Global Hunger Crisis Deepens Despite Billion-Dollar Pledges | Image Source: www.thinkglobalhealth.org
PARIS, France, 15 April 2025 – In a world more connected than ever, one might think that the fight against hunger and malnutrition has become a corner. However, despite technological advances and large-scale promises, millions of people continue to hunger and suffer even more from hidden forms of malnutrition. This paradox was the N4G focal point of March 2025 in Paris, where 127 delegations, governments, non-profit organizations, private sector leaders and multilateral organizations met to develop a global roadmap to address nutrition in all its complexities.
According to the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs of France, all countries, regardless of their GDP or geographical location, face some form of malnutrition, whether in refugee camps or epidemics of obesity in dependent societies. The N4G summit reflected this universality, which raised more than $27 billion in commitments, an impressive amount that coincided with the contributions of the last summit in 2021, despite the broader context of reductions in external aid to the United States, France and other major donors. But this raises an urgent question: if promises are similar, why is the crisis feeling worse?
The cost of inaction: millions at risk
According to the Summit data, recent reductions in donor funding are expected to leave 2.3 million untreated children suffering from severe acute malnutrition. It is estimated that 369,000 children can die within one year, each being a tragedy that can be avoided. According to WHO, this decline could lead to years of progress, with many key nutrition-related programs – from emergency food delivery to agricultural research – currently operating under the threat of complete suspension or closure. It’s not just a health problem, it’s economic.
Nutrition experts are increasingly focusing on the economic consequences of malnutrition. Poor nutrition makes physical and cognitive development difficult, reducing productivity and perpetuating cycles of poverty. As Brieuc Pont, the chief diplomat of the N4G summit, pointed out, the cost of an action does not exceed the necessary investment. ” Malnutrition not only affects the individual,” he said, “it leads to complete savings. “
Q: Why are funding pledges not enough?
A: History reveals that promises often do not translate into delivered help. After the first N4G summit in 2013, more than half of the organizations failed to meet their commitments. Without strong accountability mechanisms, generous promises may be reduced to political aspects rather than important measures.
Nutrition is not another’s problem
The illusion that malnutrition is a problem for “developing countries” has been destroyed. In France, for example, runoff – a disease often associated with 18th-century sailors – has been revived, largely due to poverty and growing food inequality. As Guillaume Lafortune of the United Nations Network for Sustainable Development Solutions (UNSSD) said, “no country is doing particularly well in Goal 2 of sustainable development.” Across the European Union, unhealthy diets continue to dominate, stimulated by aggressive marketing and lack of financial incentives for healthy eating.
The Nutri… The rating system, introduced in France and adopted in other European countries, is a positive example. It uses a colour coded label to help consumers quickly measure the health value of packaged foods. Although not perfect, its existence – and the resistance of the food industry’s vested interests – means increasing public appetite for nutritional transparency.
Q: What maintains the healthier diets in Europe?
A: According to the European Economic and Social Committee, the challenges are poor knowledge of food, insufficient subsidies for nutritious foods and the marketing of ultra-finished products. Demand interventions, such as the promotion of plant-based diets, face political and cultural resistance.
Brazil: The Paradox of Plentere
Brazil is a powerful case study on the double burden of malnutrition. Once focused on reducing hunger, its school lunch program evolved to address food quality, removing ultra-processed items and focusing on nutritional menus. Despite this, the country continues to combat high rates of obesity and pre-diabetes among adolescents. The challenge is to reconcile health policy with the powerful lobbies of food and livestock.
According to Brazilian animal rights lawyer Helena Lettieri, efforts to reduce meat at school lunches have been blocked, thus revealing the interests of agro-industry in national policy. “There is a clear lack of willingness to challenge industrial meat, even when it threatens both public health and the environment”
she said.
Q: How does the Brazilian approach to school meals differ?
A: Brazil integrates nutritional science into its school lunch programs and limits ultra-processed foods. However, it avoids dealing with meat consumption, despite the evidence linking industrial livestock to health and climate issues.
Nigeria: Progress in aid reduction
Nigeria’s nutritional landscape highlights tensions between dependence on external aid and local innovation. The country ‘ s auxiliary school food programme, which produced food at the local level, had been successful, improved school enrolment and created stable markets for farmers. But for specialty therapeutic foods like Plumpy ‘Nut, dependence on imported ingredients (about 60%) continues, limiting real self-sufficiency.
According to Abdoulkader Yonli of Nutri K, uniform standards and the presence of aflatoxins in local peanuts remain obstacles. Agricultural development in northern Nigeria exposed to conflict faces two threats: armed violence and climate variability. These systemic problems make it difficult to create a fully localized food solution.
Q: Can Nigeria achieve full self-sufficiency in nutrition?
A: Not yet. Although school meals are of local origin, therapeutic foods continue to depend on imports due to quality control and agricultural constraints. Conflicts and climate challenges make national self-sufficiency a high order.
Ethiopia: Leadership with Innovation and Partnership
Ethiopia’s recent drive for integrated nutrition and health services is an example of how countries can control their public health trajectories. As part of FAO pilot countries for food system transformation, Ethiopia has adopted both technical collaboration and national innovation. The Seqota Declaration aims to eliminate the glare of children by 2030 and has so far reduced glare by 3% per year in 40 districts.
At the same time, Ethiopia is tackling unsupervised tropical diseases, such as intestinal worms, by integrating disposable treatments into broader nutrition programmes. Over the past six months, more than 1 million treatments have been given to children under the age of 5. These efforts are supported by partnerships with the Nutrition Power, UNICEF and other agencies. As Health Minister Dereje Dugma said, “Ethiopia’s future health must be in Ethiopia’s hands”
Q: What makes the Ethiopian approach effective?
A: A combination of political will, strategic international partnerships and a long-term sustainability approach. Programmes such as the Seqota Declaration, integrated waste and multisectoral planning illustrate home-based solutions supported by global experts.
The first lines: WHO’s global efforts
Behind the scenes, WHO and its partners maintain the front lines in countries facing acute nutritional emergencies. In Somalia, more than 25,000 children were treated for severe acute malnutrition in EU-funded projects. In Sudan, WHO has stabilized 100,000 undernourished children in conflict. Ethiopia has deployed 19 mobile health and nutrition teams to assist displaced populations, while in Syria and Benin, integrated school health programmes help to detect and treat malnutrition from the outset.
Each of these interventions reflects a broader commitment to equity and sustainability. But WHO stresses that its ability to respond depends entirely on donor generosity. According to WHO, “fully flexible funding is essential to maintain impact where it is most needed”
Q: Why is flexible funding important?
A: Unlike funding for specific projects, flexible funding allows WHO to respond dynamically to emerging needs, whether it is a famine in Somalia or an epidemic in Ethiopia.
Conclusion
The N4G 2025 The summit was a critical moment for global nutrition, a time when ambitions, solidarity and realism met. While promises are encouraging, concrete action and accountability must be pursued. Countries like Ethiopia prove that with appropriate leadership and partnerships, significant progress is possible. But no nation, rich or poor, is immune to the consequences of malnutrition. It is a common crisis that requires a unified response. The question is not whether we can afford to invest in nutrition, but whether we can afford not to.
