About the fact that there is "evidence indicating that attempting to reduce rural to urban migration can lead to a number of negative consequences for food security and nutrition and that conversely there are both challenges and opportunities presented by the dynamic rural-urban linkages": It is not clear to me which evidence is referred to here. On my fieldwork in China, I could aknowledge on the opposite that governments sometimes force rural to urban migration without taking into account the fact that people staying in the countryside might not be able to take care of the land left uncultivated by migrants (too old/imperfections of the land tenure system/lack of access to financial services/lack of access to social security for migrants, etc.). This raises questions for the middle and long terme food security. I believe that middle and long term scenarios should be conducted to assess more precisely the risks associated with large scale rural-urban migration (not only in terms of food security but also in terms of the capacity of non-agricultural sectors to absorb all the labour surplus, in a context where the world economic growth does not drive industrialization anymore).
I believe that a strong focus should be put on the necessity to ensure stability (of jobs, revenues, food, etc.) in urban and rural areas. Whether formal or informal markets, temporary or permanent jobs, one of the key points is the human need for stability (and this could be brought also by alternative systems such as welfare systems, or better connection to consumers, or enabling law environment, etc....). Running middle and long term scenarios might be useful for that as well.
Finally, I think that territorial approaches and participatory approaches are necessary and this point is well underlined in the report.
Sra. Marie-Hélène Schwoob
About the fact that there is "evidence indicating that attempting to reduce rural to urban migration can lead to a number of negative consequences for food security and nutrition and that conversely there are both challenges and opportunities presented by the dynamic rural-urban linkages": It is not clear to me which evidence is referred to here. On my fieldwork in China, I could aknowledge on the opposite that governments sometimes force rural to urban migration without taking into account the fact that people staying in the countryside might not be able to take care of the land left uncultivated by migrants (too old/imperfections of the land tenure system/lack of access to financial services/lack of access to social security for migrants, etc.). This raises questions for the middle and long terme food security. I believe that middle and long term scenarios should be conducted to assess more precisely the risks associated with large scale rural-urban migration (not only in terms of food security but also in terms of the capacity of non-agricultural sectors to absorb all the labour surplus, in a context where the world economic growth does not drive industrialization anymore).
I believe that a strong focus should be put on the necessity to ensure stability (of jobs, revenues, food, etc.) in urban and rural areas. Whether formal or informal markets, temporary or permanent jobs, one of the key points is the human need for stability (and this could be brought also by alternative systems such as welfare systems, or better connection to consumers, or enabling law environment, etc....). Running middle and long term scenarios might be useful for that as well.
Finally, I think that territorial approaches and participatory approaches are necessary and this point is well underlined in the report.