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

HLPE-FSN:

I begin by congratulating all co-authors, as integrating this wealth of information is no small feat. I am confident that this report will mark a watershed in the transformation of food systems.

I offer some suggestions for your consideration:

Section 6.5.4: It may be beneficial to discuss how public food procurement systems can serve as a market price benchmark, thereby helping to mitigate speculation in crisis contexts, akin to what was observed during the pandemic. Additionally, these systems could act as a distribution channel for food assistance programs aimed at the most vulnerable populations.

Section 1.4: It is imperative to acknowledge that the food system cannot be fully understood without considering its interplay with other major systems (referred to in the draft as urbanization), but a more detailed specification is needed to clarify the point. Relevant systems to mention include transportation, land ownership, water rights for agricultural production, housing, water supply and sanitation, education, and healthcare. This concept aligns with Aromar Revi's notion of a "system of systems," where social, economic, and biophysical dimensions converge.

Chapter 2: In discussions on demographics, it is essential to delve deeper into migration as both a cause and consequence of food insecurity. Furthermore, the language used should convey a greater sense of urgency regarding the climate crisis.

Section 3.3: National-level, representative data is required to understand Food Away From Home (FAFH) in many countries. The systematic reviews already identified primarily include high-income countries. An alternative source of data could be national income and expenditure surveys, though they often lack information on this aspect, as is the case in Mexico. Issuing a recommendation to low- and middle-income countries in this regard could be significant. Additionally, I suggest moving away from the binary developed vs. developing country terminology when referring to nations, as it is a limited perspective that we must transcend, especially when the discussion pertains solely to economic development. As an alternative, consider adopting the World Bank's income-based classification: high-income countries, upper-middle-income countries, lower-middle-income countries, and low-income countries.

Regarding the retail section: It is important to note that convenience stores, which have formed large chains, are unequivocally part of the modern system. The relatively small size of each of their economic units belies the sophisticated logistics and distribution system behind them, hence their ability to displace traditional retail. On convenience stores, it would be beneficial to report their absolute and relative growth estimates in Mexico, referencing more recent and impactful publications (e.g., Hernández-F, M., Figueroa, J. L., & Colchero, M. A.. Association between density of stores and purchases of ultra-processed food and sugar-sweetened beverages in Mexico. Health & Place 2021, 68, 102528).

Complexity aspects: To go beyond the HLPE 2017's modern/traditional/mixed system classification, consider including complexity aspects. For instance, various companies have organized retail schemes based on the informal labor market, as observed in Mexico

Dear Svetlana Livinets,

I am reaching out today on behalf of the New York City Mayor's Office of Food Policy.

Our team has thoroughly reviewed the V0 draft of the HLPE-FSN Report #19 and compiled our feedback into a comprehensive document. 

To ensure our insights are considered, I have attached the feedback document. We sincerely hope that you can incorporate our valuable input into the ongoing consultation process.

Our office has invested significant effort in providing insightful and constructive feedback, and it would be regrettable if our contributions were not taken into consideration. We appreciate your understanding of the urgency of this matter and your prompt attention to our submission.

Thank you for your cooperation, and we look forward to the successful completion of the HLPE-FSN Report #19.

If there is anything additional I can do to facilitate the consideration of our submission, please do not hesitate to reach out.

Thank you

Natalie Wright

Intern,

Mayor’s Office of Food Policy

4. Is there additional quantitative or qualitative data that should be included? Are there other references, publications, or traditional or different kind of knowledges, which should be considered?

NYC supports community gardens and urban farms, empowering residents to actively participate in food production, fostering a sense of agency and ownership. Additionally, the recently released Food

Education Roadmap reflects the City’s commitment to bolstering food literacy and nutrition education. Sixty schools were each awarded $11,000 in grant money to support the expansion of nutrition education.

​​​​​​​c) Efforts to Enhance the Right to Food:

Various city-wide programs work to ensure that vulnerable populations have access to nutritious food during times of need, promoting the right to food. In 2022, 854,000 Health bucks, worth over $1.7 million, were distributed as a SNAP incentive. The supply gap decreased in 114 neighborhoods from 2021 to 2022. Over 1 million New Yorkers live within a half mile of a FRESH market. Additionally, $4.9 million in grants were distributed to improve access to all benefits enrollment, and there were 2,228 Groceries to Go participants.

​​​​​​​d) Circular Economy and Climate Change Adaptation:

The NYC Compost Project focuses on composting organic waste, contributing to a circular economy, reducing landfill waste, and addressing climate change through sustainable waste management. The city manages 230,000 acres in forest management plans, allocating $150M to preserve farms and forests from development through the Watershed Agricultural Council.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​e) National and Local Government Collaboration:

The NYC Mayor's Office of Food Policy collaborates with various city agencies, local organizations, and communities to develop and implement comprehensive food policies that address urban food challenges. Notable achievements include NYC being the first U.S. city to join the Cool Food Pledge, launching the NYC Plant-Powered Carbon Challenge to reduce private sector food emissions by 25% by 2030, winning the Milan Pact Award in 2022 for the Good Food Purchasing Framework, and presenting at the C40 Food Network Webinar in 2023 about the city's work on food in hospitals. In 2018, New York City became the first city in the world to directly report to the United Nations on local progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals and was the first entity to present at the NYS Food as Medicine Coalition.

Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation involves several key strategies:  PART 1

1. Promote Urban Agriculture: Encourage city dwellers to engage in farming activities. This can include community gardens, rooftop gardens, and vertical farming. These practices not only provide fresh produce but also help in greening urban areas.

2. Develop Local Food Networks: Build connections between urban consumers and rural producers. This can include farmers' markets and community-supported agriculture programs, which ensure a steady market for farmers and access to fresh food for urban residents.

3. Enhance Supply Chain Efficiency: Improve transportation and storage facilities to minimize food loss and ensure that fresh produce reaches urban markets quickly and in good condition.

4. Educational Programs: Implement educational initiatives to teach urban residents about nutrition, food preparation, and the benefits of locally sourced food. [This is a high quality online education program coming up that could totally foster advancement in urban communities to include household cultivation and incentives for such, and community for such a]  [This is our Nutritional Diversity educational platform that we have worked to develop however reaching mass exposure has been rough! b]

5. Policy Support and Investment: Governments and local authorities need to support urban agriculture through policies, funding, and research. This includes zoning for urban farming and providing financial incentives.

6. Incorporate Technology: Use modern technologies like hydroponics and aquaponics in urban farming, which are efficient in space and resource usage.

7. Food Waste Management: Implement strategies for reducing food waste and recycling organic waste into compost for urban agriculture. Community compost is where all of this starts.

By integrating these approaches, urban and peri-urban food systems can be strengthened to better address the challenges of food security and nutrition in rapidly urbanizing and transforming societies.

The most effective way will be education on a better diet, the Nutritional Diversity diet specifically will create the demand for better food systems in the city, and this demand will fuel the change.

Dear Co Facilitators, please see the Private Sector Mechanism Comments on the VO Draft Report

Introduction

PSM thanks the HLPE-FSN for the VO draft Report on strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation and for the opportunity to share its views on the draft.

Guiding Questions

1. The V0 draft introduces a conceptual framework informed by key principles established in previous HLPE-FSN reports (HLPE, 2017; HLPE, 2020).

i. Do you find the proposed framework effective to highlight and discuss the key issues concerning urban and peri-urban food systems?

ii. Is this a useful conceptual framework to provide practical guidance for policymakers?

iii. Can you offer suggestions for examples to illustrate and facilitate the operationalization of the conceptual framework to address issues relevant for FSN?

Response:

The report effectively highlights the profound impact of urbanization on food security and nutrition, emphasizing the increasing urban population, especially in developing countries. This comprehensive approach provides a valuable foundation for understanding the challenges and opportunities in urban and peri-urban food systems. It is a long overdue discussion and assessment of how urban and peri-urban agriculture can significantly contribute to food and nutrition security and will help to demonstrate how we accomplish multiple SDG’s through these innovative collaborations. It is a useful conceptual framework for policy makers new to the subject and issue areas, however there should be greater emphasis in the language and descriptive overview of the opportunities and threats. Focusing on examples of already successful agricultural collaborations taking place across the urban and peri-urban landscapes will help readers visualize the impacts of edible landscapes at all scales and dimensions.

Some additional areas to be covered are:

a) Demographic Shift and Pressures on Food Systems

The report should explicitly address the impact of growing youth migration to urban areas, recognizing it as a pivotal demographic shift. Comprehensive coverage of the issue should encompass the implications of this migration on urban and peri-urban food systems, emphasizing the need for strategies to meet the heightened demand for food in urban areas in the context of limited urban agricultural land. Moreover, heightened demand in urban areas also results in a reduced ability in rural areas to meet such increases.

b) Inequalities and Vulnerabilities in Urban Food Systems

While the report rightly emphasizes inequalities between physical access in urban food systems, additional attention should be given to the vulnerabilities exacerbated by lack of transportation, basic service access, inadequate housing, and land disparities, especially in urban slums and peripheral areas. The report should provide insights into how these factors contribute to the fragility of urban food systems, particularly in disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

c) Resilience to Climate Change and Sustainable Practices

The report should delve deeper into strategies required for urban and peri-urban food systems to build resilience to climate change impacts. This includes a comprehensive exploration of sustainable urban agriculture practices, with specific recommendations for initiatives such as providing land access, composting facilities, education to residents for local food production and access to renewable low-cost energy. Further, the report should address how urban agriculture can support biodiversity as an important aspect of climate resilience.

d. Circular Economy Principles and Collaborative Initiatives

Policymakers should be urged to advocate for resource efficiency through integrated solutions that reduce waste and energy consumption. As per the FAO Framework for the Urban Food Agenda, optimized supply chains and circular bioeconomy contribute to a reduction of food losses and waste in urban centers. The report should provide concrete examples of circular economy principles within urban and peri-urban food systems and recommendations for fostering collaboration among diverse stakeholders.

e. Water Management and Waste Reduction Strategies

A more detailed examination of strategies balancing urban water needs with agriculture is essential. The report should include specific recommendations for efficient water management in urban and peri-urban areas. Furthermore, a comprehensive exploration of food waste reduction strategies, recycling, and resource  

reuse should be provided to address both environmental and economic concerns.

f) Governance, Policies, and the Food-Energy-Water Nexus Approach

The report should emphasize the significance of effective governance, regulations, and policies in addressing urban and peri-urban food system challenges. A specific recommendation is to elaborate on the practical implementation of the "Food-Energy-Water Nexus" approach, providing policymakers with actionable insights to make informed decisions.

g) Incentives, Monitoring, and Data Collection

Policymakers must play a proactive role in fostering collaboration and incentivizing sustainable practices. The report should provide specific recommendations for policymakers, such as strategically locating urban food hubs to reduce transportation energy consumption, promoting water-efficient farming practices, and providing financial incentives or grants for businesses and individuals adopting sustainable practices. Robust data collection and monitoring systems should be emphasized for evidence-based policy decisions.

2. The report adopts the broader definition of food security (proposed by the HLPE-FSN in 2020), which includes six dimensions of food security: availability, access, utilization, stability, agency and sustainability.

i. Does the V0 draft cover sufficiently the implications of this broader definition in urban and peri-urban food systems?

Response:

The report provides an in-depth exploration of urban and peri-urban food security and nutrition and contributes to the understanding of urban and peri-urban food systems by offering a comprehensive definition. The broader definition of urban and peri-urban food systems acknowledges the intricate factors influencing food production, distribution, and consumption in urban areas, this expanded perspective brings several implications by encompassing physical aspects like agriculture and logistics and considering social, economic, and environmental dimensions. It underscores the need for holistic and interdisciplinary approaches to address the challenges of urban food systems, emphasizing the importance of stakeholder collaboration, data-driven decision-making, and adaptive governance. Moreover, it recognizes the potential for innovation and the development of resilient, sustainable, and inclusive urban food systems that can improve food security, reduce environmental impacts, and enhance the overall well-being of urban populations.

However, the report’s definition needs to refer to farmers who actually produce the food whether on a roof top, a vacant lot or inside a re-configured sea container. 

3. Are the trends/variables/elements identified in the draft report the key ones to strengthen urban and peri-urban food systems? If not, which other elements should be considered?

i. Are there any other issues concerning urban and peri-urban food systems that have not been sufficiently covered in the draft report?

ii. Are topics under- or over-represented in relation to their importance?

Response:

There are excellent and far ranging parts of the draft report which cover many of the  difficulties of producing, processing and selling food in an urban environment.  These go a long way towards exposing some of the weaknesses and chronic problems inherent in city after city. It is good to note that the report demonstrates that there can be no one size fits all system for these transformational suggestions.  The experience of the COVID19 pandemic and the multistakeholder collaboration which ensued to get food to those in need, can be used to illustrate some of what is going right with urban and peri-urban agriculture and rural agriculture and our food system and where there are vulnerabilities and significant areas of improvement for greater resilience. Showcase examples of industry adaptation and innovation under crisis. 

The need for critical infrastructure for growing crops and livestock was not well covered.  Water, soil, energy, cooling, cold storage, transportation pest control, and skilled labor, these are vital for perishable fruit and vegetable production at any scale.

Additionally, there is a limited discussion on urban governance power. The report acknowledges the paradox of cities having significant impact on food systems while simultaneously holding limited direct power over them. Expanding on this aspect, including specific examples or case studies, could provide more practical insights into how urban governance can effectively influence food systems despite these limitations.

While the report addresses the positive impacts of urbanization, it tends to generalize these benefits. A more nuanced discussion acknowledging the variable impacts of urbanization across different regions and contexts, especially the disparities between developed and developing countries, would provide a more balanced perspective.

Considering the increasing impact of climate change on food security and agriculture, the report could place greater emphasis on how urban and peri-urban food systems are affected by and can adapt to climate change. This includes discussing strategies for resilience in the face of extreme weather events, changes in crop yields, and shifts in agricultural zones, which are crucial for future-proofing urban food systems.

While urban and peri urban food systems have the potential to provide local communities with access to local food production and strengthens local economies by supporting family farmers and other local businesses, one of the biggest challenges is space and land use for production. In this regard, it is important that the HLPE report address the need for creative use of public spaces. This can include the acceleration of the safe conversion of land use from non-agricultural to agricultural purposes, for example by making the land use histories of urban spaces publicly available and making soil testing resources more easily accessible. Additionally, there should be clear legal frameworks for the use and transfer of vacant lots and public land for agriculture and investments in the unique needs of urban agriculture, including sustained soil remediation and improvement processes.

On the issue of taxation, taxing or subsidizing a single food or ingredients may not lead to an improvement in diets, since people can increase consumption of other similarly less nutritious items. It is important to fill the research gap on the impact of taxes and subsidies. All policies should be research and evidence-based. Food choices are generally not very sensitive to price changes, and food choices have many available substitutes which are not controlled for dietary impact (e.g., consumers may avoid a high-sodium packaged food because of a tax but choose to eat high-sodium food from a street vendor, with no impact on improving health).

The FAO Framework for the Urban Food Agenda demonstrates how the framework’s guiding principles; rural- urban synergies, social inclusion and equity, resilience and sustainability, food systems interconnections, contribute to all 17 SDGs.  the linkages between the SDGs and urban and peri urban food systems should be more clearly articulated.

4. Is there additional quantitative or qualitative data that should be included?

i. Are there other references, publications, or traditional or different kind of knowledges, which should be considered?

Response:

Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation requires a comprehensive and multidimensional approach. One key element for inclusion is how to empower local communities to participate in food production and decision-making. Support community-based organizations, cooperatives, and urban farming initiatives.

The good recommendations in the report speak to the need for an accessible catalog of all the best practices and innovative collaborations taking place around the world. 

5. Are there any redundant facts or statements that could be eliminated from the V0 draft?

6. Could you suggest case studies and success stories from countries that were able to strengthen urban and peri-urban food systems? In particular, the HLPE-FSN would seek contributions on:

a) evidence-based examples of successful interventions in urban and peri-urban food systems with the principles behind what made the process work;

b) efforts made to enhance agency in urban and peri-urban food systems;

c) efforts made to enhance the right to food in urban and peri-urban settings;

d) examples of circular economy and urban and peri-urban food system and climate change adaptation and mitigation, preferably beyond issues of production; and

e) examples of national and local government collaboration on urban and peri-urban food systems.

Response:

Farm to Family Food Box projects; Farm to Food Bank projects; Edible Landscape projects at all schools and universities; Farm Academies for newly arrived immigrants with agricultural background;  Veterans to Farmers projects; Youth Farm projects from FFA to 4-H and international equivalents.

Multiple agency collaboration and budget contributions that achieve multiple benefits from environment, health, hands-on education, cultural sharing and training; waste to energy; climate resilience.  

Getting food from the farm to the table and all the support and infrastructure needed to accomplish that day after day is a challenge and the report should address how to build resilience in the form of infrastructure from food safety to invasive pests/species protocols. 

Looking at new interventions and innovations from the top down and from the bottom up that can receive funding streams from unusual partners and collaborators and cross agency investment in annual budgets could be examined as ways to address these challenges.

There are several case studies and success stories from countries around the world that have successfully strengthened their urban and peri-urban food systems. These examples showcase various approaches and strategies that can serve as inspiration for other regions facing similar challenges. Here are a few notable ones:

• Singapore's Vertical Farming: with limited land available for agriculture, Singapore has invested in vertical farming and high-tech urban agriculture.
• Milan, Italy's Food Policy: Milan implemented a comprehensive Food Policy in 2015 that focuses on sustainable food systems, urban agriculture, and reducing food waste. The policy includes initiatives like the "Milan Urban Food Policy Pact," which encourages cities worldwide to adopt sustainable food policies.
• Copenhagen, Denmark's Food Sharing: Copenhagen has embraced food sharing initiatives, where surplus food from restaurants, supermarkets, and wholesalers is redistributed to those in need.
• Portland, Oregon's Urban Green Spaces: Portland has prioritized the creation of urban green spaces, including community gardens and urban farms. These spaces provide opportunities for local residents to grow their own food, fostering a sense of community and promoting sustainable food production within the city.
• Kigali, Rwanda's Urban Agriculture: Kigali has promoted urban agriculture as a means of improving food security and reducing urban poverty. Initiatives like "Hinga Weze" support small-scale urban farmers, providing training, resources, and market access.
• New York City's Green Carts: New York City launched the "Green Carts" program, which encourages the sale of fresh fruits and vegetables in underserved neighborhoods. Street vendors receive licenses to sell healthy produce, increasing access to nutritious food options in urban areas.
• Toronto, Canada's Local Food Procurement: Toronto has implemented policies to support local food procurement for public institutions, such as schools and hospitals. This has boosted demand for local agricultural products and strengthened the regional food system.
• Mumbai, India's Urban Farming: rooftop and balcony farming initiatives have gained traction..
• Circular Agriculture in Rotterdam: Rotterdam embraces circular agriculture practices, such as using food waste for urban farming and employing aquaponics. This not only reduces waste but also enhances climate resilience through sustainable practices.

Topic: Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation – V0 draft of the HLPE-FSN report #19

Background to this submission

Mothers First Contributed to the VO draft of the Inequalities work stream. In that work stream we unsuccessfully advocated for the inclusion of acute food insecurity which is extreme food insecurity and its associated nutritional outcomes in the final Inequalities Report. A link to our submission on this platform can be found here  https://www.fao.org/fsnforum/comment/11101 

Given that the mandate of the CFS and MyPOW is to reach the most food insecure and malnourished people we sought to understand why the inequalities report failed to achieve this central mandate.

Our findings are stark and show that the expertise and narrative of the CFS and the HLPE have traditionally centred around chronic hunger with its strong ties to the SOFI Report. This has created a blind spot within the CFS framework of achieving its vision to reach the most food-insecure and malnourished people in our world. 

Our policy input paper for the Open-Ended Working Group on the Policy Convergence Process for the Inequalities Report details that under the framework of SOFI, the CFS cannot fulfil its mandate of reaching the most food-insecure and malnourished people.

That input paper along with our recommendations can be found here.

https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/cfs/Docs2324/Inequalities/Inputs_on_priority_policy_areas/_Policy_input_paper_for_the_Reducing_Inequality_Workstream_by_Mothers_First.pdf

Relevance of our findings to the peri-urban VO draft

 Just as within the VO draft and the final  Inequalities Report, this report focuses on chronic hunger and its associated nutritional outcome of stunting and being overweight. Our analysis of this report provides further evidence that the CFS framework cannot achieve its mandate of reaching the most severe food insecure and malnourished. 

The attached report will focus on our analysis of the VO Draft using a keyword search of the document. We then provide an analysis of gaps beyond acute food insecurity that we feel are relevant and would be beneficial to the report.

This input paper will build on the previous submissions by taking a more in-depth look at the nutritional outcomes associated with acute malnutrition in women, adolescent girls and children. While it is generally accepted that acute malnutrition in children represented by child wasting is 30%  lower for urban than rural, nonetheless as the report points out in its only reference to wasting stands at 8% which is considered a public health concern.

We will also explore the prevalence of maternal underweight and its impacts on maternal and child nutritional outcomes. Again while the prevalence of maternal malnutrition is lower in urban than rural it remains a significant challenge with a prevalence of 15%.

Note to the HLPE CC members and the writing teams

While we unreservedly acknowledge the wealth of experience and, in many cases a lifelong commitment to alleviating hunger and malnutrition. The writing team are experts in chronic hunger, be it through fisheries, agriculture, science, economics and innovation. In this regard as a report based on the writing team's background, this is an excellent first draft.

The gaps we have identified however centre around acute food insecurity and their nutritional outcomes.which currently affects over 340 million people, equating to almost 1 in 3 people who are hungry in our world today.

Kind Regards,

Pat Mc Mahon

Mothers  First

Congratulations for this report. Beautiful and very useful work.

It provides a broad approach to food security, taking into account all its 6 dimensions, although I believe the sustainability aspect didn't get a deeper attention. Moreover I'd like to mention a couple of experiences and examples from Brazil: 

- the program LUPPA, mentioned in 5.4.2, is a civil-society led project oriented not only to be a supportive network for municipalities in Brazil but also a platform to spotlight food policy innovation (as highlighted in 5.4.3) and a enabler of food policy strategies (5.4.1). For that, within the program we've been able to observe and study several governance structures and test their usefulness, like the municipal transversal agencies for food policymaking and monitoring - Interdepartamental Chamber for Food and Nutrition Security, aka CAISAN, in its Portuguese acronym - a widespread policymaking structure in Brazil, by which several municipal offices or departments come together to plan a (ideally) coherent municipal food strategy. In LUPPA we support cities to enable their CAISANs because they represent an important institucional enabler, as mentioned in 6.4.1.

Another widespread structure present in Brazilian cities is the food policy council, usually called in Brazil by the name of Food and Nutrition Security Council (or CONSEA, in its Portuguese acronym). These councils are enabled at all federation levels (municipal, state and national) and are very important to keep the dialogue between public authorities and civil society / stakeholders. Food policy councils in Brazilian cities act not only at policy monitoring but algo in policymaking - usually they provide guidelines for the food strategy and /or to enable food-related policies, like those related to communal kitchens, urban agriculture, and food banks.

Regarding the multi-level policy coherence enabler (6.4.3) I'd like to raise awareness to the Brazilian "SISAN" - the national System for Food and Nutrition Security. SISAN was created in 2006, and besides the federal hiatus of 2019-2022, it has been evolved to, among other goals, support the dialogue and technical support among government levels for better food policymaking.

In 5.3.1 and 6.4.6, the report highlights the importance of human resource capacities and for that I want to call attention to a case study with Brazilian cities led by EMBRAPA in partnership with LUPPA ("Food and Cities", 2023, attached) in which we found that well trained and supported teams were considered the first enabler of good local food policies.

In 6.4.6 I suggest more attention should be given to the importance of local food systems diagnostics and planning and how municipal authorities and civil society organizations need technical support to better understand local food system bottlenecks, opportunities of change, negotiation techniques, understanding trade-offs, good practices of policy planning, including budget allocation.   

Examples of food policy innovation (5.4.1) can also be seen in Brazil, like the "Mesa Solidária" program of Curitiba (a innovative partnership to provide free meals to vulnerable people) and the "Mumbuca" program of Maricá (a kind of social currency that is used within municipal boundaries to transfer income to vulnerable people, who then can use such currency at local restaurants and other public facilities) - all examples of food policy innovation are presented in LUPPA Journals 2nd edition - attached (luppa.comidadoamanha.org).

Finally, regarding partnerships, highlighted in 5.3.2, I call attention to the work of a quasi-public agency for social services in Brazil - "SESC", that currently leads one of the main food bank programs in Brazil - the "Mesa Brasil" program, partnering with several cities nationwide to fight food waste and food insecurity.

Considering the recommendations and typology of policy instruments found in chapter 6, I believe there could be room to mention the importance of technical assistance, and all sorts of capacity support through local programs to support urban and peri-urban farmers and other urban food actors that need technical support to better thrive (food procurement alone, without some sort of technical assistance / knowledge support can be useless). In general, I think these final recommendations (6.5) are missing or giving less attention to the sustainability dimension of food security. 

The report is dense and rich with analyses and recommendations. I found the policy perspective especially interesting (as developed in Chapter 6). Some suggestions to further improve the report are given below.

1. The institutional/policy focus may leave behind the questions related to infrastructures, i.e., physical market places and rural-urban transportation, which are constraining in terms of consumers’ regular access to local and safe food (especially fresh food items which are essential in terms of nutrition). Improvement in logistics is necessary to reduce food losses, and should be grounded by a characterisation of city foodsheds. 
2. The characterisation of Urban and Peri-Urban food systems (Chapter 4) looks more like a list of items than as a classification and I would suggest to draw more on the typology we developed in Moustier et al. 2023, which considers the type of food items, the length of chain, the nature of relationships, the value orientation and the consumers’ socio-economic profiles. I find that the use of the term « territorial markets » is little appropriate to the district-based retail markets which make the bulk of urban consumers’ food supply in Asian and Sub-Saharan African cities. Likewise, most wholesale markets in Asia and Africa are not territorial. In these regions of the world, most retail and wholesale markets are place-based but not territorial, as they distribute local as well as imported food items, and they are not necessarily supported by a place-based community of stakeholders, sharing common visions and objectives. Relative to supermarket or e-commerce distribution, retail and wholesale markets (which may be formal or informal) are characterised by regular interactions and some amount of trust between the vendors and their customers, this is why we prefer to term them as relational rather than as territorial. The term territorial markets may be more appropriate to qualify assembly and retail markets with strong links with neighbouring communities, including various types of farmers’ markets (which are accounted for in our typology in the « value-oriented, SME-based urban food systems »).
3. The report stresses on different occasions how diversity is essential for resilience. This is especially relevant. Diversity of food formats is also important to reduce food losses, as different formats have different requirements in terms of quality standards with consequences on food losses as demonstrated in the case of Colombia (Chaboud and Moustier, 2020).
4. About successful interventions on UFS, some examples of UFIL (Urban Food Innovation Lab) can be found in the Urbal book (Valette et al, 2024), in particular, the setting of a value-oriented SME-driven tortilla enterprise in Mexico (Leloup and Legall, 2024) [other technical innovations for small-scale food processing e.g. fish drying in Africa can be found in Pallet etal, 2020], direct farm-consumer chain for food based on digital technology in Hanoi (Bruckert et al, 2024), sustainable school catering programme in Montpellier (Perignon et al, 2024). On the whole I think that there should be more developments on the value of urban public food procurement programmes. Also reference to some successful participatory guarantee systems to ensure food safety at low cost could be made (Niederle et al, 2020). And Urbal could be mentioned as a valuable participatory impact evaluation method of innovations in urban food systems.
5. The statement p.35 that most of the burden of foodborne disease originates from informal markets surprises me, please check the reliability of the source.
6. I think there should be more emphasis on the link between urban poverty and urban food insecurity, which makes working on other aspects than food supply per se even more critical than in rural settings.
7. About research needs : more data should be available on foodsheds (where food comes from, taking into account different food items and periods of the year, with elements of quantification adapted to the context of informal markets (common absence of standardised units of sale).
8. There are many repetitions in Chapters 5 and 6, for instance about urban food platforms/city councils. The chapters could be substantially reduced. I also find a lot of the sections about food losses in Chapter 4 could be cut when it is not consumer-centered and relates more generally to urban waste management.

Quoted references :

Bruckert, M., Lepiller, O., Sautier, D., Loc, N. T. T., & Sau, N. T. (2023). Studying the impact of e-commerce on the sustainability of food systems in Vietnam. In Evaluating Sustainable Food System Innovations (pp. 118-143). Routledge.

Chaboud, G., & Moustier, P. 2020. The role of diverse distribution channels in reducing food loss and waste: The case of the Cali tomato supply chain in Colombia. Food Policy, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101881.

Leloup, H., & Le Gall, J. (2023). 4 Traditional tortillas in Mexico. Evaluating Sustainable Food System Innovations, (1), 55-76.

Moustier, P., Holdsworth, M., Dao The Anh, Pape Abdoulaye Seck, Renting, H., Caron, P., Bricas,N. 2023. The diverse and complementary components of urban food systems in the global South: characterization and policy implications. Global Food Security, 36, 100663.

Niederle, P., Loconto, A., Lemeilleur, S., & Dorville, C. (2020). Social movements and institutional change in organic food markets: Evidence from participatory guarantee systems in Brazil and France. Journal of Rural Studies, 78, 282-291.

Pallet, D., & Sainte-Beuve, J. 2016. Systèmes de transformation durables : quelles nouvelles stratégies pour les filières ? In Biénabé, E., Rival, A., Loeillet D., (Eds), Développement durable et filières tropicales, Montpellier, Editions Quae, 151-165.

Perignon, M., Lepiller, O., Intoppa, B., Valette, É., Roudelle, O., & Wood, A. (2023). 5 The role of school canteens in building more sustainable food systems. Evaluating Sustainable Food System Innovations, 77.

Valette, É., Blay-Palmer, A., Intoppa, B., Di Battista, A., Roudelle, O., & Chaboud, G. (2024). Evaluating sustainable food system innovations: A global toolkit for cities. Routledge Studies in Food, Society and the Environment. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/77174

Dear Evariste and Paola,

Congratulations on the zero draft which I do believe covers the key issues. Regarding the specific questions, I am pleased that the report aims to address the additional dimensions of agency and sustainability, but I do feel it falls short on agency (which is admittedly a challenge).

Specifically regarding our area of expertise, I have only a few brief comments on the evidence regarding food insecurity in urban and peri-urban areas. It is essential to have a good grasp of the data on food insecurity by degree of urbanization – the evolution in measurement and monitoring, the limitations, the challenges. For example, reference to (and the chart from) a 2017 academic publication in Section 3.2.1 should be removed given the updated information provided in the 2023 SOFI.

It would be useful to directly address the different measures and urban-rural disaggregation approaches, pointing out that countries use different approaches, and that therefore national estimates are typically not comparable. The DEGURBA categorization used in Chapter 2 of SOFI 2023 is a new international standard endorsed by the UN Statistical Commission (see Box 2 of the SOFI 2023).

We stand by to provide support on these parts of the report as needed.

Please note there is nothing in the SOFI 2023 about lower access to school food programs contributing to the gender gap in food insecurity.

Section 3.2 could be synthesized better with care taken regarding the timeliness, quality and generalizability of the evidence. In our experience from analyses of food insecurity severity (based on the FIES) across Urban Rural Catchment Areas, the results were extremely heterogeneous, pointing to the different realities in different contexts and the difficulty of making generalizations.

Best regards.

Anne W. Kepple

Consultant

Food Security & Nutrition Statistics Team

Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO)

Dear Paola and Evariste,

Hope all is well with you both and all in FAO. Within the UU-IFAD EcoFoodSystems research project that I lead  (https://ecofoodsystems.org/)  we put together our input to the e-consultation call on the V0 draft of the HLPE-FSN report #19 

Many thanks

Prof. Charles Spillane,

Director of Ryan Institute, University of Galway, Ireland,  www.RyanInstitute.ie

EcoFoodSystems Info Note

Citation: Hoang K, Alememayeh D, Tessema Y, Rodríguez Plazas C and Spillane C (2024) Inputs, guidance and recommendations from EU/IFAD-funded EcoFoodSystems project to V0 draft of UN Committee on Food Security HLPE-FSN report #19 on “Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation. EcoFoodSystems Info Note, 26 January 2024.

Dear Paola, Evariste & members of the CFS High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE-FSN),

The following are the inputs, guidance and recommendations from some members of the EU/IFAD-funded EcoFoodSystems project (https://ecofoodsystems.org/), namely Prof. Charles Spillane, Ky (EcoFoodSystems Project Leader), Ky Hoang (EcoFoodSystems Project Researcher), Dawit Alememayehu (EcoFoodSystems Project Researcher), Yared Tessema (EcoFoodSystems Project Researcher), Carlos Rodríguez Plazas (EcoFoodSystems Project Researcher). The EcofoodSystems project is led by the University of Galway Ireland, with partner organisations Alliance Bioversity-CIAT, Wageningen University and Research (WUR) and Rikolto – Vietnam. The project is funded by the European Union and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

The EcoFoodSystems project and team consider this a valuable draft in terms of compilation and synthesis of concepts, models, and data on urbanization, rural transformation and their implications for food security and nutrition (FSN). We welcome the request for identification of action-oriented policy options for urban and peri-urban food systems that can encourage coordinated policies for FSN across rural, urban and peri-urban areas, taking into account specific and differentiated needs. We welcome the effort put into this document and would like to provide some constructive feedback, guidance and recommendations:

We consider that it is useful to establish key messages at the beginning of each chapter, followed by a synthesis. It could be worth graphically illustrating key messages are contradictory, including contrasts between characteristics and opportunities in urban and peri-urban Food Systems. Some of the figures need to be recrafted as higher quality figures (e.g. Fig 3.8, Fig 4.1).

In the current zero draft of the report, urban and peri-urban food system sustainability and its impacts are addressed as deeply or comprehensively as they could be.  Areas that could be strengthened include: (1) environmental impacts of food production, distribution, and consumption; (2) economic sustainability (i.e. what diversified income for farmers, what farmers markets can be promoted or supported, what production practices or innovations can reduce input costs while maintaining productivity (e.g. yield/ha) and distribution of value and profits along the value chain of specific commodities; (3) Increasing efficiency of supply chains that can minimize food losses and wastes, and lower costs through efficiency gains) and (4) social sustainability (supporting and promoting rural and urban employment  to create decent job opportunities in agrifood supply chains). There is also a need for more evidence-based assessment and comparison of policy options on strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition.

The section on urban and peri-urban agriculture/food production seems somewhat basic, lacking data on commodity outputs and assessment of capacity to meet overall consumer demand, as well as demand for specific commodities. Additionally, information on agricultural inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides seems to be missing.

The food environment section lacks insights into the flows of food, including quantities differentially sourced from urban or peri-urban areas, neighbouring production regions, and/or from international imports. Furthermore, there is scant mention of the role played by the private sector, MSMEs, and youth in urban food systems.

The document does not seem to explore the impact or influence of the transformation of the urban and semi-urban food system on employment, particularly for different demographic groups, including migrants.

In the report, although the contribution of informal and traditional components of urban and peri-urban food systems in production, processing, transport and retail are covered in the report, potential solutions or strategies for the poorest urban residents to address their needs while strengthening or building from the informal sector are not well articulated.

Food losses and waste are identified as a critical challenge to food systems sustainability along the food supply chain. Data on food waste, food loss, and environmental impacts/emissions within the context of urban food system transformation currently do not seem to be covered.

The report could provide more piloted and costed policy options to address this problem urban and peri-urban food systems of low- and middle-income countries. At present the scope is too narrow.

Though challenges and solutions across all domains of the food system are indicated in the report, further integrated discussions and recommendations that connect informality, food safety, food losses and waste, waste management, climate change, dietary diversity, and gender and marginalised group intersectionalities within food systems can provide a more systemic approach to strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems. In the conceptual framework, biodiversity is currently not considered as a factor and has little attention in relation to the peri-urban areas, or as part of a healthy food system.

The report highlights the dependence of the city foodsheds on surrounding agricultural production areas, where the discussion on urbanization primarily focuses on administrative boundaries and population growth. However, exploring urban sprawl spatially and temporally and its consequences on the environment, agriculture, and the city's foodshed are not extensively discussed. Understanding such dynamics could shed more light on the impact of urban expansion on access to food sources (proximal and distal) and the contributions to rural-to-urban migration. 

On a related point, the current exploration of urban and peri-food system interconnectedness predominantly centres on physical infrastructures like roads. However, the crucial role of internet and technological infrastructure in facilitating connections between buyers and sellers, online marketing, food delivery, and other aspects of the urban food system is currently overlooked. Recognizing the significance of virtual and technological infrastructure is essential in the context of ever evolving food systems.

The document discusses the increasing number of food outlets associated with urbanization, including the influence of fast-food establishments on urban residents' food choices based on proximity and food types (e.g., healthy or unhealthy options). Analysing the proximity and presence of different food outlets could aid in understanding their impact on food choices, behaviour, and associated variables such as demographic characteristics and health status.

One aspect could be strengthened in the is the challenge policymakers face to address urban food security arising from the lack of adequate spatial disaggregation of existing national food security data. Addressing this gap is important for development of spatially explicit strategies/policies, and identifying intervention options.

Despite considering a wide range of policy elements and interconnected dimensions of food security, the report remains focused on feeding urban and peri-urban populations. The nested relationships of the rural to urban food supply chain continuum is not strongly considered, especially in relation to the implications of shorter supply chains and circular economy principles in food systems. The impact on GHG emissions arising from different forms of food transportation are not considered across commodity types.

In our recent Liddy et al (2023) paper, our research group identified the challenge of food mapping data, methodologies and systemic integration of food mapping insights into decision-making in city regional food systems. See:

Liddy, H., Mowlds, S., McKeown, P.C., Lundy, M. and Spillane, C., 2023. Food mapping approaches for understanding food system transformations in rapid-growth city regions in the Global South. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7.

In our recent Karan et al (2023) paper, our research group has identified gaps at the sub-national (and city-regional) level in the availability of data for food systems decision making in city regions. See:

Karan, R., Mowlds, S., McKeown, P.C., Lundy, M. and Spillane, C., 2023. Data for decision-making for sustainable food systems transformation in the Eastern Cape of South Africa: what is needed?. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7.

We do hope that these inputs, guidance and recommendation can be helpful to the drafting of successive drafts, ahead of the final draft for the CFS 52th plenary session in October 2024.