Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Facilitator of

Este miembro contribuyó a:

    • Thank you to all the participants who contributed to the online consultation on the “Guidance on strengthening national science-policy interfaces (SPIs) for agrifood systems – Draft report”.

      We received 46 thoughtful reflections from 25 countries, diverse intergovernmental, public and private organizations working in different fields of expertise, academia, civil society and other institutions. Your valuable insights will help the FAO Chief Scientist Office to further refine and finalize the guidance, addressing the challenges faced by the individuals and institutions that produce and use evidence as well as the intermediaries who broker evidence in Member States and in partner organizations. 

      We truly appreciate the time and effort that you put into submitting your comments and sharing your views and experiences. Your participation and your contributions are fundamental to ensuring legitimacy, scientific quality, and the incorporation of diverse forms of knowledge and expertise in the guidance document. The guidance document is intended to be a tool to facilitate reflection about advancing an SPI, its possible scope and mandate, and launch a learning process around SPIs. It could be considered at the country level in a process to strengthen existing, or establish new, agrifood system SPIs. The guidance is envisioned to be a living document and improved (through further iterations of the guidance) by learning from such experiences.

      Best regards,

      Dr Preet Lidder, Technical Adviser in the Chief Scientist Office

      Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO)

    • Dear Participants,

      Thank you for your active and fruitful contributions so far. Aligned with the FAO Science and Innovation Strategy, the guidance is intended to be a tool to facilitate reflection about advancing an SPI, its possible scope and mandate, and launch a learning process around SPIs. It could be considered at the country level in a process to strengthen existing, or establish new, agrifood system SPIs. Your valuable insights are very important for further elaborating and refining this draft.

      We acknowledge that the document is substantial in scope and content, requiring additional time for a thorough review. Therefore, we are extending the deadline to ensure that you have sufficient time to provide comprehensive feedback in line with the guiding questions.

      Best regards from the facilitator of the e-consultation,

      Dr Preet Lidder, Technical Adviser, Chief Scientist Office, FAO

    • Dear Participants,

      Thank you to all the participants who contributed to the online consultation on “What are the barriers and opportunities for scientists and other knowledge holders to contribute to informing policy for more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agrifood systems?”. We truly appreciate the time and effort that you put into submitting your comments and participating in the discussion, and encourage you to take advantage of the consultation to review the insightful contributions from other participants on the FSN website.

      There is consensus that science and innovation are critical for transforming agrifood systems but ensuring that the best available evidence is used is not as straightforward as it sounds. Social, economic, and political forces shape how evidence is understood and valued. Decision-making processes vary across individuals, communities, institutions, and governments, and are informed by different forms of knowledge and experience in different ways.

      Due to its unique position as a facilitator of intergovernmental processes, FAO provides an essential and neutral platform for exchange between countries, allows Members to establish international consensus on global policy issues related to science and innovation, serves as an authoritative source of guidance, and supports the development of new codes of practice, guidelines and standards.

      FAO has many experiences to build on and strengthen the interface between science and policy, including through its Governing and Statutory Bodies. Your valuable insights will be instrumental in shaping the direction of our efforts on the development of guidance for strengthening science-policy interfaces as well as science- and evidence-based policy processes for agrifood systems.

      Proceedings of the contributions received as well a summary document will be made available shortly.

      Dr Preet Lidder, Technical Adviser in the Chief Scientist Office, FAO

      Dr Eric Welch, Professor, Arizona State University

    • Dear Participants,

      Thank you for your active and fruitful contributions so far. It is clear that the generation of knowledge does not equate to ensuring that it is both useful and used. Social, economic, and political forces shape how evidence is valued and understood. Decision-making processes vary across individuals, communities, institutions, and governments, and are informed by different forms of knowledge and experience in different ways.

      Your valuable insights are very important for informing work on the development of guidance for strengthening science-policy interfaces as well as science- and evidence-based policy processes for agrifood systems, helping to ensure that effective policy decisions are made based upon sufficient, relevant and credible science and evidence. In line with the guiding questions, we would appreciate your specific and focused inputs on informing policy for more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agrifood systems.

      Best regards,

      Preet

      Co-facilitator of this consultation

      Technical Adviser in the Chief Scientist Office, FAO

    • The links between agricultural research and poverty reduction are complex and interdependent, and depending on context, there may be multiple, interacting pathways through which agricultural research could contribute to reductions in poverty and associated vulnerabilities.

      In April 2016, the CGIAR’S Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) organized a Science Forum on: 'Agricultural Research for Rural Prosperity: Rethinking the Pathways'. The objective was to reassess the pathways for agricultural research to stimulate inclusive development of rural economies in an era of climate change. Nearly two hundred participants from around the globe, including 114 from Africa attended the Forum. Following the Forum, we worked through various materials to produce an ex-ante list of 18 impact pathways, linking agricultural research for development (AR4D) with poverty reduction in a results-based management format. These pathways involve innovations to increase agricultural productivity; innovations to minimize agricultural production risks; addressing market imperfections and failures; agricultural diversification; improving natural resource management, governance, property rights, and rural livelihoods; improving human nutrition and health; enhancing food supply and reducing food system waste; creating and managing food safety nets; and enhancing national food and agricultural policies and programs.

      The impact pathways framework was then used to generate an idealized “wish list” table of contents for a special issue, proposing research papers that in most cases were intended to cover more than one pathway. It proved challenging to get stand-alone papers across the full gamut of 18 pathways and therefore some pathways have been covered in our introductory paper. Of the nine papers in the special issue, seven are already available online. The special issue (edited by Tom Tomich, Preet Lidder and Peter Carberry) is expected to be published in the journal Agricultural Systems by the middle of 2018.

      This set of papers does not constitute the proceedings of the Forum. Rather, insights from the Forum were used to identify strategic gaps, constraints and opportunities in this broad field and to frame a coherent and comprehensive collection of research papers from a systems perspective. Each assesses the evidence for the key causal connections

      linking AR4D to poverty reduction for their focal pathway(s) and suggests priority research questions, implications for research methods and design, and for necessary AR4D partnerships.

      Our concluding paper in the special issue (currently in preparation) attempts to present a consistent set of conclusions emerging from the collection of papers. For example, the indirect effects of agricultural research on poverty (e.g. reduced national food prices for consumers) dominate the direct effects (e.g. income gains from on-farm productivity growth) and thus much greater attention needs to be given to assessing indirect impacts. Consequently, prioritizing AR4D that takes into account potential indirect effects occurring over a longer period of time is critical. Our paper then makes an effort to cluster the impact pathways into operational AR4D impact networks. Stand-alone pathways are rare and there are complementarities and dependencies among pathways, with some pathways possibly being more important than others in some contexts. Building on the analysis of impact pathways (possibly reconceived as impact networks), this paper suggests partnership priorities to achieve development impact, as well as implications for international agri-food systems R4D priorities and program design.

      Preet Lidder

      Agricultural Research Officer

      CGIAR Independent Science & Partnership Council (ISPC) Secretariat