I have felt for a long time that aid to underdeveloped countries should be placed in a definite and more rational order of priorities. Firstly, those underdeveloped nations who are short of food should be given what they need for attaining adequate nutritional standards. The rich countries should make up their mind that they do not want to make money out of selling food to starving peoples. In many countries, a major limitation of economic development is the valid fear that, when the unemployed and underemployed are set to work, they will consume more food than is available. It should be recognized that when, at the same time, other countries are laboring with the problems of food surpluses, this limitation of development is not only cruel but unnecessary and, indeed, absurd. There is, however, no reason why only those rich countries which have food surpluses should carry the burden of the costs of such aid. In any reasonable scheme of international cooperation, the costs for such a scheme should be shared by all the rich nations. What is more, aid should never be looked upon as a permanent solution to the problems of poverty. Aid should always be a help to self-help. For that reason a definite time limit should be set to the provision of food without pay, and a condition should be made that the aid-receiving country do everything it can to raise yields in agriculture. Otherwise there is always the danger that the food aid would only buttress its complacency. Secondly, therefore, the rich countries should also decide to give, free of charge, everything that it would be practical and economic to import from abroad in terms of tools and equipment, technical assistance, and training in order to assist underdeveloped countries to raise their agricultural production of food for consumption. Insofar as surpluses of fertilizers were available, those could be part of the aid. Otherwise, aid should instead be given to set up fertilizer factories in underdeveloped countries where conditions for fertilizer production are favorable. Thirdly, the rich countries should, in addition to meeting the fundamental request for more food to eat, agree to give everything that can be provided from abroad in the way of equipment, advice, personnel training, etc. , for the most rapid advance the underdeveloped countries can manage to engender in sanitation, health, education at all levels, and research, including surveys of their natural resources. If there are more funds available for aid to underdeveloped countries than are needed for these three forms, I would give the fourth priority to paying for equipment and other productive necessities from abroad, in order to speed up the formation of various types of overall capital such as irrigation and power facilities, ports, roads, store houses, etc. Such large-scale investment is necessary in order to give the basis for development, both in industry and agriculture. It is of a particular strategic importance in economic development, as it is labor-intensive and can thus make use of the productive resources of which an underdeveloped country has surplus, labor. If food ceased to be the cruel bottleneck as it is at present in many countries, and if undertaking these investments in overall capital would not compete for foreign exchange, underdeveloped countries would find it advantageous to give them a higher priority rating. A large part of the loans from the International Bank have this purpose, but it would be rational to use grant aid in order to make it possible for many underdeveloped countries to intensify their efforts in this direction. The author states that the first priority of aid should be focused on ______ .