For The Low, Low Price Of $6.6 BILLION....

Not even that will magically end world hunger, though it would certainly help

The head of the United Nations (UN) World Food Programme (WFP) has released a detailed plan on how spending $6.6 billion of Tesla CEO Elon Musk's money could help alleviate world hunger.

Musk engaged with WFP chief David Beasley on Twitter late last month after Beasley said that about $6 billion of Musk's wealth, equal to gains he at one point received in a single day, could help world hunger during a CNN interview. Musk shared an article on the interview and asked Beasley to show how the money would "solve world hunger," challenging him to provide a plan "in detail" and offering to "sell Tesla stock right now and do it" if he did.

"This hunger crisis is urgent, unprecedented, AND avoidable.@elonmusk, you asked for a clear plan & open books," Beasley tweeted on Monday. "Here it is! We're ready to talk with you - and anyone else - who is serious about saving lives. The ask is $6.6B to avert famine in 2022."

Beasley's tweet was accompanied by a link to a page on the WFP website titled "A one-time appeal to billionaires." The page argues that a "perfect storm of conflict, climate crises, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and rising costs for reaching people in need is causing a seismic hunger crisis," while asserting that the $6.6 billion "would help stave off starvation for 42 million people across 43 countries."

The idea that “You know, we could end world hunger if only we had X amount of money” is a romantic way to think about a seemingly intractable problem. It seems simple enough. We have x number of hungry people in the world, and it would cost y to feed them everyday day for…let’s say a year. If you do the math, the amount required to provide for all of them would be z.

I’d LOVE to believe that $6.6 billion of Elon Musk’s- or anyone’s- money could solve world hunger once and for all, but there’s a difference between throwing money at a problem and actually solving it.

When trying to solve a problem like world hunger, of course, actually doing away with it once and for all will require getting into the weeds, which means going into some incredible attention on a global scale. Without that sort of granular planning, all you’ll really have is a compendium of good ideas, not an actionable plan of attack.

And a trip into the weeds is one of the things missing from the UN World Food Program’s plan to eliminate world hunger.

Here’s the broad summary of the UNWFP’s appeal to billionaires:

The World Food Programme (WFP) has issued a call to the world's billionaires to donate US$6.6 billion to save 42 million people from famine. This is a breakdown of how this sum would be used:

• US$3.5 billion for food and its delivery, including the cost of shipping and transport to the country, plus warehousing and “last mile” delivery of food using air, land and river transport, contracted truck drivers and required security escorts in conflict-affected zones to distribute food to those who need it most. 

• US$2 billion for cash and food vouchers (including transaction fees) in places where markets can function. This type of assistance enables those most in need to buy the food of their choice and supports local economies.  

• US$700 million for country-specific costs to design, scale up and manage the implementation of efficient and effective programmes for millions of tons more food and cash transfers and vouchers – adapted to the in-country conditions and operational risks in 43 countries. This includes  office and satellite-office facilities and their security, and the monitoring of distributions and results, ensuring the assistance reaches the most vulnerable. 

• US$400 million for global and regional operations management, administration and accountability, including coordination of global supply lines and aviation routes; global logistics coordination such as freight contracting; global monitoring and analysis of hunger worldwide; and risk management and independent auditors dedicated to oversight.

The plan’s intention is to help 43 million people escape famine in the short term, but what I don’t see in the program is a long-term strategy for ensuring that famine doesn’t return once the $6.6 billion runs out. And it WILL run out, probably much sooner than anyone imagines. I can’t imagine anyone with any business sense at all signing onto a plan with so few long-term specifics.

Don’t get me wrong; I love the idea behind the plan. And who doesn’t want to see world hunger go the way of the buffalo? Making that happen is going to take far more than simply throwing $6.6 billion of Elon Musk’s money at it, though.

But how DO you solve an intractable problem like world hunger, which is really the outcome of a myriad global and related local problems around the world?

There’s drought, political unrest, sustainability issues, and a raft load of other nuts to be cracked to place different parts of the world into situations where they can feed themselves- and self-sufficiency has to be the end product. We can’t just keep throwing untold billions at a problem when all we’re doing is (barely) nibbling at the margins. Without actually addressing the root causes of famine worldwide, we have little hope of eliminating it.

Whether or not Elon Musk was serious is difficult to know, but if I were in his shoes, I’d be holding off on writing that $6.6B check until I had a LOT more information. I’d be wanting details- bucket loads of more information- before I let go of any of my $6.6B. I’m not a huge fan of Elon Musk, but he didn’t become a billionaire through being stupid.

I suspect Musk wants to see world hunger end as much as anyone else, but without seeing a plan with some granular detail, he might as well sit in front of a fire pit and use $10,000 bills for kindling. The problem is different in sub-Saharan Africa than in the Middle East or Central Asia or Eastern Europe or Central America. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. That’s what makes world hunger such a tough nut to crack.

Perhaps we be less hasty about giving away Elon Musk’s money. David Beasley may be feeling as if he’s called Musk’s bluff, but I’m not so certain that’s the case. I think Beasley still has a LOT of work to do before he can say he’s called anyone’s bluff. Or even has an actionable plan.

What he has is a good start…but it’s not worth $6.6 billion.