<p>This year’s Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to the World Food Programme (WFP). The UN agency has done impressive work in addressing global hunger and improving food security. In 2019 alone, it provided food assistance to some 97 million people in 88 countries who were in the grip of acute hunger. It has reached out to a far larger number during the Covid-19 pandemic. On the face of it, the WFP’s work does not fall under conventional ideas of peace. It is not engaged in demining conflict zones, for instance, nor has it helped negotiate a peace agreement. However, much of the WFP’s work has been in conflict zones. Its work has helped us understand how conflict is an important driver of food insecurity. Armed conflict results in death but also in destruction of food and irrigation systems. It devastates the environment and agriculture and results in famine and food shortages. Not only has it reduced global hunger but also, it has weakened attempts by conflict actors to use food as a weapon of war. By awarding this year’s Peace Prize to the WFP, the Nobel Committee has underscored the need to understand peace not just as an absence of fighting but in more comprehensive terms to include wellbeing and food security.</p>.<p>The Nobel Peace Prize has often stirred controversy. Several of its choices in the past have been deeply flawed; public opinion has held many recipients undeserving. In deciding to honour the WFP, the Nobel Committee seems to have made a ‘safe’ choice. At a time of grave polarisation on a range of issues, it has backed an organisation whose objective of addressing hunger is hard to oppose.</p>.<p>While the WFP’s work is impressive, awarding it the Nobel Peace Prize raises some questions. It was set up to tackle hunger and it has been doing its job admirably, albeit with mixed success. By awarding it the Nobel Prize, the committee may be deemed to have rewarded it merely for doing its job. There are countless individuals and organisations who are putting their lives on the line to make the world a safer place. Surely, they deserve the honour more than a well-known, well-funded UN agency. Global recognition to such individuals and organisations could make a huge difference. It would provide them with a morale boost and also throw the global spotlight on issues they are grappling with, which often receive little attention. By choosing the WFP, the Nobel Committee seems to have lost an opportunity to highlight little known but significant initiatives.</p>
<p>This year’s Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to the World Food Programme (WFP). The UN agency has done impressive work in addressing global hunger and improving food security. In 2019 alone, it provided food assistance to some 97 million people in 88 countries who were in the grip of acute hunger. It has reached out to a far larger number during the Covid-19 pandemic. On the face of it, the WFP’s work does not fall under conventional ideas of peace. It is not engaged in demining conflict zones, for instance, nor has it helped negotiate a peace agreement. However, much of the WFP’s work has been in conflict zones. Its work has helped us understand how conflict is an important driver of food insecurity. Armed conflict results in death but also in destruction of food and irrigation systems. It devastates the environment and agriculture and results in famine and food shortages. Not only has it reduced global hunger but also, it has weakened attempts by conflict actors to use food as a weapon of war. By awarding this year’s Peace Prize to the WFP, the Nobel Committee has underscored the need to understand peace not just as an absence of fighting but in more comprehensive terms to include wellbeing and food security.</p>.<p>The Nobel Peace Prize has often stirred controversy. Several of its choices in the past have been deeply flawed; public opinion has held many recipients undeserving. In deciding to honour the WFP, the Nobel Committee seems to have made a ‘safe’ choice. At a time of grave polarisation on a range of issues, it has backed an organisation whose objective of addressing hunger is hard to oppose.</p>.<p>While the WFP’s work is impressive, awarding it the Nobel Peace Prize raises some questions. It was set up to tackle hunger and it has been doing its job admirably, albeit with mixed success. By awarding it the Nobel Prize, the committee may be deemed to have rewarded it merely for doing its job. There are countless individuals and organisations who are putting their lives on the line to make the world a safer place. Surely, they deserve the honour more than a well-known, well-funded UN agency. Global recognition to such individuals and organisations could make a huge difference. It would provide them with a morale boost and also throw the global spotlight on issues they are grappling with, which often receive little attention. By choosing the WFP, the Nobel Committee seems to have lost an opportunity to highlight little known but significant initiatives.</p>
