Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Dear Colleagues:

I don't have as much time and expertise to contribute to this discussion compared to others (e.g. sustainable food systems). However, before it closes, I would like to offer a few points for your consideration:

1. There is growing attention being paid to the "food/energy/water nexus". The discourse around all three tends to be similar. On the one hand, there is concern around "shortages". However, upon closer scrutiny, we have plenty of food, water and energy for the earth's current population (and many demographers are now challenging the "reaching 9B" hypothesis due to low birthrates around the world) but there are issues around access, storage, etc. I'm told one of the British research funding agencies had a "sandpit" on the food-energy-water nexus. I would be curious what came out of that exercise. Usually these "sandpits" bring together the world's top experts in a field. 
2. What is the right balance between attention to mitigation versus adaptation when it comes to climate change? How much effort and for what expected gain do we focus on one versus the other in various situations. In Canada, most of which is cold, there is already attention being paid into the impact of climate change of bringing more land into the productive sphere due to global warming.  Small pacific islands, on the other hand, face potential obliteration. 
3. Finally, let us not place so much attention on agricultural production at the expense of examining the impacts of other aspects of the value chain. As Nicolas Bricas at CIRAD has shown, one of the biggest GHG emitting activities in the food system is consumers driving to the grocery store to fetch groceries! See my recent op-ed on feeding the world available at: http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/11/28/malthus-revisited-can-the-planet-sup…;

Thanks for allowing me to participate. I look forward to learning about the outcome of this process.

Gisèle Yasmeen (most publications available at giseleyasmeen.com and LinkedIn) 

Dear All,

I would like to endorse Katy Lee complimenting Florence and also, with your permission, record our appreciation, of her finding the time and conducting a positive and transparent consultation, focusing on the needs of the rural poor producer communities, looking for solutions for the agrarian crissis and for their long term sustainability. My answer to the 3 thematic Qs given below, with supporting attachments.

Subhash

Food,  Nutrition & Health  Security through ‘Agro ecology’ also Mitigates Climate Change:

Climate change directly affects rural poor communities producing own requirements of nutritious food. Following conventional agriculture systems has pushed 100’s of million people into deep distress, increasing hunger, malnutrition and poverty, reducing net income and purchasing power, thus hitting them the hardest, especially women  and youth, resulting in migration to urban slums.  Producer communities, pastoralists, forest dwellers and fisher folk are facing hardships in producing and accessing nutritious food due to unseasonal hail storms, rain, floods, etc. In the long term, following conventional agriculture systems is the cause of the present agrarian crissis, climate change, soil degradation, etc., seriously affecting the environment and therefore nutrition, food and  health security. 

Climate change has mostly occurred in areas following high cost high risk green revolution conventional agriculture, reducing numbers of trees, hardening of soil, increasing use of agro chemicals and water, year after year with productivity plateauing, has been harmful to the environment and cause of the agrarian crissis. Conventional agriculture facilitates climate change and being high cost high risk, will exacerbate the crisis of hunger, malnutrition and poverty with increasing prices, with the producer communities not having the money to buy own requirements of safe, nutritious food. 

’Agro ecological systems (interface between climate change, food, health and nutrition) of each area being low cost low risk is the obvious solution to ensure producers access to own requirements of safe nutritious food also mitigates the effects of climate change, FAO September 2014 conference. Urgent measures are urgently needed to be taken by countries for re converting to the low cost low risk safe and nutritious food production, following agro ecology of each  area, putting the rural poor producer communities to work and gainfully, produce own requirements of nutritious food and cash, at little or no cost and to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions, hunger, malnutrition, poverty and suicides, whilst increasing net incomes/ purchasing power to improve livelihoods of about 50% of the population dependent on agriculture thus calling for policies, programmes and projects being integrated, following Agro ecology systems of the area.

This is in keeping with Rome Declaration on Nutrition and Framework of Action adopted by the 2nd International Conference on Nutrition in November 2014 recognized: 

 “the need to address the impacts of climate change and other environmental factors on food security and nutrition, in particular on the quantity, quality and diversity of food produced, taking appropriate action to tackle negative effects” and recommended to “establish and strengthen institutions, policies, programmes and services to enhance the resilience of the food supply in crisis-prone areas, including areas affected by climate change”. 

We need to create awareness of the richness of the knowledge document and as applied by successful producer communities, to their soil and agro climatic conditions  and managed in their area around the world, learning from the AR4D being done by successful farmers, season after season, not the research being done in labs, most of which is not replicable in the field. 

I have highlighted the impact of conventional agriculture on climate change, food, health and nutrition and provide  possible solutions to improve livelihoods while reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions thus ensuring long-term nutrition, food, health and climate security, thus have endeavored to answer the following thematic Qs, focusing on meeting the needs of the rural poor smallholder producer communities in my above contribution: 

1) What are the main issues for policy-makers to consider when linking climate change to food security and nutrition through agriculture, in particular when designing, formulating and implementing  policies and programmes?

2) What are the key institutional and governance challenges to the delivery of cross-sect oral and comprehensive policies that promotes access to low cost nutritious food to the most vulnerable, and contribute to sustainable and resilient food systems in the long term?

3) What are key best-practices and lessons-learned in fostering cross-sect oral linkages to  improve nutrition and food through agriculture, while preventing, adapting to climate change and reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions?

>> English translation below <<

Saludos desde Caracas, Venezuela.

En mi experiencia en el pueblo de Cata, Ocumare de la Costa de Oro, estado Aragua Venezuela. He podido vivir como el cambio climatico esta afectando los arboles de cacao criollo, y como poco a poco el calor y los factores de lluvia, incrementan las perditas de la recoleta de cacao.

La comunidad, siempre esta en un constante desafio de aprendizaje de como crear sistema de riego de agua, para apoyara a los arboles, sistemas de riegos que no afetan el causal del río. Es bueno poder ver que la sabiduria de los habitantes locales pueden aportar solucines sustentables.

Sigo leyendo los documentos, saludos a todos. 

Regards from Caracas, Venezuela.

In the village of Cata, Ocumare de la Costa de Oro, Aragua, Venezuela, I have seen how climate change is affecting the Criollo cocoa trees, and how heat and rain are gradually increasing the cocoa harvest losses.

The community continuously faces a learning challenge: how to create irrigation systems that help the tress without impacting the river flow. It is good to see that local wisdom can provide sustainable solutions.

I go on reading the documents. Best regards.

Dear all,

As this consultation is reaching its end, let me forget my role of facilitator and add my own grain of salt (this contribution will of course not be reflected in the summary unless you believe it brings something to the very lively debate of these last weeks). 

There seems to be an agreement 1/ that the poorest are likely to be most affected by climate change and 2/ that climate change affects food security and nutrition. I would therefore suggest that we provide specific attention to households affected by malnutrition and/or social cases in climate change affected areas/hotspots: they are in my view the emerging  tip of the iceberg. If we understand the local-specific causes of either malnutrition or destitution, we should gain a better understanding of the pathways through which climate change is concretely affecting food security and nutrition in that areas and the coping strategies adopted, and therefore gain insights on possible prevention, mitigation and  adaptation measures and strategies. 

I would like to say goodbye to all of you, it was great to hear and learn from you, and to renew contacts with old friends and colleagues.  As we move towards CoP21, I hope some of the issues you brought up will feed into the debate in the coming months. I will do my best to summarize your inputs and come up with a document that all of us can live with and use where and when appropriate. 

Florence

Dear Florence,

Thank you for guiding us through this excellent topic! The International Agri-Food Network represents tens of thousands of agricultural businesses, and farmers, in 135 of the UN's member countries.

The 'climate change' position paper of the network is attached for your interest and we have some more thoughts that are relevant to your discussion below:

1. Safeguard natural resources

• Protect natural habitats by avoiding deforestation and land clearing by sustainably improving yields on existing arable land.

• Protect the integrity of watersheds, wetlands and pasturelands to preserve ecosystem services and biodiversity.

• Invest in technologies and techniques to promote water-use efficiency, such as improved irrigation systems, conservation agriculture and better water allocation systems.

• Build up soil organic matter and prevent erosion by applying techniques such as conservation tillage and nutrient management.

• Facilitate drought-preparedness and mitigation through appropriate technologies, including use of remote sensing, local weather forecasting, drought-tolerant crops, early warning information systems, irrigation technology and the building of resilience in rural communities.

2. Share knowledge

• Encourage education in locally-relevant agricultural practices and technologies which significantly increase carbon sequestration, reduce GHG emissions and improve agricultural productivity, particularly in developing countries.

• Create international programmes which share best practice and build capacity for the efficient application of existing climate-friendly technologies by making them more affordable and efficient in use as well as more accessible to farmers.

• Foster energy-efficiency improvements and emissions reductions in nitrogen fertilizer production by helping producers of all sizes to adopt best practice techniques.

• Reduce livestock-related emissions through rapid education and dissemination of improved efficiency of grazing systems, manure management, methane capture for biogas production and enhanced feeds and feed additives.

• Use Integrated Crop Management (ICM) best practices (notably by deploying the right nutrient source, at the right rate, right time and in the right place to improve nutrient use efficiencies) and apply Integrated Pest Management (IPM) to optimise pesticide effectiveness.

• Recognise and support the development of synergies between resilience and mitigation through the inclusion of improved farm management practices in research programmes.

3. Build local access and capacity

• Mainstream and co-ordinate funding for climate change and agricultural programmes, in ways which address grassroots needs and reach all levels of farming.

• Encourage improved cropping systems (e.g. the use of cover crops and appropriate crop rotation methods, such as nitrogen-fixing legumes), cultivation practices (e.g. by limiting fallow periods and reducing cultivation) and soil quality practices to increase overall resource productivity.

• Invest in infrastructure-building and related training programmes.

• Provide training to existing extension networks to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of farm inputs (e.g. fuel, mineral and organic nutrient sources, seeds and crop protection).

• Invest in bioenergy to achieve energy security and rural development through sustainable local production.

• Secure access to land and water resources, especially for women farmers.

• Provide risk management tools to support farmers in managing weather and market variations.

• Localise the application of agronomic knowledge, pest identification and meteorological information.

• Facilitate the use of modern varieties which are resistant to pests and diseases and decreasing the need for tilling.

4. Protect harvests

• Reduce emissions by minimising pre- and post-harvest losses.

• Support efforts to enhance food quality and safety and to reduce waste along the food chain through to endconsumers.

• Improve safety testing for food-handling and processing equipment, as well as storage techniques, cold-chain systems and transportation infrastructure.

5. Enable access to markets

• Channel new and additional funding for climate change mitigation, adaptation and technology transfer directly to the agricultural sector.

• Reward all responsive farmers using sustainable agricultural practices through positive incentives which acknowledge their vital role in providing ecosystem services.

• Develop innovative financial mechanisms for the transfer of technologies in order to support farmers in developing countries.

• Support farmers’ organisations, enabling them to operate as aggregating agencies bringing together individual farmers to improve access to financial mechanisms, funding and carbon markets.

• Mainstream climate change related efforts into market development.

6. Prioritise research imperatives

• Invest in R&D aimed at scaling up a broad range of new mitigation and adaptation technologies and practices addressing diverse climate needs.

• Develop climate information services and early warning systems, as well as best possible estimates of weather and climate impacts on crop or forage production, at a temporal and spatial scale useful for vulnerable rural communities.

• Promote partnerships between farmers and scientists to develop adequate and fit-for-use technologies as well as land and water management tools where they are most needed.

• Improve scientific insight into the role of GHG emissions from methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Increase research on areas of potential savings in order to include them in any future monitoring and accounting rules determined through the Copenhagen process.

• Improve the capacity of a broad range of crops to grow in harsher climates, developing locally-adapted drought- tolerant, salinity-tolerant and heat-tolerant varieties.

• Instigate a system for monitoring GHG emissions from agriculture, including developing performance indicators for agricultural practices that reduce emissions.

Policy issues: policy makers would do well to recognize that policies are only as good as instistitutions implementing them. Best policies do fail where institutional capacity is weak; limited funding and lack of visionary leadership. Developing nations need to move from theory to practise especially on food security and poverty alleviation matters. Nonethless current food security policies are insufficent to deal with climate change impacts: a shift from reactive policy measures to pro-active approaches in mainstreaming sound, achivable, ecosystem based climate change policies across all socioeconomic sectors; removal of barriers that limit most small scale farmers who constitute majority of agro-communities in developing nations. Policy should also focus on the possible impacts of adapatation practices on water availability and access as farmers seek to mantain/improve production.

Most of the exististing food security/agricultural polcies, programs and projects are localized and not taken up nationally as yet and their implementation remains with civil societies or NGOs or farmer groups with minimal government leadership/intervention. National food security policies and implementation in response to climate change and poverty eradication; sufficient investiment in agricultre in research, human development, extension services, farm application and tool, technology etc. water and land resources management is key in adapting to climate change as water scaricity increases.

1) What are the main issues for policy-makers to consider when linking climate change on the one hand and food security and nutrition on the other, in particular when designing, formulating and implementing policies and programmes?

Policy review

Awareness of policies, climate change and impacts on food security and nutrition (Past and present and areas to change).

Can the policies/programs/plans in their current form make communities, including the (vulnerable) adapt to climate change.

Policies, some of which were formulated fifty years ago need to be reviewed to;

Meet the current demands in the changing climate and changing food systems

Amend the areas that may not have been considered during enforcement

2) What are the key institutional and governance challenges to the delivery of cross-sectoral and comprehensive policies that protect and promote nutrition of the most vulnerable, and contribute to sustainable and resilient food systems?

Accountability;

What are the terms of operation at organization, community and individual (Staffing level)?

Do the institutions/communities/individuals have the capacity/knowledge/skills to deliver what is expected of each? If no what measures are in place to bridge such gaps

How many people are to be reached in a given period?

How are they to be reached?

What is expected out of each institution/individual after a given period reflecting on the terms of operation?

3) In your experience, what are key best-practices and lessons-learned in fostering cross-sectoral linkages to protect and improve nutrition while preventing, adapting to climate change and reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions in projects?

Participatory plan development and enforcement at different scales by interdisciplinary teams.

This arises from approaches/tools including but not limited to;

Integrated watershed management (Large scale) and Agro-ecosystem analysis to understand plots, farm and village systems. The approaches and tools engage communities to appreciate strengths, threats, weaknesses and opportunities at watershed and farm level.

Plans if developed and filed by communities may be reviewed to enrich and or fix missing areas of interest to meet nutrition, food security and nutrition and environment health while also reducing emission of greenhouse gases and or absorbing it from the atmosphere.

Hi Florence,

Hector Malett’s third contribution referenced below is far more optimistic about future food production and supplies than most predictions I’ve seen. If the figures he quotes are correct, why is it that so many other ‘experts’ are foreseeing food supply problems in the coming decades? Have they not examined the same data, or do they interpret them differently? Can someone (in FAO or elsewhere) please explain.

But there seems to be another issue that Hector does not take into account: the (unsustainable) current contribution of agriculture - including both crops and animal/meat production - to global warming and to the pressure being put on other ‘planetary boundaries’ including nitrogen, phosphorous and ocean acidity to name but three. The team of scientists that has proposed the planetary boundaries (the Stockholm Resilience Centre and others) and many of the experts who are working on ‘sustainable development’ (e.g. Jeffrey Sachs) tell us that there is an urgent need for a ‘transition’ not only in the production and use of energy but also in agricultural production methods and food habits (notably by eating less meat) if we are to limit global warming to the famous 2’C and also stay within the other planetary boundaries. If I understand him correctly, Hector is counting on a more-or-less linear development of existing food production systems, and that would quickly drive us beyond the 2’C target and other planetary boundaries. Am I missing something?

(Ron Ockwell) 

I would like to comment on the first topic: What are the main issues for policy-makers to consider when linking climate change on the one hand and food security and nutrition on the other, in particular when designing, formulating and implementing policies and programmes?

During the past few years the global community has been awakening to the serious but long neglected issues of postharvest food losses and waste, and many organizations are now involved in research, education, planning and outreach activities in the field.  Food losses and waste negatively impact both nutrition/food security and the environment, since throwing away one third to one half of the food we produce before it can be eaten is a huge strain on the productive resources of all countries.  Climate change and current worries about the stability of productive resources will only make these issues worse, so now is the time for policy makers to focus on how best to support agricultural development programs that will reduce food losses, protect natural capital and improve food security.  

Dr. Lisa Kitinoja 

The Postharvest Education Foundation

PO Box 38, La Pine, Oregon 97739 USA

Website homepage: www.postharvest.org

Mobile phone: (916) 708-7218 

 Replies to Dr. Hector Malleta,

It is indeed a very lively exchange of information! I think that this is a result of our desire to find solutions to the world's most pressing problems.

As far as I know,  the highest confidence level for scientific researches is 99% and the lowest margin of error is 1%. This means that all researches, have the probability/chance that they can also be factually wrong.  I believe we do need to consider this fact.I have never read or heard about a research that is 100% true all the time and I would be interested to know about it if there is any, with regards to this matter.

I. These are the following data for cereals and total agricultural production:

 A. In my april6 post, I cited the  March 6, 2015 ICCG webinar presentation and  it’s link. To be more precise, I have attached a word file. I took a screen shot of the data presented by professor Alberto Garrido CEIGRAM (Research for the Management of Agricultural and Environmental Risks)  Universidad Politecnica de Madrid. Here I can see, that the growth rate of cereals are changing and not steadily rising since 1961.   Here is a direct link: http://www.iccgov.org/FilePagineStatiche/Files/EVENTS/Seminars/6march2015/Garrido_2015_FEEM_ICCG_Webinar_6_march_2015.pdf

B.) Another is from IFPRI.  The data for this is also  in the word file. Link: http://www.ifpri.org/gfpr/2012/agricultural-productivity

C) Another is from International Journal of Rural Development- “OECD-FAO experts expect lower global agricultural production growth. Production short falls, price volatility and trade disruption remain a threat to global food security.”-http://www.rural21.com/english/news/detail/article/lower-global-agricultural-production-growth-expected-0000752/

D) FAO Document- “In recent years the growth rates of world agricultural  production and crop yields have slowed. This has raised fears that the world may not be able to grow enough food and other commodities to ensure that future populations are adequately fed.”(http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/y3557e/y3557e03.htm)

II. Climate Change is one of the planetary boundaries that has been already exceeded. This means that it has a negative impact on the resilience of the earth system procecesses that could destabilize the earth, as a whole.  This is according to the Planetary Boundaries Framework of Johan Rockstrom,et. al. "The Planetary Boundaries framework was first launched in 2009. Behind the  framework lies over 50 years of international scientific effort to understand  physical climate, geochemical and ecological processes and their driving forces"-http://www.stockholmresilience.org/download/18.6d8f5d4d14b32b2493577/14…

Here is a link to the updated version of the paper http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/1259855

Some  of organizations/people, that recognize/support the Planetary Boundaries Framework:

*WBCSD- http://www.wbcsd.org/work-program/capacity-building/sdmi/src.aspx

*IISD- On the 2009- year historical timeline :https://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/sd_timeline_2012.pdf

* Kate Raworth- Author of Doughnut Economics-http://www.kateraworth.com/about/

*The Ministry of the Environment of Finland, in cooperation with Sweden,   Norway, Denmark, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and  Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC), organized an international workshop  “Planetary boundaries and environmental tipping points: What do they mean for sustainable development and the global agenda?” on 4-5 November 2013 in Geneva, Switzerland".-http://www.ym.fi/planetaryboundaries