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

Please find attached the submission to the E-Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security.

Martin Wolpold-Bosien FIAN International, Germany

Warm greetings from FIAN International, and best wishes for 2013!


With this email, I would like to send you some contributions to the ongoing consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition.


1)      As a first contribution, I attach some key documents that were produced by the Civil Society working group before and after the elaboration of the First Version of the GSF. In my opinion, these are two key documents that bring together a:


Civil society alternative approach to the framing of global policies on food security and nutrition (“CSO Working Document on the GSF” which was elaborated as an input for draft 0 of the GSF);


Civil society assessment of the GSF after the approval of its First Version by the CFS in October 2012 (“CSO final assessment of the GSF...”). This document analyses the approved GSF from the perspective of the major CSO concerns and proposals that were brought to the attention of CFS stakeholders during the consultation and negotiation process. I strongly believe that these CSO positions should be taken into account when discussing the Post-2015 framework.


In short, CSO expressed after approval of the GSF by the CFS in October 2012 in their “Statement of social movements and other civil society organizations on the Global Strategic Framework of the Committee on World Food Security CFS”:


“We welcome the adoption on October 17, 2012, of the first version of the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF).


The GSF, as the overarching framework, will be the primary global reference for coordination and coherence in decision-making on food and agricultural issues. It is an important achievement of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS). We as social movements and civil society organizations participated intensively in its elaboration.


The GSF constitutes a step forward in promoting a new model of governance on food, agriculture, and nutrition. This document is built upon the human rights approach, women’s rights and the recognition of the central role of smallholder farmers, agricultural and food workers, artisanal fisher folks, pastoralists, Indigenous Peoples, landless people, women and youth to food and nutrition security.


The GSF also recognizes that formal employment of rural workers and assurance of minimum living wages are key for food security and nutrition. The document mentions the potential of agro-ecology and provides important guidance on nutrition based on the Right to Food Guidelines. It also reaffirms the strong commitment of States to the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Lands, Fisheries and Forests, including through agrarian reform.


The GSF negotiations reached an important consensus on human rights-based monitoring and accountability, which implies that States, intergovernmental institutions and the private sector are held accountable for their actions and omissions  regarding their obligations under international human rights law.


Several issues that are important to civil society are not addressed in the current version of the GSF in particular Food Sovereignty. We affirm our commitment to ensure that the new paradigm for food security policy will be based on food sovereignty.


We expect countries and all actors to fully support the implementation on the GFS on all levels. We will contribute to make use of this important tool for our initiatives and struggles at local, national and international level.”


2)      As a second contribution I would like to stress three key human rights challenges for the debate on the post MDG period that address at the same time essential shortcomings of the MDG, especially MDG 1:


a) Primacy of human rights: Although the inclusion of human rights terminology and references has increased significantly in international frameworks dealing with food security and nutrition, it is still not fully understood and accepted that human rights are the primary responsibility of States and have primacy over any other policy area as stated in Article 1 of the Vienna Declaration adopted by consensus at the UN World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. In this perspective, it was an important achievement that the Vision Statement of the reformed CFS states that “the CFS will strive for a world free from hunger where countries implement the voluntary guidelines for the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security”. The formulation of the post 2015 framework should recognize this primacy.


b) Qualifying policy coherence: The concept of coherence should be understood in terms of “human rights coherence”. In other words, government policies must be reviewed with the objective of ensuring they do not result in negative human rights consequences including on the right to food. This qualification is needed to avoid unintended effects resulting from having different policy objectives. Policy coherence is not an end in itself. Policy coherence must be human rights based, which essentially means that all policies with negative impact on human rights must be stopped, revised and made consistent with human rights requirements.


c) Human rights based monitoring and accountability: These terms have gained increasing acceptance among most actors in the food security and nutrition field, and were recognized in the First Version of the GSF. Although we know that States, intergovernmental institutions and private actors are hesitant to accept monitoring mechanisms that assume legal accountability for human rights impacts, we also know that without such accountability, no substantial change in national and international policies can be expected. If we believe that hunger is largely a product of policy failures to meet human rights obligations, including extraterritorial obligations, we must insist on establishing and strengthening accountability mechanisms at all levels.


3) Finally, as a third contribution and reference on how to include the Right to Adequate Food into global policy frameworks and how to apply a human rights approach in national food and nutrition security strategies, the FAO Right to Food colleagues published in collaboration with  FIAN two Factsheets in March 2012:


1) The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition: A Right to Food Perspective

2) Human Rights - a Strategy for the Fight against Hunger


From our point of view, the elements and conclusions of these fact sheets are as well valid for the Post 2015 consultation and could be taken into account in the context of the process.


I hope that these few contributions seem useful to you. If you have further requests or need some more information, please let me know.


Warm greetings,


Martin Wolpold-Bosien

Right to Food Accountability Programme Coordinator

Coordinador para América Central

FIAN International Secretariat

Braulio de Souza Dias Convention on Biological Diversity on Hunger, Food and Nutrition ...

Contribution from the Executive Secretary  of the Convention on Biological Diversity on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security

The achievement of food security requires the sustainable increase of food production and access to food. More, and nutritionally adequate, food needs to be produced using less global inputs (land, water, fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides and other chemicals) per unit of produce. This needs to be achieved in the face of dwindling resources and increasing competition for those resources, whilst simultaneously responding to the impacts of climate change on farming systems and natural ecosystems and reducing the impact of agriculture on the environment. The challenge is indeed significant but most commentators conclude that it can be met.

Biodiversity has a central role to play in meeting the challenge. Biodiversity underpins ecosystem services which are essential for sustainable food production at all scales, from industrialised to small-holder subsistence farming. Some key examples where significant progress can be made include:

•    Reversing the degradation of soils, which underpin all agricultural production. Conserving or restoring soil biodiversity and ecosystem functions delivers multiple benefits including:  improved nutrient cycling and availability for crops, hence improving fertiliser use efficiency on-farm and reducing off-farm impacts; restoring soil organic carbon content, with multiple on-farm benefits in addition to contributing to mitigating climate change; improving water cycling, including soil water storage, thereby improving crop-water productivity as well as increasing resilience to increasing climatic variation; improving nature-based pest and disease regulation, thereby improving integrated pest management and enhancing prevention of spread of invasive alien species. Practitioners can determine the most feasible approach based on local environmental and socio-economic conditions, but restoring soil health, and the biodiversity underpinning it, must be the cornerstone of any sustainable agriculture strategy. Much success is being achieved by the farming community and needs to be mainstreamed and upscaled. The International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Soil Biodiversity ( was adopted in 2008 by the Parties to the CBD specifically to strengthen efforts in these regards. At CBD COP-11 Governments and international organizations launched the “Hyderabad Call for a Concerted Effort on Ecosystem Restoration” (;
•    Genetic diversity is essential to maintain options for farmers, resilience of farming systems and productivity increases through improved breeds and varieties, particularly in response to increasing climatic change and increased variability. Maintaining the diversity of genetic resources available to farmers, preferably in-situ (landraces on-farm and wild relatives in natural ecosystems) but where necessary ex-situ, and including maintaining the cultural knowledge of farming, and the communities associated with this biodiversity, is an essential requirement for sustainable food security. We need to significantly strengthen support to the important efforts of the farming community, particularly small-scale farmers and indigenous and local communities, to conserve and sustainably use these critical genetic resources;
•    Reversing the decline of pollinators, which are essential for sustaining crop productivity, as outlined further in the International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Pollinators (;
•    Recognising that the needs are not simply for food security in terms of minimum requirements of calories and protein, but for food security which includes adequate provision of vitamins, minerals, micro-nutrients and other essential components of a healthy diet. A diverse source of foods, produced on healthy soils, is essential for food and nutrition security. Biodiversity has a central role to play in achieving a healthy diet, as outlined further in the Cross-Cutting Initiative on Biodiversity for Food and Nutrition (

These, and other, needs and approaches are well captured in the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011-2020) and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets ( The central purpose of this plan is to promote the contribution that biodiversity can make to achieving sustainable development. The plan and targets, therefore, are not just for the environment or biodiversity community but represent a framework for action for all interested in sustainable development. The contribution of biodiversity to achieving food security in a post-2015 world is one of the most significant areas in which progress can be made.

As indicated in the UN Rio+20 outcome document "The Future We Want", biodiversity has a critical role to play in maintaining ecosystems that provide essential services, which are the foundations for sustainable development and human well-being.

The UN General Assembly declared 2011-2020 the United Nations Decade on Biodiversity, with a view to contribute to the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets, decided in 2010 in Nagoya, Japan by the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention. This Strategic Plan for Biodiversity considers biodiversity as an opportunity for human well-being and poverty eradication. That is why the 20 Targets to implement the Strategic Plan relate not only to conservation and sustainable use, but also relate to reducing direct pressures on biodiversity and, most importantly, addressing the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across all sectors of government and society.

Overall, the Targets aim to bring about a considerable change in our lifestyles, and particularly in our development paradigm – over the next decade we must move firmly away from unchecked consumption and towards sustainable use.

Breastfeeding, a smart choice for working women.


Introduction: Mothers are the fastest-growing segment of current global workforce. In the past 20 years, the percentage of new mothers in the workforce has increased which makes women more challenging when they become pregnant. In most cases,  those mothers are not able to return works due to lack of support in work place or  lack of care giver who can take care of their baby during her absence that make it challenging to continue her jobs and results is discontinuation of  job in this stage. Those continue their job phase lots of challenges to continue breastfeeding to their child and started bottle feeding. It is well documented that one of the primary reasons for early breastfeeding cessation is the Mother’s return to work.         


Breastfeeding is a low-tech, low-cost health promotion behavior that has received increasing support from public health authorities worldwide over the past 50 years. It has become increasingly clear that breastfeeding is the best option for infant and young child feeding, and that not breastfeeding exposes mother and child to higher risks of ill health in both the short and long term.


Inappropriate Infant and Young Child Feeding practices is one of the major cause of child malnutrition. Initiation of breastfeeding within one hour, exclusive breastfeeding for first six months and continued breastfeeding for 20 to 23 months have been identified as major indicators for achieving Millenium Development Goal 4, reducing child mortality one third by 2015.


Barriers to optimal infant and young child feeding contribute to 1.4 million preventable deaths annually in children under five, the majority of whom are dying already during the first month of life. Initiating breastfeeding within the first hour of birth can reduce neonatal mortality by 20%, but shockingly, more than half the world’s newborns are not breastfeed within an hour of birth. Exclusive breastfeeding for six months and continued breastfeeding for 12 months may prevent under five child deaths by 13%, complementary feeding may contribute to reduce 6% child deaths (Lancet2003). Globally only around 37% of infants under six months are exclusively breastfed (Lancet2003). A 16-country study found that adequate maternity leave policies might increase breastfeeding sufficiently to prevent one to two neonatal deaths per 2,000 live births.


Human milk and infant formula are not equivalent and are not equally suitable options for infant feeding. Research    has found that for every $1 spent on breastfeeding support, companies save $3. This is because in companies which support breastfeeding women return to work earlier,fewer health-care dollars are spent, fewer sick days are taken, employees report greater job satisfaction, companies report reduced staff turnover.


Health insurance studies have documented that infants who are exclusively breastfed for three months or longer have overall health care costs that are $300-$400 less per year than infants who are bottlefed.  Evidence reported in a two-year study of 343 employees an annual savings of $240,000 in health care expenses.  Breastfeeding also Lower Absenteeism & Turnover Rates One-day absences to care for sick children occur more than twice as often for mothers of formula feeding infants.  A study of multiple companies with lactation support programs found an average retention rate of 94%.

Given this atmosphere of unacknowledged demand, there is an urgent need to educate employers on the value and feasibility of worksite breastfeeding support programs for business profitability. So  a  worksite breastfeeding support initiative can easily build upon the increased awareness of the importance of breastfeeding, utilizing a combination of outreach and education strategies to reach both employers and empoyees.Breastfeeding support in workplace improve retention, mitigates lost productivity/absenteeism, earlier return from maternity leave, higher employee loyalty and create a family friendly business.

Challenges and opportunities:


The challenge in terms of breastfeeding protection is the adoption and the monitoring of an adequate policy of maternity entitlements that facilitate six months of exclusive breastfeeding for women employed in all sectors, with urgent attention to the non-formal sector. Lack of support in Workplace, family members, poor Implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes makes mother more difficult to continue breastfeeding.


The Innocenti Declarations (1999, 2005) and WHO Global Strategy for IYCF (2002) call for provision of imaginative legislation to protect the breastfeeding rights of working women and further monitoring of its application consistent with ILO Maternity Protection Convention No 183, 2000 (MPC No. 183) and Recommendation 191. MPC No. 183 specifies that women workers should receive:


•    Health protection, job protection and non-discrimination for pregnant and breastfeeding workers
•    At least 14 weeks of paid maternity leave
•    One or more paid breastfeeding breaks daily or daily reduction of hours of work to breastfeed


Furthermore, Recommendation 191 encourages facilities for breastfeeding to be set up at or near the workplace.


Many country’s make good progress in tracking maternity protection and could manage six months maternity leave with payment, however, long ways needs to go to achive this.

Directions for the future:


•    Aware employers with this maternity protection law and encourage for incorpoarting into their existing policy.
•    Prenatal education classes for the pregnnat women in the work place
•    Orientation of employes with the advantages of breastfeeding
•    Establish baby creche in all work places.
•    Improve knowledge amongst both employers and employees regarding importance of proper breastfeeding and complemnetary feeding practices.
•    Establish a work site environment that favors mothers recently given birth breatsfeed exclusively enabling them to transition back into the workplace while optimizing the benefits their infants receive from being breastfed.
•    Advocate employes to make an reasonable time and private accommodations for employees to express milk at the workplace whom are not taken their baby in the work site.
•    Ensure Co-workers support in the work place.
•    Proper implementation of International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitute.
•    Provision of worksite based lactation management.


Submitted by: Eminence and Bangladesh Civil Society Network for Promoting Nutrition(BCSNPN)
3/6, Asad Avenue, Mohammadpur, Dhaka, Bangladesh.,,,



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.   For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?


In the development field, the concept of governance achieved prominence at the end of the 1980s and beginning of 1990s with the recognition that development policies were failing, in part because insufficient attention had been paid to political and institutional processes and outcomes. These concerns also were reflected in the field of food and nutrition security , and took special relevance due to challenges aroused by the globalization, with different positions that looked at the global level as the most challenging level, or at the national level as the critical point where governance weaknesses constrains the adequate provision of public goods.

After the 2007-2008 crisis, all the stakeholders have recognised the need to reconfigure the prevailing arrangements for food and nutrition governance at global level and  also the critical role of governance at national and local level. This consensus was expressed in  World Summit on Food Security Declaration (2009) that  underlines the need to “Foster strategic coordination at national, regional and global level to improve governance, promote better allocation of resources, avoid duplication of efforts and identify response-gaps.”;  it has also seen in the move to reform the FAO Committee on Food Security (CFS). Simultaneously the scope of governance has passed from the visions limited to government responsibilities to the recognition of the role of civil society and private sector.

The current governance of food and nutrition security reflects its multidimensionality and cuts across many areas of policy such as development, production, health,  trade, science, human rights and climate change. At global level there is no single international institution with the exclusive mandate to address food and nutrition security; instead there are multiple institutions that are responsible for various aspects. In addition, other common types of international institutions, such as special programs or funds, and informal institutions have a relevant impact and play determinant roles (e.g. the G8/G20). All those elements configure governance of food and nutrition security as a complex regime with rules and functions determined in distinct international fora, and a heterogeneous nature in terms of membership composition and decision-making procedures. At national levels a similar complex regime  prevails, with public and private institutions and stakeholders interacting in a multisectorial scenario influenced by the international framework and external actors.

The complex regime of governance food and nutrition security has not achieved the results intended and is under strong scrutiny. It does not provide mechanisms that ensure that humankind overcomes the challenges it  face yet, it is however the product of a long process of cooperation. Improving it requires to understand the gaps, conflicts and weaknesses that cause its poor functionality.

The first is an issue of overall institutional architecture which creates overlaps  of authority and jurisdictions of different bodies and institutions.  

The second issue is the lack of internal coherence and consistency when it comes to principles, laws and regulations, stemming from the lack of consensus on hierarchy of different laws and gaps in the global regulatory system to resolve contradictions, as it is the case between trade and human rights.

The third issue is a two part problem: 1)lack of practical linkages between bodies that necessarily should be linked, and 2) absence of follow up between them, that is to say, a disconnect between deliberative institutions where consensus on diagnoses and recommendations are reached and those international bodies that handle negotiations and decision-making needed to put in practice what is agreed upon by the former.  

Those issues are not specific to ‘food and nutrition security’ governance; they are also seen in a variety of development areas, such trade or environment, themselves governed by complex regimes. The global governance system yet does not offer effective solutions to resolve the  contradictions resulting from the above mentioned issues.

Building the Post-2015 Global Development Framework.

The reform of Committee on Food Security (CFS) has been very successful but there needs to be a continued international effort to strengthen the mechanisms for enabling the participation of all stakeholders and countries in a meaningful way and facilitate more inclusive dialogue processes. The regional integration bodies could play a bigger role acting as a node that facilitates the link between the global and the national level  in the dialogues and deliberative aspects, but also by taking action to enable States in implementing recommendations from CFS, thus filling some gaps of the governance regime.

The regional actors  could also play a relevant role to build a global framework sensitive to regional and national contexts and capacities and facilitate national ownership. Building  frameworks in this way facilitates their adoption thru stronger commitments and realistic timeframes.

Within the process of developing the global framework there should be space for committing to global governance as a goal or target in and of itself. This should fill some gaps related to overlapping mandates,  lack of adequate mechanisms to resolve conflict of principles, laws and regulations, and other system failures.

FAO member States approved the Voluntary guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security that constitutes a framework for enhancing food and nutrition security governance at national level. The Right to Adequate Food can also be a reference point to overcome some of the inconsistencies of food and nutrition security governance at global level.

Improving governance at national level matters and is a critical aspect but it has to be complemented with a clear and sound improvement at  international level, otherwise we will perpetuate the weaknesses and failures of past decades.


Juan Carlos García y Cebolla
Team Leader – Right to Food
Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA), FAO
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy


Sara Wuehler Micronutrient Forum secretariat, unofficial comments, Canada

The new Micronutrient Forum has been working on strategy development topics that may provide some insight into the process, but not available for this deadline.  If you will take suggestions beyond this date, please let me know. 


In the mean time, my personal input is the following:


Theme 1:


lessons learned: a) Current global and national support, although improved, is still insufficient and/or not evenly distributed to those sectors where progress and funding is required, i.e. nutritional aspects of various interventions; b) More time/ effort is needed to move beyond uni-sectoral approaches and recognize the whole-ness that is needed for effective programs and interventions




a) Getting various groups to set aside prejudices and recognize each-others’ contributions and essentiality in the mix

b) Removing the threats and waste introduced by warring and greedy countries and leaders

c) Getting countries to develop population-driven long-term agendas, as opposed to donor or politically driven agendas that drop as soon as the funds end or the next political leader takes over


Theme 2:

what works:


a) Programs and interventions MUST come from within each country (encouraging topics by providing funding is self-limiting)

b) International organizations must recognize and work from the fundamental premise that no matter what we do, we cannot force countries or individuals within countries to comply (obesity and non-communicable disease in Europe and North America are classic examples)


Theme 3:  These objectives are a mixed bag of some thought and some essentially unattainable goals that do not take into consideration the fundamental causes behind the “clinical signs”


Should build objectives that approach the cause:


a) All countries have functioning cross-sectoral working groups that develop country-specific plans aimed at reaching universal year-round access to appropriate and adequate food, reducing chronic malnutrition (as demonstrated by reductions in stunting), developing sustainable food systems aimed at improving the quality and quantity of food and minimizing any waste and loss of these foods;

b) All political leaders demonstrate their commitment to long-term national development by developing nutrition and health systems that continue to function separately from a given political party.


Now THAT would be something to accomplish



There are many proofs already that the cheapest and most lasting way to feed the hunger is to help small farmers to help themselves. They must have the right to have land, water and the knowledge of organic farming, storage and selling. This knowledge is not known to many decision makers and the public. It is necessary to find ways to spread this concept to them.

See the attachment: LY Logo.doc
Paula Hinson La Leche League, United Kingdom

Please don't overlook the importance of breastfeeding as a key contributor to child survival, health and healthy development. Exclusive breastfeeding until around 6 months and continued breastfeeeding alongside complementary foords for  2 years and beyond is the optimum feeding practice. 

Ann Yarwood United Kingdom

In a week that saw the news that Australia is "suffering" from a "formula shortage'" thanks to bulk buying Chinese consumers who are sending infant formula home after the milk fiasco there, there seems to be an urgent need for mentioning  the importance of BREASTFEEDING (and making the WHO code a more robust tool that protects all mothers and children) in the Millenium Development Goals.  I'd like to add my voice to others who have called for BREASTFEEDING to be included.




Thomas Forster New School for Public Engagement, United States of America

Dear all,


The remarks I make under the themes of this consultation are drawn partially from a 2011 FAO position paper for which I was a coordinating author titled Food, Agriculture and Cities: the challenges of food and nutrition security, agriculture and ecosystem management in an urbanizing world. The full paper can be found at In addition this builds on recent policy language included in the Rio+20 outcome document calling for urban rural linkages for food and nutrition security.


Theme 1:


The key lessons from the initial Millennium Development Goals (MDG) must include, among many things stated by others, a recognition of a changed context for achieving food and nutrition security for all in the mid-21st century. The urbanization of world population, and the consequent challenges of feeding cities and rural hinterlands in a world of economic and environmental volatility, demand fundamental change in the way food systems are conceived, implemented and made more resilient. As these challenges have become increasingly evident, especially following the food price and economic crises of the last five years, there are also innovative ecosystem approaches that have civil society and multilevel government support for policy, programmes and resources in every region, in both low and high income countries. 


Theme 2:


New approaches combine systems-based and integrated crop, livestock and forest landscapes in both rural and urban settings. New approaches include integrating new agricultural landscapes with both targets of climate change mitigation and adaptation and with targets of reducing poverty and hunger.  New approaches also integrate these ecological, social and economic targets with local and national political commitment. While such multi-dimensional integration is not ubiquitous by any means, it is evident in pockets of innovation across the world. This is very hopeful.  To spread these examples of good practice and multi-targeted outcomes, it is necessary to have a multipronged approach such that three critical groups in all society – civil society, local authorities and national governments – all take ownership of such integrated sustainable development approaches in setting targets.


Theme 3:


The targets of the ZHC are a useful beginning, but there should be explicit reference to integrated solutions as mentioned above. There should also be explicit reference to the need for integration of urban and rural areas to achieve the targets of sustainable diets and resilient food systems to meet the continuing economic and environmental challenges that will characterize the future in all regions. In this spirit I would add the following to existing goals a, c and e:


  1. a. 100% access to adequate and healthful food all year around
  1. c. All food systems and diets are sustainable
  2. e. Zero loss or waste of food in both rural and urban areas.
See the attachment: FSN contribution - Forster.docx

Key Lessons - Both over nutrition (obesity) and under nutrition (malnutrition) are set during infancy.  Early and exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months fo life followed by complementary (home) foods and continued breastfeeding up to two years and beyond mitigates both these extremes.  (1) 


Human milk is the most 'secure' food for an infant. Protection of breastfeeding by world wide adherence to both the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (and subsequent relevant WHA Resolutions) ('the Code') and The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding ( 2003) is critical to ensuring that each child can maximize their life potential.     


The attached summary table in the UN SCN Breastfeeding and Complementary Feeding Working Group 2004 summarises how intimately essential breastfeeding (human milk) is to achieving the eight MD goals.  Breastfeeding (human milk) protects the life of the child nutritionally and healthwise now and in the future, and protects and provides normal health for the mother. (2)  All of which is a cost saving to both the family and the community. (3) 


(1) Victora C. Nutrition in early life: a global priority. The Lancet 2009; 374(9696):1123-1125.)

(2) Ip S, Chung M, Raman G, et al. Breastfeeding and Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes in Developed Countries. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Apr. (Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 153.) Available from:

(3) Bartick M, Reinhold A. Pediatrics. The burden of suboptimal breastfeeding in the United States: A pediatric cost analysis.  2010 Apr 5. Pediatrics (online) DOI: 10.1542/peds.2009-1616


Challenges - The encrochment of industry and commercial self-interests into the governance and decision making around nutrition issues is a challenge.  Blurring of the distinction between the interests of the private sector in public policy making weakens and pushes aside public input.  As is stated by The Conflicts of Interest Coalition " a clear distinction to be made between business-interest not-for-profit organisations (BINGOs) and public interest non-governmental organisations (PINGOs)" in particular with the World Health Organization.  The pressure by industry to get involved in public health decisions must be resisted by governments and governing agencies in order to protect, in particular, breastfeeding.  This is why as above adherence to 'the Code' is crucial.  
What Works Best - An ethical, and  human rights based approach. 
First, the child's right to human milk (4) and second the mother's right to breastfeed.(5)   To quote IBFAN
"Breastfeeding is an integral part of women’s reproductive health and as such, represents a right for  women. However, women can only enjoy the full health benefits of breastfeeding when they receive  accurate information to make an informed choice about infant feeding, are able to exercise their  right to breastfeed without coercion and pressure, and when governments, communities, health  professionals and families protect this right." 
Second, basic principles of ethics.  
Veracity - truthfulness and lack of guilt in stating the RISKS of not breastfeeding to mothers and families preparing for childbirth.  Application of the strictest guidelines to truthfulness in marketing and advertising of foods which can interfere with breastfeeding. i.e 'the Code.'  
Beneficence and non maleficence -protection from harm, doing good and ensuring that in efforts to eradicate hunger and achieve food security the focus of doing good clearly benefits the public and NOT industry. ( i.e Nestle gift to PAWHO, contracts with US municipalities to eradicate obesity.)  
Justice - equality and no discrimination in the meting out of world resources for prevention of malnutrition and insuring as food security, the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding in developing AND developed countries. 
(4) Convention on the Rights of the Child 24.2.e  

(5) Ball O.  Breastmilk is a human right.  Breastfeeding Rev. 2010;18(3):9-19


Initiatives - The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent relevant Resolutions, and The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding, if applied worldwide with honest commitment of governments to their people, will ensure reaching the eight goals.  

Nikki Lee Self-employed, United States of America

Breastfeeding promotion, protection and support is a global activity that addresses all 5 components of Theme 3.


Breastfed infants will have virtually 100% access to adequate food all year round. Most women can breastfeed, when their society welcomes and encourages it.


Breastfed children grow appropriately, and healthily.


Breastfeeding is an ecologically sound activity, a sustainable and renewable resource.


Breastfeeding enables smallholders to conserve their resources by reducing fertility and expenditure.


Breastfeeding is only wasted when it is not done. In a shrinking world and facing political and climate unrest, why encourage mothers to throw food away?


Breastfeeding for at least 2 years, with the gradual introduction of iron-rich complementary foods around 6 months is an appropriate objective for every country. This objective has no time limits, and will apply to today's generation and at least seven generations to come.

Key lessons - Under nutrition (malnutrition) and over nutrition (obesity) are programmed mostly during infancy. Prevention of either means ensuring early and exclusive breastfeeding  during the first six months, followed by introduction of complementary foods along with continued  breastfeeding up to two years and beyond.  A growing body of evidence points to the key role of infant and young child feeding practices, especially early and exclusive breastfeeding, in mitigating over and under malnutrition.
Breastfeeding is one of the best preventions for disease later in life for both the child being fed human milk and the mother herself.  Breastfeeding also provides protection for the infant and child from communicable diseases.  In developing nations which lack clean water, access to public healthcare, human milk is not only healthful but can be lifesaving, and in developed countries is shown to provide normal health compared to use of artificial baby milks which results in sub-optimal health.  (1)
 In conclusion, both the WHO/UNICEF International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent relevant WHA Resolutions, and the Global Strategy on Infant and Young Child Feeding are key directives, that if applied broadly worldwide will accomplish the ideals set out in the health-related Millennium Development Goal (MDG) see attached table summary from this 2004 document.  (2)
(1)Victora C. Nutrition in early life: a global priority. The Lancet 2009; 374(9696):1123-1125.)
(2) Ip S, Chung M, Raman G, et al. Breastfeeding and Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes in Developed Countries. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Apr. (Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 153.) Available from:

Key challenges - the commercialization of food world wide, and the encrochment by commercial food industry interests into the decision making of non-governmental bodies around the world.  To quote Baby Milk Action " Several WHA Resolutions have highlighted these risks and have called for 'governance' in health policy and programme setting to be protected from the undue influence of those who stand to gain financially from decisions.  Insustry involvement at a core strategic level can favour market led response to infant and young child feeding that sidelines the critical role of breastfeeding and appropriate complementary feeding"... of 'home' foods.  See


What works best. A respect for the rights of the child! It is a child's right to have it's mother's milk. (3)  An approach that respects human rights, and one which incorporates the basic tenets of medical ethics ( after all, over and under nutrition end up being medical problems!); autonomy and veracity (parents getting the truth about the risks of NOT breastfeeding when a choice of feeding is available); beneficence and non-maleficence (acknowlegement without guilt, that NOT receiving human milk for the first six months is harmful), and justice (the same rules for all babies, children, familes and mothers no matter where in the world they live).   


(3) Convention on the Rights of the Child, 24.1.g 

(4) Nygren-Krug, Helena.  A human rights based approach to non-communicable disease.

(5) Ball O.  Breastfeeding is a human right.  Breastfeeding Review. 2010;18(3)9-19

See the attachment: UN SCN BF Comp Food 2004 Table
Lou Pingeot NGO Working Group on Food and Hunger at the United Nations, United States ...

Theme 1: Challenges and Opportunities

In September 2011, the NGO Working Group on Food and Hunger at the United Nations submitted a policy statement to the UN General Assembly, addressing global policy around food and hunger issues, and highlighting the key areas that need attention. While the statement was published in 2011, these issues are relevant and need to be addressed in the post-2015 agenda. The fourteen points raised in the statement were the following:


1. Ecological Approaches to Food Production

2. The false promises of the “New Green Revolution” & Agro-Industrial Ideologies

3. Local Food Production and Food Sovereignty

4. Global Food Governance & the Committee on World Food Security

5. Land Rights and Land-Grabbing

6. Financial Speculation in food commodities markets

7. The impact of biofuels on food availability

8. Water

9. Soil Protection

10. Responsible investment in agriculture

11. Agricultural Families and Agricultural Labor

12. Nutrition & Food Quality

13. Other Issues (use of pesticides, ‘western’ diets, biodiversity, over-fishing etc.)

14. Food Enough for All Please find the full statement as an attachment.


The NGO Working Group on Food & Hunger was founded in December 2008 to coordinate NGO advocacy at the United Nations in New York on issues of hunger, malnutrition, agriculture and food production, and related matters. Spurred by the food crisis of 2008, the Working Group promotes better understanding and more effective action on these issues at UN headquarters. The Working Group brings together a number of NGO participants in New York, as well as corresponding participants from other worldwide locations. The Working Group maintains contact with civil society work at the Committee on Food Security in Rome.

For more information about the Working Group, please visit

Lou Pingeot

Program Coordinator

Global Policy Forum

777 UN Plaza, 3D

New York, NY 10017

+1 212 557 3161

Kathleen Kendall-Tackett United States of America

Please include breastfeeding as part of your Millenium Goals to reduce child mortality. Both UNICEF and WHO recognize that breastfeeding substantially lowers the rate of diseases that kill children. Including breastfeeding in the revised MDGs would do much to help breastfeeding advocates around the world put breastfeeding on local, state, and national agendas.


Thank you for your consideration.

Kathleen Kurz DAI, United States of America

Theme 1. Key lessons MDGs 2000-2015


Stunting among children under 5 years (height/age) is a good indicator for malnutrition, and reflects as well changes in poverty and hunger. Importantly, it also portends the strength of the human capital developing for the next generation of a country’s leadership and workforce. Stunting assesses the accumulated effects of negative factors on children’s nutritional status, and as such it needs to be accompanied by indicators of the factors determining it:  1) dietary diversity and adequacy; 2) behaviors such as breastfeeding, complementary feeding, and keeping the family’s environment hygienic to prevent illness; and 3) adequacy of health services to treat the most prevalent childhood diseases compromising nutritional status -- diarrhea, respiratory infections, and malaria.


The process for achieving the MDGs requires more time, though much progress has been made. Food-based agricultural approaches for improving nutrition in particular requires time for the two disciplines to understand each other’s language, find commonality in approaches, objectives and indicators, and learn how to improve nutrition through the food families consume from own production or purchase.


Theme 2. What works best and is governance important?


Governance, including accountability and political commitment are exceedingly important for providing a strong country platform by which lasting reductions in poverty, hunger and malnutrition can be achieved.


Theme 3. Zero Hunger Challenge


The ZHC is a welcome proposal from the UN Secretary-General and a valuable rallying call. To chart success toward zero hunger, a set of sub-objectives with indicators, interim targets, and time limits would also be valuable.

Peter Schmitd HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation, Switzerland

Thanks for providing the opportunity to contribute to this consultation. Please find below some thoughts related to theme 3.


HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation is one of the oldest and largest Swiss development NGOs presently engaged in 32 countries. The main primary stakeholders of HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation are rural poor in developing countries, hence those people most affected by food insecurity. In several of our projects, the improvement of food security in rural areas is an explicit and inherent part of the intervention strategy. Moreover, the majority of projects have direct or indirect implications on the food security situation of rural livelihoods. Therefore the topic of food security has always been and will continue to be a fundamental topic for the organisation both at the level of project implementation and advocacy work.


We are thankful to FAO and its partners for launching this discussion about a post 2015 development agenda related to hunger, food and nutrition security. The wealth of contributions to this discussion provides a substantial input to develop a “Post-2015 Development Agenda and Framework”. We would like to contribute few thoughts on theme three, namely the set of objectives that has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under the Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):


a. 100% access to adequate food all year round

b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old

c. All food systems are sustainable

d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income

e. Zero loss or waste of food.


We would like to congratulate the UN Secretary General for this initiative and the importance given to the theme of hunger and nutrition. We are impressed by the clarity of the message and its comprehensiveness in a very condensed form.

However, if the Zero Hunger Challenge shall serve as a starting point for the formulation of a post 2015 development framework we believe that certain aspects deserve more precise definition or additional attention.


1. General observation: “The right to food” should form the basis for a future development agenda in this theme. It therefore deserves to be mentioned and referred to explicitly. Even if the goal is “Zero Hunger” we believe that in order to reach this goal it needs particular attention and affirmative action directed at the most disadvantaged. Often women are among the most disadvantaged. It is not enough just to list them (as done in “100% increase in small holder productivity”). The disadvantaged groups need to be identified in each particular context and specifically targeted interventions need to be designed and undertaken. The focus on food and nutrition excludes the problem of loss and degradation of natural resources and the competition for fertile land and water by non-food crops, in particular for agro-fuel.


2. 100% access to adequate food all year round. The FAO food security concept rightly builds on the four pillars “availability, access, utilisation and stability”. It seems to us that aspects of “food utilisation” are in the “Zero Hunger Challenge” somewhat concentrated in the thrust “Zero stunted children less than 2 years old.” Particularly the access to save drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) has to go side by side with the access to food for all other population groups, too.


3. All food systems are sustainable We highly appreciate the importance given to sustainability. We however expect a stiff debate on what is called “sustainable”. We would like to stress the equal importance of the three dimensions (social, ecological and economic) of sustainability. Minimal requirements for a sustainable agriculture could be further defined, e.g. using the principles of LEISA (Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture) or organic agriculture.


The aspect of energy consumption in food production is worth to be actively addressed, too.


Similarly we support the mentioning of “responsible governance of land, fisheries and forests” but fear that there will be divergent definitions of what is called “responsible”.


4. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income The mentioning of “improving land tenure” is in our view a too weak formulation. Smallholder productivity will only increase if farmers can rely on secure and legally protected property rights in the long run and have access to other productive resources and services. What is needed is a secured / legally protected access to productive resources (land, water, seeds, forests, bio-diversity, fisheries) and a secured access to assets (financial and non financial services, information, and knowledge).


5. Zero loss or waste of food We highly appreciate the inclusion of this aspect. Food losses, energy consumption and green house gas emissions increase with the transport of food. We therefore suggest to highlight here the promotion of short value chains to local and regional markets. Labelling alone is not sufficient.


Labels need to be trustworthy and therefore need to be supported by adequate certification schemes (e.g. participatory guarantee schemes).


We again would like to thank for the opportunity to contribute to this consultation.


Yours sincerely


HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation


Peter Schmidt

Co-head Advisory Services

Zürich, January 9th, 2013

Ronald Vargas FAO-Global Soil Partnership, Italy

I will refer now to a field that is continuously forgotten when referring to the main challenges towards achieving food security.


Sustainable management of soils has not been soundly addressed by any of the MDGs and nor by food security strategies and actions.


When looking at pillar 1 of food security referred to availability and considering the challenges of population growth, it is estimated that food production should be increased by 60%. Yet, soil degradation has been a very active process in most of the developing regions. Healthy soils are crucial for producing healthy and nutritious food, still because it is everywhere, we tend to overlook the fact that soil is a limited natural resource. Therefore, if we want to properly deal with the challenges of food security ahead, we should develop an integrated approach towards sustainable development and not only focus in some components of the system.


Definitely, the sustainable management of soils should be considered as one target  or component of the post 2015 sustainable development goals and of the zero hunger challenge.

Phyll Buchanan Breastfeeding Network, United Kingdom

The current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015) helped improve the health of mothers and babies in the UK. This work needs to continue, particularly the focus on early and sustained exclusive breastfeeding with appropriately timed introduction of solid food.  This will help address malnutrition - over and under nutrition and keep a focus on infant mortality which appears to be beginning to increase once again in the UK.

Dear Moderators,


Many thanks for providing this opportunity for sharing views and contributing to the post-2015 agenda for hunger, food and nutrition security. Please find below (and also attached) contributions by OHCHR.


Theme 1:




The efforts to eradicate hunger and malnutrition in the pre-2015, including MDGs, have been facing several challenges.


Firstly, the challenge to ensure equitable distribution of food has not been tackled sufficiently. In 1974, the Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition recognized that both higher food production and a more equitable and efficient distribution of food as fundamental responsibilities of the Governments. Since then, the world has had enough food to feed its entire population so far, but the efforts have been focused mostly on food production, and not on how to eradicate structural obstacles, such as discrimination and denial of rights, that prevent certain groups of people to access existing food.


Secondly, the world has been facing the challenges arising from globalization, including growing demand for resources (such as land, energy, water)  across the borders, intensifying impact of international markets and trades on national food markets, and increasing number and scale of extreme climate events. These are causing food price volatility and harsher competition over resources, resulting in further reducing the capacity of certain groups, smallhold and landless farmers, fishers, pastoralists, urban poor, in accessing and producing foods with disproportionate impacts on women among them. In order to tackle these issues, due attention needs to be paid to strengthening modes of international cooperation and meaningful reform of global governance institutions, processes and policies.


Thirdly, re-investment in agriculture has had positive and negative impacts. After the 2007-08 food price crisis, the international community has made steady progress in increasing investment in agriculture, which has been critically needed. On the other hand, a rush of investments in agricultural lands lead to further food and nutrition insecurity of people who lost access to land due to the investments. It would be crucial to ensure that new investments in agriculture are in support of models of agricultural development which improve local food and nutrition security, reduce rural poverty, and preserve the environment and the ecosystems resilience against threats emerging from climate change.


Fourthly, the role of private business enterprises and impacts of their activities are intensifying. While States are primarily responsible for achieving the right to food for people in their territories, it is not feasible to achieve food and nutrition security for all without involving the private sector.  While private business enterprises can have a positive and significant role in achieving food and nutrition security, there are concerns over negative impacts certain activities of the private sector actors have had, including on access to resources and productive inputs, food price volatility, food safety, environmental pollution, labour conditions for employers in relevant sectors, violence against people claiming their rights, etc. It would be important to hold business actors account to their human rights responsibilities.


Lastly, there has been a general lack of governance, accountability and justice mechanisms at national and international levels through which people can exercise their right to participation and access to justice and remedies in the area of food and nutrition security. Often, people who claimed their right to food or the right to participation faced exclusion, repression, violence and denial of access to justice, freedom of expression and assembly.



While we are facing challenges, there are initiatives and efforts made to tackle such challenges.

  • Efforts have been made to implement the right to food at country level. The right to food is no longer perceived as a rhetoric or theory. Instead, in the past 20 years, concrete efforts to implement it are being made at many countries. For example, the Special Rapporteur on the right to food documented efforts made at country level, both in Africa and Latin America (, and
  • Reform of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) in 2009 created a new global centre of governance on food security. It has adopted an innovative participatory process, enabling not only States but also civil society, the private sector and international organizations to participate in deliberation of its strategy, policy discussion, standard setting, etc. The CFS has been addressing several challenges outlined above. For example, it successfully developed the Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security (adopted in 2012) through such participatory process, and working on principles on responsible agricultural investment, social protection, etc.
  • UN human rights mechanisms have been actively addressing the right to food. In 1999, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights articulated the understanding of the right to food provided under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Committee has been monitoring regularly the implementation of the right to food at country level through its review of State party reports and constructive dialogue with States. In 2000, the Commission on Human Rights (predecessor of the Human Rights Council) has created a mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food. Since then, two mandate holders appointed under this mandate have rigorously analysed the issues relevant to the right to food, and recommended concrete measures necessary for the realization of the right to food.  In 2007, the Human Rights Council held the first thematic special session focusing on the food crisis and the right to food.  In 2012, the Council has set up an Open-Ended Working Group to discuss a declaration on the rights of peasants other people working in rural areas. Civil society organizations are actively using the UN human rights mechanisms for monitoring the right to food at country level.
  • FAO has advanced in their tools and expertise on integrating the right to food into food and nutrition security. For example, in 2004 the FAO Council has adopted the Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security, a major tool to operationalize the right to food. FAO has also developed a number of tools and methodologies to implement the right to food.
  • Commitments made at the Rio + 20 conference  reaffirmed “the necessity to promote, enhance and support more sustainable agriculture” as well as “the need to maintain natural ecological processes that support food production systems”, and “resolving to increase sustainable agricultural production” globally (A/RES/66/288, Annex, paras. 110-111). The Outcome document also tasks the CFS in "facilitating country-initiated assessments on sustainable food production and food security” (para. 115). These commitments resonate with their commitment for the right to food.


Theme 2:


What works:


  • Experience shows us that to a large extent the success of efforts to address hunger and food and nutrition insecurity depend on whether such efforts are informed by the view of the victims of hunger and malnutrition.

At the national level, appropriate legal and institutional frameworks are essential to: (i) ensure the adequate participation, particularly, of the most food-insecure segments of the population; (ii) identify, at the earliest stage possible, emerging threats to the right to adequate food, by adequate monitoring systems; (iii) improve coordination between the relevant ministries and between the national and sub-national levels of government; and (iv) improve accountability, through the setting of targets, with measurable indicators, defining the timeframe within which particular objectives should be achieved.

  • National parliaments and parliamentarians together with organized civil society groups, social movements and human rights institutions, have played a fundamental role in placing the right to food on top of political agendas.



  • At the regional level, Latin America and the Caribbean have seen positive progress as a result of regional initiatives based on the right to food, such as the Iniciativa América Latina y Caribe Sin Hambre¸ launched in 2005 with the objective of eradicating hunger in the region by 2025, and the Parliamentarian Front against Hunger in Latin America and the Caribbean (PFH).
  • For country experiences, please see the following briefing notes by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food:

From Charity to Entitlement: Implementing the right to food in Southern and Eastern Africa (

A Rights Revolution: Implementing the right to food in Latin America and the Caribbean (


Theme 3:


The post-2015 development framework should address the following:


  • Aligning itself clearly with States’ normative obligations, including those under international human rights law. This will clarify responsibility of States, including measures they are expected to take, and entitlements of people. This would allow measuring not only outcomes but also means. This would strengthen a basis for accountability of States, not only vis-à-vis donors or the international community, but most importantly, vis-à-vis their people based on the rule of law. The methodology and framework developed for human rights indicators (e.g. see: allow linking States’ obligations and realization of food and nutrition security for all, through measuring commitments, measures and outcomes. Already some countries are applying these methodologies and framework to their public policies relevant to food and nutrition security (e.g. Nepal, Bolivia, Kenya)
  • Advancing the three closely-related concepts, i.e., equity, equality and non-discrimination. They should be cross-cutting key principles for any goals/agenda for post-2015. This means that any goals or indicators set should allow for disaggregation to reveal exclusion and inequalities. In particular, it is crucial to guarantee gender equality and place the empowerment of women at the centre of food security strategies, primarily in order to guarantee the right to food of women but also because it is the most cost-effective measure to reduce hunger and malnutrition for all.
  • Ensuring free, active and meaningful participation of rights-holders in designing and deciding on objectives, targets, indicators, and means to achieve goals for post-2015 agenda, as well as monitoring and evaluation of its implementation.
  • Recognising responsibilities of both developed and developing countries, in particular in order to address international factors affecting food and nutrition security, including international markets, trades, investments, environmental protection, biodiversity, climate change, use of resources (energy, water, lands, fisheries, seeds, etc), etc. This angle would be relevant to all ZHCs.
  • Addressing roles and responsibilities of the private sector and States’ duties vis-à-vis activities of the private sector, based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The roles and responsibilities of the private sector and corresponding duties of States should be addressed throughout the food chain, including investments in agriculture and in relevant resources (such as land).
  • Goal and time-frame setting which allow a transformative change, which accommodates long-term change (e.g. for full realization of the right to food), and at the same time fostering accountability and progress in the immediate and medium terms.
  • Ensure coherency and coordination among all goals/issues identified for post-2015 agenda. Likewise, ways to facilitate policy coherency and coordination among actors, institutions and mechanisms to implement such goals at international and national levels would need to be considered. (For example, in order to achieve improved governance and apply a rights-based approach, closer interaction and coordination between the CFS and the UN human rights system may be needed at international level.) 


As for ZHC, in addition to over-arching issues mentioned above, which would be relevant to all ZHC, more specific feedback on each Zero Hunger Challenge are as follows:

  1. 100% access to adequate food all year round: Understanding of the concepts such as “access” and “adequacy” of food should be gained in line with the human right to food as articulated by the UN human rights mechanisms. For example, “access” is understood not only as physical access, but also as economic access to food (affordability of food). “Adequacy” of food is understood as being nutritious, safe and culturally acceptable. This challenge should be addressed both through enabling people to produce adequate food for their consumption as well as through decent employment and a social protection system which enable people to afford adequate food without compromising the enjoyment of other human rights.
  2. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old: It would be important, as recommended by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, that under-nutrition is addressed together with, micronutrient deficiency and overnutrition by reshaping food systems, and through a life-cycle approach. Therefore, means to achieve this target should be defined narrowly, but allow a comprehensive approach to nutrition.
  3. All food systems are sustainable: Need to address challenges of globalization and responsibilities of developed countries, in particular taking into account sustainability of global as well as national food systems. Also, sustainable food systems should be respectful of human rights of people involved, including labour rights of waged agricultural or fishery workers, access to safe and affordable food by consumers, availability of adequate food for future generations, rights of indigenous peoples to their lands, resources, and culture, etc.
  4. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income: “Smallholders” should include smallhold (incl. landless) farmers, fishers, pastoralists as well as smallhold food processors.
  5. Zero loss or waste of food: Important to address responsibility of developed countries (e.g. food waste at consumption level in developed countries), as well as developing countries.



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?


Over the years development approaches have gone through several phases affecting operating methods and the types of planned and implemented interventions.


Food security, agriculture and rural development are no exception.


Recently, to improve alignment with the strategies and programmes of partner countries, national level participation and sector programmes has been encouraged; these programmes include different types of interventions such as initiatives for public aid for development, private investment, national and local interventions, etc. (e.g. the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme - CAADP).


Particular attention has been dedicated to strengthening institutions in order to guarantee programmes’  sustainability and ownership..


Furthermore, in order to be effective, aid for food security, agriculture and rural development must take the sector’s specifics into account:


• the central importance of gender issues (the majority of small subsistence farmers are women);


• the key role of the private sector and civil society;


• the importance of non-renewable natural resources (water, soil, biodiversity, climate, etc.) and frameworks regulating how they are managed;


• Inter-sectorial nature of the issue that involves different types of policies, competences and actors (e.g. energy, health, etc.);


• the local scope of problems, risks and opportunities (e.g. environmental, economic, social, etc.);


• the value of territorial and decentralized cooperation and the promotion of development programmes based on the participation of local community and grass-root organisations.


Some of the key lessons could be so summarised:


1. There is a strong interdependency among the MDGs. The multifacets/ sectorial dimension of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition imposes to tackle at the same time several causes and determinants, hence MDGs (e.g., Goals 2, 3, 7 and 8). On the other hand, fighting hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition is critical, for example, to reduce under-five mortality rates (Goal 4);


2. It is not always easy to translate the broad MDGs into action, notably as far as priority setting, specific patterns and determinants, division of labour and resources among Ministries and institutions are concerned. An example could be provided by the limited attention paid in some countries to pastoral, fishery and forestry issues in spite of their importance to several communities and to the national economy and welfare;


3. In such regard and considering the specificity of the agricultural sector, sound Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers helped in defining priorities and specific plans of action to achieve the MDGs which is, hence, not only a technical but also a key political exercise. Under this internationally shared framework, it was possible to convey national efforts to achieve common goals and to compare results;


4. The MDGs should reflect with clearer emphasis the strong association between hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition, on one side, and natural resources management, economic and socio-cultural issues, on the other.


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


In order to achieve the food and nutrition security objectives there many interconnected challenges and opportunities.


Main challenges:


• Rapid deterioration of natural resources, in particular water and land fertility, fisheries and forests


• Rapid population growth


• Climate change and its effect on traditional agricultural systems


• Inter-sectorial nature of the issue


• Need to develop and adopt more effective policies at global, national and community level


• Local scope of problems, risks and opportunities


• Possible inequities in the access to land and water


• Increased prices of oil products and their effects on the cost of and on the demand for agricultural inputs (e.g.,  biofuels)


• Price volatility of agricultural products


Main opportunities:


• Growing demand for agricultural, livestock and fishery products


• Food security continues to be high up in the political and development agenda with high concern from civil society and media


• New investments in policy research and in technologies with revised approach to innovation systems


• Clear resilience shown by many traditional, mixed and semi intensive farming systems against all the odds and in spite of limited support from some national governments


• Better understanding of broader action frameworks such as: strong interdependence between emergency, recovery and development; need for effective inter-sectorial collaboration and coordination; importance of processing and marketing, of farming system evolution and of interdependence between the public and the private sector in agriculture and rural development


• Improved governance at the  international level


• Ongoing Reform processes of major International organisations (such as:


CFS, CGIAR), which will improve coordination , for example within the UN Rome


based food agencies


• In some countries, strengthened organisations of smallholder family farmers


• Economic growth and new market developments linked to the urban/rural dynamics


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?


We believe four issues are critical:


1. there is the need to translate the vast amount of knowledge and experience into practical, science-based, shared solutions and actions;


2. governance and equity issues need to be properly addressed by regional and national policies;


3. ownership of the whole process from national authorities who, on their turn, have the responsibility to involve and to adapt the policies to the different communities/ key actors (e.g., women, small scale farmers, pastoralists, commercial sector)


4. development rhetoric, therefore ambitious goals and objectives, should be avoided as much as possible in favour of feasible and tangible results.


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 ( [1]), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?


The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS provides a comprehensive policy framework for coordination and harmonisation of policies and intervention at all levels, where the CFS provides the global forum for improving mutual understanding and collaboration between different

stakeholders: Governments, International Organisations, Farmers Organisations, CSOs, Research & Education, etc. In our view the work of the CFS on F&NS should be further supported and continued.


The Zero Hunger Challenge provides an overarching international agenda for action, encompassing objectives for developing, emerging and developed countries. We value the approach of merging development objectives with the objectives of sustainability. Another strength is its simplicity to understand and to communicate.


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



a. 100% access to adequate food all year round

b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old

c. All food systems are sustainable

d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income.

e. 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?


We consider the objectives set out in the Zero Hunger Challenge initiatives important for achieving global food security. These are at the same time ambitious and concrete; one could dispute about our current capacity to define an appropriate set of indicators for monitoring progress towards their achievement; nevertheless we consider that these objectives provide the direction for the required changes in order to achieve sustainable global food security and nutrition. Their quantitative dimension should be carefully articulated at the country and sub-country level to show the intensity of the required changes. The time horizon should be country specific and set according to the intensity of the change needed.




Elaine Geyer-Allely WWF International, Switzerland

As outlined in the UN Secretary General’s Zero Hunger Challenge, eliminating hunger and achieving universal food security requires a range of measures and investments.  WWF’s contribution to the consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security addresses just one element of that challenge: protecting and enhancing the ability of the natural world to supply a growing human population with a nutritious, sufficient and diverse food supply.   Please see the attached paper for responses under Themes 1 and 3.

Carol Bartle Te Puawaitanga Ki Otautahi Trust , New Zealand

Please find attached my submission for the e-Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security.


Best Wishes

Carol Bartle

Maternal, infant and young child health promoter/educator

Coordinator: Canterbury Breastfeeding Advocacy Service

Te Puawaitanga Ki Otautahi Trust

153 Gilberthorpes Road


Christchurch 8042

New Zealand 

See the attachment: MDG Submission January 2013.pdf
Nathalie van Haren Both ENDS, Netherlands

Theme 1: The most important challenge towards achieving food and nutrition security is the issue of access to and control over land and water. Secure tenure rights to land will contribute to fullfill the human right to food as women producers, small-scale farmers, forest people will be able to grow what they need to feed for their families. In addition, secure tenure rights to land will allow people to make long term investments in the land, in trees and in the soils, in agro-ecology.


Theme 2: The voluntary guidelines for the responsible governance of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security (VGs) that were adopted by the UN CFS were developed in a very participatory way and can count on broad support amongst civil society.  However, these  guidelines should not remain a beautiful paper solution, but will need to be implemented. Therefore, the SDGs should make a reference to the VGs.


Theme 3: There should be specific targets on:


- respect, protect and support the right to food

- implementation of the VGs

- participation of local people in policy processes affecting their right to food

- promote and invest in agro-ecology

Laura Ciacci Slow Food, Italy

Please find below and enclosed Slow Food's contribution to the Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security:




Slow Food is a member of the Italian coordinating committee for the Global Coalition Against Poverty (GCAP), which actively participates in the Beyond 2015 international campaign coordinated by Concord, which hosts the international and European secretariat. In particular, as GCAP Italia we are part of the European Task Force, and within it, the leaders of the thematic working group on “economy, trade, finance, production and consumption”. We are also leading and implementing a broad national consultation that will involve institutions and civil society and allow participation in the international debate through the construction of a national position.


Theme 1


 For the first time in human history, the Millennium Development Goals represented a global desire to fight hunger and poverty through an integrated approach. The underlying concept is that the goals cannot be reached individually, but must be all reached together, because they cannot be separated from each other. In fact, wherever results have been seen, wherever visible advancements have been made in improving the overall lives of populations, government plans have integrated interventions in the fight against hunger, maternal and child health, the fight against pandemics, environmental protection, and so on.


Now, however, it is necessary not just to renew the commitments, moving the deadline by which the goals must be reached, but to reinforce the goals themselves. If we think specifically about the objectives relating to hunger, food security and malnutrition, it is the global food system that must be changed, as it is blocking the achievement of the goals. This is and must remain the primary objective, including in post-2015 developments. At Rio+20 it was confirmed that we cannot talk about development without first resolving world hunger. The central role of food must be the point of departure for a new form of politics, for a new economy and new social relationships. The central role of food implies the belief that the right to food is the primary right of humanity—ensuring not only human life but also that of the whole planet.


Among the main challenges and opportunities in making the objective of wiping out hunger a reality is the assumption of certain obligations for states, according to what is already contained in the definition of the right to food set out by the High Commissioner for Human Rights:


 - the obligation to respect, meaning to refrain from interfering with the means of subsistence of their citizens and their capacity to provide for themselves.


- the obligation to protect, implying the constitution of a system of rules on food safety, environmental protection and land ownership.


- the obligation to fulfil, implementing suitable policies to ensure that the weakest have access to resources or, in extreme cases, providing direct assistance to at least allow freedom from hunger.


The first obligation alone would suffice to reveal the harmfulness of the industrial food system determined over the past 60 years by the international organization of markets. For Slow Food and Terra Madre, this obligation concerns respect for traditional, sustainable forms of agriculture, the only ones that have always protected agrobiodiversity, resources and cultural diversities. Their standard-bearers are small-scale food producers, women, the elderly and indigenous peoples.


In addition, it has to be considered that neither innovation and new technologies in themselves nor GMOs have proved to be the solution to fight hunger. We also don’t share the belief of those claiming that food production must be increased massively to solve the hunger problem. Given that one third of the food produced is lost or wasted, it is not necessary to stress our planet earth further but rather to be able to apply alternative sustainable models in the production and in the supply chain.


These elements are fundamental to us and must be incorporated in the post-2015 challenges and opportunities. They must be included in the global objective of reforming the production and consumption systems through the inclusion of incentives that switch from economic profit to universal well-being.


See the attachment: ConsultationFAO_Slow Food
Richie Alford Send a Cow, United Kingdom

Context - the issue is not about food production - globally there is enough food available for 12 billion people to eat today - so the issue is more of distribution.  In this distribution, the issue is about power and access.  Today more people are overweight and obese, rather than hungry - so again the issue is not solely limited to one facet it is multi-faceted.  Clearly it is important to worry about the hungry and ensure global systems care for them; but there is a growing cost to society in treating the consequences of over-eating and obesity as well which must not be forgotten.


Theme 1 - the MDGs have been a clumsy way of setting development targets.  An imposed global target leads to bad dvelopment; doing the thing the wrong way to get the right result (short-term fixes over permanent solutions).  Targets need to contain social and environmental considerations and fit the context of a nation or region, and cannot work well from a global perspective. 


Theme 2 - Food Sovereignty as a framework marks the way forward from where we are now.  The world knows how to build a suitable food production system and it is set out in the ISTAAD report, that has been conveniently ignored, by those who should take notice, for too long.


Theme 3 - The four goals of the Zero Hunger Challenge (A, B C and E) are clear and understandable.  Goal D doesn't make any sense as written as there are too many implicit variables within it.  "80% food produced by smallholders" is clearer.


For the Zero Hunger challenge to be truly global, the counterpoint to hunger needs to be incorporated.  For example target B ought to include and "Zero obese children under the age of five years old".

Jodine Chase Breastfeeding Action Committee of Edmonton, Canada

This letter is to support the many contributions you have received calling for BREASTFEEDING to be specifically mentioned in the new MDGs. It is not necessary for me to repeat the compelling arguments made by other experts - my intent in writing is to add my voice to their call. Thank you.


Jodine Chase

breastfeeding advocate

member, Breastfeeding Action Committee of Edmonton (BACE)


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.


Organization: Concern Worldwide (Ethiopia office)


Author of submission:


  • Adèle Fox


Below are several key learnings from our project integrating Infant and Young Child Feeding and the Productive Safety Net Programme in Ethiopia:


Two years ago, Concern Worldwide documented the poor nutritional situation in Ethiopia and the multiple obstacles hampering previous efforts to improve it. It concluded that a multi-sectoral approach to improve infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices and to increase access to food were among the responses needed. In 2010, the IYCF – Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP) project was launched as a pilot multi-sectoral approach aimed at reducing malnutrition in Dessie Zuria. It targeted poor households enrolled in the existing PSNP as well as the general population and addresses both the direct and root causes of malnutrition. The project aimed to develop an effective, sustainable and scalable model to improve IYCF practices in the most vulnerable households. The final results have been impressive, with large improvements in IYCF practices and a positive response from the communities and stakeholders involved in the project.


A number of factors contributed to the success of the IYCF – PSNP project. The project took a multi-sectoral approach, involving actors across a wide range of groups and sectors. It went beyond simply behaviour change communication, targeting the enabling environment as well as social norms, and involving the community at large. The project used multiple platforms and approaches to disseminate messages, and used a targeted approach to behaviour change, basing project activities and messages on formative research and emphasizing simple, do-able actions rather than health education messages.


  • Multisectoral approach: This project engaged actors from a range of sectors, including agriculture, education, women’s affairs, and health. This aspect was described as a key strength of the project, with each sector working together towards a common purpose, leading to increased ownership and accountability. A multi-sectoral approach also provides greater opportunities for engaging with communities. Cooking demonstrations, school clubs, and agricultural support were all combined to provide an overall aim of preventing malnutrition among children.


  • A multi-level approach: As well as working across sectors, the project also created strong links between woreda, kebele and community levels through a cascading style of training and through the continued provision of support and supervision.


  • A social and behavioural change approach: Early assessments showed that simply providing behaviour change communication alone was unlikely to be effective, given widespread food insecurity and other barriers to behaviour change. This project went beyond simply carrying out BCC, to influencing the community and social norms as a whole, as well as addressing barriers to practicing recommended IYCF behaviours.

The results of this project suggest that it is effectively fostering behaviour change, and  increasing levels of awareness among woreda officials, kebele level leaders and community members alike. It has differed from previous efforts to reduce malnutrition because it has shown people how to make simple, practical changes and reinforced the messages through a multitude of actors, contact points and methods, vastly increasing the likelihood of behaviour change. It is also focused on prevention of malnutrition rather than cure.


The approach has been able to reach a large number of people who are widely dispersed over challenging terrain. Channelling activities through the PSNP creates additional contact points and ensures targeting of the poorest households.

Peter Greaves United Kingdom

As a nutritionist who was much involved in UNICEF in the 80's  with the protection, promotion and support  of  breastfeeding, I strongly believe that breastfeeding, exclusively for 6 months and for up to 2 years afterwards together with appropriate complementary foods, should figure prominently in the new MDGs, and fully support the position taken by IBFAN in this consultation.

Alison Linnecar IBFAN, Switzerland

Infants and young children are particularly vulnerable to infections because at birth their immune system has not yet matured. Breastfeeding is a living fluid, providing anti-microbial substances such as lactoferrin and secretory IgA antibodies, while at the same time boosting the maturation of the infant's own immune system. Formula fed infants do not benefit from this protection because formula is a processed product and contains no live cells.


Furthermore, powdered infant formula (PIF) is not a sterile product and indeed "During production, PIF can become contaminated with harmful bacteria such as Enterobacter sakazakii and Salmonella enterica. This is because, using current manufacturing technology, it is not feasible to produce sterile PIF." (1)  Enterobacter sakazakii, now renamed Cronobacter sakazakii, and Salmonella species are heat-resistant bacteria that can cause severe invasive infections such as meningitis and bacteraemia in newborns and older infants. Such infections are rare but can be fatal or result in long-term disability.


Chemical contamination of infant feeding equipment and utensils is of further concern. Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals such as Bisphenol A and phthalates are found in certain plastics and can leach into prepared feeds and foods. Since infants are at a stage of rapid development, research evidence shows possible long-term negative health effects from fetal and postnatal exposure to these chemicals. Breastfeeding has been shown to provide beneficial effects to mitigate results of exposure.


Breastfeeding is environmentally friendly; producing zero waste and using no scarce natural resources such as water, land and raw materials. It is a valuable and renewable natural resource which comes straight from producer to consumer and requires no processing or transportation. Optimal breastfeeding practices contribute to spacing births and can help a mother plan her family when contraception is unavailable, unaffordable or unacceptable for religious or cultural reasons.


Formula feeding leaves a heavy ecological footprint which is demonstrated using indicators of use of scarce resources: water use for dairy farming and manufacturing; land use for raising cattle and growing soy; raw materials for packaging and energy for dairy farming, manufacturing and processing and transportation.  In addition, formula feeding produces greenhouse gas emissions and non-biodegradable waste, contributing to global warming and polluting the environment.


For all these reasons, breastfeeding contributes to a healthier population, a healthier environment and to sustainable development. Optimal breastfeeding practices should be protected, promoted and supported as a key objective of the post-2015 Global Development Framework.



(1) Executive Summary, in 2007 WHO Guidelines on safe preparation, storage and handling of powdered infant formula:

and the 3 meeting reports of the WHO/FAO expert consultations on Enterobacter sakazakii and Salmonella:


Alison Linnecar

Kaija Korpi-Salmela FAO, Italy

Dear FSN,


Below are some comments on the introduced Themes:


Theme 1:


I agree fully with the targets under MDG 1. However, the chosen indicators for 'reduction by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger' could have been better. Underweight can be attributed to both acute and chronic malnutrition, and therefore it offers a rather weak basis for programming. Stunting, on the other hand, is a good indicator of chronic malnutrition and therefore more suitable as an indicator for a long-term target. Therefore I'm glad to see that stunting, instead of underweight, has been selected for the Zero Hunger Challenge.


The second indicator, 'the proportion of population below the minimum level of dietary energy consumption' is difficult to measure. The minimum level of dietary energy required varies by the sex, age, health status, and level of physical activity. The international standard of 2,100 Kcal/day is only applicable to a part of the population. Therefore any new indicators selected for the post-2015 period should be more practical in terms of a) getting the data and b) planning interventions. 


Main challenges and opportunities: A big opportunity is the heightened global awareness of food security and nutrition as a result of the price crises in recent years. Challenges are posed by increasing population, especially in Africa, water scarcity (especially when not properly managed), and lack of suitable land for expanding cultivation.


Theme 2:


All the raised issues are pertinent to achieving food and nutrition security. These concepts should, however, be broken into more concrete and tangible recommendations and objectives. For example, what do 'political commitment' and 'accountability' really mean in the context of food and nutrition security? After that it would be far easier to evaluate their role and meaningfulness in this context. It also would be worth considering setting different targets for different regions, and even countries, taking their starting point and capacity into consideration. This may, however, be difficult politically.


On achieving nutrition security: basic things account for a lot. Access to education for girls and women, improved care practices, access to safe water and basic health care, and adequate sanitation would go a long way in addressing the problem of malnutrition. Access to adequate food is not enough to combat malnutrition if children (and adults) face infections on a continuous basis due to problems with hygiene and sanitation.


On achieving food security: the key is to focus on smallholders in developing countries. Their access to markets, credit, inputs, and know-how has to be facilitated to enable higher food production, which in turn will improve income levels and food security situation in the households. In order to feed the growing population from only marginally increasing cultivated area, the yield has to increase substantially. In this improved practices such as agroforestry and vertical cultivation (growing food on the same land under the soil, on the ground, and above ground) should bring many advantages.


Theme 3:


All objectives, and at the very least their targets should be time-bound. Without a 'deadline' there is no impetus to achieve results, and preparation of implementation strategies becomes very difficult.


Objective a) This objective is very challenging and almost impossible to monitor. For it to make sense, the targets and indicators need to be a lot more concrete.


Objective b) This is a good objective. In addition, setting of targets and indicators is relatively easy and data for monitoring exists.


Objective c) This is a difficult objective. There is a lot of controversy on what 'sustainability' actually means, and how you would define it. These questions need to be tackled first (from the framework of food and nutrition security) before any targets or indicators can be set.


Objective d) Another objective which is difficult to achieve and hard to monitor. Also, it has to be noted that the poor in rural areas usually have different income sources. They often cultivate land, but food and income from that is rarely enough to cover their food and non-food needs. Most have additional food and income sources, such as casual labour, or gathering and sale of natural resource products. Focus on agricultural production alone would not suffice if the objective remains this wide.


Objective e) An ambitious objective, which focuses on an issue which has not been properly addressed so far. The objective would need to have targets which focus on different parts of the food system (producers, food processing, transport, marketing, and consumers) in order to achieve results.


Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments, this has been very interesting and thought-provoking!

This brief document is part of the Spanish position paper regarding post2015 development agenda process. It includes core messages and concerns for the Government of Spain on food and nutrition security.



a) Key lessons learned during the current MDGs Framework, in particular in relation to the MDGs relevance to Hunger, Food insecurity and Malnutrition.


  • The main lesson of MDGs is MDGs themselves as the first global common agenda for development setting time-bound targets resulting from years of debates and discussions within global community.
    MDGs relevance and usefulness are rooted in the availability of a common global framework that allow programmes, resource management, coordination, harmonization, alignment and, as a consequence, effectiveness.
  • Nevertheless, one of the main weaknesses of current MDGs is that they are quantitative outcome-focused objectives and nor qualitative outputs nor process are formally considered. When talking about sustainable development results, process is as relevant as the results themselves. Future development agenda should, thus, consider setting process indicators.
  • Development goals cannot be approached individually but as a whole, since the achievement of each and all of them will conduct peoples towards development. An individual approach might guide development process towards a short-term progress accounting for a short group of individuals.


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


  • There is a core difference between 2000 when MDGs were set and now. Political will regarding development, and particularly regarding Hunger and Food Insecurity has risen and development has become an international policy issue high top in the agendas. This is, thus, a very challenging situation.
  • Efforts regarding food and nutrition security have been fostered worldwide latest years i.e. the renewed Committee on Global Food Security, the Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realization of the Right to adequate Food in the context of the national food security, the Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security, the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) or the working group within the G20 amongst others. These efforts concreted in different initiatives should be considered as a cornerstone for the future development agenda as regards food and nutrition security. Lessons learned from above mentioned and others are a very good input to start from since most of them are the outcome of participatory and inclusive processes that have been fed with experiences at country level.
  • Effectiveness is definitely the main challenge for future development agenda. In this respect, the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation is the reference post2015 development agenda should be built upon since it provides the tool on the “HOW” we should work on development. Effectiveness will allow sustainable results and according to development effectiveness principles.
  • Another challenge is the sustainable use of natural resources and how to prevent climate change and mitigate its effects especially in agriculture.


THEME 2. a) What works best? What we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on?


  • 3 out 4 food insecure people depend directly or indirectly on agriculture for their living. It is also important to add that 75% of people suffering from abject poverty live in rural areas. This people devote 60-80% of their income to buy food.
  • Following the WB’s WDR 2008, agriculture is both a way for achieving food security and household income, which are the two dimensions of MDG 1: poverty and hunger. That is the paradox of hunger, that most hungry people are food producers, small-farmers. It should be clearly stated that any development goal regarding hunger reduction should be considered simultaneously in its two dimensions, as progress in food and nutrition security may in some cases deepen rural poverty for the rural poor if their participation on the provision of food security is not ensured. In this regard, agriculture development by smallholders may contribute to economic growth and substantially to poverty reduction.
  • Combining measures of improvement of livelihoods within vulnerable groups and risk prevention and management actions would result in better food and nutrition security indicators.
  • Figures and reports conclude that same groups and same places periodically suffer food insecurity due to their vulnerability to shocks comprising their permanent access to adequate food, compromising the realization of the right to food.
  • Determining proper targets and indicators require a proper identification and classification of vulnerable groups as well as the causes of their vulnerability.
  • In this regard, local or community-based food and nutrition insecurity surveillance systems contribute to prevent critical situation within vulnerable groups.
  • Social protection systems have demonstrated their positive impact in reducing vulnerability and strengthening resilience among vulnerable groups. Strategic food reserves as part of safety nets provide an opportunity for small producers as food providers as long as they avoid spoiling local markets.


THEME 3. a) Please provide us with your feedback on the 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 future development agenda should adopt a rights based approach. Rights based approach means focusing on the most vulnerable, adopting human rights principles: participation, non discrimination, transparency, accountability. The right to food approach means that the main goal of food security is the realization of the human right to adequate food for every man, woman and child wherever and whenever.
  • Hunger Zero Challenge makes reference to women linked to nutrition. However, women’s role in food and nutrition security goes far beyond. Women make the difference as providers of food security at household and national level since However, women situation regarding food and nutrition security relates to access and control of productive resources like land, credit or technology.
  • Development agenda- objectives and targets- must be country-specific and country-driven. In this respect, targets and indicators should be defined locally, regionally and nationally. Global outcomes cannot undercover local situations. For example, hunger MDG at global level looks better that looking country-by country since figures in India or China have a high impact in global absolute figures.
See the attachment: Comments MoFAC Spain.pdf
Willem-Jan Laan Unilever, Netherlands

Considering the large number of reports which have been written over the past number of years on food and nutrition security, I will focus on a number of specific recommendations which were included in initiatives with Unilever contribution.


- Recently our CEO Paul Polman argued in the Financial Times: “Now is the time for action to achieve global supply security”. He specifically provided 3 recommendations:


* We need increased investment in agricultural production and productivity, especially in Africa and Latin America. Governments and businesses need to direct investment towards strengthening whole value chains and support for smallholder farmers, particularly women.

* We need active policy programmes for food & nutrition security in individual developing countries, based on partnerships with the private sector, donors and civil society. Investments in fighting malnutrition would benefit people more than any other type of investment with a return of $30 for every $1 invested. Investment in nutrition can translate to a 2-3 per cent increase in a nation’s GDP each year, breaking the cycle of poverty that traps families and nations.

* We should eliminate the use of unsustainable biofuels. Most first generation biofuels are neither environmentally efficient nor cost effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the demand they place on land is destabilising world food supply and increasing prices.

- In 2012 several private sector actors did work together in the so-called B20 Task Force on Food Security. This Task Force, co-chaired by our CEO Paul Polman, provided recommendations for the G20 in Mexico in June last year (B20 report attached).


Recommendations with regard to Strengthening land rights were included:


Recommended industry commitments:


* Follow the Voluntary Guidelines for the Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests agreed through the Committee on Food Security (CFS).

* Ensure that agricultural investments are transparent, responsible and compatible with the Voluntary Guidelines as implemented by national authorities. Industry to respect special regulations on large-scale land acquisitions where such policies or guidelines are not in place.

* Develop robust investment standards through the Committee on Food Security.

Recommended public-sector commitments:

* Promote and adopt the Voluntary Guidelines for the Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests agreed through the Committee on Food Security.

* Establish adequate legal frameworks and enforcement measures to formalize and ensure land rights, and recognize informal and customary tenure, with specific safeguards for smallholders.

* Commit to contract transparency and appropriate dispute settlement procedures.

* Provide appropriate temporary measures, including special regulations on large-scale land acquisitions, as long as adequate legal frameworks are not implemented.

* Develop robust investment standards through the Committee on Food Security.

- Recently we have contributed to the UN Global Compact Key Pillars on Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture. This report contains an extensive list of good practices by private sector entities, working together with governments and civil society. This UN Global Compact report also refers to adequate principles for responsible investment in farmland and the activities of the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI-platform):


The Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform is an industry initiative comprised of some of the world’s largest food companies who seek to support the development of sustainable agriculture worldwide. Created in 2002 by Nestlé, Unilever and Danone, SAI recognizes that food companies are the biggest purchasers of agricultural raw materials in the world and that by working together they bring scale, resources and expertise to the challenge of creating more sustainable food systems.


Today, the SAI Platform counts over 30 members, including Coca Cola, Kraft Foods, Heineken and McDonalds, who all agree that sustainable agriculture is “a productive, competitive and efficient way to produce agricultural products, while at the same time protecting and improving the natural environment and social/economic conditions of local communities”.

- We welcome current initiatives including the Zero Hunger Challenge and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition. We support the UN Secretary General in setting objectives, targets and indicators for the Post-2015 Global Development Framework. We believe that eliminating hunger and malnutrition should be embedded in national food & nutrition programmes. These programmes should be time-bound and monitored annually at local level.


Global institutions, including the FAO, have an important role to play. Key tasks include:


* Monitoring progress at global level with annual scorecards.

* Sharing best practice in the areas of agricultural production, food security and nutrition.

* Supporting developing countries with their food & nutrition security programmes while sharing expertise with the private sector.

* Produce support for the implementation of national programmes by bringing together local stakeholders.


- We welcome the Action Plan included in the FAO Strategic Framework for 2014-2017. We have noted the commitment from Member Countries together with their development partners to adopt evidence-based and inclusive governance mechanisms for eradicating hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. We particularly welcome the agreed actions which include “the promotion of governance systems which ensure the implementation of agreements such as the Voluntary guidelines on the Right to Food, and on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security; and on Responsible Investment in Agriculture.”


- In accordance with the conclusions of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), we are prepared to contribute to the stakeholder consultations on the principles for responsible agricultural investments in the coming year.


We look forward to the High Level consultation which will be hosted by the Government of Spain (March 2013) in order to provide concrete actions and positive outcomes at local level. Now is the time for action!


Willem-Jan Laan

Director Global External Affairs


10 January 2013

Carmen Florentina Radu Start Focus, Romania

What I would very much like to be developed is a global strategy and a common vision for 100 years in terms of food. And such a strategy is necessary. 100 years means hope, getting several generations into the topic and having a sustainable structure, for a common goal. With just a few years strategy, although it encourages to more rapid actions to achieve it, such case can be dropped out far more easily and contested, without reaching the sustainability point. Developing a strategy for 100 years would mean A. getting all the results of the researches until now and was was learned also through the MDGs, B. envisioning a future with healthy, affordable, safe food through consultations, for different age groups, different areas of the world according to their regional particularities, more developed and sustainable C. setting the goals D. establishing guideline steps(of 5, 10 years each), aid and monitoring structures.




Carmen Florentina Radu

Ina Verzivolli International Baby Food Action Network, Switzerland

Food and Nutrition Security From the Start of Life by the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN)

There is growing concern today about the increasing global burden of malnutrition – both under nutrition and obesity – with health consequences throughout the life course. Malnutrition is a major factor in child health and survival; it has been estimated to be an underlying cause of up to 50–60 percent of under-five deaths[1]. Today, almost a quarter of the world’s children, especially in Africa and Asia do not get adequate food[2]. At the same time, there is a rising incidence of nutrition related noncommunicable diseases including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancer.


Malnutrition – both under- and over – sets in during the first two years of life, mostly during infancy[3]. Food and nutrition security during this period means ensuring early and exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months, followed by introduction of complementary foods along with continued breastfeeding up to two years.  A growing body of evidence points to the key role of infant and young child feeding practices, especially early and exclusive breastfeeding, in mitigating both forms of malnutrition and in the prevention of child mortality. Nonetheless interventions that address these practices have not received adequate attention during the MDGs era, and thus there is an unused potential for achieving progress in food and nutrition security in the childhood but also in the adulthood. The post-MDGs development agenda should bridge this gap and make a priority of such interventions.


Please find attached the full submission.

Felicity Savage World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action and Infant Feeding Consortium, ...

During the current MDG Framework, it was shown conclusively  that breastfeeding is critical to child health, preventing stunting, and with life-long benefits; that current health care practises undermine breastfeeding; and that exclusive breastfeeding rates can be increased by counselling and support before during and after delivery in health facilities and the community.


Therefore it should be the right of every mother and child to receive such support, and provision of skilled help to 100% of women and infants should be an objective of the Post 2015 Global Development Framework. 


The other proposed objectives for the Zero Hunger Challenge make no sense and are unachievable without provision for laying the foundations of health and nutrition in the first six months of a child's life, and continuing up to 2 years. 

Juanita Jauer Steichen IBFAN/LLL FRANCE/COFAM/REGAAL, France

Policies on infant nutrition and health such as the World Health Organization’s Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding and the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes as well as overwhelming evidence-based research have demonstrated the crucial rôle of breastfeeding on infant ntrition and infant and maternal health. Yet breastfeeding rates continue to fall around the world, largely due to the impact of the aggressive marketing of formula, and the social manipulation by advertising, undermining breastfeeding as the biological and social norm for infant feeding, even among the poorest populations. Follow-on and growth milks have been determined to be unnecessary, despite unsubstantiated claims by industry to the contrary, and, along with special babyfoods through early childhood, present a continued financial burden to families with no nutritional advantage over family foods. The International Code and WHA Resolutions are insufficiently legislated, and there is growing concern about the widespread conflicts of interest between industry and health sectors. Please see IBFAN's position statement on Sponsorships for more detail.

Breastfeeding is a fundamental human right, and recognised as such by the Convention on the Rights of the Child.Exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months, followed by continued breastfeeding along woth appropriate complementary foods to age two years or beyond, represents food, health and care, as it prevents malnutrition, protects both mother and child against disease (with protection increasing with duration of breastfeeding) and reduces economic differences.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food addressed the World Breastfeeding Conference 2012 in New Delhi, emphasising the importance of breastfeeding as a human right for both the mother and the child, the neeed for the full implementation of the International Code on the Marketing of breastmilk Substitutes as well as maternity protection for working mothers and better education for girls and women.

Peer support in the form of mother to mother breastfeeding support groups or breastfeeding peer counsellors have been found to be one of the most effective ways of increasing both initiation and duration of breastfeeding.

The World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative launched by IBFAN/WABA in 2004 is a tool to evaluate the state of breastfeeding according to different criteria, and allows countries to monitor breastfeeding rates and implement actions for improvement. Currently used by 83 countries, the WBTI should be implemented worldwide in order to improve breastfeeding rates, maternal protection at work, education, ans Code implementation.

During emergency situations – wars, floods, earthquakes, epidemics – breastfeeding saves the lives of those most vulnerable, infants and young children. lives. When food distribution comes to a halt, when fuel, drinling water, medicine and health services are unavailable, the breastfed baby or infant has significantlt improved rates of survival.. In 1998, during the first three months of conflict in Guinea-Bissau, the death rate among 9-20 month old non breastfed children was 6 times higher than those who were breastfed.

Breastfeeding is vital for the MDGs.

Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Breastfeeding is economical and provides high quality, irrepalceable nutrition through breastmilk, and its complex and species-specific composition.

Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education 

Well-nourished babies and infants are equiped to learn. Breastfeeding is shown to improve cognitive and neurological devlopment.

Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women

 Empowers women who realise that they can meet their child's emotional and nutritional needs through breastfeeding. Gives all children an equal good start in life.

Goal 4 Reduce  child  mortality

Reduced infection, better nutrition, reduced risk of malnutritio.

Goal 5 Improve  maternal  health

Many benefits - decreased maternal postpartum blood loss,lower incidence of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer, as well as the probability of decreased bone loss post-menopause. …

Goal 6 Fight HIV and other diseases

Research shows that breastfeeding in conjunction with ARV treatment protects the child

Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability

 Breastfeeding is green ! Environmentally friendly, it has an invisble carbon footprint when compared to that of formula production..

Goal 8 Develop a  global  partnership  for  development

 The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding encourages collaboration and partnerships in multiple sectors on national, local and international levels. Optimal infant feeding has a major impact on health outcomes and on economic productivity.

See the attachment: message of Prof Schutter.pdf
Roxanne Howdle United Kingdom

Please prioritise implementing WHO goals and Baby Friendly Initiative with regards to breastfeeding (mainly preventing all promotions and samples) in UK, Europe as well as continuing to resist attempts by Danone and Nestle to illegally promote infant formula products around the world.

Pamela Morrison International Board Certified Lactation Consultant, United Kingdom

Please consider specifically highlighting breastfeeding as currently recommended by WHO and UNICEF as being one of the most important factors in achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.   In particular, funding currently over-supplied to providing thousands of babies and young children annually on emergency supplies of Ready to Use Therapeutic Foods would be better spent on teaching their mothers about the value of exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life and continued breastfeeding with normal household weaning foods for at least 2 years.  Such a strategy would enable mothers, and indeed countries to use their own sustainable resources rather than relying on hand-outs given as "aid".  Lastly, please consider as a matter of urgency disseminating the current recommendations for breastfeeding and antiretroviral therapy for HIV-positive mothers - please see WABA’s International Policy on HIV and Breastfeeding:  a Comprehensive Resource, released 3 December 2012, see

Please find attached the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) position paper, "A World Free from Hunger and Malnutrition: Food and Nutrition Security in the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda." The Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) is a global foundation which currently assists nearly 670m people facing malnutrition in over 30 countries. This short note sets out why and how we believe better nutrition should be integrated into global development priorities post 2015. Our major call is for Zero Stunting – eliminating the factors which blight the physical and mental development of children for ever - to be a new benchmark for global development success.