[Catch-22: no-win situation or a double bind of any type. Source: Wikipedia]

Today, two different pieces of news caught my attention. First, a report recently released by FAO that makes pretty somber predictions regarding the future evolution of prices for basic foodstuffs. According to the report, food prices are going to rise by a whopping 80% during the next ten years or so.

The second piece of news was an Economist article saying that Japan quadrupled its aid to Africa, in an effort to get a solid political footing on the Continent and harvest Africa’s rich resources.

There is a third story, but that is not really news: energy prices, which stubbornly stay above $ 130/barrel, in spite of recent demand concerns.

So there we have it: three pieces of the same puzzle. Allow me to elaborate. First, food prices. According to the FAO report, there are two main causes for the increase. First, climate changes affecting food-producing regions and thus negatively impacting supply. Second, the increasing shift from crops for human consumption toward bio fuels.

Bio fuels, you say? Oh yeah, it’s that kind of alternative fuel which is supposed to help us weather the current energy crisis. Biofuels are increasingly embraced as an alternative to fossile fuel, and as a way to cope with a looming oil shortage. Add to this the fact that the shift to the less polluting biofuel is widely seen as a way of combating climate change, and you should be able to get a picture of what can be called a Catch-22 situation. To sum it up:in order to avert a criticial energy crisis, the world economy needs to shift to alternative fuels. Furthermore, a decline in the use of traditional fuels will help alleviate global warming and climate change. One of the alternative fuels favored worldwide is biofuel. Yet, the shift toward biofuel, coupled with the aforementioned global warming, is cited as the main cause of the current food crisis.

So where does Africa come into play here? As the least developed continent, and one where the population is still largely dependent on subsistence agriculture, it will be the most affected by rising food prices. In fact, unless decisive action is taken, the increase in food prices is creeping into a large-scale humanitarian disaster throughout Africa.

So far, the conclusion is quite grim: we have an energy crisis, a food crisis, and a potential large-scale humanitarian crisis. To quote Robin Williams in his massive Broadway show: life is shit, get used to it! [to be read with a French accent]. Yet, there is a way out. One that might potentially help sort out Africa, while allowing the rest of the world to deal with its own problems.

Let us return to the Economist article. The signal sent by Japan is quite clear: although a latecomer, it wants a share of Africa’s resources, where it will have to compete both with the aggressive Chinese, and with the political clout of the former colonial masters from Europe.

This competition, however, might end up doing much good to Africa, if properly ‘regulated.’ An ideal scenario, which is entirely possible, would entail the developed world subsidizing Africa’s development in exchange to easy access to its resources. This would then help African countries manage the food crisis, while allowing the West and the East alike to tap into much needed resources, not least oil [see the case of Nigeria], and thus smooth a transition toward an alternative-energy based world economy.

Here, however, the keyword is ‘regulation.’ If the subsidy is disbursed in the form of bribes toward African governments, with no accountability or transparency requirements, the outcome will be that of perpetuating corruption and bad governance, and ofdeepening Africa’s crisis. If, however, donors [and suitors alike] sign on to a Compact for Africa, instituting both a reliable system of controlling the impact of aid, and channelling the aid according to an integrated plan aimed at addressing the most pressing needs on the Continent, the initiative may actually lead to a real improvement of life throughout the Continent.

I guess the lesson from this story is that, often times, relief comes from where you least expect. And that pragmatic means to lucrative ends can intesect with principle-grounded ideals.