The report notes that despite the progress made in recent decades, today nearly 800 million people, most of them in rural areas, still do not have enough food to eat.
Eliminating chronic undernourishment by 2030 is a key element of the proposed Sustainable Development Goal 2 of the new post-2015 agenda to be adopted by the international community later this year and is also at the heart of the Zero Hunger Challenge promoted by the UN Secretary-General.
"The message of the report is clear: if we adopt a "business as usual" approach, by 2030, we would still have more than 650 million people suffering from hunger. This is why we are championing an approach that combines social protection with additional targeted investments in rural development, agriculture and urban areas that will chiefly benefit the poor," said FAO Director-General José Graziano da Silva.
"Our report estimates that this will require a total investment of some US$267 billion per year over the next 15 years. Given that this is more or less equivalent to 0.3 percent of the global GDP, I personally think it is a relatively small price to pay to end hunger," Graziano da Silva added.
Lifting people from below the poverty line and making this sustainable
According to the report, a "business as usual" approach would still leave some 650 million people hungry in 2030.
It contrasts this with a combined social protection and investment scenario whereby public funded transfers will be used to lift people out of chronic hunger by ensuring that they reach a US$1.25/day income which corresponds to the World Bank-determined poverty line level.
This social protection measure would cost an additional $116 billion per year - $75 billion for rural areas and $41 billion for urban areas. Some $151 billion in additional pro-poor investments - $105 billion for rural development and agriculture and $46 billion for urban areas - would also be required to stimulate income generation to the advantage of those living in poverty. The combination of social protection and investments brings the total to $267 billion.
Most of the investment would normally come from the private sector, especially farmers. However, private investments need to be complemented by additional public sector investments in rural infrastructure, transport, health and education.
In rural areas, pro-poor public investments could target small-scale irrigation and other infrastructure benefitting small holders. They could include measures such as food processing to reduce post-harvest waste and losses, as well as stronger institutional arrangements for land and water tenure, credit facilities, labour legislation, and other areas, to make farm and off-farm activities and markets accessible to marginalized groups, including women and young people.
In urban areas, the additional investments should ensure that people living in extreme poverty will eventually be able to provide for themselves. The investments could, for example, target capacity building to impart entrepreneurial and other skills, including craftsmanship, and ensure fair labour contracts, provide credit facilities, housing as well as nutrition-related services.