institutions and private sector entities. 93 This disparate system, which lacks leadership and coordination, is susceptible to inefficiencies, poor communication, bureaucratic restrictions, corruption, and costly duplicative administrative systems that prevent rapid, flexible and effective responses to changing needs.94 86. Funding shortages are an important concern as the number of disaster- and conflictprone areas is increasing. Donor countries have promised to spend 0.7 per cent of their gross national income as aid. According to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development records, many rich countries have failed to reach their agreed obligations; only a few have met their commitments. 95 87. Food from supply-driven rather than demand-driven food aid programmes frequently goes to people who do not want to eat it, do not know how to cook it or have no real use for it.96, 97 Furthermore, the quality of the food has been often contentious, with 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 16 Ibid. See A/70/287. For instance, in the case of Africa, 70% of the budget goes on transportation. See Medill and USA Today, “Hunger pains: U.S. food program struggles to move forward”. See www.oxfamamerica.org/take-action/campaign/food-farming-and-hunger/food-aid/. Some financially powerful NGOs are World Vision, CARE and Catholic Relief Services. Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP), The State of the Humanitarian System, 2015 edition, p. 19. ALNAP, The State of the Humanitarian System, 2015 edition. See www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-aid-rises-again-in-2016-butflows-to-poorest-countries-dip.htm. Rob Bailey, Chatham House, cited in “Hunger pains: U.S. food program struggles to move forward”.