Dear FSN Forum members,
1. What are the main issues for policy-makers to consider when linking climate change on the one hand and food security and nutrition on the other, in particular when designing, formulating and implementing policies and programmes?
Sustainably managed forests can play a key role in climate change mitigation and adaptation. Therefore, Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) practices are important and relevant to this particular discussion.
Despite the seemingly obvious causal link between climate change and FSN, there is still a lack of comprehensive understanding on the nexus. Negative impacts of climate change on natural resources bring an immediate effect on food availability and access, thus urgent attention is required. However, we should also not forget other remaining aspects of FSN, which are directly dependent on healthy forest resources. Some of the examples include the potential deterioration on: i) safe cooking practices due to a lack of fuelwood, ii) human health led by disappearing local non-wood forest products and a lack of access to clean water and air, iii) long-term environmental health and resilience to shocks based on overall forest ecosystem services, as well as many other elements which are essential to ensure sustainable FSN.
In dealing with Climate Change and Food Security and Nutrition, there is generally a lack of cross-sectoral policies. For example, while SFM policies and policy-makers take certain aspects of livelihoods into consideration when addressing climate change adaptation practices, the Food Security and Nutrition (FSN) objectives are usually not properly reflected nor adequately incorporated in the SFM practices. SFM policy-makers do not necessarily confer about climate change and FSN in a cross-sectoral manner involving actors from FSN-related sectors. In turn, opportunities to enhance FSN through SFM, in the context of climate change, are not fully captured at policy level.
2. What are the key institutional and governance challenges to the delivery of cross-sectoral and comprehensive policies that protect and promote nutrition of the most vulnerable, and contribute to sustainable and resilient food systems?
As discussed above, the lack of understanding on the extensive nexus between SFM and FSN yields limited efforts to plan and implement cross-sectoral and comprehensive policies. Consequently, there is relatively little knowledge including best practices on effective design and implementation of such policies by different sectors.
Cross-sectoral collaboration can be particularly difficult among the “competing” sectors in some cases. As an example, sectoral dynamics among the forestry, the agriculture and the environment sectors can vary depending on the national institutional context, and in some challenging contexts, such dynamics can act as a bottleneck in spite of the sound understanding on the link between SFM and FSN.
3. In your experience, what are key best-practices and lessons-learned in fostering cross-sectoral linkages to protect and improve nutrition while preventing, adapting to climate change and reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions in projects?
It has been evident that Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) policies and programmes which are better integrated into other sectors, such as rural community development, not only ensure generation of greater socio-economic benefits including food security and nutrition but also enlarge the number of beneficiaries.
A good example of best practices is the one of the the Republic of Korea (RoK). RoK is one of the few countries who succeeded in forest rehabilitation at national level with the aim, amongst others, to improve FSN. The national forest cover of today has reached 63% of the total land cover while in the 50s it was less than 35% in a severely degraded condition. As such, it demonstrated that restoration of forests and prevention of consequential climate change impact were possible and led to substantial FSN improvement.
The Republic of Korea’s National Forest Rehabilitation Plans have been implemented since 1973 in ten-year cycles. Especially in the 70s and 80s, RoK’s National Forest Rehabilitation Plans were implemented under a bigger framework of “Saemaeul Undong” (New Community Movement in Korean). “Saemaeul Undong” began with an objective to “improve the living and agricultural environments, solve food problems, increase profits for farmhouses, reduce the income gap between urban and rural communities, and improve morale of the populace” (Ministry of Strategy and Finance, 2013). RoK’s experience is, therefore, a very good example of the integration of forestry policy with community development policies including some key elements of FSN.
The National Plans were implemented in conjunction with a broader “Saemaeul Undong” programme, covering activities related to income generation, fuelwood plantation and fruit tree plantation. Successful implementation of the plans not only made forest and landscape restoration possible at national level but also, contributed to the country’s food security and rapid economic development through the rehabilitation of ecosystem services.
Among many of the success-factors, the presidential leadership at the time ensured a sound cross-sectoral collaboration among the concerned ministries (e.g. Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Defense etc.). Last but not least, it should also be highlighted that the policies were able to reinforce the role of communities as illustrated by their strong participation and the sense of ownership.
Forests for Food Security and Nutrition