• It’s very important when considering any policy actions beyond direct food aid to have a reasonable idea of why the price rises have occurred (has demand risen or supply fallen?) and whether those changes are temporary or permanent.
• Groups like Oxfam are arguing that supply has fallen and blame the West and their demand for biofuels: the charge is that crop-land that was once being used to grow food for direct consumption is being moved to crops for biofuels, so there is a drop in supply. Personally, I’d be surprised if that was responsible for all, or even most, of the price increases. The cynic in me wonders if Oxfam might just be using it as a means of justifying an increase in aid (which may be a good thing, but will be so for reasons independent of food prices).
• I seem to remember that world wheat production was very low last year because most of the major producers (including Australia) were affected by bad weather. Putting aside climate change (because even a five-year drought isn’t caused by climate change), that will have been a temporary drop in supply.
• Increases in demand will be coming from the increasing wealth of the developing world. I know that some people point the finger at the increasing demand for meat and the fact that grain is diverted to feed those animals. That’s certain to be part of the story, but I wonder why it would necessarily push up the price of rice or wheat. Is it just because the land has been switched over to feed-grain?
• If the high prices are sustained, they will certainly spur more production, which will bring them back down a little.
• Hopefully developing countries will use the higher prices as a reason to improve the infrastructure for agricultural productivity (irrigation, land rights, roads, etc.).
• Just as important (for Africa) but with less hope, I think that the governments there ought to allow, even if they don’t encourage, the use of GM crops. Even before the recent price increase, forbidding GM has been killing people.

Any thougths?