Font size:

Contact us:

Topic: Policies and Strategies

Download resource

Carbon Incentive for Physical activity: Conceptualizing clean development mechanism for food energy

The basic fact is that intense practitioners of yoga consume food only once a day while moderate practitioners of yoga consume food twice a day. With the normal consumption being around three times on a given day, the economic benefit or the reduction in food consumption due to yoga practice is two meals per person per day for intense practitioner and the same would be one meal per person per day for moderate practitioner. In addition, the economic benefit includes increase in wellbeing & consciousness, and decrease in cost of non-communicable diseases.
 
The paper analyses the food and water consumption, excessive consumption, food consumption taxes like fat tax and brings out the business behaviour of tickling food consumption. In addition to taxing and regulating the excessive consumption & the tickling behaviour, it explores the preventive best practices that reinforce natural human ability of self-control over food consumption. It identifies the practices where there is purposeful or consequential reduction in food consumption i.e. weight loss treatment and yoga, proposes clean practice, suggests accounting for savings & carbon incentive, and discusses the finance and policy options in developed and developing countries. Yoga also meets some of the objectives of health, education, environment, culture & sports, food and finance, and therefore seeks finance allocation from corresponding ministries to support the carbon incentive work. As an alternative, the human capability developed can be measured under capability approach for creation of human development incentive. With the efforts to increase physical activity by subsidy proving to be less effective and with the taxes preventing consumption but not reducing temptation in short run, the paper considers embedding the best practice in the education to bring the habit of physical activity. Evaluating the practice for optimizing food consumption may operationalize a wellbeing practice, stimulate economic growth, and may lead to completeness in conserving all forms of energy and to completeness in charging of food consumption taxes

Download resource

Recognizing Linkages Between Social Protection and Agriculture

Since social protection and smallholder agricultural interventions often cover the same geographic space and target the same households, there are opportunities for synergies and complementarities that strengthen livelihoods of poor rural households.

Social protection policies aim to reduce socio-economic risks, vulnerability, extreme poverty and deprivation, while smallholder agricultural policies focus on improving productivity in crops, fisheries, forestry and livestock and access to markets. Both areas of policy are important elements in poverty reduction strategies, but little attention has been paid to the interaction between them and the implications for design and implementation of related policies and programmes.

Poor rural households that mostly rely on agriculture for their livelihoods are often affected by limited access to resources, low agricultural productivity, poorly functioning markets and repeated exposure to risks. Social protection can help alleviate credit, savings and liquidity constraints by providing cash and in-kind support. In addition, the regularity and predictability of social protection instruments help households to manage risks better and to engage in more profitable livelihood and agricultural activities. Agricultural policies and programmes can help smallholder households manage risk by stimulating farm output, income and overall household welfare.

Download resource

FSN Forum Brief - Forests and trees provide benefits for food security and nutrition – what is your say?

Brief based on the online discussion, held from 4 to 26 February 2013, facilitated by FAO’s Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum) with FAO’s  Forestry Department in the context of the International Conference on Forests for Food Security and Nutrition.

Download resource

Policy brief: Improving wheat trade policy administration to benefit both consumers and producers in the United Republic of Tanzania

Import tariffs and costly import procedures may explain why consumers in the United Republic of Tanzania pay relatively high prices for wheat. Although wheat farmers benefit from higher prices, domestic production has not increased. Indeed, since 2000 domestic wheat production has been able to cover only about 20 per cent of the country’s consumption requirements.

 Findings from a recent study conducted by the Monitoring African Food and Agricultural Policies (MAFAP) project suggest that:

  • - simplifying procedures for importing wheat and reducing overall import costs would make wheat more affordable for consumers;
  • - monitoring re-exports of wheat flour to neighbouring countries would help ensure that lower import tariffs for wheat actually lead to lower domestic prices; and
  • - supporting efforts to develop wheat varieties adapted to local agro-ecological and climatic conditions, and expanding related extension services, are crucial for increasing wheat production.