806 



tion growth as a condition of receiving U.S. food aid, actually encour- 

 aged them to ignore the problem in the belief that food from the United 

 States would always be available in a time of crisis. Such an argument, 

 however, overlooks the fact that even today family planning is reluc- 

 tantly accepted in the developing countries. The problem did not seem 

 so apparent or so pressing in the 1950s, and many developing countries 

 were probably not as ready to adopt measures that would restrict 

 population growth as they were to become a decade later. It is even 

 possible they would not have accepted U.S. assistance for such activity, 

 or would have pursued it in very desultory fashion, had P.L. 480 food 

 been linked to population planning. 



In 1966, P.L. 480 underwent a major overhaul ; the program of food 

 assistance was tied directly to the efforts of the developing countries 

 to limit their population growth. These changes can be found in the 

 Food for Peace Act, P.L. 89-808. In the first place, the entire rationale 

 of the law was changed. Instead of a device to dispose of U.S. agricul- 

 tural surpluses, the new law advances a program to combat hunger and 

 malnutrition and assist economic development, particularly in those 

 countries that do the most to help themselves. In line with this pro- 

 gram, the President is directed, in negotiating and carrying out agree- 

 ments for the sale of agricultural commodities, whether for dollar 

 credits or foreign currencies, to take account of the efforts of the other 

 countries to meet their problems of food production and population 

 growth. In the Foreign Assistance Act of 1968 one of the purposes for 

 which agreeanents concerning the use of foreign currencies can be made 

 is that of " * * * activities, where participation is voluntary^ related to 

 problems of population growth ♦ * *. Not less than five (5J percentum 

 of the total sales proceeds received each year shall, if requested by the 

 foTcign country, bo used for rohmfnt^ programs to control popula- 

 tion growth." (Emphasis added.) That same law also contained a 

 provision stipulating, as one of the self-help criteria the developing 

 country must meet in order for the President to agree to the sale of 

 agricultural commodities, the criterion of "carrying out voluntary 

 programs to control population growth." This is stronger languasre 

 than that which would merely take account of LDC efforts at self- 

 help. 



Thus today the distribution of U.S. foodstuffs abroad under P.L. 

 480 is definitely linked to action by the receiving country to deal with 

 its population problem. Obviously, this linkage does not apply when 

 there is a natural catastrophe, such as the earthquake in Peru or the 

 floods in East Pakistan. In those instances food is likely to be made 

 available whether or not the stricken country is doing anything to 

 alleviate its population problem. 



Otherwise food assistance, if implemented in accordance with the 

 law, will be geared in with total development. Such aid is no lonjrer 

 an outlet for surpluses, but rather a catalyst to induce the develop- 

 ing countries to go forward with their own food production, and to 

 establish and support family planning activities. The food that is 

 shipped no longer has to be in a surplus category. Whether this may 

 simply be a short-term phenomenon, derived from the elimination of 

 U.S. surpluses, or a really long-term trend, remains to "be seen. If 



