Funding cuts will push millions towards starvation, says UNWFP's Carl Skau

India should scale up funding to supplement the fund crunch, says Carl Skau

The United Nations’ World Food Programme (WFP), the world’s largest humanitarian agency awarded the Nobel Prize in 2020, is going through one of the worst funding crises in its history, with the US government slashing annual assistance by almost half since 2024.

 

In 2024, the US was WFP’s largest donor, contributing almost 46 per cent of the budget. The funding shortfalls have forced the agency to drastically cut staff and programmes, including closure of regional offices and disruption of services, affecting around 16.7 million people in 2025.

 

In an interview with Business Standard, Carl Skau, Deputy Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer of WFP, said that due to the fund crunch, the possibility of famines and starvation deaths has grown manifold in conflict-ridden regions such as Yemen, Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Afghanistan and Congo. Edited excerpts: 

How is the funding cut impacting the humanitarian activities that the World Food Programme does? Also, how severe have been the cuts?

 

To start, the World Food Programme is the largest humanitarian and food security agency in the world, employing some 20,000 people, with a budget of around $10 billion over the past few years.

 

This year we had a drop of about 35–40 per cent. It is mainly due to cuts from the US, but not only that — even Europe is cutting down funding, including the UK, Germany and others. We are funded around 75 per cent from what we call traditional donors, largely the OECD countries, and we are completely voluntarily funded.

 

The challenge is that the needs keep going up, and quite dramatically. This year we estimate some 320 million people are acutely food insecure. That is three times the number we had five years ago. So we now have a bifurcation: needs are rising and funding is declining. That equation obviously does not work.

 

So how are you addressing the fund crunch?

 

We are trying to do things more efficiently. We are going through big changes in the organisation to be more efficient and effective. (WFP has cut its worldwide workforce by 25–30 per cent, impacting 6,000 people).

 

We need to broaden our partnerships, both in terms of how we mobilise funding and how we do our work. We need to focus even more on solutions so that we can prevent needs from rising, while also pushing back on acute needs. And we need to prioritise.

 

Is the funding cut pushing up the number of people who are food insecure from the current level of 320 million?

 

We are aiming to reach around 100 million of the 320 million people in 2025. Last year we reached about 130 million. So it is already down 30 million compared to last year.

 

Within countries, there are specific cases particularly hit by the cuts. Three years ago, for example, we were assisting around 8 million people in Afghanistan. This year we are trying to reach 1.5–2 million. That is a dramatic drop, in a country where 10 million people are acutely food insecure.

 

What happens is that we are forced to prioritise: taking from the hungry to give to the starving. The problem is that those who are hungry today will be starving tomorrow. By cutting funds and not preventing that, we are pushing more people into starvation — to a higher category of food insecurity. These cuts will have to be paid for later, rather than being addressed now.

 

So these cuts are primarily because of the US reducing funding?

 

Not only the US, though that is a big part. But cuts are happening across the board.

 

India has been a long-term supporter of WFP. What kind of assistance are you seeking from India now?

 

India is critical to tackling global hunger simply because of its size. If India can crack it, then the world can. In that regard, it is an inspiration. India has successful domestic initiatives that we want to scale globally.

 

India has also made important progress and has a size that matters. It is really at the frontline of digital and technological solutions.

 

What are the specific issues you have come to discuss with India?

 

One is how we can do more procurement in India for the WFP, given the surplus here, especially for countries most in need. We are also looking at establishing a centre of excellence to tap into India’s solutions and make them available to the world.

 

We are also here to discuss crises like Afghanistan. We are hoping India could step up. India used to supply wheat to Afghanistan. (WFP will sign an agreement with the Indian government to supply around 50,000 tonnes of fortified rice for Afghanistan’s humanitarian needs).

 

Are you also looking at India scaling up financial assistance to WFP?

 

Yes, we are looking at that going forward. India presently provides annual assistance of around $1 million, mainly for our programme here in India. But as I said, we are looking to diversify our funding base.

 

I was just in Jakarta. The Indonesian government has stepped up, contributing significantly to countries like Afghanistan, Gaza and Sudan. Countries like India, Brazil and South Africa, like Indonesia, are now increasingly important for us.

 

But it is not only about money. It is also about ideas. For example, India’s supply-chain management initiatives for grains — we are looking at scaling that up globally. And on the diplomacy side, India has increasing influence through the G20 and as a regional power.

 

In many contexts, the problem is not only money but also access. In Myanmar, for example, we face challenges to operate outside government-controlled areas, though many hungry people are there. Negotiating access with governments is an area where countries like India can be helpful.

 

Between distributing grains physically and providing cash in lieu of grains, which is more acceptable globally?

 

It depends on the context. There is no single solution. Take Gaza, for example. The Internationally Recognised Review Process has declared a famine in Gaza.

 

Before the war, we assisted around 400,000 people there. Since the war, we have tried to reach around a million per month. In February, during the ceasefire, we delivered to 2 million people — the entire population. We opened 25 bakeries, hundreds of soup kitchens, and delivered over 8,000 trucks of food in 42 days.

 

Now we are back at the bottom again. At present, we are only doing in-kind food distribution. But as soon as possible, we want to return to cash and vouchers. (In 2023, WFP had to reduce food assistance from $12 per person per month to $10, and further down to $8 in 2025 due to the fund crunch).

 

How severe is the humanitarian and food crisis in Gaza?

 

Right now, it is the worst we have seen. It is unique because the entire population is affected, and they have nowhere to go. The borders are closed, and the death toll — from both food insecurity and violence — is stark.

 

I believe it is possible to turn this around. In January, a ceasefire allowed us to deliver to the entire population. If there is another ceasefire, we can return to that operation. If not, there will be starvation.

 

Do you think the global zero hunger target for 2030 has gone off track due to this funding crisis?

 

We are definitely off track. Hunger is not only about WFP; national governments have an important role. But given the drivers of hunger now — mainly conflict, climate change and economic shocks — it is rising. Two-thirds of acute hunger is conflict-driven.

 

We also see extreme weather events, droughts and floods — sometimes in the same countries. Many conflict-ridden countries are also climate vulnerable. The pandemic and the Ukraine war added to the economic shocks.

 

Now, in 2025, we are going to see people dying from hunger. We already have two confirmed famines. That is unprecedented. I cannot recall when in history we last had two confirmed famines at the same time. 

WFP funding crunch: Humanitarian impact

• US slashed WFP funding by nearly 50% since 2024
• WFP aims to aid 100 million of 320 million food-insecure people in 2025, down from 130 million last year
• Food assistance cut from $12 to $10 to $8 per person/month (2023–25)
• Pre-war Gaza: 400,000 people assisted; post-war: about 1 million/month
• Crises worsen in Yemen, Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Afghanistan, Congo; funding cuts escalate starvation
• Global workforce cut 25–30% (6,000 staff); regional offices closed
• Two confirmed famines in 2025 — an unprecedented global hunger crisis