Hubbry Logo
World Food ProgrammeWorld Food ProgrammeMain
Open search
World Food Programme
Community hub
World Food Programme
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
World Food Programme
World Food Programme
World Food Programme
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Empty sack of the World Food Programme

Key Information

The World Food Programme[a] (WFP) is an international organization within the United Nations (UN) that provides food assistance worldwide. It is the world's largest humanitarian organization[2][3] and the leading provider of school meals.[4] Founded in 1961, WFP is headquartered in Rome and has offices in 87 countries.[5] In 2023 it supported over 152 million people,[6] and it is present in more than 120 countries and territories.[7]

In addition to emergency food relief, WFP offers technical and development assistance, such as building capacity for emergency preparedness and response, managing supply chains and logistics, promoting social safety programs, and strengthening resilience against climate change.[8] It is also a major provider of direct cash assistance, and provides passenger services for humanitarian workers through its management of the United Nations Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS).[9][10]

WFP is an executive member of the United Nations Sustainable Development Group,[11] a consortium of UN entities that aims to fulfil the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), with a priority to achieve SDG 2, "zero hunger", by 2030.[12]

The World Food Programme was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2020 for its efforts to provide food assistance in areas of conflict and to prevent the use of food as a weapon of war and conflict.[13]

History

[edit]

WFP was established in 1961[14] after the 1960 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Conference, when George McGovern, director of the US Food for Peace Programmes, proposed establishing a multilateral food aid programme. WFP launched its first programmes in 1963 by the FAO and the United Nations General Assembly on a three-year experimental basis, supporting the Nubian population at Wadi Halfa in Sudan. In 1965, the programme was extended to a continuing basis.[15]

Background

[edit]

WFP works across a broad spectrum of Sustainable Development Goals.[12] Food shortages, hunger, malnutrition, and foodborne illness lead to poor health, which affects other areas of sustainable development, such as education, employment, and poverty (Sustainable Development Goals Four, Eight, and One respectively).[12][16]

Funding

[edit]

WFP operations are primarily funded by voluntary donations by governments worldwide, along with contributions from corporations and private donors.[17] In 2022, funding reached a record USD 14.1 billion—up by almost 50 percent from 2021—against an operational funding need of USD 21.4 billion. The United States was the largest donor.[18]

In 2023, the WFP received USD 8.3 billion in funding, likely marking the first time since 2010 that funding decreased from the previous year, creating a funding gap of 64%.[6]

In February 2025, the WFP received directives from the U.S. to halt operations on numerous U.S.-funded grants, despite an emergency waiver issued by Secretary of State Marco Rubio intended to allow essential food assistance to continue. These grants, managed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), are valued at tens of millions of dollars and are instrumental in providing food aid to countries such as Yemen, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, Haiti, and Mali. The suspension encompasses several projects under the Food for Peace Title II program, which annually allocates approximately $2 billion for the donation of U.S. commodities and constitutes a significant portion of U.S. international food assistance. This program is jointly administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and USAID.[19][20]

Organization

[edit]

Governance, leadership and staff

[edit]

WFP is governed by an executive board that consists of representatives of 36 member states and provides intergovernmental support, direction, and supervision of WFP's activities. Of the 36 board members, 18 are elected by the United Nations Economic and Social Council and 18 by the Food and Agriculture Organization.[21] The European Union is a permanent observer in WFP and, as a major donor, participates in the work of its executive board.[22] WFP is headed by an executive director, who is appointed jointly by the UN Secretary-General and the director-general of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. The executive director is appointed for fixed five-year terms and is responsible for the administration of the organization as well as the implementation of its programmes, projects, and other activities.[23] Cindy McCain, previously Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the United States Mission to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Agencies in Rome, was appointed to the role in March 2023.[24]

In March 2023, WFP had over 22,300 staff.

The headquarters in Rome

List of executive directors

[edit]

Since 1992, all executive directors have been American. The following is a chronological list of those who have served as executive director of the World Food Programme:[25]

  1. Addeke Hendrik Boerma ( Netherlands) (May 1962 – December 1967)
  2. Sushil K. Dev ( India) (January 1968 – August 1968) (acting)
  3. Francisco Aquino ( El Salvador) (July 1968 – May 1976)
  4. Thomas C. M. Robinson ( United States) (May 1976 – June 1977 acting; July 1977 – September 1977)
  5. Garson N. Vogel ( Canada) (October 1977 – April 1981)
  6. Bernardo de Azevedo Brito ( Brazil) (May 1981 – February 1982) (acting)
  7. Juan Felipe Yriart ( Uruguay) (February 1982 – April 1982) (acting)
  8. James Ingram ( Australia) (April 1982 – April 1992)
  9. Catherine Bertini ( United States) (April 1992 – April 2002)
  10. James T. Morris ( United States) (April 2002 – April 2007)
  11. Josette Sheeran ( United States) (April 2007 – April 2012)
  12. Ertharin Cousin ( United States) (April 2012 – April 2017)
  13. David Beasley ( United States) (April 2017 – April 2023)
  14. Cindy McCain ( United States) (Since April 2023)

Activities

[edit]

Emergencies

[edit]
WFP truck in Dnipro, Ukraine, during Russian invasion in Ukraine.

About two-thirds of WFP life-saving food assistance goes to people facing high degrees of food insecurity, predominantly resulting from violence and armed conflict.[26][27] Over 60% of the people facing hunger globally live in regions experiencing armed violence, which compounds with increased displacement, destruction of food systems, and increased humanitarian access challenges to pose massive risks to food security in the regions.[28] In 2023, more than 300 million people faced acute hunger globally.[6] WFP said it had "reached 152 million people with essential aid" in 2023.[6]

The latest Hunger Hotspots outlook released June 2024 and co-published by WFP and FAO, emphasised that "acute food insecurity is likely to deteriorate further in 18 hotspots" between June and October 2024. These countries and country clusters face famine or risk of famine, with population already in or facing IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe). Of those countries, Haiti, Mali, Palestine, South Sudan, and Sudan are classified as the most concerning.[27]

WFP is also a first responder to sudden-onset emergencies. When floods struck Sudan in July 2020, it provided emergency food assistance to nearly 160,000 people.[29] WFP provided food as well as vouchers for people to buy vital supplies, while also planning recovery, reconstruction, and resilience-building activities, after Cyclone Idai struck Mozambique and floods washed an estimated 400,000 hectares of crops on early 2019.[30]

WFP's emergency support is also preemptive in offsetting the potential impact of disasters. In the Sahel region of Africa, amidst economic challenges, climate change, and armed militancy, WFP's activities included working with communities and partners to harvest water for irrigation, restore degraded land, and support livelihoods through skills training.[31] It uses early-warning systems to help communities prepare for disasters. In Bangladesh, weather forecasting led to the distribution of cash to vulnerable farmers to pay for measures such as reinforcing their homes or stockpiling food ahead of heavy flooding.[32]

A couple of Liberian citizens (wearing blue vests that read World Food Program) unload weights of food to other citizens.
The World Food Program hands off high-energy biscuits to civilians at a Liberian port during the Second Civil War.

WFP is the lead agency of the Logistics Cluster, a coordination mechanism established by the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC).[33] It also co-leads the Food Security Cluster.[34] The WFP-managed United Nations Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS) serves over 300 destinations globally. WFP also manages the United Nations Humanitarian Response Depot (UNHRD), a global network of hubs that procure, store and transport emergency supplies for the organization and the wider humanitarian community. WFP logistical support, including its air service and hubs, has enabled staff and supplies from WFP and partner organizations to reach areas where commercial flights have not been available during the COVID-19 pandemic.[35]

Climate change

[edit]
WFP took pre-emptive action to reduce the impact of floods in Bangladesh. Photo: WFP/Sayed Asif Mahmud

WFP provided cash to vulnerable groups ahead of torrential rains in Bangladesh in July 2019.[36] Its response to Hurricane Dorian in the Bahamas in September 2019 was assisted by a regional office in Barbados, which had been set up the previous year to enable better disaster preparedness and response. In advance of Dorian, WFP deployed technical experts in food security, logistics and emergency telecommunication to support a rapid needs assessment. Assessment teams also conducted an initial aerial reconnaissance mission with the aim to put teams on the ground as soon as possible.[37]

Nutrition

[edit]
A child holds a WFP supplementary, specialized food to treat malnutrition among children, at a WFP-supported nutrition clinic in Yemen. Photo: WFP/Issa-Al-Raghi.

WFP works with governments, other UN agencies, NGOs and the private sector, increasing food security, supporting nutrition interventions, policies and programmes, that include school meals and food fortification.[38][39]

School meals

[edit]
A child eats a WFP school meal in Lao. Photo: WFP/Vilakhone Sipaseuth

School meals encourage parents in vulnerable families to send their children to school, rather than work. They have proved highly beneficial in areas including education and gender equality, health and nutrition, social protection, local economies and agriculture.[40] WFP works with partners to ensure school feeding is part of integrated school health and nutrition programmes, which include services such as malaria control, menstrual hygiene and guidance on sanitation and hygiene.[41]

Smallholder farmers

[edit]

WFP is a member of a global consortium that forms the Farm to Market Alliance, which helps smallholder farmers receive information, investment and support, so they can produce and sell marketable surplus and increase their income.[42][43] WFP connects smallholder farmers to markets in more than 40 countries.

In 2008, WFP coordinated the five-year Purchase for Progress (P4P) pilot project. P4P assists smallholding farmers by offering them opportunities to access agricultural markets and become competitive players in the marketplace. The project spanned across 20 countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America and trained 800,000 farmers in improved agricultural production, post-harvest handling, quality assurance, group marketing, agricultural finance, and contracting with WFP. The project resulted in 366,000 metric tons of food produced and generated more than US$148 million in income for its smallholder farmers.[44]

Asset creation

[edit]

WFP's Food Assistance for Assets (FFA) programme provides cash or food-based transfers to address recipients' immediate food needs, while they build or boost assets, such as repairing irrigation systems, bridges, and land and water management activities.[45]

FFA reflects WFP's drive towards food assistance and development rather than food aid and dependency. It does this by focusing on the assets and their impact on people and communities rather than on the work to realize them, a shift away from previous approaches such as Food or Cash for Work programmes and large public works programmes.[46]

Cash assistance

[edit]
A beneficiary shows the humanitarian assistance card she used to receive money at a WFP cash transfer point in Niger. Photo: WFP/Simon Pierre Diouf

WFP uses cash transfers such as physical banknotes, a debit card or vouchers, aiming to give more choices to aid recipients and encourage the funds to be invested back into local economies. During the first half of 2022, WFP delivered US$1.6 billion in cash to 37 million people in 70 countries to alleviate hunger.[47] A 2022 study by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative concluded that the Emergency Social Safety Net (ESSN) cash programme "significantly reduced the incidence and intensity of multidimensional poverty" among the people receiving cash transfers.[48]

Capacity building

[edit]

In the most climate disaster-prone provinces of the Philippines, WFP is providing emergency response training and equipment to local government units, and helping set up automated weather stations.[49]

Digital innovation

[edit]

WFP's digital transformation centres on deploying the latest technologies and data to help achieve zero hunger. The WFP Innovation Accelerator has sourced and supported more than 60 projects spanning 45 countries.[50] In 2017, WFP launched the Building Blocks programme. It aims to distribute money-for-food assistance to Syrian refugees in Jordan. The project uses blockchain technology to digitize identities and allow refugees to receive food by eye scanning.[51] WFP's low-tech hydroponics kits allow refugees to grow barley that feed livestock in the Sahara desert.[52] The SMP PLUS software is an AI-powered menu creation tool for school meals programmes worldwide [53]

Partnerships

[edit]

WFP works with governments, the private sector, UN agencies, international finance groups, academia, and more than 1,000 non-governmental organisations.[54] The WFP, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development reaffirmed their joint efforts to end global hunger, particularly amid the COVID-19 pandemic, during a joint meeting of their governing bodies in October 2020.[55] In the United States, Washington, D.C.–based 501(c)(3) organization World Food Program USA supports the WFP. The American organisation frequently donates to the WFP, though the two are separate entities for taxation purposes.[56]

Aid transparency

[edit]

WFP joined the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) in 2013 as its 150th member[57] and has regularly published data since then using the identifier XM-DAC-41140.[58] The organisation was assessed by Publish What You Fund and included in the 2024 Aid Transparency Index[59] with an overall score of 84.5, which is categorised as a "very good" score.

Countries of operation

[edit]

Afghanistan

[edit]

14.8 million people have acute food insecurity.

Yemen

[edit]

19.5 million people need humanitarian assistance and 17.1 million are food insecure.

Reviews

[edit]

Recognition and awards

[edit]

WFP won the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize for its "efforts for combating hunger", its "contribution to creating peace in conflicted-affected areas", and for acting as a driving force in efforts to prevent the use of food as a weapon of war and conflict.[60][61] Receiving the award, executive David Beasley called for billionaires to "step up" and help source the US$5 billion WFP needs to save 30 million people from famine.[62]

Challenges

[edit]

In 2018, the Center for Global Development ranked WFP last in a study of 40 aid programmes, based on indicators grouped into four themes: maximising efficiency, fostering institutions, reducing burdens, and transparency and learning. These indicators relate to aid effectiveness principles developed at the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005), the Accra Agenda for Action (2008), and the Busan Partnership Agreement (2011).[63]

There is wide general debate on the net effectiveness of aid, including unintended consequences such as increasing the duration of conflicts and increasing corruption. WFP faces difficult decisions in working with some regimes.[64]

Some surveys have shown internal culture problems at WFP, including sexual harassment.[65][66]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

World Food Programme

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The World Food Programme (WFP) is the United Nations agency mandated to deliver food assistance in response to emergencies, while supporting longer-term efforts to address hunger, malnutrition, and resilience against conflict, disasters, and climate impacts. Established in 1961 by the UN General Assembly as a three-year experimental initiative to channel surplus food aid through the multilateral system, it became a permanent program in 1965 and is headquartered in Rome, Italy. Operating in over 120 countries, WFP relies entirely on voluntary contributions from governments, corporations, and individuals to fund its activities. As the largest humanitarian organization by scale, WFP provided assistance to 124.4 million people in need during the 2023-2024 period, distributing emergency rations, cash transfers, and nutritional support amid global crises. Its 2024 funding reached $9.8 billion, enabling operations that include logistics for food transport in hard-to-reach areas and feeding programs to enhance access. A landmark achievement came in 2020 with the , awarded for WFP's role in combating , preventing its weaponization in conflicts, and integrating food aid with initiatives, such as community reconciliation projects in regions like and . Despite these accomplishments, WFP has faced scrutiny over operational inefficiencies and management lapses, including scandals involving substandard food supplies that compromised quality. Recent internal evaluations, such as those from its response, have highlighted failures to expand delivery amid escalating needs, missed donor opportunities, and coordination breakdowns that alienated funding partners and hindered hunger relief. Independent assessments have also critiqued its bureaucratic structure for contributing to slower response times compared to more agile models, underscoring challenges in measuring long-term impact beyond immediate distribution.

Origins and Historical Context

Founding and Initial Mandate

The World Food Programme (WFP) was established on 19 December 1961 through Resolution 1714 (XVI), adopted at the 1084th plenary meeting, concurrently with Conference Resolution 1/61. This created WFP as a joint organ of the and the on an experimental basis for three years, with provisions for reassessment thereafter. The initiative built on earlier UN efforts to address global food surpluses, including Resolution 1496 (XV) of 27 October 1960, which had endorsed multilateral mechanisms for channeling such surpluses to food-deficient populations. The program's founding responded to post-World War II agricultural overproduction in developed nations, particularly the , where surplus commodities posed economic challenges, prompting proposals for humanitarian repurposing. U.S. leadership, including advocacy from figures like as director of the "Food for Peace" initiative, emphasized efficient multilateral distribution over bilateral aid to enhance coordination and reduce waste. Established in under FAO auspices, WFP's structure included an executive director appointed by the UN Secretary-General in consultation with the FAO Director-General, overseen by a joint UN/FAO committee. WFP's initial mandate centered on two complementary functions: delivering emergency food assistance to mitigate acute needs from , failures, or other calamities, and financing development projects that leveraged aid to support , , and social programs in developing countries. This dual approach prioritized the use of in-kind commodities, cash equivalents, or services from voluntary contributions, ensuring aid complemented national development plans without substituting for them. The experimental framework allocated initial resources modestly—equivalent to $100 million annually in value—to test efficacy amid skepticism about multilateral aid's and impact. By 1963, operations commenced with pilot projects, validating the mandate's viability despite early logistical hurdles in global distribution.

Key Historical Milestones

The World Food Programme (WFP) was established on November 24, 1961, through United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1714 (XVI), as a joint initiative of the UN and the to channel food surpluses for and emergency relief on an experimental three-year basis. Initially funded primarily by voluntary contributions from member states, the program demonstrated its utility in early responses to disasters, leading the General Assembly to declare it permanent on December 14, 1965, via Resolution 2200 (XXI), expanding its mandate to include broader humanitarian assistance. WFP's inaugural operation commenced in 1962, delivering , , and to over 12,000 survivors following a devastating in . By 1963, it initiated its first long-term development projects, including agricultural support in and school feeding programs in benefiting 5,000 children, marking the shift toward integrating food aid with capacity-building efforts. Throughout the and , WFP scaled up emergency responses amid escalating global crises. In 1973, it coordinated airdrops of across Africa's during a severe affecting millions. The agency led relief for 370,000 Cambodian refugees in in 1980 and delivered approximately 2 million metric tons of assistance during Ethiopia's 1983–1985 famine, which claimed an estimated 400,000 to 1 million lives. In 1989, "Operation Lifeline Sudan" pioneered cross-border airdrops, supplying 1.5 million metric tons of food to famine-stricken areas amid civil conflict. The 1990s saw WFP expand into complex conflict zones. It provided aid to hundreds of thousands displaced by the starting in 1992 and supported 3 million Rwandan refugees following the 1994 genocide. In 1998, the agency assisted over 600,000 people impacted by in , one of the deadliest Atlantic storms on record. Into the 21st century, WFP innovated logistics and response mechanisms. The (UNHAS) launched in 2003, facilitating delivery in insecure environments, including feeding efforts in amid the U.S.-led . The 2004 Indian Ocean prompted relief operations across 14 countries, reaching millions. In , WFP introduced and voucher-based transfers as alternatives to in-kind , enhancing , and assumed of the UN's humanitarian logistics cluster. Major natural disasters and conflicts defined subsequent responses: 4.5 million people received aid after Haiti's 2010 earthquake; 1.5 million were assisted during the 2011 drought; and operations scaled in from 2011 onward. The 2014 outbreak in saw WFP feed over 3 million affected individuals, while by 2015, it reached 9 million in amid escalating civil war. In recognition of its global impact, WFP was awarded the in 2020 "for its efforts to combat , for its contribution to bettering conditions for peace in conflict-affected areas and for acting as a driving force in efforts to prevent the use of as a weapon of war and conflict." That year, it adapted operations to serve 138 million people amid the , incorporating remote monitoring and supply chain adjustments. Recent crises, including the 2022 global food price spikes triggered by Russia's invasion of and compounded by climate extremes, prompted WFP to assist over 150 million people annually by 2023, though persistent funding gaps—reaching 60% shortfalls—forced ration cuts in multiple operations.

Evolution Through Crises

The World Food Programme (WFP), established in as a joint and initiative, initially allocated resources equally between development projects and relief, but recurrent global crises prompted a decisive shift toward the latter, with operations comprising over 90% of its activities by the . This evolution reflected the growing prevalence of conflicts, droughts, and disasters outpacing development gains, necessitating innovations in , , and delivery modalities to reach isolated populations. Early responses, such as aid to 12,000 earthquake victims in in with , , and , laid groundwork for scaling up amid escalating demands. In the 1970s, the drought crisis marked a pivotal adaptation, as WFP coordinated airdrops to deliver food across vast, inaccessible regions, assisting 25 million people over three years and establishing precedents for air-based logistics in famine-prone areas. The 1980s further accelerated this trajectory during Ethiopia's 1983–1985 famine, where WFP delivered 2 million metric tons of food aid, collaborating with governments and NGOs to avert mass starvation amid drought and , though the response highlighted vulnerabilities to political interference and delays in access. By 1989, "Operation Lifeline Sudan" exemplified refined airdrop capabilities, airlifting 1.5 million metric tons—the largest such operation to date— to southern amid conflict-blocked roads, underscoring WFP's growing role in negotiating humanitarian corridors. The 1990s and early 2000s tested WFP's capacity in complex emergencies, including assistance to 3 million Rwandan refugees following the 1994 genocide and responses to Somalia's 1991–1992 famine, where and clan warfare complicated distributions, prompting early integrations of armed escorts and local partnerships to mitigate looting and diversion risks. In 2005, amid post-tsunami recoveries and displacements, WFP introduced vouchers and cash-based transfers as alternatives to in-kind food, enabling beneficiaries to procure culturally appropriate items while stimulating local economies, a shift that expanded to over 50% of operations by the for efficiency in urban settings. Subsequent crises reinforced these adaptations: the response fed 4.5 million, leveraging prepositioned stocks; the 2014 Ebola outbreak in reached 3 million with fortified foods; and Syria's civil war from 2011 saw WFP scale from emergency parcels to monthly cash e-vouchers for 4 million, adapting to urban hunger and besieged areas via digital platforms despite sanctions and access denials. Yemen's conflict, starting 2015, pushed distributions from 9 million to 13 million people by 2021, incorporating nutrition-specific interventions like ready-to-use therapeutic foods amid blockade-induced shortages. The 2020s brought compounded shocks, with prompting aid for 138 million in 2020 through contactless cash and fortified rations, earning WFP the for combating hunger as a conflict driver. Russia's 2022 invasion of disrupted global grain exports, exacerbating a affecting 345 million; WFP facilitated corridor shipments and prepositioned supplies in 20+ countries. Yet, persistent underfunding—reaching a 60% shortfall in 2023—forced ration cuts for 20 million beneficiaries, exposing reliance on voluntary contributions and the limits of scaling without diversified financing, while innovations like anticipatory action in 36 countries integrated early warnings with preemptive cash to mitigate climate shocks. This trajectory illustrates WFP's transformation into a powerhouse, though critiques from independent evaluations note ongoing challenges in corruption-prone environments and over-dependence on donor priorities.

Organizational Framework

Governance and Leadership

The World Food Programme (WFP) is governed by the Executive Board, its supreme governing body, comprising 36 Member States of the or Member Nations of the (FAO). The Board provides intergovernmental oversight, approves strategic plans, budgets, and policies, and ensures accountability in operations. Members are elected for staggered three-year terms, divided into five regional lists (A through E) to promote geographic balance, with elections handled by the UN Economic and Social (ECOSOC), UN , and FAO . For the 2024–2026 term, List D includes , , , , , Republic of Korea, and , among others. The Board convenes in regular, , and special sessions to review performance, address emerging crises, and appoint key officials. Leadership is headed by the , who manages day-to-day operations, resource mobilization, and policy implementation under Board guidance. The position is appointed jointly by the UN Secretary-General and FAO Director-General for a renewable five-year term, following consultations with the Executive Board and other stakeholders. of the has held the role since her appointment on 1 March 2023, succeeding . McCain's tenure has encountered internal challenges, including staff protests in late 2023 accusing her of inadequate response to the Gaza humanitarian crisis and perceived favoritism toward , such as attending an event honoring the country amid aid restrictions. These incidents prompted calls from advocacy groups for her dismissal over alleged breaches of humanitarian neutrality. Additionally, by September 2025, reports emerged of tensions with U.S. officials and over high rates of aid in WFP operations, attributed to shortcomings. In October 2025, McCain took medical leave following a mild , with expectations of full recovery. Such events underscore vulnerabilities in executive continuity and impartiality within WFP's governance framework.

Staff Composition and Operations


The World Food Programme employs more than 23,000 staff, with approximately 87 percent positioned in field operations across over 120 countries and territories. This composition emphasizes national staff recruited locally for contextual expertise and cost efficiency, comprising over 90 percent of the workforce, while international professional staff total around 2,265 as of December 2022, including 46.7 percent women and 48.4 percent from developing countries. WFP maintains a decentralized operational structure, with in , , overseeing five regional bureaux and country offices that facilitate direct engagement with beneficiaries and agile crisis response. Field operations prioritize as the core enabler, managing an integrated encompassing , warehousing, and via WFP's aviation unit, shipping services, and land convoys. As lead of the cluster, WFP coordinates common services for the sector, addressing bottlenecks in access and delivery during emergencies. In practice, these operations delivered 2.5 million metric tons of food to 81 million people across 71 countries in , leveraging data-driven and partnerships to mitigate disruptions from conflict and events. Staff training emphasizes emergency preparedness, with rapid deployment teams enabling surge capacity for acute crises, though challenges persist in retaining skilled personnel amid funding volatility and hazardous environments.

Accountability and Internal Controls

The World Food Programme (WFP) maintains through its Office of the Inspector General (OIG), which performs independent audits, investigations into , , and wrongdoing, and advisory services to mitigate risks. The OIG's activities include annual internal audits of operations, such as those in (July 2025), (September 2025), and financial service providers (February 2025), which assess , risk management, and control effectiveness in areas like beneficiary targeting, partner oversight, and humanitarian access. WFP's and Oversight Framework, updated in documents from 2023 to 2025, outlines hierarchical accountabilities from the to field offices, emphasizing ethical conduct, resource efficiency, and compliance with UN standards. Internal controls are supported by an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) policy established in 2018, which integrates risk identification, assessment, and mitigation across operations, including anti-fraud measures and continuous improvement of the control environment. This framework draws from models like COSO, covering components such as internal environment, risk assessment, control activities, information communication, and monitoring, with tools for operational risk registers and management reviews. The Independent Oversight Advisory Committee provides external validation through annual reports, reviewing audit and investigation outcomes to enhance transparency. WFP publishes select audit reports publicly per Executive Board decisions, covering topics like fleet management and security, though full disclosure is limited to protect sensitive operations. Despite these mechanisms, accountability has faced challenges, including instances of aid diversion and inadequate responses. In , a 2023 internal probe revealed widespread food aid looting involving up to 80% of supplies in Tigray, with WFP resigning amid findings that the knew of for years but delayed suspending programs or alerting donors effectively. Similar issues emerged in , where a 2024 internal report highlighted operational scaling failures, funding misses, and donor alienation due to poor and oversight gaps. A 2019 staff survey documented widespread of , , and , pointing to cultural and control weaknesses within the . U.S. Government Accountability Office assessments have recommended stronger controls, noting persistent vulnerabilities in detection and program monitoring as of 2012, with echoes in later operations. These cases underscore limitations in WFP's internal controls, particularly in high-risk conflict zones where partner oversight and real-time monitoring prove insufficient against local and logistical constraints.

Funding Mechanisms

Primary Donors and Revenue Sources

The World Food Programme (WFP) relies entirely on voluntary contributions for its , with no allocation from assessed dues or regular budget. Governments form the principal source of revenue, supplemented by contributions from multilateral organizations and private donors. In , total contributions amounted to $9,772,313,947, enabling operations across multiple countries. The provided the largest share, contributing US$4,451,081,279, accounting for approximately 46% of the total. Other major government donors included (US$995,256,230), the (US610,111,395),[France](/page/France)(US610,111,395), [France](/page/France) (US196,568,134), and (US$183,625,723). Multilateral funding, led by the (US$593,835,206), and contributions (US$335,733,625) also played significant roles, though governments dominated overall. The following table summarizes the top 10 contributors in 2024:
RankDonorAmount (US$)Category
14,451,081,279Government
2995,256,230Government
3610,111,395Government
4593,835,206Multilateral
5Private Donors335,733,625Private
6228,077,489Government
7Republic of Korea203,149,489Government
8196,568,134Government
9183,625,723Government
10166,813,498Government
Contributions are typically earmarked for specific programs or flexible for broader allocation, with over 60 governments participating annually on a voluntary basis. Private donations, while growing, remain a smaller portion compared to governmental support.

Budget Management and Allocation

The World Food Programme's is outlined in its annual Management Plan, which serves as the primary financial planning document detailing estimated resources, expenditures, and allocations aligned with strategic priorities. The submits the Management Plan to the WFP Executive Board for approval, which includes the overall annual encompassing operational, programme support, and administrative costs. For instance, the Board approved the Management Plan for 2025–2027 in , with subsequent updates addressing revenue projections and cost adjustments. Operational requirements for 2025 were initially estimated at US$16.9 billion to reach up to 123 million people, with updates increasing this figure to around US$19.1 billion. For 2026, operational requirements are projected at US$13 billion to assist 110 million people amid acute global hunger crises driven by conflict (69% of cases) and climate shocks, including US$9.6 billion (74%) for emergency response, US$2.9 billion (22%) for resilience-building, and US$0.5 billion (4%) for addressing root causes, supported by a US$7.7 billion implementation plan. Budget allocations are directed toward Country Strategic Plans (CSPs), which outline country-specific interventions and are submitted to the Board for endorsement, ensuring funds support response, , and resilience-building activities. Corporate priorities, such as and , guide baseline activity funding, with flexibility for reallocations in response to emerging crises via mechanisms like the Programme Support and Administrative Equalization Account. In 2024, the Board approved a reduced Programme Support and Administrative appropriation of USD 528 million to align with contribution levels, incorporating savings measures up to USD 40 million. Flexible funding, comprising a portion of voluntary contributions totaling USD 9.8 billion that year, enables rapid shifts to high-need areas without rigid earmarking constraints. Financial management emphasizes value-for-money principles through rigorous , expenditure tracking, and monitoring, with teams ensuring proper recording and reporting to donors. Transparency is maintained via audited annual accounts, reviewed by independent external auditors, and Annual Country Reports detailing fund usage at the country level. The Annual Performance Report further assesses allocation effectiveness against outputs, such as delivering aid to 124.4 million beneficiaries in 2024, while highlighting variances between planned and actual spending. These processes are governed by WFP's Financial Regulations, which mandate Board oversight of appropriations and prohibit expenditures exceeding approved limits without amendments.

Financial Challenges and Shortfalls

The World Food Programme (WFP) has encountered persistent funding shortfalls due to its reliance on voluntary contributions from governments and private donors, which have failed to match escalating global humanitarian demands driven by conflicts, climate events, and economic pressures. In 2024, WFP raised US$9.8 billion, yet for 2025, it required US$16.9 billion to address unrelenting needs, with projected resources anticipated to drop by 34 percent from the previous year, exacerbating operational constraints. These shortfalls have manifested in acute pipeline breaks and forced program reductions, with a US$622 million gap projected over the six months following October 2025, threatening six critical operations as early as November. Overall, donations for 2025 declined by approximately 40 percent compared to 2024 levels, leaving an estimated US$8.1 billion deficit that compels prioritization of the most severe crises while curtailing aid elsewhere. Contributing factors include donor fatigue amid multiple overlapping global emergencies, inflationary pressures increasing procurement costs, and shifts in national budgets that reduce allocations to multilateral ; for instance, WFP's indicates that every 1 percent cut in food assistance correlates with 400,000 additional pushed into emergency levels. In response, WFP has implemented ration reductions—sometimes halving distributions—and suspended support for millions, risking spikes and food insecurity for up to 58 million beneficiaries across 28 operations without urgent inflows. Such financial pressures highlight structural vulnerabilities in WFP's model, where funding unpredictability undermines long-term , as evidenced by 2023's 60 percent shortfall that affected nearly half of its portfolios, leading to scaled-back emergency responses despite rising acute affecting over 280 million people globally. Despite appeals for diversified revenue—such as increased engagement—the agency's dependence on a handful of major donors, primarily governments like the , amplifies risks when contributions fluctuate, perpetuating cycles of shortfall and reactive .

Core Programs and Interventions

Emergency Food Aid Delivery

The World Food Programme's emergency food aid delivery constitutes its primary response to acute humanitarian crises, including armed conflicts, , and sudden-onset shocks, aiming to avert and stabilize for affected populations. Operations typically commence within 72 hours of an invitation from the host government, involving the prepositioning of supplies and rapid deployment of assets. WFP's global network includes over 5,000 , 20 ships, and approximately 80 operating daily to commodities such as fortified cereals, pulses, and vegetable oils to remote or insecure areas. Delivery modalities encompass direct food distributions via convoys and warehouses, maritime bulk shipments to ports, and airdrops or operations where road access is impeded by conflict or . In 2024, WFP distributed 2.5 million metric tons of food assistance to 81 million across 71 countries, representing two-thirds of its total beneficiaries that year and underscoring the scale of emergency-focused efforts amid escalating global affecting 319 million individuals. Specific interventions include fortified biscuits for immediate caloric needs and family rations calibrated at 2,100 kilocalories per person per day, often supplemented by nutritional enhancements for vulnerable groups. Challenges in execution arise from security constraints, infrastructural disruptions, and donor funding volatility, which can necessitate ration reductions of 50-70% or pipeline interruptions. For example, in , WFP contends with one of the world's most hazardous operating environments, relying on armored convoys and local partnerships to navigate active combat zones and deliver aid to millions displaced by . Similarly, in Gaza, distributions have targeted populations facing catastrophic (IPC Phase 5), though access denials and hostilities have periodically halted operations, affecting 2.7 million recipients with incomplete baskets lacking essential items like or fresh . As of October 2025, funding shortfalls threaten six major operations, potentially pushing 13.7 million people deeper into emergency levels. To mitigate logistical bottlenecks, WFP employs the (UNHAS) for passenger and light cargo flights to isolated regions and invests in forward stockpiles at strategic hubs. Evaluations highlight efficiencies in cost-per-ton delivery, averaging lower rates through scale, but persistent issues like risks in local and dependency on bilateral donor pledges—primarily from the and European nations—underscore vulnerabilities. In and , hybrid models combining in-kind aid with cash transfers have adapted to volatile markets, yet physical delivery remains cornerstone for populations lacking banking access or facing .

Nutrition and Vulnerability Targeting

The World Food Programme employs targeted interventions to address acute and chronic among vulnerable populations, prioritizing groups such as young children under five, pregnant and women, and individuals with heightened nutritional risks like those living with . These efforts focus on both prevention and treatment, integrating supplementary feeding, supplementation, and behavior change communication to improve dietary quality and resilience against food insecurity. In 2023, WFP's programs reached operations across over 83 countries, supporting immediate life-saving assistance alongside longer-term with governments and communities. Vulnerability targeting in WFP operations relies on rigorous analysis and assessment tools, including the Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA), to identify households and individuals most at risk of and . This data-driven approach categorizes beneficiaries using criteria such as nutritional status, household income levels, dependency ratios, and exposure to shocks like conflict or events, ensuring aid is directed away from less needy groups toward those with the highest probability of deterioration without intervention. For instance, in emergency contexts, WFP applies proxy means testing (PMT) methodologies, often enhanced with qualitative data, to refine targeting precision and coverage, as demonstrated in operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo where household-level assessments informed . A core component is the treatment of moderate acute (MAM) through targeted supplementary feeding programs (TSFP), which provide nutrient-dense rations like ready-to-use supplementary foods (RUSF) to prevent progression to severe acute malnutrition (SAM). Evaluations of WFP's MAM protocols, such as in Timor-Leste from 2015 to 2017, have shown recovery rates exceeding 70% in community-based settings when combined with growth monitoring and , though challenges persist in coverage due to logistical constraints in remote areas. WFP also emphasizes the first 1,000 days of life, from to age two, with interventions like lipid-based supplements to reduce stunting, supported by partnerships with and WHO for early detection in humanitarian crises. School feeding programs represent another targeted strategy, delivering fortified meals to enhance intake and combat undernutrition while prioritizing enrollment in vulnerable communities. These initiatives have been linked to improved rates of up to 8% and nutritional outcomes, including reduced , by sourcing local foods to align with dietary needs and cultural preferences. In conflict-affected areas, WFP's school meals evaluations indicate sustained benefits for child growth and , though effectiveness depends on consistent supply chains and integration with national systems.

Development-Oriented Initiatives

The World Food Programme implements development-oriented initiatives to enhance long-term , resilience, and livelihoods in vulnerable communities, distinguishing these from short-term emergency responses by emphasizing asset creation, market linkages, and . These programs align with national development plans and the , particularly SDG 2 on zero hunger, by investing in , , and economic opportunities rather than solely addressing acute crises. A core initiative is Food Assistance for Assets (FFA), where participants receive food or transfers in exchange for labor on community assets such as systems, terraces, and projects, simultaneously meeting immediate nutritional needs while fostering environmental resilience and income generation. Implemented in over 80 countries, FFA has supported millions in building productive infrastructure; for instance, in Ecuador's 2019 program, it targeted resilient communities by combining assistance with asset creation to mitigate food insecurity risks from . Evaluations indicate FFA enhances household and diets, though impacts vary by context, with added benefits from complementary training in sustainable farming practices. School feeding programs represent another pillar, providing nutritious meals to children to boost , , and local economies through home-grown sourcing from smallholder farmers, thereby linking with agricultural markets. WFP, the world's largest provider, directly supported 20 million children with meals or take-home rations in recent years, contributing to global efforts reaching 466 million children overall. Rigorous studies, including in , demonstrate these programs increase enrollment by up to 10-20% and improve learning outcomes, while home-grown models stimulate rural demand for produce, enhancing farmer incomes and food system sustainability. The Purchase for Progress (P4P) initiative, launched in as a pilot across 21 countries, procures staple crops directly from smallholder farmers to integrate them into commercial markets, offering training in post-harvest handling and to boost and . By 2014, P4P enabled WFP to source over 30% of its food needs locally in participating countries like , benefiting thousands of farmers through aggregated and . Evaluations highlight gains in farmer incomes and crop diversification, though challenges persist in scaling beyond pilots due to market volatility and gaps. These initiatives often incorporate cash-based transfers and partnerships for smallholder market support, such as the Farm to Market Alliance, to promote private-sector investments in supply chains and resilience against shocks. Despite positive outcomes in targeted areas, program effectiveness depends on local and complementary policies, with independent assessments underscoring the need for rigorous monitoring to ensure sustained developmental impacts over relief dependency.

Innovative Delivery Methods

The World Food Programme has shifted from traditional in-kind distributions to -based transfers, enabling recipients in functioning markets to purchase locally, which supports economic activity and reduces logistical burdens. In 2023, WFP delivered over $3 billion in and vouchers to more than 40 million people across 60 countries, prioritizing efficiency in areas like and where physical delivery is challenging. This method leverages digital platforms to transfer funds directly to beneficiaries' mobile wallets or bank accounts, minimizing waste and corruption risks associated with physical commodities. Blockchain technology underpins WFP's Building Blocks platform, a decentralized system implemented since 2017 to facilitate secure, transparent cash transfers and identity verification. Deployed in refugee camps in and , it has processed over 1 million transactions by 2020, reducing administrative costs by up to 98% compared to traditional banking and enabling biometric authentication to prevent . The system records every transaction immutably, allowing real-time tracking of aid flow from donor to end-user, though scalability challenges persist in low-connectivity environments. Drones represent another advancement, used for rapid needs assessments, mapping inaccessible terrains, and in some cases, delivering small to remote or conflict-affected areas. WFP's drone program, active since 2016, has conducted over 200 flights in countries like and , providing aerial imagery that informs delivery routes and reduces risks to ground teams. While not yet scaled for bulk food transport due to payload limits, drones enhance prepositioning strategies, as demonstrated in Vanuatu's 2015 response where they surveyed damage in hours rather than days. Logistics innovations include AI-driven route optimization tools like Route The Meals, launched to build efficient delivery networks using data analytics for real-time planning. This software minimizes fuel use and delivery times in complex terrains, supporting WFP's that handles 5 million metric tons of annually. Additionally, partnerships for status streamline border crossings, as seen in collaborations that expedite aid movement. These methods collectively aim to increase reach and speed, though dependency on technology infrastructure can limit efficacy in the most austere settings.

Operational Scope and Case Studies

Focus on Conflict and Instability Zones

The World Food Programme conducts extensive operations in conflict and instability zones, where armed conflicts exacerbate insecurity for a majority of the world's acutely hungry populations. In 2025, approximately 70% of people facing acute insecurity reside in fragile or conflict-affected countries, with conflicts contributing to a 25% increase in such events compared to 2024. WFP's efforts in these areas focus on emergency deliveries, cash assistance, and nutrition support, often employing airdrops, convoys, and partnerships to navigate access restrictions and threats. Despite these interventions, operations face persistent challenges including bureaucratic hurdles, attacks on aid workers, and risks of diversion to combatants, which can undermine effectiveness. In , ongoing civil war and Houthi control over key territories have prolonged a , with WFP providing food assistance to millions amid and global price surges. By mid-2025, severe funding shortages threatened nationwide programs, leading to a suspension of operations in Houthi-controlled areas in September 2025, impacting vulnerable populations. Operational constraints, including limited access to 1.5 million people in 32 districts by March 2025, highlight the difficulties of delivering in divided territories controlled by non-state actors. Sudan's conflict since 2023 has triggered famine declarations in multiple regions, prompting WFP to surge deliveries including airdrops to isolated areas like Upper Nile state in July 2025. The agency reached over 800,000 people in famine-risk zones with food and nutrition aid, yet humanitarian access remains impeded by violence and requires $645 million for the subsequent six months to sustain efforts. Famine persistence, confirmed in parts of the country, underscores how conflict disrupts food systems and limits aid scale-up. In , WFP scaled emergency assistance to 2.8 million people in 2024, extending to the entire population of Sweida governorate by August 2025 amid successive crises. shortfalls, including U.S. cuts, have forced reductions, with millions losing in-kind in early 2024 due to delivery issues in opposition-held northwest areas. Prolonged conflict prevents recovery, as families endure repeated shocks that maintain high food insecurity levels. WFP's response in Gaza involves scaling distributions post-ceasefire pauses, but supplies fell below the 2,000-tonne daily target in October 2025, with only five of 20 supported bakeries operational by January. was confirmed in in August 2025, projected to spread, amid restrictions and insecurity that pause convoys and limit crossings. In , since the 2022 invasion, WFP delivered aid equivalent to 3.3 billion meals and cash to millions, targeting frontline regions where one-third of the population struggles with food access by February 2025. Across these zones, aid diversion poses a , as warring parties exploit humanitarian supplies in predatory economies, with WFP sometimes delaying responses to verified despite internal warnings. Such issues, compounded by access denials and against convoys, necessitate rigorous monitoring, though evidence suggests incomplete mitigation in high-conflict settings.

Long-Term Assistance in Developing Regions

The World Food Programme delivers long-term assistance in developing regions via Country Strategic Plans (CSPs) and specialized programs that prioritize resilience-building, enhancement, and over short-term emergency responses. These efforts target chronic vulnerabilities in areas like , , and , integrating food aid with capacity development to address root causes of hunger such as and climate shocks. In 2024, WFP's activities under these frameworks supported national governments in over 80 countries to strengthen systems and systems. School feeding programs form a of WFP's sustained interventions, providing meals to improve child nutrition and educational outcomes while stimulating local economies through home-grown sourcing from smallholder farmers. In , WFP directly assisted 20 million children across 61 countries with school meals, take-home rations, or cash-based transfers, contributing to a global total of 466 million children benefiting from such initiatives. These programs yield economic returns of up to US$35 for every US$1 invested, primarily by boosting enrollment and in low-income settings. In , government-led school meals expanded to reach 20 million additional children between 2020 and , with WFP providing for . Food Assistance for Assets (FFA) engages communities in labor-intensive projects to construct productive , exchanging work for or cash to build household resilience against recurrent droughts and floods prevalent in developing regions. In 2021, FFA reached 7.5 million participants—3.6 million men and 3.9 million women—in 49 countries, focusing on assets like irrigation canals, terraces, and feeder roads. Earlier data from 2019 showed 9.6 million beneficiaries across more than 50 countries, demonstrating scaled implementation in arid and semi-arid zones of and . These initiatives reduce dependency on by enhancing production capacity, though outcomes depend on complementary investments in markets and . Resilience-building extends to broader efforts like early-warning systems and disaster risk insurance, tailored via CSPs in countries such as and , where WFP aids in digitalizing supply chains and linking smallholders to markets. In the , integrated programs have improved food availability and economic shock resistance, diminishing reliance on over time. Protracted Relief and Recovery Operations (PRROs) bridge to long-term development in transitional contexts, supporting up to 3.7 million in food-insecure districts of nations like , though evaluations highlight variable success tied to local stability.

Responses to Specific Global Crises

In response to the Yemeni civil war that intensified in March 2015, the World Food Programme scaled up emergency operations to address widespread risks, delivering food assistance to millions amid ongoing conflict and . By 2023, WFP supported 47 percent of Yemen's population through distributions of , fortified foods, and cash transfers, though a $1.66 billion funding shortfall halved ration sizes and reduced assistance frequency for many recipients. As of 2024, Yemen's crisis persisted, with 19.5 million people—over half the population, including 15 million women and children—facing acute , prompting WFP to prioritize severely food-insecure households despite access constraints imposed by hostilities. Following Russia's full-scale invasion of on February 24, 2022, WFP launched an emergency airlift and overland operation at the Ukrainian government's invitation, providing in-kind food parcels, vouchers, and cash assistance to displaced and frontline populations. The initiative reached more than 3 million beneficiaries by mid-2025, injecting over $1.3 billion into the economy via local sourcing of grains and products to bolster supply chains disrupted by and occupation. Evaluations noted WFP's adherence to neutrality principles amid contested territories, though delivery volumes fluctuated with securitized corridors and donor volatility. The , erupting in March 2011, prompted WFP to expand targeted aid programs, initially reaching 2.8 million food-insecure and displaced persons with monthly rations of staples like rice and lentils. Operations evolved to include cross-border convoys from and , sustaining support through regime shifts and sieges, but by , an 80 percent reduction in aid volumes was enforced due to chronic underfunding, limiting distributions to the most acute cases. In August 2025, WFP ramped up interventions in southern Syria's Sweida governorate, providing emergency baskets, fortified flour, and nutrition supplements to the entire affected population of over 400,000 amid protests and supply breakdowns. During the 2011 Horn of Africa famine, triggered by prolonged drought and affecting up to 13 million across , , and , WFP airlifted and trucked over 500,000 metric tons of food commodities including cereals and nutritional pastes, targeting hotspots in refugee camps and rural areas. The response, coordinated with partners, mitigated death tolls estimated in the tens of thousands, though retrospective analyses highlighted delays in scaling due to initial funding hesitancy despite early warnings from regional monitors.

Performance Metrics and Impact Assessment

Quantitative Outcomes and Reach

In 2024, the World Food Programme (WFP) provided assistance to 124.4 million people across 123 countries and territories, representing a core measure of its operational reach amid global acute hunger affecting 319 million individuals. This included 90 million people supported through emergency operations, primarily in response to conflicts, disasters, and economic shocks. WFP's funding for the year totaled US$9.8 billion in voluntary contributions, enabling the distribution of 2.5 million metric tons of in-kind food commodities to 81 million beneficiaries, which accounted for approximately two-thirds of total assistance recipients. Complementing physical food deliveries, WFP disbursed $2.82 billion through cash-based transfers and vouchers, enhancing local procurement and market access for vulnerable populations. In nutrition-specific interventions, WFP reached 27.6 million women and children with programs aimed at treating and preventing , including specialized nutritious foods and supplementation. Regional breakdowns highlight concentration in high-need areas: for instance, 21.5 million people received aid in the , Northern Africa, and , achieving 82% of targeted outcomes despite funding constraints. These figures reflect WFP's scale under its 2022-2025 Strategic Plan, which emphasizes Strategic Result 1 (ending ) through indicators like the number of people receiving food assistance. However, contributions declined to $8.5 billion in 2023 from pandemic-era peaks, underscoring dependency on donor priorities and resulting in coverage shortfalls for an estimated 13.7 million additional people at risk in 2025 due to gaps. Independent assessments, such as those from the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN), affirm WFP's broad delivery capacity but note variability in outcome attainment against self-set , with reach often exceeding development-focused metrics.

Efficiency Evaluations and Cost Analyses

The World Food Programme (WFP) maintains an indirect support cost rate of 6.5 percent on project contributions, intended to cover administrative, management, and operational overhead, which it describes as the lowest among major UN agencies. This rate has declined to 6.1 percent of overall costs in recent assessments, reflecting internal efforts to reduce non-program expenses. However, 93 percent of funding is earmarked by donors, limiting flexibility in and potentially increasing transaction costs. WFP calculates the average cost per at USD 0.49 per day under its 2024-2026 management plan, an 8 percent increase from USD 0.45 in the prior period, yielding an annual figure of USD 127. Transfer costs for , cash-based transfers, or vouchers comprise approximately 85 percent of this total, with variations by modality—such as USD 0.42 daily for assistance versus USD 0.63 for transfers—driven by prices and market dynamics. The pursues efficiency through initiatives like the Global Commodity Management Facility, which generated over USD 80 million in cost avoidance, and IT optimizations reducing times by up to 40 percent in management. The 2024 Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN) evaluation rates WFP's and value-for-money practices as satisfactory overall, praising need-based prioritization but noting the absence of comprehensive methodologies for cost-efficiency analysis at the country level. It finds no for certain efficient delivery indicators due to insufficient on timeliness and cost-effectiveness, amid fragmented IT systems that elevate operational expenses. External critiques have highlighted specific inefficiencies, including inflated shipping costs in operations, where WFP routed business through government entities, increasing expenses without clear beneficiary benefits. Some comparative analyses rank WFP poorly on overhead relative to peers, suggesting higher effective administrative burdens despite headline figures.

Causal Effectiveness and Long-Term Results

Impact evaluations of the World Food Programme (WFP) employ rigorous methods, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), difference-in-differences analyses, and , to attribute outcomes causally to interventions by comparing treated groups against credible counterfactuals. For instance, an RCT of anticipatory cash assistance in during the 2022 monsoon floods demonstrated causal improvements in , reduced reliance on negative coping strategies, and better outcomes relative to post-shock response groups. Similarly, blanket supplementary feeding in causally lowered moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) incidence from 28% to 14% during lean seasons, particularly among seasonally mobile households, using to control for confounders. Short-term causal effectiveness is evident in nutrition-sensitive programs, such as food assistance for assets (FFA) in , which reduced MAM incidence by 19% via difference-in-differences estimation when combined with treatment and prevention efforts. School feeding in increased intake by 52% and availability by 64%, with stronger effects in non-conflict zones, confirmed through quasi-experimental designs. Cost-effectiveness analyses indicate interventions like combined FFA in cost $352.60 per to achieve non-MAM status, though data limitations constrain broader applicability. These findings, often from WFP-partnered studies, provide empirical support for immediate but warrant scrutiny for potential selection biases in self-reported or agency-conducted evaluations. Long-term results reveal persistent challenges in sustaining causal gains, with chronic hunger cycles unbroken in many targeted areas despite interventions like maternal and child health (MCHN), school feeding, and FFA. Evidence from and shows no significant differences in household hunger levels between WFP-supported and unsupported groups, attributed to funding volatility that reduces ration sizes and shifts priorities away from asset-building. While FFA creates assets, beneficiaries prioritize vocational over such , limiting enduring gains. Independent reviews highlight weak exit strategies and integration into national systems, undermining and perpetuating aid dependence rather than fostering adaptive livelihoods. Unintended long-term effects include reinforced social inequalities, as repeated food aid in Nepal's Humla region benefits better-off households more, consolidating power structures without altering poor households' or resource access. No behavioral dependency emerges—households do not reduce agricultural efforts anticipating aid—but aid's unreliability fails to build resilience against stressors like variability, with increased workloads sometimes diverting children from . Overall, while short-term causal attribution is robust, long-term evaluations suffer from monitoring gaps and contextual confounders, yielding mixed evidence of transformative outcomes and underscoring the need for stable funding and lifecycle approaches to mitigate dependency risks.

Criticisms, Failures, and Controversies

Operational Inefficiencies and Waste

In 2023, the World Food Programme recorded post-delivery losses of 51,534 metric tons of commodities across ten country operations, representing 95 percent of its total post-delivery losses for the year. These losses, occurring after commodities reached distribution points or beneficiaries, stem primarily from inadequate post-distribution monitoring, local storage failures, spoilage due to environmental conditions, and instances of diversion or . Pre-delivery losses, during handling, , and warehousing, added further inefficiencies, with overall global losses underscoring logistical vulnerabilities in supply chains exposed to conflict, poor , and climatic factors. In 2024, total losses rose to 57,940 metric tons—valued at USD 62.8 million and equating to 1.75 percent of the 3.3 million metric tons handled—despite efforts to mitigate risks through improved tracking systems like the Logistics Execution Support System (LESS). Internal audits by WFP's Office of have repeatedly identified operational shortcomings necessitating "major improvement," particularly in , where inefficiencies in vehicle utilization and maintenance have led to underperformance and higher costs. Security audits have similarly flagged gaps in and controls, contributing to commodity losses in high-risk environments. Staffing structures exacerbate these issues: staff costs have increased amid a growing number of unassigned personnel, signaling potential resource misallocation, while reliance on temporary staff and consultants now accounts for 31 percent of total staff expenses, up from 13 percent a decade prior, which may inflate overhead without proportional gains in delivery capacity. Evaluations of specific operations reveal design flaws and capacity shortfalls, such as ambitions outpacing , leading to weaknesses in internal communication and execution. Independent assessments, including those from the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN), note WFP's strengths in scale but highlight escalating financial and operational challenges that hinder efficiency, with funding shortfalls forcing ration cuts and pipeline breaks in critical zones like and the of Congo. Despite a relatively low indirect support cost rate of 6.5 percent among UN agencies, these factors collectively indicate systemic waste in resource deployment, where donor funds yield suboptimal outcomes relative to logistical and administrative hurdles.

Mismanagement and Corruption Allegations

In high-risk operational environments, the World Food Programme (WFP) has encountered persistent allegations of , diversion, and inadequate oversight, often substantiated through internal audits and external probes. The organization's of the Inspector General (OIG) maintains a zero-tolerance toward , conducting independent investigations into , yet reports indicate recurring vulnerabilities, particularly in conflict zones where local partners and weak facilitate . For instance, between 2011 and 2012, WFP dismissed 17 staff members following disciplinary proceedings for and , highlighting systemic risks in and distribution. A prominent case emerged in in 2023, when WFP and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) suspended all food distributions after detecting large-scale involving the diversion of commodities worth millions. An October 2024 investigation further detailed how U.S.-funded , intended to famine, was systematically looted by Ethiopian officials and armed groups, with WFP's monitoring systems failing to prevent or adequately respond to the , thereby denying to millions amid ongoing conflict. This incident underscored challenges in third-party oversight, as local implementing partners allegedly manipulated beneficiary lists and warehouse inventories. Similar issues surfaced in , where in August 2024, WFP launched an internal probe into two senior officials accused of , including the concealment of critical information from donors during a worsening hunger crisis. A December 2024 internal report, cited by , revealed broader operational troubles, including alienated donors and hampered relief efforts due to these allegations, exacerbating risks in a country already facing acute food insecurity. In Somalia, widespread theft prompted the European Union to temporarily withhold funding in September 2023, following UN records of aid diversion exceeding 50% in some distributions, attributed to corruption networks involving local elites and militants. Uganda's refugee programs faced scrutiny in 2023 over thousands of fraudulent registrations, including ghost beneficiaries in northern camps, which undermined WFP's cash and food assistance integrity despite biometric safeguards. In South Sudan, a letters-of-credit scheme for food imports collapsed amid a billion-dollar corruption scandal, where elite capture diverted funds from vulnerable populations, leading to prolonged aid inefficiencies. These cases reflect broader critiques of WFP's reliance on local partnerships in unstable regions, where risks are elevated, though the agency has responded with enhanced anti-fraud policies and whistleblower protections. Independent oversight bodies, including donor-led audits, continue to recommend stronger verification mechanisms to mitigate recurrence.

Unintended Consequences and Dependency Issues

The provision of large-scale food aid by the World Food Programme (WFP) has been associated with market distortions in recipient countries, where influxes of donated or subsidized commodities depress local prices and reduce incentives for domestic agricultural production. Economic analyses indicate that such distortions can lead to decreased farm output, as producers shift away from cultivation toward aid-dependent activities or informal sectors, exacerbating long-term food insecurity. In , household-level data from WFP distributions in the and early revealed that targeted food aid correlated with reduced local crop production among recipient farmers, as cheap imports undercut market returns and discouraged investment in seeds, tools, and labor. Dependency on WFP has manifested in regions with prolonged assistance programs, where populations and governments anticipate recurring distributions rather than developing resilient local systems. A desk review of emergency assessments identified pathways to negative dependency, including weakened household coping mechanisms and fiscal disincentives for host governments to prioritize agricultural reforms, as fills immediate gaps without addressing structural vulnerabilities. In Southern , WFP's food assistance during reintegration efforts post-conflict contributed to aid reliance among returnee communities, with beneficiaries reporting diminished motivation for self-sustained farming due to reliable external supplies, hindering economic autonomy. Empirical studies across , including WFP operations, have found mixed but persistent evidence of these effects, with general equilibrium models showing that even modest aid volumes can amplify disincentives in import-competing sectors. WFP has responded to these critiques by increasing local and regional —sourcing 20% of commodities from within affected by —to minimize import-driven distortions, alongside greater use of cash transfers to stimulate rather than supplant markets. However, in chronically insecure areas like and , where WFP delivered over 4 million metric tons annually in peak years, sustained flows have correlated with stagnant , as measured by FAO indices, underscoring unresolved risks of entrenched dependency. Critics argue that while short-term humanitarian imperatives justify , the absence of stringent exit strategies perpetuates a cycle where recipient economies remain aid-subsidized, delaying investments in , storage, and value chains essential for . These outcomes highlight the tension between immediate and long-term development, with evidence suggesting that untargeted or prolonged distributions amplify rather than alleviate underlying vulnerabilities.

Broader Systemic Critiques

Critics argue that the World Food Programme's reliance on in-kind food aid often fosters dependency among recipient populations, undermining local agricultural incentives and perpetuating cycles of rather than promoting self-sufficiency. A desk review by the Humanitarian Policy Group highlights pathways through which prolonged free can erode household resilience, as recipients prioritize over investing in farming or market participation, leading to diminished local production capacities in prolonged emergencies. Similarly, empirical analyses indicate that food aid inflows depress local prices, displacing domestic producers and creating structural disincentives for economic recovery, as observed in various conflict-affected regions where aid volumes exceed market absorption. This systemic issue is compounded by the WFP's operational focus on short-term relief, which, while addressing immediate , rarely integrates mechanisms to rebuild endogenous food systems, thereby sustaining vulnerability to future shocks. Broader inefficiencies within the international aid architecture further exacerbate these problems, as the WFP's heavy dependence on voluntary, often earmarked contributions from a handful of donors—primarily the , which historically provides nearly 50% of funding—prioritizes geopolitical agendas over neutral need-based allocation. This donor-driven model results in fragmented programming, where funds are tied to specific countries or projects aligned with bilateral interests, distorting responses to global hunger hotspots and amplifying waste through uncoordinated multi-agency efforts. For instance, U.S. Government Accountability Office reports have documented inadequate oversight of donated commodities, revealing persistent gaps in tracking end-use and outcomes, which erode and enable diversion risks in corrupt environments. At a foundational level, the WFP's approach is critiqued for of without confronting causal drivers such as failures, distortions, and conflict perpetuation in recipient nations, thereby embedding within a flawed that externalizes responsibility from local actors. Studies on 's conflict nexus suggest that untargeted distributions can inadvertently fuel violence by altering resource dynamics, such as through or militia incentives in unstable areas, rather than conditioning assistance on reforms that address root inefficiencies like mismanagement or issues. This reluctance to enforce accountability—amid systemic biases in UN institutions toward consensus-driven inaction—means often subsidizes dysfunctional regimes, prolonging and hindering transitions to market-oriented development, as evidenced by stagnant in chronically aid-dependent regions despite decades of intervention. Such patterns underscore a causal disconnect: while the WFP mitigates acute , its systemic embedding in a donor-recipient framework impedes the first-principles reforms needed for enduring , including property rights enforcement and trade liberalization.

References

  1. https://www.wfp.org/who-we-are
  2. https://www.wfp.org/history
  3. https://www.wfp.org/stories/wfp-glance
  4. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2020/press-release/
  5. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2020/wfp/facts/
  6. https://www.aei.org/articles/how-corrupt-is-the-world-food-program/
  7. https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/world-food-programs-troubles-sudan-hurt-hunger-relief-alienated-donors-internal-2024-12-04/
  8. https://en.irefeurope.org/publications/online-articles/article/nobel-prize-for-un-world-food-programme-not-all-that-glitters-is-gold/
  9. https://www.refworld.org/legal/resolution/unga/1961/en/12111
  10. https://www.fao.org/4/p4228e/P4228E14.htm
  11. https://research.un.org/en/docs/unsystem/wfp
  12. https://applications.icao.int/postalhistory/icao_and_the_world_food_programme.htm
  13. https://www.developmentaid.org/news-stream/post/157998/a-brief-history-of-the-wfp
  14. https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e574
  15. https://www.wfp.org/news/un-report-pandemic-year-marked-spike-world-hunger
  16. https://www.wfpusa.org/place/somalia/
  17. https://www.wfp.org/cash-transfers
  18. https://www.wfp.org/stories/syria-how-cash-cards-and-kind-food-wfp-support-one-family-amid-hard-times
  19. https://www.wfp.org/climate-action
  20. https://works.swarthmore.edu/context/fac-poli-sci/article/1231/viewcontent/poli_sci_232.pdf
  21. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/
  22. https://www.wfp.org/governance-and-leadership
  23. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/composition-members-board-2023-2025
  24. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/composition-members-board-2024-2026
  25. https://www.fao.org/4/v7640e/V7640E12.htm
  26. https://www.un.org/sg/en/appointments/wfp/cindy-mccain
  27. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/01/world/middleeast/cindy-mccain-wfp-gaza-protest.html
  28. https://passblue.com/2023/11/20/the-world-food-programs-boss-faces-backlash-for-attending-an-event-honoring-israel/
  29. https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/5972/WFP-chief-Cindy-McCain-should-be-fired-for-unethical-breach-of-neutrality
  30. https://www.jns.org/cindy-mccain-world-food-programme-head-reportedly-on-outs-with-white-house-congress-members/
  31. https://apnews.com/article/cindy-mccain-world-food-programme-humanitarian-aid-cb78a242e9cd44d24a3d0f636dd09afb
  32. https://www.mopan.org/en/our-work/performance-evidence/wfp.html
  33. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000148993
  34. https://www.devex.com/organizations/world-food-programme-wfp-44564
  35. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000101377
  36. https://www.wfp.org/logistics-cluster
  37. https://cdn.logcluster.org/public/documents/Logistics%252520Cluster%252520Concept%252520%252520Guidelines%25252022.03.07%252520ENDORSED.pdf
  38. https://www.wfp.org/stories/12-things-you-may-not-know-about-world-food-programme
  39. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000156049
  40. https://www.wfp.org/internal-audit-investigations
  41. https://www.wfp.org/audit-reports/internal-audit-wfp-operations-yemen-july-2025
  42. https://www.wfp.org/audit-reports/internal-audit-report-wfp-operations-tajikistan-september-2025
  43. https://www.wfp.org/audit-reports/internal-audit-wfps-financial-service-provider-management-february-2025
  44. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000169152
  45. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000099393
  46. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-12-790.pdf
  47. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8afadeb4-a7c8-4a8d-af16-4d4f500ad9c2/content
  48. https://www.wfp.org/audit-reports
  49. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2023/06/05/exclusive-wfp-leadership-ethiopia-resigns-amid-aid-diversion-probe
  50. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/famine-aid-ethiopia/
  51. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241204-world-food-programmes-troubles-in-sudan-hurt-hunger-relief-efforts-alienated-donors-says-internal-report/
  52. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/08/world-food-program-un-survey-finds-abuse-discrimination/
  53. https://www.wfp.org/funding-and-donors
  54. https://www.wfp.org/funding/2024
  55. https://www.wfp.org/publications/wfp-management-plan
  56. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000141150
  57. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/5c40ae3d-759e-467f-b0ea-79c95f620600/content
  58. https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-projects-us13-billion-operational-requirements-2026-amid-ongoing-global-hunger-crises
  59. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000019140
  60. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000161321
  61. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000157405
  62. https://www.wfp.org/publications/wfp-annual-report-flexible-funding
  63. https://www.wfp.org/stories/how-wfp-maximizes-value-money-and-ensures-transparency-and-accountability
  64. https://www.wfp.org/publications/audited-annual-accounts
  65. https://www.wfp.org/annual-country-reports-2024
  66. https://www.wfp.org/publications/annual-performance-report
  67. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000132212
  68. https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-requires-us169-billion-2025-respond-unrelenting-humanitarian-needs
  69. https://www.wfp.org/publications/food-security-impact-reduction-wfp-funding
  70. https://www.wfp.org/stories/funding-cuts-six-critical-wfp-operations-risk
  71. https://genevasolutions.news/peace-humanitarian/as-hunger-soars-un-food-agency-grapples-with-chronic-financial-crisis
  72. https://www.wfpusa.org/news/tens-of-millions-at-risk-extreme-hunger-funding-crisis-spirals
  73. https://www.wfp.org/news/new-wfp-analysis-shows-every-1-cut-food-assistance-pushes-400000-people-emergency-hunger
  74. https://www.wfp.org/global-hunger-crisis
  75. https://www.wfp.org/news/tens-millions-risk-extreme-hunger-and-starvation-unprecedented-funding-crisis-spirals
  76. https://www.wfp.org/stories/cost-cuts-funding-shortfalls-threaten-push-millions-facing-hunger-brink-starvation
  77. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/feature/2023/12/13/wfp-aid-food-cuts-mean-people-hunger-crisis-around-world
  78. https://www.wfp.org/funding
  79. https://www.wfpusa.org/news/wfp-needs-to-be-invited-in-before-delivering-food/
  80. https://www.wfp.org/
  81. https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-warns-six-critical-operations-are-facing-significant-food-aid-pipeline-breaks-year-end
  82. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sudan-how-wfp-overcoming-complex-logistics-challenges-i1ice
  83. https://www.gao.gov/international-food-assistance
  84. https://www.wfp.org/publications/2021-emergency-supply-chain-preparedness-disaster-resilience-may-2021
  85. https://www.wfp.org/publications/2023-wfp-nutrition-numbers
  86. https://www.humanitarianlibrary.org/sites/default/files/2014/02/wfp203208.pdf
  87. https://wfp-evaluation.medium.com/optimizing-targeting-of-humanitarian-food-assistance-in-the-drc-precision-and-coverage-29c6d39d2ee9
  88. https://www.unevaluation.org/member_publications/timor-leste-moderate-acute-malnutrition-treatment-evaluation
  89. https://www.wfp.org/publications/nutrition-programming-first-1000-days
  90. https://www.unicef.org/partnerships/unicef-wfp-and-who-join-forces-global-efforts-improve-nutrition-humanitarian-crises
  91. https://www.wfp.org/news/new-report-confirms-game-changing-impact-health-and-nutrition-school
  92. https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/nyas.15222
  93. https://www.wfp.org/sdgs
  94. https://reliefweb.int/report/ecuador/world-food-programme-food-assistance-assets-ffa-resilient-communities-latin-america
  95. https://www.ifpri.org/project/operational-research-wfps-food-assistance-assets-ffa-program-sri-lanka/
  96. https://www.wfp.org/school-meals
  97. https://alnap.org/help-library/resources/pilot-impact-evaluation-of-the-home-grown-school-feeding-programme-in-guatemala/
  98. https://www.wfp.org/publications/state-school-feeding-worldwide
  99. https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/profiles-of-progress-p4p.PDF
  100. https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/116331e9-5bcd-4d41-b50b-1e5f94341d94
  101. https://www.wfp.org/smallholder-market-support
  102. https://www.wfp.org/impact-evaluation
  103. https://www.theguardian.com/news/article/2024/jul/18/food-water-wifi-is-this-the-future-of-humanitarian-aid
  104. https://www.wfp.org/building-blocks
  105. https://innovation.wfp.org/project/building-blocks
  106. https://www.itu.int/hub/2020/04/how-the-world-food-programme-uses-blockchain-to-better-serve-refugees/
  107. https://drones.wfp.org/
  108. https://www.wfpusa.org/news/10-innovations-changing-how-the-u-n-delivers-food/
  109. https://innovation.wfp.org/project/route-meals
  110. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18l7KPS79js
  111. https://www.wfp.org/innovation
  112. https://www.wfp.org/conflict-and-hunger
  113. https://www.u4.no/publications/corruption-in-humanitarian-assistance-in-conflict-settings.pdf
  114. https://www.wfp.org/countries/yemen
  115. https://reliefweb.int/report/yemen/wfp-yemen-food-security-update-june-2025
  116. https://www.yemenonline.info/special-reports/10282
  117. https://www.wfpusa.org/news/wfp-airdrops-food-prevent-catastrophe-south-sudan/
  118. https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/food-and-nutrition-crisis-deepens-across-sudan-famine-identified-additional-areas
  119. https://www.wfp.org/stories/wfp-calls-humanitarian-access-sudanese-city-grapples-starvation
  120. https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-scales-emergency-food-assistance-southern-syria-reach-entire-population-sweida-0
  121. https://syriadirect.org/syrians-lose-wfp-lifeline-as-us-slashes-funding/
  122. https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-scales-food-aid-distributions-crisis-hit-syria
  123. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/21/wfp-says-food-supplies-to-gaza-below-targets-urges-more-crossings-to-open
  124. https://www.wfp.org/emergencies/palestine-emergency
  125. https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/gaza-humanitarian-response-update-22-december-2024-4-january-2025
  126. https://www.wfp.org/countries
  127. https://www.wfp.org/social-protection
  128. https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-report-20-million-more-children-sub-saharan-africa-now-receive-government-led-school-meals
  129. https://www.wfp.org/publications/wfp-food-assistance-assets-ffa-2021
  130. https://www.wfp.org/publications/wfp-food-assistance-assets-ffa-2020
  131. https://www.wfp.org/resilience-building
  132. https://www.wfp.org/publications/integrated-resilience-sahel
  133. https://www.wfp.org/operations/200447-assistance-address-food-insecurity-and-undernutrition
  134. https://www.wfp.org/operations/annual-country-report?operation_id=YE02&year=2023
  135. https://www.wfp.org/countries/ukraine
  136. https://www.wfp.org/operations/ua03-ukraine-interim-country-strategic-plan-2025-2027
  137. https://www.wfp.org/publications/corporate-emergency-evaluation-wfps-response-ukraine
  138. https://www.wfpusa.org/place/syria/
  139. https://www.wfp.org/countries/syrian-arab-republic
  140. https://news.mongabay.com/2011/08/photos-world-food-program-works-to-save-lives-in-east-africa-famine/
  141. https://www.refugeesinternational.org/reports-briefs/we-were-warned-unlearned-lessons-of-famine-in-the-horn-of-africa/
  142. https://reliefweb.int/report/world/wfp-annual-performance-report-2024
  143. https://www.wfpusa.org/news/12-things-you-didnt-know-about-wfp/
  144. https://www.wfp.org/publications/2024-year-review-pathways-change
  145. https://www.mopan.org/content/dam/mopan/en/publications/our-work/evidence/wfp/wfp-2024/mopan-wfp-report-2024.pdf
  146. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000038431
  147. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/86af75a2-ddf3-492f-b590-de052fa848c3/content
  148. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000166378
  149. https://wfp-evaluation.medium.com/acting-early-the-causal-impacts-of-wfps-anticipatory-action-programmes-in-nepal-and-bangladesh-fea93833208b
  150. https://www.3ieimpact.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/WP31-Synthesis-WFP-nutrition.pdf
  151. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000004009
  152. https://www.international.gc.ca/gac-amc/publications/evaluation/2012/dev-wfp-pam12.aspx?lang=eng
  153. https://bulletin.ids.ac.uk/index.php/idsbo/article/view/2890/ONLINE%2520ARTICLE
  154. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000157536
  155. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000165599
  156. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000166937
  157. https://humanitarianfundingforecast.org/stories-agency-expenditure/
  158. https://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/930
  159. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2023-002087_EN.html
  160. https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3065728-fraud-and-concealment-allegations-at-wfp-amid-sudan-hunger-crisis
  161. https://www.reuters.com/world/eu-temporarily-holds-back-food-aid-somalia-after-un-records-widespread-theft-2023-09-18/
  162. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2023/04/21/uganda-refugee-programme-fraud-concerns
  163. https://thesentry.org/reports/cash-grab/
  164. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000127451
  165. https://www.fao.org/4/a0800e/a0800e03.pdf
  166. https://barrett.dyson.cornell.edu/files/papers/MixedEffectsv2Mar2006.pdf
  167. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c0109/c0109.pdf
  168. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228322359_Food_Aid_and_Dependency_Implications_for_Emergency_Food_Security_Assessments
  169. https://odi.org/documents/916/4847.pdf
  170. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305750X05001294
  171. https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000165600
  172. https://www.fao.org/4/ag037e/ag037e00.pdf
  173. https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/25956/hpgreport19.pdf
  174. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919223001409
  175. https://archive.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/133-tables-and-charts/51214-top-10-donors-to-wfp.html
  176. https://humanitarianoutcomes.org/sites/default/files/publications/humanitarian_financing_efficiency_.pdf
  177. https://www.gao.gov/products/nsiad-94-29
  178. https://www.ujpps.com/index.php/ujpps/announcement/view/57
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.