Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-195)

Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-195)

September 23, 2016
Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-195)
President Obama signed the Global Food Security Act of
also supports flexible approaches to increase effectiveness
2016 (GFSA, P.L. 114-195) into law on July 20, 2016. The
of food assistance in emergency situations such as natural
GFSA calls for a unified approach to U.S.-funded support
disasters and human-caused conflict.
for international food security. It also amends the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 87-195) to re-authorize and
Two key components of the act are (1) establishment of a
expand funding for International Disaster Assistance (IDA).
comprehensive strategy to coordinate all U.S.-funded
It makes up to half of this funding available for the
efforts to support global food security, and (2) codification
Emergency Food Security Program (EFSP), a program that
of the EFSP into law.
began in 2010 and this law now formalizes.
Global Food Security Strategy
Provisions of the GFSA will be implemented starting in late
The GFSA requires the President to develop a Global Food
2016. Given the number of congressional committees and
Security Strategy (“the Strategy”) to coordinate all U.S.
extensive reporting requirements involved in implementing
efforts related to global food security, as well as agency-
the law’s provisions, this issue could continue to remain of
specific plans that identify anticipated contributions to
interest to Congress.
implement the Strategy.
Food security can be defined in many different ways. In
The law calls for the Strategy to emphasize agricultural
essence, it means reliably having enough nutritious food
development, nutrition, and resilience, as has taken place
available to all people when they need it.
under the FtF. Prior to FtF, most U.S. international food
security programs (such as Food for Peace and Food for
For nearly 60 years, the United States has supported
Progress) primarily used the shipment of U.S. agricultural
international food security mostly through programs that
commodities as in-kind food aid to be distributed directly
rely on the purchase of U.S. agricultural commodities.
in-country or to be sold on the local market to generate
These programs include many restrictions on how the
funds for food or broader development objectives.
assistance is used.
Emergency Food Security Program
The EFSP, in contrast, offers significant implementation
The Obama administration began the EFSP in 2010 with
flexibility. This formalization of the EFSP into law is
the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
considered a marked shift toward more flexible approaches
allocating IDA funds for this purpose under the authority of
to international food assistance. For more on U.S. food
the Foreign Assistance Act. The EFSP uses a range of
assistance policies, see CRS Report R41072, U.S.
approaches such as cash, vouchers, or purchase of
International Food Aid Programs: Background and Issues.
agricultural commodities in the location or region of a
disaster in order to provide food assistance. This is widely
On a separate track, the Obama Administration launched
considered a preferred approach when in-kind food aid
Feed the Future (FtF) in 2010 as a presidential initiative to
cannot arrive quickly enough to respond to a disaster
support global food security as part of commitments made
situation or when other approaches may not be appropriate
at the 2009 G8 summit. FtF emphasizes a government-wide
or practical for local market conditions.
approach to address global food security through a range of
approaches, including supporting developing countries in
The GFSA formalizes the EFSP in law and makes up to
growing their own food, strengthening agricultural market
half of IDA funds available to implement the program.
access, and improving nutrition outcomes. This expanded
the range of ways that the U.S. addressed global food
Oversight and Implementation
security. The GFSA builds on this approach and authorizes
The GFSA recognizes six congressional committees as
a funding level similar to what FtF has received as a
being involved in the act’s oversight:
presidential initiative. It is therefore widely seen as an
 Senate: Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry;
institutionalization of the Obama Administration’s FtF
Appropriations; and Foreign Relations.
initiative. For more on FtF, see CRS Report R44216, The
Obama Administration’s Feed the Future Initiative.
 House: Agriculture, Appropriations, and Foreign
Affairs.
Key Components
This differs from most international food assistance
The GFSA identifies a number of policy objectives to put
programs authorized since 1949, which the agriculture
food insecure countries on a path toward long-term self-
committees have authorized as part of periodic omnibus
sufficiency for reliable access to food and good nutrition. It
farm bills.
https://crsreports.congress.gov

link to page 2
Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-195)
In addition, the GFSA includes 11 executive departments
next fiscal year (FY2018), expenditures of the past five
and agencies as potential implementers, with the possibility
fiscal years, and use of federal funds for multilateral
for the President to include additional agencies.
commitments to global food security.
International food assistance programs that operated prior

to the GFSA are implemented by two agencies: USAID and
One and two years after the date of submission of the
the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This shift toward
Strategy: Implementation reports of the Strategy.
broader coordination among federal agencies to support
 March 1 of each fiscal year: Report of EFSP activities
global food security efforts began with FtF and continues
and anticipated outcomes.
with this act.
Issues for Congress
Financial Authorizations
As Congress continues to discuss U.S. support for global
The GFSA authorizes nearly $3.8 billion per year for
food security efforts, a number of issues related to
FY2017 and FY2018, subject to annual appropriations
implementation, funding and oversight might arise.
allocated as follows (see Figure 1):

Some groups have applauded the GFSA for its emphasis on
$1 billion for implementation of the Strategy. This is a
a coordinated approach for long-term food security in
similar level of funding as the outlays for FtF.
developing countries and flexibility for food assistance
 Nearly $2.8 billion for IDA funds to address
operations in international disasters. Others have expressed
humanitarian needs in international disasters. This is a
concern that these approaches may divert funding from
sharp increase over the $25 million that was previously
programs that support U.S. farmers through commodity
authorized, but is similar to the IDA appropriation in
purchases. In addition, the Government Accountability
FY2016. It is the first change in IDA funding level
Office notes that it is difficult to assess the impact of the
authorization since 1985 (most foreign aid program
EFSP. These concerns could be raised by constituent
funding has not been re-authorized since then). Of this
groups, such as agricultural and maritime interests.
$2.8 billion, up to $1.3 billion may be used for the
EFSP. The remaining IDA account funds are for flexible
Previous Congresses have proposed modifying food
use (not necessarily for food security) to mitigate the
assistance programs to allow for broader implementation
impact of disasters. This authorization matches EFSP’s
flexibility. The establishment of the EFSP in law sets a
annual spending in FY2014-16. However, it is a four-
trend toward more flexible approaches to food assistance
fold increase over the EFSP’s first two years of
rather than reliance on use of in-kind aid. The GFSA calls
operations (FY2010-11).
for stronger coordination for a unified approach to global
food security but also states that it does not “supersede or
Figure 1. Global Food Security Act Authorizations
explicitly affect” existing food assistance programs (P.L.
114-195, Section 9). Discussions on revising existing food
assistance legislation might resurface in order to consider
how to relate existing food assistance programs, the newly
authorized EFSP, and the unified approach that the GFSA
calls for.
Funding for the GFSA depends on annual appropriations.
Therefore, the act’s priorities and approaches could arise
during appropriations deliberations. The GFSA authorizes
funding only for the portions of the Strategy to be
implemented by the Department of State and USAID. Other
agencies’ contributions to the Strategy would come from
Source: CRS from P.L. 114-195.
Notes: Total authorization: approximately $3.8 bil ion for each of
within their own existing appropriations authority.
FY2017 and FY2018, subject to annual appropriations.
The GFSA requires the President to deliver the Strategy and
Implementation Timeline
agency-specific implementation plans to six congressional
The act outlines a specific timeline for implementation,
committees during the 114th Congress. The committees
including an accelerated schedule for development of the
could consider these plans and discuss how to coordinate
Strategy, reports to Congress, and annual reviews:
review of the Strategy according to their jurisdiction.
 October 1, 2016: President submits to Congress the
Sonya Hammons, Analyst in Agricultural Policy
government-wide Global Food Security Strategy and
agency-specific implementation plans.
IF10475
 Within 120 days of the presidential budget
submission: Director of the Office of Management and
Budget submits a report that identifies budgets in the

https://crsreports.congress.gov

Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-195)

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10475 · VERSION 2 · NEW