Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Hola. Me dedico desde 1999 a la Asesoría, Consultoría, Docencia e Investigación en aplicaciones, análisis y desarrollo de Trazabilidad y GeoTrazabilidad, a lo largo de América Latina y El Caribe. Uno de los grandes desafíos que me encontré en Latinoamérica, fue el desconocimiento (inclusive hoy) del término "Trazabilidad", herramienta que se aplica en Comunidad Europea desde hace más de 20 años (Reg. 178/02 CE), en USA (Ley de Bioterrorismo) y otras Regiones.

Más del 30% del alimento Mundial proviene de Latinoamérica, y ante la exigencia de Trazabilidad de los Países compradores para saber el Origen, Calidad, Inocuidad, etc. del Producto que consumían, sin dejar de mencionar otros beneficios como el ReCall Alimentario (retirada de circulación de lote afectado), Denominación de Origen, Certificación de Origen, etc, se comenzó a complicar dicha producción, donde quienes implementaron esta noble herramienta, dieron un valor agregado a sus productos y se diferenciaron del sus pares. Doy un ejemplo en el cual participé: el mango como producto, es excelente en Haití, pero dadas las condiciones políticas cotidianas del País, USA importa el de República Dominicana, donde el USDA (Departamento de Agricultura de USA) ayudó a este último País a implementar Trazabilidad y ReCall Alimentario, donde se capacitó y diagramaron Manuales de Buenas Prácticas.

Cuando noto que parte del problema Latinoamericano era la capacitación, escribí un Libro que titulé "Introducción a la Trazabilidad: un primer acercamiento para su comprensión e implementación", el cual se usa ya en varias Universidades (inclusive en España) como material didáctico, lo cual es un Honor, más orgullo me da cuando un Agricultor Familiar se puso a Googlear "Trazabilidad", me encontró y nos ponemos a charlar al respecto.

Hoy nos encontramos con una nueva Reglamentación de Comunidad que por cuestiones MedioAmbientales exigirá más Trazabilidad de los alimentos para saber a ciencia cierta que esos productos no vienen de tierras deforestadas, lo cual tendrá que demostrarse fehacientemente. Es obvio que muchos productos dejarán de exportarse porque muchos provienen de varios Países que han permitido la deforestación. Creo que este es el momento ideal para que quien produce tome conciencia, incluyendo los Políticos y se capacite para tomar conciencia, porque de no implementarse, se verán afectadas las Economías Regionales, muchas de ellas, exportadoras o con ganas de hacerlo.

PD: para cualquier consulta, mis redes sociales están en https://linktr.ee/trazabilidad

I appreciate the excellent contributions so far. I would like to share my point of view as a plant scientist whose long career was mostly spent in the private sector (food & beverage industry), and who served as president of the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform.

Throughout the thread of contributions, I noticed the inclusion of the ‘private sector’ as a possible or current player in agricultural research, which can, in turn, inform policy. Below I am highlighting what I see as shortcomings and opportunities of food & beverage industry engagement in agricultural sciences.

1. Private Sector Delineation: First and foremost, I think that any time we mention private sector in reference to agriculture, we should specify whether we are talking about input providers (and if possible, differentiate between agrochemical or seed or fertilizer suppliers), or farm machinery, or technology, or food & beverage (end users or consolidators), etc. The reason that this is critical is because it allows us to discern drivers and zeal for engagement. While most private sector players will cite the Triple Bottom Line as a guiding force for their businesses, it would be naïve to ignore the weight that profit (or lack thereof) has in decision making processes. So having clarity on how agricultural science impacts a company’s bottom line, is a critical element in judging if, how and to what extent a company is willing to engage in agricultural research efforts.
2. Interest Drives Engagement: While some food and beverage companies such as Nestle or McCain, have had a distinct interest in agriculture and how it impacts their supply from a quanti- and qualitative point of view, it is in recent years that more companies are claiming concern about the matter. That said, the insertion of agricultural sciences in strategic decisions, priorities and funding of many food and beverage companies are usually at a basic level. “Big egos and shallow pockets” claimed a stakeholder referring to big brands that do not commit much funding to agricultural projects. Furthermore, because historically agricultural research has not been a part many food and beverage companies, they are not staffed to handle this critical activity. With greater urgency to act on the climate crisis and given the awareness of the impact of agriculture on climate, we could see more interest of private sector players in helping catalyze solutions.
3. Collaboration of Authentic Stakeholders: One key to the success of agricultural projects embedded in food and beverage companies, it the formation of alliances with ‘authentic’ stakeholders. In general, food and beverage companies are not equipped to carry the weight of these projects, so forming alliances can spread the weight among stakeholders. From an expertise point of view, collaboration is also critical. As other colleagues have pointed out, the inclusion of social dimensions is imperative in these types of projects and working alongside gender/inclusion/equity experts becomes a necessity.
4. Construct for Success: Collaboration with the private sector can lead to formidable success or failure (risk of greenwashing, lack of continuity, false expectations, etc.). No efforts should be withheld in conducting a through ex-ante analysis of the project scope  and all its stakeholders and ramifications.

Best,

Ernesto Brovelli, PhD, Courtesy Professor 

Horticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida

Dr TP Rajendran

Retired Asst. DG (Plant Protection), ICAR, Department of Agriculture Research and Education, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India

My inputs are given below:

Analysis of the complexities and practical problems associated with science-policy interfaces

It is significant to decipher the essentiality and emrgency of the research in agriculture of a country through its plethora of institutes. Practical problems in farms are a traditional experience of farmers over generations. Comprehending these problems across the variation in natural resources including weather changes over several decades is essential to understand how traditions in farming were brought into traditional knowledge systems across continents. In this Anthropocene era, the policy framework is mainly for funding research, financing agriculture with the goal of satiating food security locally in each country and globally in all deserving countries of the seven continents.

Traditional farming knowledge has embedded much science in terms of modern research output. Many rediscoveries could enhance and sharpen the adaptive technologies that are now offered through government-patronised knowledge extension systems as well as by commercial agri-business consultancy systems. All said and done, the target to produce more from diminishing natural resources in the farm lands has driven us to engage in this FAO-discussion too. The paradigm to implement local indigenous farm solutions that would resolve commodity production constraints could provide enough production of those agri-commodities to satiate local food needs. Let’s for once remove from our goals global hunger index metrics and drive country-needs of food requirements under very peaceful political situations. Many global eruptions of conflicts have aggravated global strain of hunger across continents. No matching science and policy can bring any harmony to such people in constant strife.

Knowledge production for policy

Synthesis of local and global scientific and technological output in enhancing constancy in farming in all nations towards deriving benefits of harmonised commodity production has always the challenge to farmers from the markets that eat into the realtime pricing of agri-commodities. In the quest for global food security after securing the UN-sustainable development goals there is very poor synteny of aligned policy from available knowledge reservoir.

Knowledge translation for policy-making

Translation of available national and globally accessible knowledge, science and technology for ‘proftable’ crop commodity production plans get hit when the natural resources of farms do not align well with the policies.

Assessing evidence

Indian Green Revolution era has the typical evidence to show the world that in spite of professed technology and science for finding the miscarriage of goals of sustained and stable crop commodity production without harming natural resources significantly. Unlearning and reinventing traditional crop production strategies has gone into the unwinding of the ‘glorified’ and ‘professed’ promise of satiating all the hungry Indians in the last century. Beyond the conundrum of purchasing power, government subsidised access to food also became challenge due to enormous increase in the costs for paying farmers as well as maintaining the flow of food grains through public distribution network of the states.

Examples

Recent examples for hunting and validating the Indigenous Traditonal knowledge in Indian farming led to the discovery of ‘non-chemical farming’ touted to be ‘organic farming’, ‘nature farming’, ‘chemical-free farming’ and ‘Best farming solutions’. The Indian government has framed policy for ‘traditional farming / organic farming / nature farming and has announced huge investment.

While researchers shunned these systems of crop production for many past decades fearing crash in crop production and productivity, the band-wagon researchers have now come out with prescriptive technology support for the new approach in turning conventional farming practises into tradition-driven practices.

Many islands of such cropping systems where in overwhelming emphasis for microbial agri-inputs are stressed upon in farming practices, have successfully sprung up in Indian states with demonstrable success of sustained crop productivity across seasons. Low to no-tillage farming in addition to enhanced supply of farm yard manure and composts could enhance significantly soil organic carbon beneficially. From national average 0.2 -0.3 percentage the organic carbon content in farms were enhanced to 0.7 to 1.0 in various agroclimatic zones across states resulting in the competitive crop productivity at far-reduced cost of production.

PROBLEM: RESEARCH to FARM GAP(s)

There is a significant GAP between what's happening in the universities, research centres, policy makers structures and what's happening in the farms, in the input providers and downstream supply chain.

The GAP is at the level of direct "people's connection", understanding of practical daily priorities, perspective.

Unless these worlds are more connected daily, global policies, innovations, opportunities will be missed and there will be a mismatch among what science focuses on and what the farm (and overall agri sector) needs.

(POSSIBLE) SOLUTION(s)

1. Farmers closer to university-research: identifying key farmer's representatives to be regularly involved in the decision making process of policies and researches, through interviews, easy presentation of the ongoing researches and activities; such representatives should have a power of vote.

The same should happen with the representatives of the upstream (input providers) and downstream (food supply chain) of the agri value chain. Involving equivalent representatives in the academia and policy institutions as active members.

2 . university-research to farm: leading universities have their internal farm(s) where they actually produce and test all innovations. This approach should be followed (and even expanded) by all agri-universities and research centres, allowing the scientist to put themselves in the shoes of the farmers and translate the research into practice. 

3. innovator farmers: farmers with an attitude to innovate should be invited regularly to the above described University farms, where they can see and "touch" what's happening on the research side. They will also provide feedbacks and further ideas to these farms. Ideally some of them will also be invited to directly participate in the activities of such farms. 

Finally the "innovator farms" should be able to access at low-cost or no-cost the results of the innovations & test the new policies. Being selected by an open attitude towards innovations, they would likely embrace such innovation allowing a second level test for further fine tuning. In exchange for the access to innovations at better conditions they will indeed be demanded to provide clear feedback.

Evidence based research can be key in n informing policy. Researchers and knowledge holders have the feel of how a piece of legislation impacts on the target group. By interacting with issues downstream they have a better understanding of what works and what doesn't and should be in a stronger position to advise policy makers as such. Unfortunately there is always a gap between researchers and policy developers. Policy developers have their own research unit which informs the process but that may not be enough as you need wider research and knowledge input from different perspectives such as gender , livelihood status, community priorities etc.  These are key factors to take into consideration for effective policy development . 

My contribution relates to Question 4: Assessing evidence

I will make a follow-up contribution on Question 5: Some examples

From 2015 to 2022, I have been involved in evaluating and reviewing CGIAR programs and initiatives using an evolving Quality of Research for Development (QoR4D) Framework. Lessons learnt from each evaluation have informed improvements in this Framework. In addition, it has been informed by other methods for evaluating agricultural research for development e.g. IDRC Research Quality + Assessment Tool and the UK Research Excellence Framework. The current model (https://iaes.cgiar.org/evaluation/publications/cgiar-evaluation-framework) is well-constructed, robust and flexible and can be used at all stages of the project cycle from proposal to mid-term to project termination to impact. It is based in four well-defined elements: relevance, credibility, legitimacy and effectiveness in four dimensions: design, inputs, processes and outputs. Evidence is evaluated in a rigorous, transparent and gender aware manner through well-defined quantitative and qualitative indicators using a mixed methods approach. The subjective nature of some qualitative indicators is reduced by using rubrics. Communication to stakeholders is initiated early in the evaluation process, making them aware of the objectives of the evaluation and making sure that all stakeholders are involved. Many different tools are used to communicate the evidence including videos, briefs, workshops etc. depending on the audience (managers, researchers, partners, farmers, policy makers).

Dear FSN Forum Manager, 

I had the opportunity to once again go through the report (FAO, 2022. FAO Science and Innovation Strategy, Rome). This report helped me understand the framework needed for an innovation system.

1. However, I could not see how this report could capture the importance of extension systems as an important component of the science and innovation strategy. Food systems require up-to-date knowledge to compete in the market, and small-scale primary producers cannot afford to participate in formal education systems for such an extended period of time.
2. I felt that it needed to be seen from the perspective of extension systems, which is also important from the science and innovation perspective in agriculture. The knowledge developed by higher education institutions also needs to be transferred, especially to small-scale producers, to promote entrepreneurship, equity, and the environment. 
3. All these need "project formulation" and "community organization development" strategies. The social scientists working in higher education institutions, especially in agriculture and related subjects, need to conduct research in this direction. Therefore, please incorporate extension education into the framework of science and innovation. 
4. Otherwise, in the third outcome of the first pillar (evidence-based decision), where there is a mention of "research and development,"  we can modify it as "research and extension to achieve SDGs" (as the word "development" lacks clarity to some experts), and later this can be elaborated on that.

The above suggestions are submitted for your kind consideration. 

Regards

Regards

I will start with barriers:

1. One of the most significant barriers is the need for vital interest by authorities to acquire knowledge and skills to inform policy. This scenario is particularly evident in developing economies where every policy implementation is viewed through a political lens, as those in the offices question how an apparent policy enhances their political chances. 
2. The second barrier is the need for sufficient funding for such policies to be rolled out. Developing countries usually depend heavily on external financing. However, this funding is sometimes inadequate. In other instances, this funding is delayed because of various reasons on the funder's side. Moreover, such funding in recent times has been affected by such occurrences as the coronavirus, Russia-Ukraine War, and climate change, which all have been destructive to the global economy.
3. Some policies appear good from a global perspective but need a robust campaign, lobbying, and negotiations to boost uptake in the developing world, followed by financial, technical, and other logistical support. For example, it is a commonplace that climate change is real and poses a substantial risk to human existence. However, in the developing world, this is taken as a hoax, or something unreal, particularly at the grassroots. Changing this outlook needs a more aggressive approach to inform the communities of the apparent danger, which is different now.

Opportunities:

1. The world is substantially interconnected thanks to the technology that has enhanced this connectivity. Social media, radio, TV, and other channels should all be used to influence knowledge uptake and policy design and implementation. It is easy to learn of the tsunami or tornado which has hit the US in a matter of hours, floods that have hit Germany and other countries in the EU, or floods in Madagascar in a matter of hours.
2. Research indicates that the global literacy rate currently stands at 87%, up from 12% in 1820. Most developed countries have achieved a 99% literacy rate. In the developing world, such as Africa, in 2021, 67.4 percent of people aged 15 years and above in Africa were able to read and write a simple statement and understand it. Given these facts, this should be an opportunity for policymakers and knowledge creators to inform the communities of the policies and knowledge as and when the need arises.
3. "From promoting the development of democratic institutions to establishing peace between warring nations, the UN supports economic and social development and the promotion and protection of human rights." Thus, the UN and its specialized agencies should be given more powers and mandates to promote peace and security, particularly in developing regions like Africa, where peace and security are still contentious issues. In most countries where the two still need to be included, policymaking and implementation are stagnant, whereas knowledge creation and uptake are stalled.

The United Nations and the Food and Agriculture Organization has  declared 2023 as the  International Year of Millets 2023! how this policy decision was arrived? was it due to evidence that millets are very nutritive? or due to many small holders in Asia & Africa cultivate & depend on millets? or millets can be grown comparatively in water scarce conditions, or poor people cant afford buying cereals? It could also be all factors together led to the decision. What process was followed to arrive at this policy decision-evidences produced by scientists and presented before the policy makers/politicians to convince? India is one of the leading camapigners of International Year of Millets.

The scientists enaged in research on millets often publish papers on virtues of millets-decalring them as super foods, leading to consumer acceptance in many countries. Since 2023 has been declared as Year of Millets, we are likely to see huge number of research papers, articles, books, blogs published including social media campaigns in support of millets adding fresh evidences on virtues of millets. We are likely to see increasing export of millets  from developing countries to countries in North, where millets could be new craze. At times decision taken at highest level influences many processes at different level. Thanks to this decision, many millets which were on the brink of extinction-likely to see revival in many countries including India. In my childhood, I used to consume lot of finger millet & maize, but as I grew up & became a bit wealthier, I stopped eating these coarse grains, no matter 100s of publications approving these as health foods. May be now me too will look towards these once again-thanks to policy decisions at highest levels!!

https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1881244#:~:text=The%2….

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8005370/#:~:text=Nutrition….

https://www.mygov.in/campaigns/millets/

https://agricoop.nic.in/sites/default/files/Crops.pdf