المنتدى العالمي المعني بالأمن الغذائي والتغذية

It is a praiseworthy effort.

Thank you SFS Programme- UN One Planet network for your confidence in our opinion.

The Triptolemos Foundation has developed a model that allows the Global Food System TRIPTOLEMOS Index (ITRIn), to be quantified through previously defined parameters. The model allows the forecast and comparison between food systems in different countries and territories. The model has been recognized by UNESCO with the grant of the Chair "Science and Innovation for Sustainable Development: Global Food Production and Safety".

Triptolemos Foundation defines the Global Food System on four basic axes: availability, economy, politics and knowledge, and believes that Sustainable Food Systems are linked to territory, culture, country ... and that one of its objectives should be not only be the sustainability of resources but also that production be able to ensure the availability and accessibility of a proper diet the population. In a globalized world, this objective can be articulated through a Global Food System that acts as a regulator.

On the other hand, regarding the definitions of the technical vocabulary used in the document One Planet draft v.1, we can suggest contacting the prestigious IFT (Institute of Food Technology) to create a working group that defines them in accordance with their technological evolution linked to sustainability and the maintenance of the population's food resources.

Our overall vision of the Global food System can be found in our publications The Global Food System: I-Definition of a space (2013) and The Global Food System: II-Quantitative approximation to the food space of Mediterranean Europe (2018), and in the book with the Thomson- Reuters editorial "The Food System: globalization, sustainability, security and food culture" (572 pages and 29 chapters).

We remain at your disposal for any extension and subsequent action.

Greetings from Barcelona

Kind regards

Yvonne Colomer

www.triptolemos.org

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the V1.0 draft sustainable food system. We have some comments that we will ask you to take into consideration:

In 2014 the CFS gave the advice to make fish a visible, integral element in food security and nutrition strategies, policies and programmes. CFS also invited FAO to make explicit reference to fish resources and aquaculture as vital in combating hunger and securing nutritious food for everybody in all relevant documents on agriculture, food security and nutrition. Fish contains high levels of important nutrients that are not commonly found in other foods. It is a good source of proteins, very long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin D, vitamin B12, selenium and iodine. These nutrients are of greatest public health concerns. Food security is not just about enough food but the right kind of food. We have to remember that aquatic food can be a part of the solution. Still, aquatic food is often left out of relevant work, including in some of the text in this V1.0 draft. Reference is made to the CFS HLPE report on Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition, which we think should be looked into and referred to in this work: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3844e.pdf

Food systems also includes aquatic food systems. In UN the word "agriculture" is defined to include crops, livestock, forestry, fisheries and aquaculture. The document actually mention a sort of similar definition, but we have to wait until we get to the box at page 44. The first time fish is mentioned is at page 17. Fisheries and aquaculture are included in the text before that, however hidden in the word agriculture. When people read the word "agriculture", eg page 6 "the area of food and agriculture", chances are slim that they will think of fisheries and aquaculture. This is unfortunate, and may be one of the reason that aquatic food, fisheries and aquaculture often are left out of relevant texts and work. Hence we would ask you to look through the document and see if you could do as CFS has recommended, make fish visible. Eg add a footnote were the term agriculture is used the first time, which states that in this document the term “agriculture” includes crops, livestock, forestry, fisheries and aquaculture. Alternatively specify in the text where appropriate. Another alternative is to change the wording "food and agriculture" to "food and food production". This do not exclude fisheries and aquaculture semantically. Having said that, we are also happy to see that the definitions on food systems, page 8, uses the words food, food production etc. Such words are related to all types of food, both from land, oceans and inland waters.

With a reference to the fact above, we do question the footnote no 24 at page 11 which says: "While specific definitions are likely to vary from country to country, the food and agriculture sector typically comprises: i) entities that are engaged in growing crops, raising livestock and harvesting other animals as well as timber; ii) entities that transform agricultural products into food and beverage products for intermediate or final consumption (including packaging, etc.); iii) wholesalers and retailers (including transportation, etc.). " Where is the fish?

Sustainable food systems for healthy diets is recognized as one of the six pillars of the UN Decade of action on Nutrition. Thus Norway has initiated a global action network Sustainable Food from the Oceans and Inland Waters for Food Security and Nutrition under the umbrella of the Nutrition decade. Taking a holistic approach from the healthy ocean to the healthy consumer, including cross sectorial expertise and paying attention to the elements of food security (sufficient, safe, nutritious, dietary needs, food preferences and leaving no one behind). We believe that responsible fisheries and aquaculture development will be one of the keys in achieving the sustainable development goals (such as goal no 1, 2, 3, 8, 12. and 14 to mention some). We would like to ask why SDG 14, life below water, is not mentioned at page 27? Life on land SDG 15 is. The environment where we grow our food, both on land SDG15 and below water SDG14 is important. Why just mention one? Healthy sustainable environment both on land and in waters are important to produce sufficient and safe food.

We are happy to see that in the later part of the document, there are several references related to aquatic food, but it would be even better if it was made clear earlier in the document that sustainable food systems also includes aquatic food. It deserves to be more visible at the beginning. We would also appreciate if you looked through the text to make sure that aquatic food systems are not excluded by the formulations.

Best regards,

Anita Utheim Iversen

Senior Adviser

Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries

Thank you for the invitation to share our inputs and views on the v1.0 draft ‘Towards a Common Understanding of Sustainable Food Systems’. We, the SHARECITY team, Department of Geography, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, would hereby like to make a contribution. We acknowledge the present section 2.2 which identifies key concepts in relation to sustainable food systems including food waste on p.23 of the draft. However, we feel like food sharing as a key concept is currently underrepresented.

Food sharing is one of the oldest forms of collective behaviour is currently experience a renaissance through the application of information and communication technologies (ICT) (Davies et al. 2017a).

We would hereby like to hereby submit the following definition for the inclusion in chapter 4:

Food sharing is defined as “having a portion [of food] with another or others; giving a portion [of food] to others; using, occupying or enjoying [food and food related spaces to include the growing, cooking and/or eating of food] jointly; possessing an interest [in food] in common; or telling someone about [food]” (Adapted from Oxford University Press, 2014) in Davies et al 2017b

Food sharing is often facilitated by grassroots and citizen led initiatives as they appear in the SHARECITY100 database (Davies et al. 2017a, 2017b). Food sharing initiatives include growing initiatives like community gardens, e.g. Muck and Magic community garden, Dublin, Ireland, initiatives, which facilitate cooking and eating together, e.g. Be Enriched, a community canteen from London, UK (Marovelli 2018), redistribution initiatives, e.g. Foodsharing.de from Germany (Morrow 2018; Weymes and Davies, 2018) and educational initiatives, e.g. Global Generation, London, UK. Many of the initiatives like Global Generation are multifunctional and are conducting many different services leading to a more sustainable food system.

Section 3 addresses different roads leading to a more sustainable food system. We feel that grassroots and citizen-led initiatives should be included into this section as key drivers of sustainability transitions. We would hereby like to suggest explicit mention the role of grassroots innovation and collective activities for facilitating more sustainable food systems which has been demonstrated internationally (Rut and Davies 2018a, Rut and Davies 2018b, Davies 2012).

We welcome the recognition of research and innovation on p.41 of the draft. In addition to this, we would hereby like to suggest SHARECITY as one of the research projects on p.43 leading food systems onto more sustainable pathways. This project uses a collaborative and trans-disciplinary approach to assess the practice and sustainability potential of city-based ICT-mediated food sharing economies. SHARECITY (2015-2020) is funded by the European Research Council (ERC) and involves a team of international researchers and a high-level advisory panel of global experts.

SHARECITY establishes the significance and potential of food sharing economies by:

• Developing deeper theoretical understanding of contemporary food sharing
• Generating comparative international empirical data about food sharing activities within cities
• Assessing the impact of food sharing activities
• Exploring how food sharing in cities might evolve sustainably in the future

To conclude, we would like to add the following references:

• Davies, A., et al., 2017a. Creative construction: crafting, negotiating and performing urban food sharing landscapes. Area, 49 (4), 510–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12340
• Davies, A., et al., 2017b. Making visible: interrogating the performance of food sharing across 100 urban areas. Geoforum 86: 136–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.09.007
• Davies, A., et al., 2017c. Sharing economies: moving beyond binaries in a digital age. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 10 (2), 209–230. https://academic.oup.com/cjres/article/10/2/209/3868122
• Marovelli, B. 2018. Cooking and Eating Together in London: Food Sharing Initiatives as Collective Spaces of Encounter. Geoforum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.09.006
• Morrow, O. 2018. Sharing Food and Risk in Berlin’s Urban Food Commons. Geoforum https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.09.003
• Rut, M. and Davies A.R. 2018a Transition without confrontation? Shared food growing niches and sustainable food transitions in Singapore, Geoforum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.07.016
• Rut, M. and Davies, A.R. 2018b Sharing foodscapes: shaping urban foodscapes through messy processes of food sharing, in Plows (ed.) Messy Ethnographies in Action, Vernon Press: Wilmington, DE. 978-1-62273-329-3. pp 167-175.
• Weymes, M. and DAVIES, A.R. (2018)  [Re]Valuing Surplus: Transitions, technologies and tensions in redistributing prepared food in San Francisco, Geoforum https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001671851830335X
• Davies, A.R. (2012) Enterprising Communities: Grassroots sustainability innovations, Emerald Publishing, London.

The authors: Anna Davies, Principal Investigator of the ERC-funded project SHARECITY, Professor of Geography, Environment and Society at Trinity College Dublin, Stephen MacKenzie, Postdoctoral Researcher with SHARECITY, Monika Rut, PhD student with SHARECITY, Vivien Franck, Research Assistant with SHARECITY

SHARECITY, Department of Geography, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, the University of Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. E-mail: [email protected], www.sharecity.ie

On behalf of the Private Sector Mechanism (PSM), we thank Sustainable Food Systems Programme (SFS Programme) of the UN One Planet network (10YFP) for the opportunity to comment on the draft v1.0; Towards a common understanding of Sustainable Food Systems.

After an initial review of the draft, the following are overarching comments based on the leading questions;

1. Global Multidimensional Poverty Index 2018 prepared by UNDP indicated 3 billion people live in multidimensional poverty. 85% of those live in rural areas. Furthermore, 83% of all multidimensionally poor people in the world live in Sub- Saharan Africa and South Asia.
2. Today we face the reality that the number of hungry globally is on the RISE. The most pressing issues of development must focus on SDG 1 and SDG

2.2 particularly stunting and wasting of children, along with child and maternal health.

1. Based on the above, PSM urges that sustainable food systems must first and foremost focus on the most vulnerable population such as those living in rural poverty, women, and children while taking into account the unique needs of individual countries.
2. Sustainable food system approach considers food systems in their totality, taking into account the interconnection and trade-offs among the different elements of the food system, as well as their diverse actors, activities, drivers and outcomes. However, in describing the sustainable food systems approach, Attention to sustainability seems to be displacing attention to the need to make serious efforts to end hunger in the world. We strongly disagree with the notion that sustainable food systems is a precondition for global food security. The reality is that we are far from solving the global hunger problem.
3. Food safety, nutrition and food security are inextricably linked. Unsafe food creates a vicious cycle of disease and malnutrition, mainly affecting infants, young children, the elderly and the sick. Foodborne diseases impede socioeconomic development by straining health care systems and harming national economies, tourism and trade. Throughout various section of the draft and in particular Section 2.1, we recommend the addition of food safety as a key pillar within the sustainable food system approach. The word safe only shows up in the text on page 17 of the document.
4. Global food trade has a critical role to play in feeding the world: by matching food supply to global demand, efficient markets ensure that food is accessible and affordable for all. The effort to eliminate tariff and non-tariff barriers towards a multilateral trading system that is open, non-discriminatory, and rule-based is a necessary component of any food system.
5. Productivity gains achieved through external inputs can increase farm incomes and resilience. Poorest farmers often have the lowest yields due to lack of improved seed varieties, and other external inputs. External inputs can reduce risks e.g. by providing missing nutrients, micronutrients, crop protection and disease and pest resistance. We support the efficient and integrated approach to inputs as an integral part of any sustainable food system.
6. On the ten principles of agroecology, agroecological agriculture should include traditional food systems with good environmental outcomes, and also innovative systems that are reducing the footprint of agriculture. Agroecological outcomes should have clear metrics on soil, water use, water quality and other outcomes. Furthermore, the principles are missing an essential component on the importance of Science, Technology and Innovation
7. The development of innovative technology to increase sustainable food production remains an area with enormous potential. Innovations to improve water efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions already exist; an immense challenge is in facilitating technology adoption in developing countries that suffer from low productivity.
8. Sound investments in infrastructure, ranging from roads to markets to telecommunications, will accelerate the transformation towards a more sustainable system.
9. Today, more than 40% of the population globally is youth. We won't be able to achieve the SDG goals unless we can engage, recruit and retain youth in the sustainable food systems approach. We think it will be critical to make efforts towards engaging young agricultural and food leaders and to equip them with the knowledge, resources, and access to markets needed to produce and distribute food to feed the world.
10. We reinforce the recommendation in section 3.3 and in particular
    • Achieving coherent, integrated policies working across sectors to support enhanced food systems and diverse consumption requires emphasis on institutional and human capacity building. Without strong institutions and capable personnel, even the best and well-formulated guidelines will not provide the desired policy and program development, implementation and monitoring.
    • It is difficult to design and enact sound policies in the absence of nutrition-focused and policy-relevant research on food systems and food demand. It is essential to have access to high-quality, multi-sectoral information systems, analytical capabilities, knowledge sharing platforms, and best practices resources.
    • Countries cannot achieve their SDG goals without an aligned, motivated and incentivized private sector as a key partner. In this context, improved multi-stakeholder dialogue and collaboration between government, business, civil society and international organizations is crucial for guiding engagement and focusing efforts where they can have the most sustainable impact and long-term success.
    • The private sector is a supportive partner in improving public health and well-being through listening, learning, and sharing expertise to discuss and develop practical opportunities for actions that meet public health objectives.
    • The sustainable food system approach should encourage all actors to invest, apply, adapt, and co-create R&D to improve the sustainability and resilience in the context of FSN development and support to risk management tools such as crop insurance, which can improve the long- term well-being of farmers and provide a stable platform for further improvements in production systems.

Description of Sustainable Food Systems; Section 2.1.1:

In the statements copied below (as in other sections), I suggest removing the words “or neutral,” as it opens a door for abuse of the term “sustainable.” Creative minds can think of many ways to substantiate their impact as “neutral”, for example by being destructive in one area and reforesting in another. Given the heavy environmental damage already caused by human action, the only way to be “sustainable” is for systems to have a positive impact that regenerates the natural environment.

“This means that sustainable food systems are profitable throughout (economic sustainability); have broad-based benefits for society (social sustainability); and have a positive or neutral impact on the natural environment (environmental sustainability).”

“On the environmental dimension, sustainability is determined by ensuring that the impacts of food system activities on the surrounding natural environment are neutral or positive, taking into consideration biodiversity, water, soil, animal and plant health, the carbon footprint, the water footprint, food loss and waste, and toxicity.”

Use of term “traditional”, Section 2.1.2 and elsewhere:

I commend the inclusion of Indigenous people and traditional food systems. I suggest doing a search for other uses of the word “traditional” in the text to assure that there is not confusion. For example, in the phrase below (Section 2.1.2, pg. 14), I assume the use of traditional does not refer to cultural traditions or traditions of Indigenous people

Overcoming polarization and traditional power dynamics as well as promoting inclusiveness are paramount conditions to enhance multi-stakeholder collaboration.

Use of terms “developed” and “developing countries, Section 2.2.1 and elsewhere:

Prefer the use of terms High Income Countries and Low and Middle Income Countries instead, as “developed” is a value judgement.

Unbalanced burden on consumer responsibility rather than industry responsibility (Section 2.2.1):

Section 2.2.1 should focus more on the role of industry in assuring that their products are environmentally, socially and economically sustainable, rather than putting the burden on consumers to make that choice (as it does in the phrase copied below, pg. 18). It makes more sense to change the behaviors of a few large industries than to attempt to educate and change behaviors of billions of individuals. Consumers will take into account their more pressing individual constraints (e.g. cost, preference) over their ideologies while choosing from the options that are available on the market; the market should thus offer sustainable choices for consumers to choose from. The complicity and resulting responsibility of the food industry should not be minimized.

“In addition, people need better information and clearer recommendations regarding environmentally, socially and economically sustainable food and how food consumption impacts on all elements of the food system.”

Definition of agroecology:

This section is very well developed and provides a clear depiction of agroecology, as well as its emphasis of family farming and social/cultural concerns. Excellent! A small word choice correction: at the bottom of page 32, the word “Besides” should instead be “Additionally,” and the following sentence also needs clearing up. 

Ana Deaconu

PhD Candidate in Nutrition, University of Montreal

BS and MS in Earth Systems, Stanford University

Dear Colleagues, greetings from Neuchâtel, Switzerland!

Please find below and attached my contribution to this important discussion. Merci! 

Gisèle Yasmeen (normally in beautiful Vancouver, British Columbia).

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important document.

This is a worthwhile initiative, a very nice overview and well presented. I only have the following constructive comments to make.

I think that giving more prominence to the role of urbanization and the role of urban food systems in shaping global trends would be helpful. “In 2015 an estimated 54 per cent of the world’s population resided in urban areas and the urban population is expected to increase to 6.3 billion by 2050, when 66 per cent of the world’s population is projected to be urban (UNDESA 2014).

Regarding section 2.3 on food loss and waste, I think it’s excellent that you are including this but feel as though the language and conceptualization is a bit too aligned with the FLW challenges of the global north. My understanding is that post-harvest losses are the big issue in the Global South and that this can be lessened with investments in infrastructure. Half of grains and at least a third of fresh fruits and vegetables never make their way to market in low and middle-income countries. It would be useful to really emphasize this.

In the box on page 33 (section 1.3), while I agree that all regions have development potential, not only urban areas, I would add that rapid urbanization is a key structuring feature of the future, particularly in Africa and Asia. However, to help stem the tide of rural to urban migration, increasing incomes in rural areas is key.

On p. 34, Box 3, first bullet, I would suggest adding that micro, small and medium enterprises in the agri-food system (including informal microenterprises), have a key role to play in the value chain. Please see my report published by the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada earlier this year (Yasmeen et. al. 2018).

On p. 36 at the end of section 3.1.3, it might be worth mentioning that much of the world’s agriculture land is devoted to growing animal feed and sugar. While complex, devoting some of this land to grow suitable, nutritious food for human beings, could go a long way in dealing with food security.

In section 3.1.4 in the box on Public Health Approaches, it would be worth mentioning that access to potable water for the washing of hands and food is the number one way to ensure higher degrees of food safety in the global south.

Finally, there are a host of other smaller issues that might be worth raising in this framework, for example: the role of sustainable packaging to move away from plastic, engaging botanical gardens as fellow travelers in the world of sustainable food systems given their role in the preservation and curation of plant-related knowledge and related education (see references below) and more references on the cost of food / purchasing power. Furthermore, I would caution against using the word “natural” when discussing breeding of domesticated plants and animals as this process has been controlled by humans for thousands of years. What may be useful to raise is the relation between biodiversity within domesticated versus wild species and opportunity share genetic resources for the benefits of human and environmental health.

Finally, the graphic depicted on Annex 1 is difficult to read. Can a simplified version be generated?

Thanks ever so much to a number of you for reaching out to encourage me to comment on this important topic. I hope my comments are helpful and I look forward to learning of what comes out of this process.

Sincerely,

Gisèle Yasmeen

Gisèle Yasmeen, Ph.D.

Senior Fellow, Institute of Asian Research, School of Public Policy and Global Affairs

University of British Columbia

Adjunct Professor, School of Environment and Sustainability

Royal Roads University

www.giseleyasmeen.com

References

Moreau, T and Yasmeen, G. “Botanical Gardens: Allies in Food Security and Nutrition,” Food Tank, Published June 8, 2018. Available at: https://foodtank.com/news/2018/06/botanical-gardens-food-security-nutri… 


UNDESA. 2014. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights. New York.

Yasmeen, G., R. Kunin and Vietnam Silicon Valley, Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises in Agri-Food: A Study of the Philippines, Vietnam and Peru, Vancouver: Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada on behalf of the Global Affairs Canada funded Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Growing Business Partnership. March 23, 2018. Available at: https://apfcanada-msme.ca/research/micro-small-and-medium-enterprises-a… 


Yasmeen, G. 2018. “Evolving Foodscapes: Lessons from the Asia-Pacific”, published in Roots: Botanic Gardens Conservation International Education Review Volume 15, Number 2, November 2018, pp 17-19. 


Dear members of the FSN Forum,

There has been a lot of activity related to the consultation “Towards a common understanding of Sustainable Food Systems” over this past week. Detailed and thought provoking feedback was provided, looking at the draft v.1.0 from a whole range of different angles. Among the most frequently expressed comments was the suggestion to integrate more examples to illustrate the different concepts and approaches (e.g. further examples of sustainable diets, resilient production systems, etc.). In addition, several contributors high-lighted the importance of the Right to Food and the adoption of a human rights-based approach. Yet other feedback focused on language, highlighting the need for the draft to be easily understandable to a range of different stakeholders. Furthermore, it was mentioned that the interlinkages and differences between the different approaches presented in the draft may still be made more explicit. This is just to highlight some of the most recurrent inputs, while the wealth of feedback received was of course much broader and detailed than that. Many thanks to all contributors for their time and effort put into this consultation so far!

Several commentators highlighted the fact that Sustainable Food Systems is a very broad and complex topic that requires adequate consideration. In addition, there was an important increase in the activity on the FSN Forum over the past days, which I see as an indication of the persisting appetite for this online consultation. For both these reasons we have decided to extend the consultation period until December 13th, allowing even more contributions to add to the solidity of the draft and improving our common understanding of SFS.

For this last week of the consultation, we would particularly appreciate:

1. inputs providing illustrative examples for the different concepts and approaches presented in the draft; and
2. suggestions on how to further strengthen the description of the relationship (incl. similarities and differences) between the SFS Approach and the other presented approaches.

Best regards,

Alwin Kopse

Deputy Assistant Director-General

Head International and Food Security Unit

Federal Office for Food and Agriculture FOAG, Switzerland

Some Additional Remarks on the V0 Draft, Towards an Understanding of Food Systems

I have read some of the contributions to the current discussion with much interest. There are many sound suggestions on what the contributers believe to be the optimal ways of making our current food production sub-systems perform better. As I have described in my first contribution, this sub-system of a food system includes agriculture as defined by the FAO including animal husbandry, fish farming, etc.

I recall at least one contribution pointing out the importance of limiting food wastage, but surely this is the result of an operational ineptness rather than an attribute of a food system itself. Of course, it could also arise from the use of inappropriate or inefficient methods in any sub-system in a food system starting from a cultivated field, poultry farm, a fishing boat to how food is used at home. Would it not be a good idea to think about the best use of the system after we have agreed on its whole structure in a separate discussion?

At the risk of being misconstrued, may I kindly point out that unless we all can agree about the structure of what may justifiably constitute a food system, it would be exceedingly difficult for any of us to make a unified effort to eliminate hunger from the globe, and ensure a sustainable, wholesome and varied balanced diet to all.

Best wishes!

Lal Manavado.

This is overall a very good draft that tries to highlight the linkages between sustainable production and consumption, pointing to a range of entry-points for achieving sustainable food systems. Congratulations to the team.

While trade-offs are briefly mentioned, my main concern is the lack of adequate acknowledgement of power relations and hierarchies embedded within all stages of the process, that is, the distributional issue. We know that there is a huge gap between the rich and poor in terms of food consumption and dietary diversity, with indigenous people in India confronting a decline in dietary diversity over the past three decades, due to larger changes in land use patterns and the conflicts between macro-economic policies that encourage GDP growth through ‘industrial and infrastructure development’ often at the cost of biodiversity and local livelihoods. Divisions based on social identity – class, caste and ethnicity – need to be acknowledged, so the challenge of rising global income inequalities can be addressed.

We also know that there are power inequalities by gender which both shape divisions of labour and consumption patterns. Women in many contexts may be inclined to cultivate a diverse set of crops for food security, however, they may be excluded from decisions on land use, and lack control over inputs and resources. Greater attention needs therefore to be placed on social and gender power dynamics at each stage of the SFS, and the resource entitlements of women and men across diverse communities, in order to identify and address possible constraints.

A second element relates to shifts in diets to ultra-processed foods, contributing in turn to the double burden of malnutrition. There are many reasons for this, which are often not well understood. First, at a policy level, taxation policies need to restrict the sale and use of such foods, promoted often with several subsidies and incentives by the producing firms. On the other extreme, at the micro-level we need to better understand local livelihood patterns and the gender divisions of labour that may be encouraging the consumption of ultra-processed fast foods. In the hills of Uttarakhand in India for instance, where a majority of men migrate to the plains in search of employment, the entire burden of production and reproduction falls on women. Firewood for fuel is often not easily available and requires long treks. As a result, food that needs little fuel for preparation is potentially preferred. It is also easier for children to consume fast foods, when their mothers are absent from the home.

Third, several countries in the world today are facing growing youth employment, contributing to a competition for scarce resources for ensuring survival. I would like to draw attention to the marine fisheries sector in India. This continues to be dominated by small-scale fishers, however, over the past decade or so, there has been a push towards rapid capitalisation to enable boats to fish further from home. The size of catch has been declining, though with rising prices, earnings have remained stable. Sustainability however is in question on many fronts – ecological, economic and social. Overfishing has contributed to resource depletion, alongside rising pollution and other problems in the coastal environment. Economically, large export companies have replaced small-scale fish vendors, mainly women, depriving the latter of their livelihoods, as they can no longer access fish catch for local sales. Also, more young men are migrating to other countries to raise the capital for investment in larger boats and more technologically advanced gear (albeit often destructive). Socially, and in terms of diets, not just are women losing their source of income, but also access to fish for home consumption. Shifts in diets dependent largely on carbohydrates (rice), rather than including protein (fish) is enhancing problems of obesity, especially amongst women.

While I really appreciate the link being made between nutrition and health, social protection and agricultural production policies, bringing in social differences and power relations, based on gender and class in particular, will help move towards sustainable solutions.

Here is a selection of titles proposed by FAO Publications for forum participants who would like to read more on sustainable food systems.

Food systems for an urbanizing world

This report presents a narrative stressing the centrality of food to the future of cities, countries and the planet, and to jobs, human health, food security and climate change, and proposes the TRANSFORM framework to develop food-smart cities.

Integrating food into urban planning

Through an array of successful examples, spanning from the Tsukji market in Tokyo to urban agriculture in Lima, this paper shows that a systemic approach to integrating food into urban planning is crucial to increase food security and nutrition. 

Plates, pyramids, planet

This report evaluates government-issued food guidelines from across the globe, looking in particular at whether they make links to environmental sustainability in addition to promoting good eating habits.

The State of Food and Agriculture 2017: Leveraging food systems for inclusive rural transformation

This year’s report looks at rural and urban areas not as separate domains but as a continuum ranging

from the farm level to megacities, and emphasizes the dynamic roles that rural towns and secondary cities play as intermediaries in boosting the rural economy.

Nutrition and food systems: A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition – September 2017

This report looks at the links between access to food and people’s nutritional status. It calls for policies that promote adequate food access for all and strengthen consumers’ information on healthy products.

Nutrition-sensitive agriculture and food systems in practice: Options for interventions

This publication provides a list of food system-based interventions (e.g. biofortification, price policies, labelling and education) to improve nutrition across four key functions of the food system: production; storage and processing; trade and marketing; and food preparation.

Building a common vision for sustainable food and agriculture

This report builds on FAO’s extensive experience in developing sustainability concepts, approaches and tools.

Further reading

Sustainable value chains for sustainable food systems: A workshop of the FAO/UNEP Programme on Sustainable Food Systems

Food losses and waste in the context of sustainable food systems: A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition June 2014

Our world is urbanizing: Is food on your agenda?