WFP-FAO co-led Post 2015 Global Thematic Consultation on Hunger, Food Security and Nutrition

19-11-2012 - 10-01-2013

The discussion is now closed.

See below the contributions received or download the proceedings.
Summary of key themes emerged from the discussion is available here

This is YOUR OPPORTUNITY to contribute to this global debate.

As the target date for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) approaches, a number of processes have been put in place to seek inputs from country, regional and global levels, into the “Post-2015 Development Agenda and Framework”.  For more background information click here.

This is your opportunity to help identify the actions, goals, targets and indicators needed to achieve food and nutrition security, and the eradication of hunger, in a post-2015 world.  Many food security and nutrition policies, strategies and action plans have been written over the past number of  years.  Challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in a sustainable way have been identified, and many countries are making good progress.  Nevertheless, close to 870 million people around the world remain undernourished and do not have access to a healthy diet.  It is time for everyone to take urgent action – in a concerted manner – and to elaborate a new development agenda around lasting concerns of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.

The outcome of this e-consultation, together with the proposed CFS consultation, will feed into the high level experts consultation to be hosted by the Government of Spain in March 2013.

Ultimately, your contributions will feed into the UN General Assembly discussions beginning September 2013 for the elaboration of an agreed post 2015 global development agenda.

E-Consultation: next four weeks

Over the next four weeks, FAO and WFP will facilitate this e-consultation in drawing on the widest possible group of stakeholders and interested parties on how best to address hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition at all levels, and to seek your inputs on the elaboration of a new agenda for action beyond the current MDG framework.

We also invite you to submit papers, findings, or on-going work on the topic of hunger, food and nutrition security.

We seek your inputs on the following three themes:

Theme 1

(i) What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition? 

(ii) What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?

Theme 2

What works best?  Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on.  Provide us with your own experiences and insights.  For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? 

Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (, and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?

Theme 3

For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.  A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):

  1. 100% access to adequate food all year round
  2. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old
  3. All food systems are sustainable
  4. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income
  5. Zero loss or waste of food.

Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals.  Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?


Contribution received:

Claudio Schuftan People's Health Movement, Viet Nam

Nutrition post-2015

If we have made so much progress on the MDGs, then why is the central message after twelve years still the same? We are still facing a world with hunger, widening inequalities and continuous destruction of our planet. Instead of jumping into the process of defining new goals we need to analyze why, behind the numbers and statistics of progress, the situation has not changed.

MDGs focus on ends while being silent on the means. The values and principles expressed in the Millennium Declaration were lost in translation and we were left with a set of quick wins in which progress was measured in terms of country averages. The MDGs were defined and implemented in a top-down process and issues of governance, participation and empowerment were insufficiently addressed. This all has been said many times over.

World leaders have tried to solve our problems by simply doing more of what caused these problems in the first place. We cannot realistically expect more of this to get us out of it. If we want the next set of goals to change the situation we need to have the courage to make a radical turn in our approach.

A principled approach, tackling the causes of the causes

We therefore support the Task Team’s call for transformative change and a holistic approach with a focus on the core values of human rights, equity and sustainability. We call upon the UN to add empowerment to the list of core principles. Instead of translating the core values and principles of the Millennium Declaration we should put them at the centre of the agenda.  This is also being said many times over.

We welcome the suggestion to define a set of “development enablers” to guide countries on how to achieve the desired end(s). However, one size does not fit all. Policy choices need to be discussed at country level in a democratic and participatory way. Overarching principles and values agreed at the global level can guide policy choices, but countries should be given space to move on different paths with different speeds.

Looking into the proposed “enablers” to achieve inclusive social development, we welcome the concept of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) –-since the underlying causes of malnutrition pertain to food, care and health. UHC can potentially promote equity and health systems strengthening overall, instead of the current disease-focused approach which leaves nutrition at the fringes. If defined correctly, realizing UHC is a means to achieving the progressive realisation of the Right to Health and of nutrition. However, the concept is broad and there is no consensus to date on its precise meaning. We oppose the promotion of a minimalistic insurance model that would offer “basic packages of care” (often excluding nutrition) and would operate within a market-based system of healthcare. UHC must be achieved through organized and accountable systems of high quality public provision of comprehensive primary health care that includes nutrition services and of a fully functional referral system governed by need of care.

In addition, we are worried that the focus on “service delivery” will divert attention from action on the structural determinants of malnutrition and tackling the root causes of preventable ill-health, malnutrition and premature deaths. Equal access to health care and nutrition services address an underlying social determinant of malnutrition, but just one of them. Striving for UHC should be part of a comprehensive strategy focusing on the social determinants of health and of nutrition in general. Although the UN and WHO define health services as including “prevention, promotion, treatment and rehabilitation”; we are concerned that the promotional services for nutrition will encompass action only on some of the determinants of health, e.g. water and sanitation, but leaving out others, e.g., trade and power relations. If one really wants to use nutrition as a benchmark for progress in other fields of development and to promote a health-and-nutrition-in-all-policies approach, a more pro-active attitude will be needed. The holistic approach advocated for by the UN Task Team means going beyond health and  and nutrition and looking at the other fields to ensure policy coherence and synergies between the different goals. Human rights, including the right to health, the right to nutrition, equity and sustainability should be put at the center of all policies. We call on WHO and on FAO to take this approach a step further and to engage with all the other sectors that affect health and nutrition, including global trade.

Engaging with other sectors is crucial. We look at the global crisis as a consequence of the failure to go beyond the individual sectors (health, food, education) to address the social, political and environmental determination of their shortcomings --that additionally result in an erosion of people’s food sovereignty, in higher levels of poverty, as well as in a lack of fair and equitable access to water, housing, sanitation, education, employment and universal and comprehensive social services. The new sectoral goal(s) should not be solely about service delivery, even if broadly interpreted; we need to address the causes of the causes.

In our view, the UN has, so far, not gone far enough in suggesting an alternative course for the development paradigm. The global food, fuel and financial crises have exposed systemic failures in the workings of financial and commodity markets and major weaknesses in the mechanisms of global governance. We have argued, in the PHMs Global Health Watch 3, that the multiple crises not only show the failure of the current institutional framework of the global economy, but also of the currently dominant neoliberal paradigm of economics itself. It demonstrates the non-viability of capitalism in its current form, characterised by perpetuating extreme inequalities traceable to poorly extreme inequality and poorly regulated markets, and dominated by the interests of a small rich minority embedded in the corporate and financial sectors.                                                                                  

We take strong exception with the fact that none of the currently circulating proposals and documents from UN-institutions challenges the prevailing paradigm of economic growth. The UN Task Team calls for “stable, equitable and inclusive economic growth, based on sustainable patterns of production and consumption”, but the word ‘redistribution’ does not appear once in the entire document. For us, it is not about poverty reduction by all efforts going to uplift the poor; it is about disparity reduction. The Commission on the Social Determinants of Health stated rightly that “income redistribution, via taxes and transfers – the latter of which are key to social protection – are more efficient for poverty reduction than economic growth per se.”  Moreover, in a carbon-constrained world, a strategy of growth does not make sense. A paradigm break is needed post-2015.


We strongly welcome emphasising issues of governance.  We agree with the UN that better governance of the economic and financial sector will be key to maintaining regulatory frameworks that respect human rights and protect the environment. The current global trade and investment regime is seriously undermining universal social entitlements and rights, as well as the power of states to regulate the activities of corporations and of private financial institutions.

We need to redesign our political culture and our institutions, both nationally and globally; to create relations based on solidarity; and to put in place the mechanisms of accountability needed to run the global political, economic and social structures in a manner that is just, equitable and sustainable. Genuine equality of influence should be at the heart of all decision-making.

We are further adamant about the need to divert from the prevalent ‘charity’ model in global relations to a rights-based approach with clearly delineated responsibilities and related accountability-mechanisms. One of the major shortcomings of the current MDGs has been the imprecise definition of the global partnership for development. Many of the commitments made by the international community have remained unfulfilled because of the absence of accountability frameworks and undemocratic global governance. To be achievable and sustainable, the new development goals will have to be embedded in an agreement that allocates new responsibilities, both national (states towards their inhabitants) and international (the international community towards states needing assistance). We cannot ignore issues of governance and finance: there need to be clear agreements on how to pay and who will pay. In this respect, we call for fair and progressive taxation regimes within and between countries that will enable a transformative and equitable redistribution of resources and power instead of relying on charity.

Governance not only requires allocation of responsibilities, but also organisations and mechanisms to ensure accountability. Uneven progress towards the health and nutrition  MDGs may be due, at least in part, to the uneven creation of organisations, institutions and regimes for supporting the achievement of the MDGs. There are simply too many global health actors and initiatives – better coordination and a truly country-driven approach to health improvement will require a radical rationalisation and shrinkage of the global health and nutrition architecture. In addition, there is inadequate monitoring of the policies and actions of donors --they are largely immune from scrutiny or censure. PHM calls upon WHO and FAO to play a significantly more active role in this call for more global democratic governance and to seek a more coherent and accountable system of global health governance. PHM will support WHO and FAO in such an endeavor.


Finally, and most importantly, the implementation of a post-2015 development agenda will depend critically on the legal and economic empowerment of people, especially those most excluded, and of their civil society organizations, to participate effectively in national and local decision-making. People should be at the centre of the new development agenda and be engaged at every stage of the process; defining, implementing and monitoring of the new development framework. This links with accountability; the ability of people to hold institutions accountable for the delivery of quality services; it calls for responsiveness, recourse and transparency; and for setting and adjusting priorities and targets --and people’s empowerment is key for this.

Empowerment should be one of the core values of the new development framework. We cannot achieve equality in health and nutrition without addressing power imbalances at local, national and global level. There is promising work ongoing using community monitoring for accountability and social action in both the health and the food and nutrition areas. Such processes have to play an increasingly important role in measuring and monitoring progress. The national and global surveys currently used give a very distorted picture about people’s lived reality. Community monitoring does not only provide richer data, but also enables people to claim their human rights.

In terms of community participation and empowerment, the UN consultation process is largely falling short. The country consultations are supposed to target the poor and marginalized, but the guidelines suggest to include only representatives of various groups in the consultations (e.g., NGOs, community-based organizations (CBOs), universities and research institutions, private sector entities). These consultations shouldn’t be simply about extracting information to help define global goals that will then be implemented in a top-down approach. They should be used to put in place mechanisms of continuous community engagement. We must set up a constant feedback loop that will enable people to effectively engage in the entire process and hold their governments accountable for their promises. We call for community consultations, not as a one-time information collection effort, but as a first step towards democratic global governance.



Tracy Gerstle CropLife International, Belgium

Theme 1:

What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?


The original MDG on food security is effective in focusing the global community on the key development challenges to address poverty and hunger.  However, by focusing only on the challenges and not identifying the underlying causes and pathways to address hunger and food insecurity, the MDGs risks promoting unsustainable actions, while missing the opportunity to promote collective action and innovation in identifying and scaling up solutions.


Post-2015 food security targets should identify the overarching desired outcome, e.g. eliminate hunger, supported by outputs that measure progress in identifying the underlying causes, e.g. increasing incomes and increasing smallholder productivity in food insecure countries.  There should be a range of outputs to allow sufficient flexibility to reflect the range of differing causes of food security across regions, so countries can prioritize outputs as meets their needs.


The next generation of targets should also consider how to promote integrated solutions across sectors such as food, water, energy, landscapes and ecosystems—given the inherent linkages and the need to maximize synergies and to minimize unintended impacts.


What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?


With our population expected to reach nine billion by 2050, farmers will need to increase food production substantially despite finite natural resources. Addressing food waste and over nutrition can help to lessen these pressures, but climate change and harsher growing conditions, poses a real threat to the ability of the world’s farmers to provide for themselves and their families. Improving the way farmers operate will be critical to sustainability increasing food production and alleviating poverty for the world’s 2.5 billion farmers, particularly in developing countries where there are substantial yield gaps.


We believe the first step will be recognizing the environmentally friendly practices already being used in agriculture, and determining how these sustainable practices could be shared with more farmers. Today, farms around the world utilize crop protection products and plant biotechnology to increase crop yields, improve incomes and reduce their environmental footprint. For example:


•              In Brazil, farmers who use biotech soybeans, cotton and corn varieties have reduced their water usage by 16.2 billion litres from 1996 to 2010.

•              Farmers in Kenya who use pesticides to produce disease-free passion fruit improve their income by 400%.

•              Bt cotton farmers in India earn between $378-$520 more per hectare than growers using conventional cotton varieties, which has led to $9.4 billion in farm income gains due to Bt cotton adoption from 2002-2010.

•              In Canada, adoption of no-till practices in canola, enabled by crop protection products and plant biotechnology, sequesters nearly one million tonnes of carbon each year.

•              Each year, crop protection product prevent nearly 50% yield loss in wheat crops around the globe.


In every region of the globe, farmers are using plant science to enhance their sustainability and protect their lands for future generations. Governments, NGOs and the private sector must examine how we can promote policies that support farmers to use good agricultural practices today, while continuing to improve upon the sustainability of practices in the future.


Opportunities offered by expanding access to good farming practices and plant science are as follows:

Fighting Poor Nutrition:
Creaitng healthier diets through new varieties and abundant food choices

Conserving Water:
Reducing water needs through plant science technologies

Feeding Nine Billion:
Improving yield through new varieties and protection from pest

Preserving Soil:
Reducing soil erosion by enabling conservation agriculture

Protecting Biodiversity:
Safeguarding biodiversity by reducing the need for additional land

Responding to Climate Change:
Managing our changing climate through innovative technologies


Importantly, while we believe in the opportunities posed by plant science to address the aforementioned challenges, its important to allow flexibility in the Post-2015 frameworks and SDG targets for countries and farmers to employ a range of farming practices and technologies, as there are no “one size fits all solutions in agriculture: given the wide array of landscape and agro-ecological zones.


Theme 2:

What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights.  For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?

Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (, and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?


The private sector is at its best in leveraging market-based solutions to address some of the most intractable problems in addressing poverty and sustainability. In this spirit efforts would include:


  • Increase investments and mobilize existing commitments to address the SDGs on food security and sustainable agriculture
  • Ensure that investments use resources sustainably, including farming inputs, both through internal investment policy and public-private collaborations to measure and track resource use at a landscape and farm level
  • Promote diversity in economic opportunity, by expanding market access and support to smallholder farmers and particularly women
  • Commit to good governance and sustainable business practices, using frameworks including the UN Global Compact and the PRAI (Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment) as recognized by the G20 in Seoul in November 2010, and value chain sustainability consortiums and standards including Utz, and the  Responsible Soy Roundtable and Field to Market
  • Invest in agricultural research and development partnerships to promote innovation and to build local capacity, particularly building capacity among developing country researchers and institutions
  • Invest in extension and knowledge sharing that assists in scaling farmers’ adoption of good farming practices, and planning to be resilient to climate change and potential yield losses


To succeed, we also need to see concerted efforts by governments, both in the developed and the developing world—particularly as we as a global community look to expand beyond the MDGs to truly global SDGs that seek to secure future food security via sustainable agriculture.


  • Carry through the MDG Commitments to poverty reduction, while integrating the global post-2015 agenda
  • Engage the private sector as an equal partner and stakeholder in the post-2015 development agenda for food security and sustainable agriculture
  • Develop national food security strategies, in partnership with the private sector and other stakeholders, to align priorities and to promote collaboration
  • Encourage the sustainable use of resources via policy measures, including incentives
  • Identify and scale good practices as a national and international level that maximize public-private partnerships and collaboration, with the New Vision for Agriculture and Grow Africa as examples of effective partnerships
  • Develop a means to track and to promote collaboration among business and other stakeholders who make commitments (across the many different processes currently on-going on sustainability and food security)
  • Invest in agricultural research and development at both the domestic and international levels, particularly building capacity among developing country researchers and institutions
  • Invest in extension and knowledge sharing the will assist in scaling farmers’ adoption of good farming practices, and planning to be resilient to climate change and potential yield losses
  • Support free global, regional and local trade that enables investments in agriculture
  • Promote a positive enabling environmental, with security for citizens, zero tolerance for corruption, support of intellectual property and systems to ensure good governance
  • Adopt and promote policy frameworks and legislation that ensure good governance in land tenure and promote investment at all farm sizes and which include women


Theme 3:

For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.  A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):

a.    100% access to adequate food all year roundb.    Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc.    All food systems are sustainabled.    100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee.    Zero loss or waste of food.

Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals.  Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?


The Zero Hunger Challenge is a good starting point and importantly it puts the focus where the greatest attention is needed in terms of addressing the needs of hungry people around the world, while promoting sustainable agriculture.  However, as the SDGs will be global integrating sustainability and development, food security should be similarly scoped and ambitious, considering hunger, malnutrition, and obesity (or over-nutrition), and the links to the four commonly accepted dimensions of food security: availability, access, stability and utilization. 


Scoping of the targets for food security, should allow for pathways that address the underlying causes particularly in terms of poverty, by promoting economic growth in key sectors that provide incomes and employment for poor people, including agriculture, as well as considering the role of safety nets for the most vulnerable


Ensure that the proposed pathways and targets provide countries and farmers flexibility in terms of the farming practices and technologies, as there are no “one size fits all solutions in agriculture” given the wide array of landscapes and agro-ecological zones


Key Outputs/Measures related to Food Security include:


  1. Changes in incomes, employment and investment in agriculture
  2. Closing the yield gap in food insecure countries, particularly for smallholder farmers
  3. Adoption of farming practices and technologies that will promote environmentally sustainable intensification and regeneration, including integrated pest management (IPM), measured via continuous improvements in use of water, energy, soil and land on all sizes of farms
  4. Changes in land use, including reductions in the rate of deforestation
  5. Presence of legislation and policies that support free global, regional and local trade
  6. Scaling access to public and private extension, knowledge and climate-smart farming practices and technologies that will enable farmers to be resilient to climate change and potential yield losses
  7. Promoting food safety and reducing food waste, through access to better storage, processing and handling practices and technologies


There also needs to be indicators around hunger, malnutiriton and obesity, but we do not include these here, as these targets do not fall directly within our area of expertise.


Submission by

Tracy Gerstle

Director, Global Public Policy

CropLife International

Barbara Burlingame FAO, Italy

Theme 1: Key lessons

  1.  “Diet” needs to be addressed as the fundamental unit of nutrition; i.e., not individual nutrients and not individual foods.  The nutrition world has a long, unsuccessful history of dealing with (mal)nutrition outside the context of a whole diet.   
  2. “Agriculture”,  imbedded in “environmental sustainability”, needs to be the focus of all efforts to provide long-term solutions to the multiple problems of malnutrition.   
  3. The main challenges include treating malnutrition with real foods and diets and less as a clinical problem with industrial/pharmaceutical interventions. Opportunities include adopting the concept of sustainable diets, with important emphasis on minimizing food losses and waste, valuing local food biodiversity, and re-evaluating traditional food systems.  Diets, foods, and nutrients for human nutrition should be regarded as “ecosystem services”, thus bringing sustainable environments into the nutrition world.

Theme 3


The ZHC hits the proverbial nail on the head, providing a useful framework for addressing the problems of malnutrition.  The concept of sustainable diets encompasses all aspects of the ZHC, and can be considered one of the direct responses.  [Definition: Sustainable Diets are those diets with low environmental impacts which contribute to food and nutrition security and to healthy life for present and future generations. Sustainable diets are protective and respectful of biodiversity and ecosystems, culturally acceptable, accessible, economically fair and affordable; nutritionally adequate, safe and healthy; while optimizing natural and human resources. FAO, 2010.]


Barbara Burlingame

Principal Nutrition Officer



En atención a la invitación a evaluar la situación actual respecto de la seguridad alimentaria deseo compartir un documento que elaboré por interés personal en la búsqueda de aportar al problema actual global de la sostenibilidad, a pesar de tener un enfoque particular para Colombia la propuesta tiene un alcance mundial si aplicamos las conclusiones de los documentos que son base de este escrito y sea el momento para mencionarlo toma como fuente documentos elaborados por la ONU.


Este es un primer borrador y aunque no es exhaustivo, si marca una dirección y espero que el concepto general sea revisado y discutido, pues como lo menciono en el documento,  la seguridad alimentaria está pendiendo de un hilo porque estamos acabando con la única oportunidad degarantizar la subsistencia del hombre sobre el planeta al explotar indiscriminadamente los recursos naturales. Pienso que está llegando el momento en el que un vaso de agua será más valioso que un diamante,  si conservamos los ecosistemas tendremos el líquido más valioso de la Tierra que es el agua, con ella renaciendo y manejándola adecuadamente tendremos posibilidades de mitigar el cambio climático y encontrar las fuentes de alimentación,  a la vez si valoramos el capital humano y su conocimiento ancestral y lo utilizamos inteligentemente romperemos los ciclos viciosos que generan la pobreza, el hambre y el subdesarrollo.


Quedo atento a sus comentarios y sugerencias,


Un cordial saludo,


Alfredo Arturo Corredor Becerra

Anna Herforth Independent Consultant, United States of America

For this response I am drawing on the FSN Forum Discussion #83, which I co-led with Cristina Lopriore:


Three key messages came out of Discussion #83, relevant to the topic of hunger, food insecurity, and malnutrition.


One: We need to be thinking more about food/diet quality in addition to food quantity. Diversification of food production was strongly supported.  There were also calls for increased use of underutilized foods, biofortification, and better processing.  Many comments strongly supported reducing food waste – several people noted a research need for how to curb food waste and preserve perishable fresh foods, a difficulty for making nutritious diets more accessible.


Two: Food production is tied to environmental resources and production must be sustainable.  There were comments about incorporating climate change considerations into all decisions/investments in food production.  There were other comments about supporting soil and biodiversity to produce more, more diverse, and more nutritious foods.


Three: The biological reduction of hunger/malnutrition is not a sufficient goal; we need to support people’s dignity, culture and rights in the process.  This has to do with supporting traditional diets (related to the first point on underutilized foods) and biodiversity (related to the second point on natural resources), and also with how “development” projects are done.  We need to increase participation and the ability for people to determine the solutions that would best fit their own needs, and also get better at disseminating existing knowledge, technologies and research results wherever they are applicable and appropriate.


For further elaboration of these messages in the contributions, see the Discussion #83 website, listed above.

Thème 1 :


Quels sont, à votre avis, les principaux enseignements qui peuvent être tirés du Cadre (1990-2015) des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le développement (OMD), en particulier en ce qui concerne les OMD liés à la faim, à la sécurité alimentaire et à la malnutrition ?  


 La définition d'OMD et la simplicité de l'approche OMD ont permis une forte mobilisation politique des gouvernements et des opinions publiques dans la lutte contre la pauvreté et contre la faim.


Cependant les OMD traitent de la question de la faim, de l'insécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition de manière insuffisamment complète et trop fragmentée :


Au regard des 4 piliers de la sécurité alimentaire que sont la disponibilité, l'accès, la qualité nutritionnelle et la stabilité, l'OMD 1 pourrait être complété par des cibles (ou indicateurs), notamment sur les aspects de disponibilité et de stabilité qui ne sont pas pris en compte.


L'OMD 3 traite des questions de genre. Le rôle des femmes dans la lutte contre la pauvreté et l'insécurité alimentaire est important. Les OMD 4 et 5 traitent de mortalité infantile et de santé maternelle, en particulier à travers la dimension nutritionnelle. L'OMD 7 qui a pour objectif d’assurer un environnement durable devrait être mis en œuvre dans sa dimension transversale. Il traite notamment de l’accès à l'eau potable et salubre qui est un facteur de sécurité alimentaire.


La définition d’indicateurs est intéressante car elle permet de fixer des objectifs quantifiés et de mesurer leur atteinte.  La pertinence des indicateurs doit être réfléchie en termes dynamiques. Ex. diviser par deux les personnes souffrant de la faim en valeur absolue  conduit à une croissance de cet indicateur du fait de la démographie, alors qu’il y a eu une réduction en %. 


L'appropriation des OMD par tous les acteurs concernés est essentielle : une définition des OMD/ODD à partir de consultations préalables inclusives et globales est souhaitable. La consultation du Comité de la Sécurité Alimentaire mondiale est en  ce sens à saluer. 


La France est donc favorable à la mise en avant de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle par un objectif dédié dans un agenda international après 2015, issu de la  convergence des processus de révision des OMD et de la réflexion intergouvernementale sur les ODD.


La prise en compte des quatre piliers de la sécurité alimentaire permettrait ainsi de s'attaquer aux causes structurelles et favoriser une approche multidimensionnelle de la sécurité alimentaire. En particulier, il est essentiel de mieux prendre en compte les aspects relatifs à la sécurité nutritionnelle (qualité de l'alimentation, santé/nutrition, éducation et culture).


Quels sont, à votre avis, les principaux défis et opportunités pour parvenir à garantir la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle dans les années à venir?


Les principaux défis pour atteindre la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle 


La croissance démographique exponentielle, et ce principalement en Afrique : 9 milliards d'habitants dans moins de 40 ans.


La forte pression sur les ressources naturelles comme l'eau et la terre pour nourrir le monde mais aussi pour répondre aux autres besoins (fibres, valorisations industrielles…), et ce de manière durable : il faudra produire plus en utilisant moins de ressources.


L’accès à l’énergie (servant à la production, au transport, à la transformation des produits agricoles et à l’alimentation) à un prix correct.


La tension structurelle des marchés agricoles et l'augmentation de la volatilité des prix des denrées agricoles.


Les effets du changement climatique


La crise économique, la nécessité de créer des emplois décents.


La nécessité de renforcer une recherche interdisciplinaire qui permette de mieux comprendre les interactions entre les différents défis et développe des travaux de prospectives permettant de développer des scénarios sur les dynamiques de transformation à long terme.


Les principales opportunités


La réforme réussie du Comité de la Sécurité Alimentaire mondiale, instance de concertation multi-acteurs doit permettre une meilleure coordination des politiques et un fort engagement en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle.


La mise en œuvre du plan d'action du G20 adopté sous présidence Française doit permettre d'apporter des réponses à la question de la volatilité des prix. 


D’une manière générale, l’accent mis sur la sécurité alimentaire dans les grandes initiatives politiques internationales (Défi faim zéro du SGNU, Rio + 20, G8, G20, CAADP, etc.).


Pour répondre aux défis, le nouveau cadre post 2015 devra être ambitieux et intégrer la dimension du développement durable : le chantier qui s'ouvre sur les ODD suite à la Conférence internationale de Rio+20  devrait être intégré à celui du post 2015 pour ne former qu'un seul agenda et favoriser une approche multidimensionnelle de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle.


Thème 2


Quelles sont les mesures les plus efficaces? Sur la base des connaissances existantes, veuillez nous signaler quelles seraient les mesures les plus efficaces pour s'attaquer aux problèmes de la faim, de la sécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition dans l’avenir.  Faites-nous part de vos propres expériences et de vos observations.  Par exemple, quelle importance attribuez-vous aux questions de l'amélioration de la gouvernance, des approches fondées sur les droits, de la responsabilisation et de l'engagement politique pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle?


1.L'expérience française dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire et de nutrition au plan national

Pour lutter contre l’insécurité alimentaire et la malnutrition, la France s’appuie sur un ensemble de droits, lois, règlements, et mécanismes (dont certains partagés au niveau de l’Union européenne) dont on peut citer inter alia :


un système de protection sociale développé (sécurité sociale, assurance chômage, système de retraite) ; une législation en matière d’emploi protectrice visant au développement d'emplois décents (Salaire minimum…)


qui intègrent ou sont complétés par des mécanismes ciblés pour les plus vulnérables (par exemple la CMU pour la santé, et le RSA)


une politique agricole et alimentaire forte, assortie de politiques foncières (par exemple la politique des structures) et appuyée par une recherche agronomique performante (disponibilité)


des politiques de subvention / des politiques fiscales nationales et locales facilitant l'accès aux produits alimentaires (taux de TVA réduit sur les produits alimentaires, tarifs de cantines subventionnés)


un Plan national  nutrition santé (PNNS) (avec des objectifs et un suivi précis, des campagnes de communication et promotion, des engagements des industriels, etc.)


des mécanismes d’appui pour la fourniture d'aide alimentaire aux populations les plus vulnérables (Programme européen d'aide aux plus démunis (PEAD),  Programme national d'aide alimentaire (PNAA), exonérations fiscales pour les dons aux associations…).


une interface science-décision qui s’est appuyée sur un effort de prospective associant les différents acteurs à la formulation des scénarios élaborés.


L’expérience nationale montre l’importance d’une volonté politique forte, fondée sur les droits, de l’allocation de moyens suffisants, et d’une participation et concertation de l'ensemble des acteurs. La société civile, le secteur privé, les collectivités locales jouent un grand rôle dans ce domaine.


2. L'expérience française dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition au plan international (coopération et développement)


La plateforme interministérielle sur la sécurité alimentaire, le GISA


Le GISA est une plateforme française multi-acteurs sur la sécurité alimentaire créée en 2008 qui rassemble, sous la co-présidence du Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et du Ministère de  l'Agriculture, les autres ministères concernés (Economie, Environnement, Recherche), l'Agence Française de Développement, la société civile et des instituts de recherche.


Son objectif est de proposer, à partir d'une approche pluri-disciplinaire et intersectorielle de la sécurité alimentaire, des mesures pour renforcer la sécurité alimentaire dans les pays du Sud.


Un engagement fort en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition


Mobilisation d’une Aide Alimentaire Programmée (AAP), qui contribue à la prévention et à la gestion des crises alimentaires (y compris la réhabilitation post-crise), et soutien aux populations vulnérables sur le plan nutritionnel menacées par la détérioration de leurs conditions d'existence. En 2012, 19 pays ont bénéficié de l'aide alimentaire programmée française, pour un montant total de 35 millions d'euros.


Soutien politique et financier à la réforme du CSA et au HLPE (concrétisation du partenariat mondial pour l’agriculture et la sécurité alimentaire), soutien du multilatéralisme (nécessité de politiques sectorielles convergentes), action en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire dans le G20 (Plan d’Action), soutien au processus de négociation et de mise en œuvre des Directives volontaires pour la gouvernance responsable des régimes fonciers.


Engagements de l’Aquila (AFSI)


Une Recherche qui s’est structurée autour des ces enjeux (AIRD, AGREENIUM) afin de mieux mobiliser les compétences et une coordination ministères/institutions de recherche avec la CRAI qui complète bien le GISA sur le volet recherche.  La sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle est ainsi au cœur de 2 métaprogrammes de l’INRA (Déterminants et impacts de la diète, interactions et transitions ; Etude des transitions pour la sécurité alimentaire mondiale), des travaux INRA – CIRAD de prospective (Agrimone, duALine, Agrimonde terra) et d’alliances et grands projets collaboratifs internationaux de recherche où les organismes français jouent un rôle majeur (JPI FACCE, Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases, Global Alliance on Food Security Research, Food secure). 


La France soutient dans ses actions des approches fondées sur les besoins (alignement avec les PNIA, recherche-actions…), sur les droits, et sur la consultation et la coordination des acteurs. Ce sont des approches ayant fait leurs preuves.


L'appui au développement de politiques agricoles adaptées, aux agricultures familiales et à l’intégration régionale sont également des axes forts de l'appui français à la sécurité alimentaire.


Par ailleurs, comment pouvons-nous tirer le meilleur parti possible des initiatives actuelles, telles que le Défi Faim Zéro, lancé par le Secrétaire général des Nations Unies à la Conférence Rio+20 des Nations Unies sur le développement durable  ( et le Cadre stratégique mondial sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition élaboré par le CSA ?


De nombreuses initiatives sont à saluer :


La mise en place de la HLTF qui vise une meilleure coordination des agences onusiennes et autres institutions internationales en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition


Le mouvement SUN  qui impulse une action collective internationale sur la nutrition, vise à accroître l'efficacité des programmes sur la nutrition et à favoriser la mobilisation de fonds.


Les résultats de RIO + 20 qui invitent à développer des approches durables en matière de sécurité alimentaire.


La réforme du CSA et la mise en place du HLPE, dont les premiers résultats sont très encourageants et montrent que des efforts conjoints et une volonté politique forte conduisent à de réelles avancées (Directives volontaires, GSF…). Il convient à présent de contribuer à diffuser les « produits du CSA » et de communiquer plus efficacement pour sensibiliser les niveaux nationaux et régionaux. Les canaux de diffusion peuvent comprendre, pour la France, son réseau d’ambassades, l’AFD et ses programmes, les réseaux de recherche et d’enseignement supérieur, etc.


Thème 3:


Pour assurer le déploiement intégral du  Programme  de développement pour l'après-2015 aux échelons mondial, régional ou national, il faut définir des objectifs, des buts et des indicateurs pour aborder les problèmes de la faim, de l'insécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition.  Un ensemble d'objectifs a été proposé par le Secrétaire général des Nations Unies dans le cadre du Défi Faim zéro:
a.    100 % d’accès à une alimentation adéquate toute l’année
b.    Zéro enfant de moins de deux ans souffrant d’un retard de croissance
c.    Tous les systèmes agro-alimentaires sont durables
d.    100 % d’augmentation de la productivité et des revenus des petits exploitants
e.    Zéro perte ou gaspillage de produits alimentaires

Veuillez nous faire part de vos observations sur cette liste d'objectifs ou formuler vos propres propositions.  Certains de ces objectifs doivent-ils être propres aux pays, ou à l'échelle régionale, plutôt que mondiale? Les objectifs doivent-ils être limités dans le temps?


  • Les 5 objectifs définis par le Secrétaire Général des Nations Unies à la conférence de Rio+20 sont très ambitieux. Ils sont une bonne base pour aboutir à des objectifs partagés.  Ils prennent en compte les 4 piliers de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition, et font le lien avec la nécessaire durabilité des systèmes de production (adaptation des systèmes de productions au changement climatique, durabilité des systèmes de production, de distribution et de consommation, limiter le gaspillage dans la chaine alimentaire). Néanmoins, le 3ème objectif (systèmes alimentaires durables) est particulièrement large et difficile à mesurer.


Certains aspects pourraient être renforcés ou ajoutés :


- Le besoin d'augmenter la productivité agricole de manière durable d’un point de vue économique, social et environnemental n'est pas assez souligné dans l'objectif sur l'accès à l'alimentation, alors que l'augmentation de la demande agricole est un réel enjeu.


- La question de la création d’emploi et de revenus, et de conditions de vie attractives en particulier en milieu rural.


- L'intégration des territoires aux marchés alimentaires par l'amélioration des infrastructures publiques est une condition nécessaire pour désenclaver certains territoires ruraux les plus vulnérables face à la sécurité alimentaire et soutenir le revenu des petits producteurs.


- La question émergente de la suralimentation, de l’obésité et des maladies non transmissibles également très présente dans les pays touchés par l'insécurité alimentaire n'est pas abordée dans le Défi Faim Zéro. De manière générale la question de la nutrition mériterait d’être élargie (au-delà de la question cruciale de l’alimentation maternelle et infantile).


La France est favorable à une réflexion sur un objectif global et universel qui intégrerait les 4 dimensions de la sécurité alimentaire, et la nutrition, et comprendrait des indicateurs mesurables et équilibrés prenant en compte les composantes économique, environnementale et sociale du développement durable.


Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,


Herewith we endorse the position and we are strongly agree that "breastfeeding should be specifically mentioned in the next Millennium Development Goals". In our more than 17 years work on the issues we and our colleagues from NM "Women and Mothers against Violence" are convinced that promotion and support of breastfeeding is the best guarantee for baby's and mother's health and better quality of life especialy in the situation of economic and financial crisis. We support all arguments in IBFAN Statement and endorse it completely.


You can add our support to the list of submissions on the Post 2015 consultation.


Sincerely yours,

Prof. Dr. Roumjana Modeva, President

Prof. Dr. Mariela Todorova, Main Coordinator and Project Manager


Dear FSN Moderator


We congratulate the Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition for organizing this consultation on "Hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition: towards a post 2015 Development Agenda". Our comments focus on themes # 1 and # 2, i.e. the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security and health within the Post 2105 Global Development Framework and indicators.


Ensuring food and nutrition security and health in an integrated way is essential for poverty eradication, reduction of inequity and for the Post 2105 Global Development Framework. While almost 1 billion people suffer from under-nutrition in poor countries, more than a billion adults worldwide are overweight. This double-burden of malnutrition affects mainly low and medium income countries. At the same time diarrhoeal diseases caused by contaminated food and water kills 1.5 million children every year and is a leading cause of malnutrition in children under five years old. The UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge launched at Rio+20 calls for multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholders partnerships to end hunger .


Successful strategies for advancing food and nutrition insecurity and health have been identified, however there is a tendency to address these issues through siloes approaches, which reduces their effectiveness and impact. To improve sustainable food production, access to adequate and safe food and to reduce chronic malnutrition governments need to strengthen in a coordinated way their policies and strategies related to development, agriculture, health, environmental and social protection among others. This requires an integrated approach towards the reduction of food and nutrition insecurity, improvement of food and water safety, sanitation systems, environmental health and protection of natural resources. The future we want should ensure that these strategies are integrated in development plans and addressed by all stakeholders from a gender equality and human rights perspective.


In order to be successful, development objectives need to be linked closely to the local, national and regional realities and need to be developed following a bottom up approach and including civil society. The Pan American Alliance for Nutrition and Development is an inter agency initiative that aims to promote intersectoral, coordinated sustainable programs with a human rights framework, and with a gender equality and intercultural equity perspective to accelerate the MDGs and to contribute to the post 2015 agenda. Other initiatives such as REACH also foster intersectoral coordination.


One of the top recommendations the Rio Dialogue Days is to develop food systems that are sustainable and promote health. Health indicators can strengthen accountability over the social impacts of development policies, contributing to the governance for sustainable development. Food policies should consider nutrition security and health as an outcome, including communicable and non communicable diseases. Core indicators of sustainable agriculture, food and nutrition security have been proposed by WHO in the context of Rio+20 addressing: i) Health outcomes: such anemia in women of reproductive age; stunting in children under 5 years; obesity in children under 5 and in adults; ii) Food access and dietary quality in association with sustainable foods production: adequate access to fruits, vegetables and protein supply; excessive adult saturated fat consumption; household dietary diversity; and food contamination and foodborne diseases iii) Food market/trade policies supporting health and sustainability: e.g. countries that have phased out use of antibiotics as growth promoters; health impact assessment in agricultural policies and food trade plans; compliance with food safety standards (additives, hormone, pesticides and veterinary drug residues). The integration of these key issues through effective, transparent partnerships is fundamental to move towards an agriculture systems that ensures food and nutrition security and promote health. This requires countries' commitment and aligned donor support for cross-sectoral programming and implementation among UN agencies and other stakeholders.


For more information see:


M. Cristina Tirado-von der Pahlen

Food Safety Regional Adviser

PAHO/WHO, PANAFTOSA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

See the attachment: MDGsfoodsecurityconsultation.doc
Anna Herforth Independent Consultant, United States of America

Theme 1

One of the lessons learned from the MDGs is that the poverty, hunger, and malnutrition goals within MDG1 were poorly linked, and results poorly correlated.  For example, of the 21 countries that have already achieved the hunger goal, only 6 have achieved the underweight goal; including Mali, which has made no progress on underweight (World Bank Guidance Note on Multisectoral Approaches to Nutrition, forthcoming 2013).  Some indicator of access to diverse foods (such as dietary diversity) is one way that the goals of hunger and improved nutrition can be integrated.

Main opportunity: that there is increasingly interest within the agriculture sector in how to improve nutrition impact.  In my opinion, reframing the concept of food security back to its roots -- nutritious foods for a healthy and active life -- is the single most important thing we can do, from an advocacy perspective.  Agriculture projects often aim for improved food security, and if the common understanding is that food security means diverse, nutritious foods – so that becomes a measured goal of agriculture investments – this would be a giant step toward nutrition outcomes from agriculture.  This general view was also supported within the FSN Forum Discussion 83, by contributions from Rachel Nugent and others.

The main challenge is how to increase incentives and accountability within the agriculture sector to reduce hunger AND malnutrition, while protecting natural resources.  Indicators that measure access to diverse foods, and indicators of sustainability of production and distribution, would be an important part of accountability.


Theme 2

Consensus on how agriculture can work for nutrition would be very helpful to provide a basic idea of how to get action started in national agriculture plans and projects.  FAO has recently supported a Synthesis of Guiding Principles on Agriculture Programming for Nutrition published by a dozen

This report provides several guiding principles, each one supported by a large majority of the institutions, to address hunger, food insecurity and nutrition in an integrated way. A brief is attached.


Theme 3

The objectives should be time bound: this creates the opportunity to determine whether countries are on track or not, which has been politically powerful.

Specific feedback on each objective:

a.       100% access to adequate food all year round: Access to adequate food, of course, needs to be understood as diverse, nutritious foods for a healthy and active life; not just calories.

b.      Zero stunted children less than 2 years old: Given our definition of stunting as -2 SD below the mean, zero stunted children is not possible, since in a healthy population, 2.5% of children will fall below that cutoff. Politically speaking, 0% sounds powerful, so the wording could be changed to 0% excess stunting.

c.       All food systems are sustainable: Sustainability needs to be defined simply and clearly with indicators. Otherwise governments cannot be held accountable to it. Lack of accountability to indicators of sustainability is the bane of decades-long calls for sustainability. Only what gets measured gets managed.  A research agenda put forth by Bioversity International calls for clear metrics on sustainable diets and food systems, certainly an agenda well worth pursuing if we are serious about this goal, as we must be. (

d.      100% increase in smallholder productivity and income: Extremely important that we define productivity and income carefully.  If productivity is taken to mean tonnes/ha of staple grains, that would be a missed opportunity, not what is most important as a global target to reducing hunger.  Micronutrient deficiencies (hidden hunger) persist, and we have much more obesity now than in 1990.  Increasing just staple grains and calories will not solve these problems.  Productivity increases for non-staple crops (legumes, vegetables, fruits) are essential to balance local and global diets.  Income also must be carefully defined.  Women’s income is particularly important for hunger and malnutrition reductions.  If we focus only on the household level, we may miss the most important route income can take: through the hands of women.

e.      Zero loss or waste of food: Reducing food waste is a no-brainer for increasing food availability, and I very much support its inclusion in this list of targets.  Food waste is also tied to water waste, which is also critical to human well-being (see SIWI report link below).  Again, clear indicators need to be identified for different stages: production, transport, marketing, and consumption. Addressing aflatoxins in soils and storage is an important component of reducing food waste, since contaminated grain should not be consumed. 


Marielle Dubbeling RUAF Foundation, Netherlands

The current challenges posed by climate change and its interaction with cities, urban poverty and food security are recognized globally. In its 2010 report, the World Bank makes a plea for innovative “outside-the-box” solutions to climate change adaptation and points out that environmentally sustainable solutions for food, water, energy and transport as integrated components of a city climate change adaptation and disaster risk management plan are needed (World Bank, 2010).


Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry (UPAF) is one of these “outside-the-box” solutions currently being considered.  UPAF can play a strong role in enhancing food security for the urban poor, greening the city and improving the urban climate, while stimulating the productive reuse of urban organic wastes and reducing the urban energy footprint

The current challenges posed by climate change and its interaction with cities, urban poverty and food security are recognized globally. In its 2010 report, the World Bank makes a plea for innovative “outside-the-box” solutions to climate change adaptation and points out that environmentally sustainable solutions for food, water, energy and transport as integrated components of a city climate change adaptation and disaster risk management plan are needed (World Bank, 2010).


Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry (UPAF) is one of these “outside-the-box” solutions currently being considered.  UPAF can play a strong role in enhancing food security for the urban poor, greening the city and improving the urban climate, while stimulating the productive reuse of urban organic wastes and reducing the urban energy footprint. See further the attached document

See the attachment: Contribution FSN +UNH.docx