Forum global sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition (Forum FSN)

To complete my previous answer:

FAO seeks to accelerate transformation of agrifood systems to be more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable as a mean to achieve the 2030 agenda.

What and how can CSOs contribute to such transformation to boost impact on the ground? Please suggest concrete actions.

- Also, I would like to add that CSO often possess technical expertise that is very much sought at the ministry of agriculture but also environment (e.g., related to agroecology, agrobiodiversity, seeds and human rights specifically in agriculture context).

Based on your partnering experience, can you share a good example of meaningful engagement with FAO or another UN agency/development partner? Please highlight what/why it worked well in your opinion. - Apart from the National Office FAO in Moldova, our organization has been successfully collaborating with FAO REU.

FAO seeks to accelerate transformation of agrifood systems to be more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable as a mean to achieve the 2030 agenda. What and how can CSOs contribute to such transformation to boost impact on the ground?  Please suggest concrete actions.

CSOs have been developing expertise in agroecology-related issues for the past decades. We know the small scale food producers, what they do and how they do. We can help to build links between them and all other components for the development of regenerative, efficient inclusive and resilient agriculture and food systems. Some examples are: developing local seed production systems which joins small scale producers on one hand, and academia on the other, the later ensuring quality of seeds; also helping to organise small scale food producers in cooperatives and linking them both to consumers and to HoReCa sector; lastly but not the least, we can help organise community agroecology schools which besides farmer to farmer knowledge sharing also include experts in related fields. To do all this, CSOs need to develop a sustainable financial model which will help to gradually move from donor-based functioning to self-sufficiency.  

Climate change threatens our ability to ensure global food security, eradicate poverty and achieve sustainable development. What FAO and CSOs could maximize collective impact to adapt and/or mitigate climate change? 

As a CSO we have been promoting regenerative landscaping for food production based on ecological principles. As mentioned above, agroecology schools involving local biologists and ecologists who help to design edible landscape that is in harmony with nature, including regenerating forests, rivers, ponds and all other elements that help to build climate resilience. Moreover, our work on agrobiodiversity with farmers seeds is helping farmers to select varieties which are more adapted to local climate, and helps to ensure food and nutrition security.

Based on your partnering experience, can you share a good example of meaningful engagement with FAO or another UN agency/development partner? Please highlight what/why it worked well in your opinion.  

Our organization has been successfully collaborating with FAO both at national and regional scale on such subjects as agroecology, permaculture, farmers seeds and Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture. We have co-organised conferences, consultations, raising awareness campaign and fostered collaboration of small scale food producers and academia. It has been working well because FAO sees us as a valuable and knowledgable partner who they can trust. Moreover, the priorities of FAO coincide with the ones of our NGO, and therefore our efforts become more effective in achieving common goals. 

At present, what are the most significant challenges CSOs face in their engagement with FAO?  What could FAO do to address some of those challenges? Please provide concrete examples. 

FAO always reminds us that it is inter-governmental and therefore, the requests must come from our governments. The reality is, that our governments not always realise the importance and the added value of our (CSO) work unlike FAO which is well aware of it. For this reason, sometimes FAO could help us by raising awareness of the decision makers about the possibilities of collaboration with CSO and the potential of our organisations in doing a good work in the field. 

FAO seeks to accelerate the transformation of agrifood systems to be more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable as a mean to achieve the 2030 agenda. 

What and how can CSOs contribute to such transformation to boost impact on the ground?  Please suggest concrete actions.

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have a crucial role to play in driving the transformation of agrifood systems in the MENA region, including Jordan, towards greater efficiency, inclusivity, resilience, and sustainability. Their partnership with organizations like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other stakeholders can have a substantial impact on the ground.

One avenue for CSOs to make a difference is by bolstering Farmer-Based Organizations (FBOs). By supporting the establishment and capacity building of these grassroots entities, CSOs can empower smallholder farmers. These efforts include providing FBOs with access to resources, training, and technology, thereby improving farming practices and enhancing their ability to adapt to climate change.

CSOs can also contribute to the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices in collaboration with local farmers and FAO. Initiatives such as advocating for organic farming, crop rotation, and agroecology can be advanced through training sessions and workshops. These educational efforts help farmers adopt more sustainable and climate-smart techniques.

Addressing food security is another vital role for CSOs. Collaborating with FAO, CSOs can implement projects aimed at improving food security and reducing food waste within the MENA region. CSOs can also advocate for policies that ensure equitable access to nutritious food, particularly for vulnerable populations.

Gender inclusion is a critical aspect of agrifood system transformation. CSOs can champion gender-inclusive policies and practices, ensuring that women have equal access to resources, training, and decision-making opportunities. These efforts extend to supporting women's participation in agriculture and entrepreneurship through tailored training and capacity-building programs.

To build resilience against climate change, CSOs can partner with FAO to implement climate-resilient farming practices, facilitating communities' adaptation to changing climatic conditions. These collaborations also involve raising awareness about the significance of climate-smart agriculture and sustainable water management.

Access to finance is often a bottleneck for small-scale farmers and agribusinesses. CSOs can assist in bridging this gap by helping these stakeholders access financial resources, including microloans and grants, which can be invested in improving operations and productivity. Establishing partnerships with financial institutions to develop customized financial products for the agrifood sector is another fruitful avenue for CSOs.

Data and research are essential to informed decision-making. CSOs can undertake research and data collection to identify key challenges and opportunities within the MENA region's agrifood sector. By sharing research findings with FAO and other stakeholders, CSOs can contribute to evidence-based policies and programs.

CSOs can also serve as advocates for policies that promote sustainability and inclusivity within agrifood systems at local, national, and regional levels. Engaging in dialogues with government authorities helps influence policy decisions to align them with the 2030 Agenda.

Education and training are fundamental to capacity building. CSOs can offer training and extension services to farmers and rural communities, covering topics such as improved crop management, post-harvest handling, and marketing skills. Additionally, fostering knowledge-sharing networks among farmers enables the exchange of best practices.

Collaboration is at the heart of transformation. CSOs can partner with other CSOs, government agencies, international organizations, and private sector stakeholders to leverage resources and expertise. Facilitating multi-stakeholder dialogues and partnerships promotes integrated approaches to agrifood system transformation.

To ensure the effectiveness of their initiatives, CSOs must establish mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating their impact, ensuring accountability and continuous improvement.

Lastly, CSOs can engage with young people to promote their involvement in agriculture and entrepreneurship. Supporting youth-led initiatives and providing mentorship and training opportunities contribute to building a sustainable future for agrifood systems.

In sum, through these concrete actions, CSOs can collaborate with FAO and other stakeholders to accelerate the transformation of agrifood systems in the MENA region. This collaborative effort aims to make these systems more efficient, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable, ultimately contributing significantly to achieving the 2030 Agenda and reducing socio-economic inequality.

Addressing socio-economic inequality and working towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is a complex and challenging task. Collaboration between international organizations like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) is crucial to regain momentum and make progress, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, including Jordan. Here are some steps they can take:

1. Identify Common Goals: FAO and CSOs should identify shared objectives related to reducing socio-economic inequality and promoting sustainable development. This could involve creating a joint strategy or roadmap to align their efforts.

2. Data and Analysis: Collaborate on comprehensive data collection and analysis to understand the specific challenges and root causes of inequality in the MENA region and Jordan. This can help in evidence-based decision-making and resource allocation.

3. Policy Advocacy: CSOs can play a crucial role in advocating for policy changes at the national and regional levels. FAO can provide technical expertise and data to support CSOs in their advocacy efforts. Jointly, they can push for policies that promote inclusive and sustainable development.

4. Capacity Building: FAO can provide training and capacity-building programs to strengthen the capabilities of local CSOs. This could include helping them acquire the skills needed for effective project management, data analysis, and advocacy.

5. Partnerships with Governments: Engage with governments in the MENA region, including Jordan, to ensure they prioritize SDGs and take concrete actions to reduce inequality. FAO can leverage its relationships with governments, while CSOs can hold them accountable.

6. Community Engagement: CSOs often have a grassroots presence. They can work at the community level to engage with marginalized and vulnerable populations, ensuring that their voices are heard, and their needs are addressed.

7. Innovation and Technology: Explore innovative solutions and technologies that can help address inequality and improve agricultural practices. FAO can provide expertise in this area, while CSOs can help implement these solutions on the ground.

8. Resource Mobilization: Collaborate on fundraising efforts. FAO may have access to international funding sources, while CSOs can tap into local and regional resources. Together, they can pool resources to implement projects aimed at reducing inequality.

9. Monitoring and Evaluation: Establish a robust system for monitoring and evaluating the impact of joint initiatives. Regular assessments will help determine what works and what needs adjustment.

10. Information Sharing and Transparency: Maintain open communication channels and ensure transparency in all activities. This builds trust between FAO and CSOs and fosters a productive partnership.

11. Education and Awareness: Collaborate on educational campaigns to raise awareness about the SDGs and the importance of reducing inequality. This can include workshops, seminars, and public outreach.

In summary, FAO and CSOs can work together effectively by aligning their goals, leveraging each other's strengths, and focusing on a collaborative, evidence-based approach. The key is to create a partnership that is mutually beneficial and results-oriented, ultimately contributing to the SDGs and reducing socio-economic inequality in the MENA region, including Jordan.

The following are my answers to the Guiding Questions:

1. How can FAO and CSOs work together to regain the momentum lost and work jointly to "leave no one behind”?

CSOs today represent different groups and stakeholders than was the case in the past decade. CSOs are no longer restricted to associations, academic institutions, or professional groups. For the FAO to work jointly with CSOs to leave no one behind, it needs to identify clearly which CSOs are most active in the FAO's lines of work, and which are the ones that contribute positively to the objectives of the FAO. It is my experience that many global CSOs have converged to political action to enjoy UN backing and funding for their activities and participatory actions. It is therefore difficult to consider that a certain CSO is a contributor to the future of the SDGs, as an example, just because it calls itself a research entity or a think tank. The FAO needs to identify the level of partnership with each CSO based on contributing elements in the work of the FAO and to assess the synergies or the mutual outcomes that are sought by each CSO. As an example, the objective of reaching zero hunger outcomes is not only by addressing the causes of socio-economic inequality through assessments and political mainstreaming activities but more so by identifying “joint” programs of work that transform the entire systems of work towards a zero-hunger destination jointly and integrally by the FAO and CSOs individually and collectively. If partnerships provide the answer, then a partnership on food security, as an example, should have a thematic identity and functional values towards jointly charted milestones.

2. What and how can CSOs contribute to such transformation to boost impact on the ground?

CSOs that have survived global conditions and are in their current standing considered CSOs are mostly representatives of groups seeking to make a radical change to situations that cannot be tolerated any longer. Therefore, today’s CSOs are initiative takers, program creators, and project undertakers as well as actors of principled agendas. CSOs of interest are the push rather than the pull actors. They need to initiate specific policies and program objectives based on their understanding of the FAO’s strategic framework of actions and approach the FAO to negotiate joint modalities that can achieve results for both the FAO and CSO of interest.

In the food security area, for example, CSOs should be regional actors seeking to develop pathways to contribute to the food security strategies for each country in the region and the entire region. A local or a national actor would find interest in participating and bringing contributions from the local or national stakeholders only when the local or national interests are met at the regional table. For example, in food security policy research, which is carried out to develop food manufacturing projects, CSOs are successful in their transformation initiatives when a program of work involves all actors and produces shared outcomes. If a project is initiated in a certain country of the region, the entire group of countries in that region know and can relate to the outputs of that project knowing that the desired impact is fully regionally shared.

The best that CSOs can deliver to the agrifood systems transformation is by improving their capacities to involve and to reach out to every stakeholder in their ecosystem of work.

3. What FAO and CSOs could maximize collective impact to adapt and/or mitigate climate change?

CSOs should be technically enabled to contribute to anticipatory activities to be part of the response. Climate change is seriously taking economies to unfavorable positions. The set of activities involving the entire food supply chain should become a shared responsibility. CSOs need to be connected with the FAO through some functionality to allow for expedient actions in project undertaking and outcome monitoring. Putting CSOs at the heart of climate action along with the FAO is by creating an enabling mechanism that provides opportunities for CSOs to be effective actors in climate disasters and planned response.

The expression ’collective impact’ to adapt and/or mitigate climate change is argumentative. Today, countries are faced with climate risks associated with health risks and economic challenges. Food shortages resulting from a climate crisis could be affecting market supply or access to logistical support. CSOs can help provide spot solutions to solve particular cases in the crisis. However, CSOs, for example, cannot in flood disasters or earthquakes elevate the crisis response planning to the macroeconomic levels and wait for policymakers to interact with national actors to take measures at the national or macro levels. CSOs should be better equipped to serve in the immediate response and to be part of the humanitarian machinery on the ground to respond. Eventually, CSOs will be part of the macro-level response to achieve the collective impact factors, but they need to be quick in having the capacities to participate in the immediate response measures on the ground.

4. Based on your partnering experience, can you share a good example of meaningful engagement with FAO or another UN agency/development partner?

Unfortunately, except for being a member of the FAO’s Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum) since 2019, I was not and I am not part of any partnering experience with the FAO, but based on my daily observations of the FAO’s activities in the world and in my region, the specialized training and capacity building that FAO provides to stakeholders, through partnering CSOs and national/local government organizations, is exemplary. At the level of other UN agencies, the partnering work practiced by UNCTAD, as an example, is excellent. The consultations that UNCTAD conducts reach all stakeholders and generate constructive feedback from any stakeholder UNCTAD wishes to reach out to. I am referring to consultations that are preceded by papers and briefings, that are conducted through workshops or conferences, that address specific issues, and that ensure that each partnering CSO has contributed to the consultation. In my case, as an independent practitioner, not affiliated with any local or national CSO, UNCTAD ensures that I am invited to participate and to be part of the consultation activity.

5. At present, what are the most significant challenges CSOs face in their engagement with FAO? What could FAO do to address some of those challenges?

CSOs that are institutional actors need the necessary funding to carry out activities and to engage with the FAO. If the funding barrier is addressed, that takes care of one of the most significant challenges. However, there are greater challenges for CSOs to engage with the FAO. I find the most pressing is in the National System of Innovation (NSI). Today, the NSI in any country stands in the middle between the economic performance of a country and its position in the SDGs, especially in climate change and food security. If the CSO is not in one way or another positioned rightly in the NSI, the CSO is far from being able to engage efficiently with the FAO. The future of national and sub-national food security action plans of a country depends greatly on the local economic capacity of the country. In other words, the ability of a country to strengthen local economic inputs and outputs towards food security strategic interests opens opportunities for CSOs to innovate approaches to partner and engage with an organization like the FAO. The FAO should consider that particular note about strengthening local economic capacity towards achieving goals in the agrifood ecosystem.

Rasim S. Abderrahim

First of all, let me show surprise, if not appall, at thelanguage used in the intro: “…validity of the Strategy as the formal corporate documentguiding FAO-CSO engagement”.   Says a lot… You are asking us to identify andunderstand the opportunities and challenges for better and more transformativeengagement between FAO and [with] CSOs. 

1. To date, the efforts towards SDGs have not succeeded in reducing socio-economic inequality within and between countries.

Agree

How can FAO and CSOs work together to regain the momentum lost and work jointly to "leave no one behind”?

First of all, here: What does it really mean to ‘leave no one behind’, as the SDGs proclaim? 

Communities are not forgetfully left behind! It is the neoliberal policies that systematically exclude them. [Is there thus enough time to regain momentum…?]. The UN, FAO very much included, is clearly helping to establish ‘stakeholder capitalism’ as a governance model for the entire planet. The language of stakeholders is dishonest. It attempts to remove politics and interests from the analysis by blocking any distinctions in people's relationship to the fields of agriculture, food, nutrition and many other --and you are taking money from corporates! [As a cat lover, I have long experience observing the interactions between cats and birds or small rodents.  All are stakeholders in these interactions, but the birds and rodents have far more ‘at stake’]. FAO simply has to, better late than never, look at the SDGs from a human rights framework perspective --something the SDGs did not do. In that sense, let us be honest, FAO is not listening to public interest CSOs. Our inputs are ignored. [The CSIPM in the CFS was a welcome change, but now, we are not listened to. It has been frustrating].

2. FAO seeks to accelerate transformation of agrifood systems to be more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable as a mean to achieve the 2030 agenda. 

Disagree

Let us ask what does FAO understand by agrifood system. (Efficiency is a term used by corporate agriculture). Certainly not what PICSOS have been asking for over a decade. How convenient for FAO to mention agroecology ‘passing by’ (and that is where the resilience and sustainability resides) and in the case of food sovereignty, not even mentioning it. Do remember that PICSOs decided not to back the Voluntary Guidelines on Food Systems and withdrew: too many of our red lights were ignored --where is the inclusiveness? Well, we will not achieve the 2030 Agenda: You still have hopes?)

What and how can CSOs contribute to such transformation to boost impact on the ground? 

Please suggest concrete actions. Why only on the ground? The ground is our PICSOs’ turf, and we bring the feelings and demands of millions to you at FAO: to what avail?  (See above) We carried out comprehensive regional consultations that we shared with you. We cannot find much in final resolutions. Well, countries rendered rich in the North have a way to eclipse us (and eclipse is a generous term…).  

3. Climate change threatens our ability to ensure global food security, eradicate poverty and achieve sustainable development.

Agree  

What FAO and CSOs actions could maximize collective impact to adapt and/or mitigate climate change?

Probably none right now. The problem is with fossil fuels discontinuation and a transition to a democratic green economy (plus plus) all terribly linked to transnational corporations and powerful lobbies. What can FAO and PICSOs do that is not just a bunch of pat solutions when the problem is clearly upstream? Brings me back to the neoliberalism I mentioned above. Way more mass mobilization is needed --and we are at it.  

4. Based on your partnering experience, can you share a good example of meaningful engagement with FAO or another UN agency/development partner? Please highlight what/why it worked well in your opinion.

Well, you can see from the above that our ‘partnership’ has been quite uneven and unsuccessful, and so are other ‘partnerships’ where partners are not on an even playing field --like cat and the rodent… Take the SUN Initiative, which FAO backstops and that promotes public-private partnerships. We note SUN says that addressing “conflicts of interest should initially start from a positive perspective, not from negative assumptions,” (Wow!) thereby ignoring that conflicts of interest represent a risk to be controlled. SUN’s Secretariat also says that “tools to manage conflicts of interest should serve as a mechanism to enable, rather than prevent partnerships.” (Hmm!) But in fact, managing conflicts of interest typically requires restricting those partnerships and activities that are full of conflicts of interest. There is a lack of clear standards to preclude engagement or requiring termination when non-state actors come in with significant conflicts of interest. (Even the IMF and World Bank have warned public-private partnerships (PPPs) “incur contingent fiscal risks”). In short, I wish I had a current, good example of meaningful engagement with FAO or another UN agency/development partner. (Ayayay!)  

5. At present, what are the most significant challenges CSOs face in their engagement with FAO?  What could FAO do to address some of those challenges? Please provide concrete examples.

We want to be partners at an even level, and we are not. You use us to say we participate in decision making, but we do not. I think the bulk of the challenge is with you, not us. We are much more transparent than you. (We even cannot access the sources of your external funding). What is this consultation then going to achieve? I am a realist. Terribly little if any --depending on what responses business friendly (or controlled) NGOS will contribute. Your hands are tied. Can you meet us at least half-way? Good intentions are not the way to heaven.  

ClaudioSchuftan, Ho Chi Minh City

I would be so glad to contribute to the consultation. I will represent young farmers from Tajikistan.

* After graduation school, more than 99 % will try to be an engineer, and IT, an economics or a doctor. This is so tragic statistic.

Junto con mi Fundación Hambrunas y Gorditos - Ingeniería TIC & SaaS, aportamos a 5 de los ODS

Together with my Hunger and Gorditos Foundation - ICT & SaaS Engineering, we contribute to 5 of the SDGs:

SAO #1

SAO #2

SAO #3

SAO #4

ODS # 12

Señores FAO. / Dear FAO

Junto con mi Fundación me he dedicado a la Prevencion a muerte de seres humanos por hambre, con los componentes de Antropometria -patrones OMS, conteo al consumo para determinar excesos o deficiencias como causa de morbimortalidad, incidencia y prevalencia, geo referencia, geo localización y salud mental entre otros.

------------------------------------

With my foundation I have worked on preventing hunger-related deaths. With anthropometric components and World Health Organization (WHO) standards, we identify excesses/deficiencies as a cause of morbidity and mortality, incidence and prevalence, geo-reference, geo-location and mental health, among others.

----------------------------------------------

ICBF https://www.mapadehambre.com/ICBF-CartaHambrunas&Gorditos.pdf

FAO https://www.mapadehambre.com/pdf-fao.pdf

SDS    www.mapadehambre.com/pdf-concepto.pdf

Ejemplos

Consulta de Nutrientes https://www.mapadehambre.com/w-consuco.html

Composición de Alimentos https://www.mapadehambre.com/w-consu.html 

Mapeando consumos a 108 nutrientes aplicando RIEN de Colombia y recomendaciones de 7 países de habla hispana, por 7 niveles geográficos Global, pais, departamento, ciudad, zona, ubicación e individuo

-----------------------------------------------------

We apply the Colombian Energy and Nutrient Intake Recommendations (known in Spanish as RIEN) and the recommendations from 7 Spanish speaking countries. We map the consumption of 108 nutrients at 7 geographical levels (global, country, department, city, zone, location and individual).

----------------------------------------------------

Ejemplos:

Proteínas globales

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NG00004112244.HTML

País 

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NP00004112313.HTML

Departamento

https://www.mapadehambre.com/ND00004112333.HTML

ciudad

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NC00004112346.HTML

zona

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NZ00004112402.HTML

Ubicación 

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NU00004112419.HTML

calcio

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NG00021112444.HTML

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NP00021112518.HTML

https://www.mapadehambre.com/ND00021112536.HTML

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NC00021112552.HTML

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NZ00021112610.HTML

https://www.mapadehambre.com/NU00021112627.HTML

Espero contribuir y dejar un mundo mejor. 

Fundación Hambrunas y Gorditos - Ingeniería TIC & SaaS

www.mapadehambre.com

-

, 

1: Leaving no one behind: MCLD comprises more than 2,000 local civil society groups, nearly all of whom are in Africa. The biggest obstacle to their participation with FAO is their lack of flexible funding allowing them to attend meetings. This is particularly true of grassroots rural women farmers' organizations. As pointed out in many studies, less than 2% of DAC tagged gender ODA reaches grassroots women's organizations. Building up federations of these organizations in each country could make an enormous difference.

A huge shift in civil society today is "decolonizing" - shifting away from dependence on INGOs or even capital-city based national CSOs to community-based organizations. Similarly, COVID and Climate Change have illustrated the vital importance of shifting to locally-led food system, as well as the adoption of the Principles of Locally-led Adaptation. Again, women are in the lead in both these areas yet are often the minority of participants in consultations.

We've discovered that even within a district, travel is expensive. Internet access is expanding. Establishing simple sub-district video conferencing facilities for hybrid consultations – possibly in partnership with local governments, schools or other existing physical infrastructure – could ensure people's voices are heard. These need cost no more than $1000 for a hotspot, mini-pc, 40" monitor, webcam and jabra speaker and could be used across all sectors - health, education, nutrition as well as agriculture.

During COVID, MCLD applied these techniques to link community leaders to WHO and ACDC experts, including simultaneous interpretation. We could do the same with FAO.

2. I wrote a short piece on this for the Food Systems Summit: https://mcld.org/2021/03/31/systems-thinking-for-community-led-food-systems/

3. FAO should join more than 100 civil society organizations, UNDP and others in endorsing the Principles for Locally Led Adaptation. See https://www.wri.org/initiatives/locally-led-adaptation/principles-locally-led-adaptation

4. The toughest challenges are humanitarian emergencies. Unicef, WFP and others have mobilized local actors through the use of streamlined pooled funds able to release small grants for collective action. Traditional funding and compliance imposed impractical demands on CBOs.

5. Most significant challenge is the lack of flexible funding. FAO could establish flexible funding for grassroots women's organizations similar to the Equality Fund or the work of the African Women's Development Foundation.