Les Objectifs de développement durable - Votre récit de la création d'un monde en sécurité alimentaire
Le Programme de développement durable à l’horizon 2030 a été formulé pour guider les actions de la communauté internationale durant les 15 années allant de 2016 à 2030. En tant que cadre mondial de responsabilisation mutuelle, les 17 objectifs de développement durable (ODD) énoncés dans le Programme couvrent tous les aspects de la vie et constituent le plan directeur pour assurer un avenir meilleur et plus durable pour tous.
Tous les pays, pauvres, riches et à revenu intermédiaire, sont appelés à travailler à la réalisation de ces objectifs. Nous avons donc tous, en tant que citoyens et professionnels, la responsabilité de faire en sorte que notre travail et notre vie privée contribuent à la mise en œuvre du Programme de développement durable à l’horizon 2030.
Si le Programme de développement durable à l’horizon 2030 doit toujours être considéré comme un plan global et concerté pour promouvoir la paix et la prospérité des peuples et de la planète, des efforts centrés sur l'alimentation et l'agriculture, l'investissement dans les populations rurales et la transformation du secteur rural peuvent accélérer les progrès vers la réalisation de ces 17 objectifs de développement durable. L'alimentation et l'agriculture étant au cœur même du Programme de développement durable à l’horizon 2030, la FAO a été nommée institution des Nations Unies gardienne de 21 indicateurs pour les ODD 2, 5, 6, 12, 14 et 15.
L'un des aspects qui distinguent les ODD des précédents cadres de développement est l'importance accordée au suivi des progrès accomplis. À l’échelon mondial, les 17 objectifs de développement durable (ODD) et les 169 cibles y associées font l'objet d'un suivi et d'un examen au moyen d'un ensemble d'indicateurs mondiaux. Par ailleurs, à l’échelon des pays, les gouvernements peuvent utiliser leurs propres indicateurs nationaux pour faciliter le suivi des objectifs.
Alors que la phase de mise en œuvre bat son plein, nous pensons qu’il est extrêmement utile de connaître votre expérience de première main sur la façon dont les ODD ont transformé votre travail et votre vie personnelle et sur l'impact qu'ils ont eu jusqu'ici dans vos pays.
Dans cette discussion en ligne, nous aimerions nous concentrer sur l’ODD 2 « Faim zéro » et vous invitons à partager avec nous votre « récit de l’ODD2 ».
- Comment votre travail contribue-t-il à créer un monde de sécurité alimentaire/faim zéro ? Votre travail a-t-il changé après l'adoption des ODD? Si oui, comment ?
- Pouvez-vous nous raconter comment votre travail a contribué de façon effective à l’ODD2 dans votre pays ?
- Quelle est votre expérience en matière de suivi et d'évaluation des progrès accomplis dans la lutte contre la faim, la malnutrition et le soutien à une agriculture durable dans votre pays?
Si un autre ODD vous semble plus pertinent pour votre travail et vous disposez d'une expérience intéressante à ce sujet, nous serions heureux d'en savoir plus. N'hésitez pas à nous envoyer aussi vos photos et vidéos pour illustrer votre expérience concrète, celle de votre communauté et de vos pays par rapport aux ODD.
Vos récits nous permettront d'avoir une idée plus précise de ce qui a été réalisé et de quelle manière, et aideront les autres à tirer des leçons de votre expérience, des succès remportés et surtout des défis que vous avez pu rencontrer.
Nous nous réjouissons d’avance de votre participation !
L'équipe du forum FSN
- Afficher 54 contributions
We are all committed to achieve SDG2 beside all other SDGs. I belief this SDG 2 is our top most priority as if people have access to safe food & no hunger, then only we can move for al other SDGs.
My work since 2009 has been helping many underprievileged communities in India (Esatern States) through different food security & sustainable agriculture projects. Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) is working on most of SDGs where SDG2 is our priority. As we are investing on small holder farmers and working togther by understading their context well and planning is very essential to achieve food security. Many young farmers in my projects are coming in front and they are showing the best way that agriculture can not remain same. When small farmers and local farm science center extension institute (scientists) are working side by side then achieving goal becoming easier. Most of the smallholders are suffering for water stress throughout my country India. MCC and one of it's partner adressing this water issues in Odisha state, very easily adopting the spring water harvest system in Eastern ghat hills. I found that women members are highly benefitted with all smallholders farm families. I have attached two stories of my project.
Good day. My name is Natallia Kireyenka. I represent the Institute of System Studies in the AIC of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. I work as a Deputy Director for Research. My main research areas are food security, agricultural trade policy, marketing and logistics.
In 2015, the Republic of Belarus endorsed the UN Agenda for Sustainable Development until 2030 and expressed strong support for its implementation through the achievement of relevant Goals.
Belarus as a subject of the world economy pursues an active socio-economic and agrarian policy, which is fully consistent with the UN Millennium Development Goals in the field of sustainable agricultural development and is aimed at improving the quality of life of the population. The Doctrine of National Food Security until 2030 was developed in Belarus. This is a strategic document. I was directly the developer of this document.
For Belarus, science-based criteria and parameters for the development of national food security were developed for the first time, which take into account current trends and prospects for the development of the national agro-industrial complex, the welfare of the population, domestic competitive advantages in the social, economic and natural resources spheres, as well as the influence of the world food system. Fundamentally new mechanisms of monitoring, management and regulation, as well as regulatory and legal support of national food security, which are fully consistent with the existing mechanisms of state regulation of the social and economic development of the republic, are proposed.
Studies show that the modern structure of agricultural production makes it possible to guarantee the physical availability of food for the population in the energy rating of 3241 kcal per person per day. This virtually eliminates hunger and malnutrition (for reference: in 2017 in Belarus, 5.9% of the total population in the country fall into the category of the poor). The country produces 841 kg of grain per person per year, 675 potatoes, 127 meat, 771 kg of milk, 375 eggs. The country consumes 89 kg of meat and meat products per person, 254 – milk and dairy products, 145 – vegetables, 79 kg of fruits and 288 eggs. In general, the level of nutrition is not limited to the resources of its own production, although the diet of Belarusians. It remains unbalanced in quality parameters.
According to the results of 2017, the integral index of food security in the Republic of Belarus amounted to 1.01, which indicates the physical accessibility of agricultural products, raw materials and food. Thus, the index of agricultural production, raw materials and food is 1.16, the energy value of the diet is 0.95, the consumption of basic products is 0.99, the nutritional value of the diet is 0.95.
Currently, we continue to conduct research in this area. They are comprehensive and innovative, meet international criteria, and are aimed at achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.
The agricultural paradigm is already undergoing a shift with focus from cereal production to diversified farming.
Horticultural crops besides improving biological productivity and nutritional standards also have enormous scope for enhancing profitability. This group of crops comprising fruits, vegetables, root and tuber crops, plantation crops, medicinal and aromatic plants, spices and condiments and ornamental crops, would constitute core of any such agro-economic strategy. Past investment has been rewarding in terms of increased production, productivity and export of horticultural produce.
However, challenges confronting are still many. Although, the country is second largest production of fruits and vegetables; the availability of fruits and vegetables still continues to be much below the dietary requirements. With increase in per capita income and accelerated growth of health conscious population, demand for horticultural produce is on increase which is expected to further accelerate, which will require more production.
Consequently, horticultural development has to be seen as integrated approach, addressing important gaps, in harnessing the potential through targeted research with focus on enhancing efficiency. Thus, organic driven horticulture is expected to address the concern for complimentary and nutritional security, health care leading to ultimately economic development.
Dear all,
I am really happy to share my paper on “Nutrition Extension – An Innovative Strategy for Enhancing Nutritional Security”.
Regards,
My final comment concerns Monitoring & Evaluation. This is a major concern as it has to be done objectively and independent of the projects being monitored. The most important objective of an M&E program is to guide future programs to better serve the beneficiaries. Thus in addition to protecting the under writing taxpayers in assuring their taxes are being effectively invested and the beneficiaries are profiting as much as possible, the M&E effort also represents the beneficiaries. What they cannot be is a tool for propagandizing the projects. Unfortunately, the USAID MEL (Monitoring, Evaluation, & Learning) program is far more intent on propagandizing then evaluation and does wonder to develop impressive but meaningless number, making innovations that by all normal standards are total failures, appear to be highly successful. This does nothing for the beneficiaries, and reinforces the failure to be included in future projects. Hopefully, FAO can do considerable better and develop M&E programs that effectively guide future projects.
Please review the following webpages:
My third concern is the over emphasis on the cooperative business model to assist smallholder farmers. This is very disturbing because it only takes some brief computations on basic business parameters to show that reliance on a cooperative is far more likely to push smallholder farmers deeply into poverty than be a mechanism for poverty alleviations, despite the tremendous rhetoric to the contrary. The reason is the cumbersome administrative overhead costs associated with running a cooperative, particularly if the success of the cooperative requires seconded outside managers. This overhead cost will usually exceed the much promoted but never quantified financial benefits from bulking input purchases or produce for sale. When this happens you have to find a buyer who will pay extra for dealing with a cooperative, or reduce what you can pay the farmers, pushing them further into poverty.
The emphasis on cooperative in development projects goes back some 40 years and is based on the unsubstantiated vilifying claims that private traders were exploiting farmers. Such claims if not substantiated are slanderous and thus subject to litigation. Given the financially suppressed economy common to developing countries this is actually impossible. The limited buying power of the general population put tremendous downward pressure on consumer prices. Fortunately the farmers aren't that gullible and avoid the cooperatives like the plague leaving the development effort catering to a very small percent of the potential beneficiaries and even then the members’ side selling the bulk of their produce to the vilified private traders in contradiction to approved cooperative by-laws. The only market volume passing through most cooperatives is in-kind loan repayments and the net impact on the community economics is trivial.
Please review the following webpages:
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/request-for-information-basic-business-parameters
https://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/ECHO-Private.pdf
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/envisioned-competitive-advantage-for-cooperatives
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/loss-of-competitive-advantage-areas-of-concern
My second comments is really an outgrowth of my first concern. It is the dietary energy balance of smallholder farmers. This gets to the major emphasis on nutrition. However, as I have reviewed the nutritional projects, the emphasis mostly academic with primary interest in providing quality nutrition particularly for pregnant and nursing women. What it does not address is the nutritional need to optimize economic opportunity. Since most of the intended beneficiaries are smallholder farmers or other manual labourers, the need is for sufficient calories to put in a full day of work. This is rarely mentioned in the project, and when it is the reference is for active people with a calorie exertion of 2800 kcal/day. I would contend that this represents an office worker with a healthy exercise program of 2 hr/day. That is far from the 8+ hrs a day a smallholder farmer is expected to work which has a calorie estimate I place at 4000+ kcal/day. Unfortunately the data on caloric consumption by smallholder is very limited often in the range of 2000 to 2500 kcal/day. That barely meets basic metabolism requirements with limited work energy. I think this does wonders to explain why farmers are taking 8 weeks for basic crop establishment, how often are our innovations for improving smallholder production expecting them to work harder? Where will that energy come from? As you address the issue of improved nutrition you might take a look as some of the tough choice they have to make in balancing nutrition with their income. Please review the following webpages:
https://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/ECHO-Diet.pdf
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/ethiopia-diet-analysis
https://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/DietPoster.pdf
I have reviewed the opening comment and glanced through all the comments, or at least those in English. I have several diverse comments I would like to add, but will do so on separate comments with links to various pages on the Smallholder Agriculture website I Manage. I believe these comments apply to most developing countries.
The first comment is a major oversight in the approach to development. That is the operational limits face smallholders. The agronomist, which includes myself, do a great job of determining the physical potential of an area, but small plot research does not address the operational resources need to expand the small plot research to a full field, farm, or smallholder community. It just assume it is not a problem. It often blames non-compliance with agronomic research as limited education or risk aversion. However, when limited to just manual tools it takes up to 8 weeks for basic crop establishment with the farmers working as hard as possible, but perhaps limited by diet. The real need is to provide the farmers with access to some forms of contract mechanization to remove the basic drudgery. Who in a typical development project is responsible to determine the labour requirements, the availability of the labour, and what are the rational compromises when that labour is not available? Has this fallen into an administrative void between the agronomist and social scientists? Please review the following webpages:
https://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/OperationalFeasibility.pdf
https://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/BrinksDrudgery.pdf
Ensuring access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round while working together with smallholder farmers
Agriculture is the largest employer in the world and the leading source of income and jobs for many households. Smallholder farmers despite their inadequate knowledge in advancing their awareness in modern farming technics are still providing up to 80 per cent of food consumed in the developing countries.
With limited knowledge they turn to use inorganic fertilizers and other products to increase their yields. Investing and working together with these smallholder farmers is an important approach in increasing food security, reducing malnutrition and undernourishment, controlling the volume of production per labour unit, the average income of food production and many other challenges faced by these smallholder farmers.
We at NORSR Cameroon are working together with smallholder farmers ensuring that all people have access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round as such linking to poverty eradication and addressing malnutrion, ending hunger, ensuring access to nutritious food to everybody, increasing agricultural productivity and income, ensuring sustainable food production, maintaining the genetic diversity of seeds, as well as increasing investment in agricultural research and extension services, technology development through enhanced national, regional and international corporations.
Knowing very well that agriculture does not always reduce malnutrition, undernourishment and food security, it is our duty to work together with smallholder farmers, national and international organizations so that by 2030 we shall be able to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and SDG 2 in particular.
Dear all,
I am happy to share my paper on Youth and Sustainable Development Goals; Agriculture Food and Nutritional and Livelihoods Security.
Regards,
N.Parasuraman
Cette activité est maintenant terminée. Veuillez contacter [email protected] pour toute information complémentaire.