In drought-stricken regions with complex political and security situations, vouchers are the better alternative to in-kind food aid, an award-winning writer argues, explaining that the use of vouchers solves many problems attached to the delivery of in-kind aid.
“Using cash or vouchers is faster and cheaper. Nothing has to physically move: indeed, as Africa moves to banking by cell phone, the whole process can be accomplished by text,” Tina Rosenberg, a Pulitzer Prize recipient book author and contributing writer, says in a column in The New York Times. “It is more dignified and gives families greater choice. And it is a form of aid that helps a whole village.”
But the use of vouchers and of cash payments is not without challenges, Rosenberg says, noting that fraud is a concern, particularly if aid groups or donors do not employ enough safeguards. Vouchers and cash payments also don’t work in all circumstances, she says.
“There must be food available to begin with, whether locally grown or not,” Rosenberg explains. “ Also, people who are severely malnourished need specific high-nutrition foods, which are unlikely to be available in the local market.”
Another risk is that vouchers could cause inflation if the market is too small, she adds.
Still, there are indications the use of vouchers or cash payments as food aid is better than distributing food in kind, Rosenberg notes. Mexico, Brazil and other countries around the world, she says, are shifting toward this approach and finding it “more efficient, less prone to politicization and corruption and more secure.”
Read more development aid news online, and subscribe to The Development Newswire to receive top international development headlines from the world’s leading donors, news sources and opinion leaders — emailed to you FREE every business day.
