Criticism

1970s, 80s, 90sedit

There has been public criticism of FAO for at least 30 years. Dissatisfaction with the organization's performance was among the reasons for the creation of two new organizations after the World Food Conference in 1974, namely the World Food Council and the International Fund for Agricultural Development; by the early eighties there was intense rivalry among these organizations. At the same time, the World Food Programme, which started as an experimental three-year programme under FAO, was growing in size and independence, with the Directors of FAO and WFP struggling for power.

Early in 1989, the organization came under attack from Heritage Foundation, an American conservative think tank, which described the FAO as becoming "essentially irrelevant in combating hunger" due to a "bloated bureaucracy known for the mediocrity of its work and the inefficiency of its staff", which had become politicized. In September of the same year, the journal Society published a series of articles about FAO that included a contribution from the Heritage Foundation and a response by FAO staff member, Richard Lydiker, who was later described by the Danish Minister for Agriculture (who had herself resigned from the organization) as "FAO's chief spokesman for non-transparency".

Edouard Saouma, the Director-General of FAO, was also criticized in Graham Hancock's book Lords of Poverty, published in 1989. Mention is made of Saouma's "fat pay packet", his "autocratic" management style, and his "control over the flow of public information". Hancock concluded that "One gets the sense from all of this of an institution that has lost its way, departed from its purely humanitarian and developmental mandate, become confused about its place in the world – about exactly what it is doing, and why." Despite the criticism, Edouard Saouma served as DG for three consecutive terms from 1976 to 1993.

In 1990, the U.S. State Department expressed the view that "The Food and Agriculture Organization has lagged behind other UN organizations in responding to US desires for improvements in program and budget processes to enhance value for money spent".

A year later, in 1991, The Ecologist magazine produced a special issue under the heading "The UN Food and Agriculture Organization: Promoting World Hunger". The magazine included articles that questioned FAO's policies and practices in forestry, fisheries, aquaculture, and pest control. The articles were written by experts such as Helena Norberg-Hodge, Vandana Shiva, Edward Goldsmith, Miguel A. Altieri and Barbara Dinham.

2000sedit

The 2002 Food Summit organized by FAO was considered to have been ineffectual and unproductive by the official participants. Social movements, farmers, fisherfolk, pastoralists, indigenous peoples, environmentalists, women's organizations, trade unions and NGOs expressed their "collective disappointment in, and rejection of the official Declaration of the ... Summit".

In 2004, FAO produced a controversial report called 'Agricultural Biotechnology: meeting the needs of the poor?', which claimed that "agricultural biotechnology has real potential as a new tool in the war on hunger". In response to the report, more than 650 organizations from around the world signed an open letter in which they said "FAO has broken its commitment to civil society and peasants' organisations". The letter complained that organizations representing the interests of farmers had not been consulted, that FAO was siding with the biotechnology industry and, consequently, that the report "raises serious questions about the independence and intellectual integrity of an important United Nations agency". The Director General of FAO responded immediately, stating that decisions on biotechnology must "be taken at the international level by competent bodies" (in other words, not by non-governmental organizations). He acknowledged, however, that "biotechnology research is essentially driven by the world's top ten transnational corporations" and "the private sector protects its results with patents in order to earn from its investment and it concentrates on products that have no relevance to food in developing countries".

In May 2006, a British newspaper published the resignation letter of Louise Fresco, one of eight Assistant Directors-General of FAO. In her letter, Fresco stated that "the Organization has been unable to adapt to a new era", that its "contribution and reputation have declined steadily" and "its leadership has not proposed bold options to overcome this crisis".

The 32nd Session of FAO's Committee on World Food Security in 2006, attended by 120 countries, was widely criticized by non-governmental organizations, but largely ignored by the mainstream media. Oxfam called for an end to the talk-fests while Via Campesina issued a statement that criticised FAO's policy of Food Security.

On 18 October 2007, the final report of an Independent External Evaluation of FAO was published. More than 400 pages in length, the evaluation was the first of its kind in the history of the Organization. It had been commissioned by decision of the 33rd Session of the FAO Conference in November 2005. The report concluded that "The Organization is today in a financial and programme crisis" but "the problems affecting the Organization today can all be solved". Among the problems noted by the IEE were: "The Organization has been conservative and slow to adapt"; "FAO currently has a heavy and costly bureaucracy", and "The capacity of the Organization is declining and many of its core competencies are now imperilled". Among the solutions offered were: "A new Strategic Framework", "institutional culture change and reform of administrative and management systems". In conclusion the IEE stated that, "If FAO did not exist it would need to be invented".

The official response from FAO came on 29 October 2007. It indicated that management supported the principal conclusion in the report of the IEE on the need for "reform with growth" so as to have an FAO "fit for this century". Meanwhile, hundreds of FAO staff signed a petition in support of the IEE recommendations, calling for "a radical shift in management culture and spirit, depoliticization of appointments, restoration of trust between staff and management, and setting strategic priorities of the organization".

In November 2008, a Special Conference of FAO member countries agreed a US$42.6 million (€38.6 million), three-year Immediate Plan of Action for "reform with growth", as recommended by the IEE. Under the plan US$21.8 million would be spent on overhauling the financial procedures, hierarchies and human resources management.

In 2015, the FAO was criticized by The Economist for giving a diploma to Venezuela for being one of 72 countries that had "reached the UN Millennium Development Goal of halving the percentage of their populations suffering from hunger". It argued that the positive conclusion reached by FAO about the performance of a country experiencing major economic difficulties was based on false statistics and that the percentage of the Venezuelan population suffering from hunger had actually increased. It quoted FAO as saying that it had no reason to doubt the Venezuelan statistics.

In 2016/17 FAO was heavily criticized for recruiting Nadine Heredia Alarcón de Humala, wife of the former president of Peru, Ollanta Humala, to a senior position, at a time when she was being investigated by Peru following corruption allegations. Critics included Transparency International.

At the end of April 2017, FAO staff unions addressed the organization's Governing Council to complain about the practice of issuing short-term contracts that "exploit employees without providing job security, social security and paid leave". Other complaints included the increasing centralization of management processes, despite claims that FAO was being decentralized, and the failure to follow United Nations recommendations regarding increasing the retirement age. The staff representative also complained about the high percentage of unfilled positions, increasing the workload for others who were under pressure to deliver more with less. She also noted that contacts between Management and the staff bodies were becoming less and less frequent.

From 2013, an English-language newspaper based in Rome, The Italian Insider, made several allegations of nepotism and corruption within FAO and reported on poor management-staff relations. In June 2018, FAO and four of its officials took the paper and its editor, John Philips, to court alleging defamation, using a law dating back to the fascist era in Italy. Reporters Without Borders condemned "the disproportionate nature of the defamation proceedings", for which the newspaper was liable for a fine of up to Euros 100,000 and the editor at least three years in prison. The case was adjourned until January 2019, when it was further adjourned until May 2019. The January hearing was considered by the British satirical magazine Private Eye to have been "one of the more surreal courtroom scenes in modern times", involving dispute as to the meaning of an English slang word used by the Insider.

World food crisisedit

In May 2008, while talking about the ongoing world food crisis, President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal expressed the opinion that FAO was "a waste of money" and that "we must scrap it". Wade said that FAO was itself largely to blame for the price rises, and that the organization's work was duplicated by other bodies that operated more efficiently, like the UN's International Fund for Agricultural Development. However, this criticism may have had more to do with personal animosity between the President and the Director-General, himself a Senegalese, particularly in light of the significant differences in the work carried out by the two organizations.

In 2008, the FAO sponsored the High-Level Conference on World Food Security. The summit was notable for the lack of agreement over the issue of biofuels.

The response to the summit among non-governmental organizations was mixed, with Oxfam stating that "the summit in Rome was an important first step in tackling the food crisis but greater action is now needed", while Maryam Rahmanian of Iran's Centre for Sustainable Development said "We are dismayed and disgusted to see the food crisis used to further the policies that have led us to the food crisis in the first place". As with previous food summits, civil society organizations held a parallel meeting and issued their own declaration to "reject the corporate industrial and energy-intensive model of production and consumption that is the basis of continuing crises."