Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

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?

Observations from: Dr. Sazzala Jeevananda Reddy
• The words such as “efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable” have rarely achieved under modern systems as here diverse people with vested interests on the one hand and weather-climate on the other are involved. The former is a profit driven system and in the later it is beyond human control need to adapt to them. In the later also entered vested groups for profit diverting the basic science. For example: climate change. The profit driven system misusing the word “climate change” as an adjective or as a de-facto global warming. International scientific community entered time-pass computer simulation modelling wasting huge quantity of power.
• Analysis of the complexities and practical problems associated with science-policy interface: As an IICA Expert, FAO Expert & WMO Chief Technical Advisor visited and worked in several countries. In the case Mozambique presented reports and methodologies and travelled [by Air] important agri areas. Based on the proposed method presented food aid requirement for sub-division-wise. Presented natural variability in rainfall [that includes Zimbabwe and Malawi]. The reports are available with INIA/Maputo & FAO/Rome. In the case of Ethiopia, applied those methodologies developed in Mozambique. Travelled around the country in a Truck, fuel barrel at the back. The reports are available in NMSA/Addis Ababa.
• After returning to India, I brought out a book with all the information including my work in Australia/Canberra for my Ph.D. with ANU.
I submitted the article in two parts for publication in open access journal “Impacts of WCCC on Sustainable Agriculture & Food Security: Part-I: Weather-Climate-Climate Chang [WCCC] w.r.t. Agriculture and Part-II: Sustainable Agriculture vs Food Security.
• Reddy, S.J., (1993): Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries., www.Scribd.com/Google Books, 205p; Book Review appeared in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 67:325-327 (1994).
• Reddy, S.J., (2019): Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries (2nd Edition with the same title). Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 372p – no changes made to 1993 book but added few others.
Few other books & articles:

• Reddy, S.J., (2000): Andhra Pradesh Agriculture Scenario of the last four decades. Hyderabad, 105p.
• Reddy. S.J., (2002): Dry-land Agriculture in India [An Agroclimatological and Agometeorological Perspective]. BS Publications, 429.
• Reddy, S.J., (2008): Climate Change: Myths & Realities. www.scribd.com/Google Books, 176p.
• Reddy, S.J., (2017): Climate Change and its Impacts: Ground Realities. BS Publication, Hyderabad, India, 276p.
• Reddy, S.J., (2019): Water Resources Availability in India. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 224.
• Reddy, S.J., (2019): Workable “Green” Green Revolution: A Framework [Agriculture in the perspective of Climate Change]. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi. 221p.
• Reddy, S.J., (2021): Agrometeorology: An Answer to Climate Crisis”. Brillion Publishing, 242p.
• Reddy, S.J., (2022a): Disturbances Recorded in Bay of Bengal & Arabian Sea: A Note. Journal of Agriculture and Aquaculture 3(2).
• Reddy, S.J., (2022b): A note on “Coldwaves V& Heatwaves”: Disturbances (Part-II]. Journal of Agriculture and Aquaculture 4(1).
• Reddy, S.J., (2022c): A Note on Interlinking of Rivers: An India Example (Part-III]. Journal of Agriculture and Aquaculture 4(3).

Dr. Sazzala Jeevananda Reddy
Formerly Chief Technical Advisor – WMO/UN & Expert – FAO/UN
Fellow, Telangana Academy of Sciences [Founder Member]
Convenor, Forum for a Sustainable Environment
Hyderabad, TS, Inda
[email protected]

Your organization's initiative was a very interesting one. Today, science professors are expected to be the drivers of society. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. To strengthen the connection between professors, practitioners, and policymakers, I offer the following perspectives.



1. After Covid 19, it is becoming more evident that poverty and prosperity are driven by professors, practitioners, and policymakers.



2. When professors and practitioners in a society have a relationship based on worth, that is, to promote entrepreneurship, equity, empowerment, and the environment, society's worth rises to the next level.



3. When politics pollutes professors and practitioners in society by indoctrinating birth-based identities based on communities and places of birth, the policies benefit a few while marginalizing many in society.



4. Therefore, the professors have to be mobilized, mentored, and monitored to promote the worth-based relationship between the policymakers and the practitioners.



5. If such an initiative is taken to streamline the research systems, the planet earth will be a worthy place to live.

Apart from laboratory based hard core research on nutrition values, systematic studies done by interdisciplinary team involving food scientists, economists, public health experts can monitor developmental inteventions to bring out evidence to extend, for instance, the nutrition programmes like Mid Day Meals in schools. Currently, eggs are served in mid-day meals in 13 states and three Union Territories in India as part of “additional food items”. There is “clear evidence of significant improvement” in the growth of children who are given eggs as part of mid-day meals, with girls in Class 8 gaining up to 71% more weight than their peers who were not served eggs, as per a study commissioned by the Karnataka government covering over 4,500 students in two districts. With this clear evidence on benefits of eggs, still it may not be extended in many other Indian states for the reasons other than the evidence. So, at times, even if evidence is there, likelihood of policy being framed in line with the evidence may not be seen.https://indianexpress.com/article/education/karnataka-study-shows-eggs-…

While reading the background note prepared for this consultation, I appreciate the observations made, in particular following two:

 1.  Single disciplines on their own are not able to address systemic challenges in a holistic manner &

 2. Policymakers may not inform scientists and other knowledge holders about their needs while scientists and other knowledge holders may not actively engage in the policy-making process. Additionally, many obstacles may compromise this participation.

Let us accept, many scientists including me have little understanding of how agri-food systems policy is enacted at national, regional or international levels. Many papers published by scientists in their respective disciplines are used mostly by subsequent researchers just as review material not as an input for policy making. Many scientists engaged in livestock research, particularly those responsible for Animal Sourced Foods (ASFs)) repeatedly come out with findings in support of the importance of consuming ASFs for human health and well being. Yet, whatever the scientific evidence may say, policy makers may opt to ignore the evidence on ethical or ideological grounds. For instance, it has been observed that meat products are discouraged or even banned in the menus in public canteens, in disregard of the fact that apart from its role in human health & well being, animal husbandry plays an important role in culture, societal well-being, food security, and the provision of livelihoods in developing countries in particular. There can be several reasons to justify discouragement to ASF consumption, but how to balance human health needs with that of other considerations. The scientists of a specific disciplines may not be sufficient enough to address this issue- role of ASF in sustainable human diets vis-a vis environmental & ethical implications of animal production. The vegan movement globally is getting stronger, risking decision making based on ethical and unsubstantiated reasons than on logical grounds by the policy makers.

I contributed some blogs, which again don’t take other implications of animal production, but only human health & well being:

Can Consumer-Centric Extension (CCE) Boost Animal-Sourced Food (ASF) Consumption? https://agrilinks.org/post/can-consumer-centric-extension-cce-boost-animal-sourced-food-asf-consumption

Consuming Animal Sourced Foods (ASFs) is a must for a healthy living, so let’s improve animal production! https://agrilinks.org/post/consuming-animal-sourced-foods-asfs-must-healthy-living-so-lets-improve-animal-production

The researchers often work in isolation within the confines of their respective disciplines, so generally have compartmentalized thinking. They continue to be confined to their respective disciplines to be focused and excel publishing in their respective subjects than having broader outlook by taking up work in inter- disciplinary modes. There has been encouragement for interdisciplinary work but it seems it will take a long time for scientists to accept the importance of interdicsiplinary work and  have good connect with policy making bodies and decisions. This consultation, I see a good opportunity to sensitize the scientific community how they can contribute even more meaningfully by being able to be heard by policy making bodies.

Looking for your feedback!

Mahesh Chander

I am part of an academe-based institute of social research and development. To interface between research and policymaking, we are producing a series of "informing policy and practice" briefs that serve as information dissemination material for policy and best practice recommendations from research conducted by our faculty- and full-time researchers. Based on this very local experience, one barrier I can identify (in the context of higher education research) is there is less incentive for scientists and knowledge holders to go to the extent of sharing their findings to inform or influence policy, or for extension in general. Scientists and knowledge-holders in universities are incentivized to publish in research journals, register utility models and patents, create start-ups, and earn from technologies developed, but there are almost no incentives for scientists/knowledge-holders who are able to influence or inform policy-making. I am not very sure but even global university ranking system metrics under university research impact do not include such.

POLICY MAKING PROCESS

The policy making process currently stays in between the highly fragmented agriculture diversities and the global digital system convergence.

DIVERSITIES

The food production system is fragmented and highly diversified in crops, farm size, farm budget, climate, local infrastructure available, ...

DIGITAL

At the same time, digital allows convergence of information, easy(er) connection throughout the player of value chain, knowledge sharing (geographically and over time) and much more.

Digital represents a tremendous opportunity to allow local policy makers to better connect locally (aggregating info and accessing them efficiently) and globally (keeping up with the newest opportunities).

The digital divide is progressively diminishing with a more global coverage and more affordable smartphones pushing penetration in developing countries.

FARMERS & CONSUMERS INVOLVEMENT

Farmers and consumers are the key entities in the process: the first produce, the latter pay. They should be included in the policy making process and digital platform finally make it easy to connect and share.

Representative of both categories should be constantly present and have a more relevant weight into the decision making process. 

(CON)FEDERATIVE DECISION MAKING PROCESS

As agri is significantly impacting the environment and most food cross the national (and often continental) borders, a multi-level body system of decision making process is desirable, having the core of the international body focusing on the issues having a global impact on people and planet health while having a focus on the global food system resiliency. Local bodies will have more time and freedom to focus on specificities of the local production.

Practical Problem with Science-Policy Interface

I hope to use the Three Sisters Companion Gardening Technology to increase the income and food security of families working in the Ugandan rock quarries. The Three Sisters Gardening technique requires that participants understand the Three Sisters Gardening planting strategy as well as corn and squash "hand pollination" procedures.  It is my understanding that a lack of pollinators is causing a lot of agriculture productivity problems for small Ugandan farmers. You can look at their corn or watermelons and in 5 seconds determine if the corn or watermelon is being pollinated properly. Hand pollination procedures can help solve the pollination problems.  Hand pollination may be "new technology" to extremely poor Ugandan farmers.

It took me awhile, but I now understand why I can't get the seed supplies I need to help small farmers stop starvation in Uganda. Initially I noted that most African countries have a very limited number of seed suppliers and that these seed suppliers sold a very limited number of products.  I also was told by Ugandan personnel that they wanted to use only non-GMO seeds.  

After a little investigation I determined that African countries sell most of their vegetables in the European market and Europeans wanted to buy only non-GMO products. They noted that it is very difficult to distinguish between a GMO seed product and a non-GMO seed product.  Most African countries limit the number of seed companies in their country and limit the import of seeds into their country to ensure that they are selling only non-GMO products.

It also is very difficult and expensive to get an Import Permit to import seeds into an African country even when you are importing seeds that have been declared to be non-GMO by a US grower such as those at Seed Saver Exchange.  I must use only the seeds that are available in Uganda unless I want to spend more than two years to get the proper Import Permit and Phytosanitary certification. I may need to wait a few years to obtain non-GMO, non-Hybrid green pole bean seeds or non-GMO, non-Hybrid corn seeds with strong stalks in Uganda if I am lucky. These seeds are very common in other parts of the world including Europe.

To counter this lack of seed availability I am focusing on methods for increasing production of small Ugandan farmers that do not rely on improved seeds.  I am focusing on the use of "Hand Pollination" of corn, squash, and watermelons.  Hand pollination can significantly improve the small farmer production of corn, squash, and watermelons in regions that lack insect pollinators (bees) including parts of Uganda.

Ugandan women and children working in the Kampala rock quarries do not have the food security and income that they could have.  Ugandan officials are implementing a seed policy that goes well beyond what European and International personnel are recommending.  European and International personnel do not want to see Ugandan women and children suffer due to an over-the-top application of a seed policy that the international community has advocated.

I hope that the Uganda State Trade Association officials will work with the FAO, the Ugandan Government and Ugandan university personnel to solve this problem before poor Ugandan women and children suffer additional unnecessary food shortages

Here is an argument for not using GMO seeds

https://grain.org/article/entries/427-twelve-reasons-for-africa-to-reject-gm-crops

Here is an argument for using GMO seeds

https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/10-things-everyone-should-know-about-gmos-in-africa/

Here is my understanding of why African nations are reluctant to use GMO seeds

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/why-is-africa-reluctant-to-use-gmo-crops/

I am a rural sociologist and gender integration specialist working primarily in East Africa on food insecurity and biomass energy and energy poverty more generally.  This conversation is critically important and I am honored to contribute.  

In my professional experience working in East Africa and elsewhere, there is a substantial missing piece when we think about the creation and sharing of knowledge.  First, there is the assumption that scientific inquiry is in and of itself sufficient for the formation of policy, leaving out the reality that the issues of key importance to the lab-based sciences may or may not answer the needs of policymakers and communities.  Secondly, there is an assumption made that knowledge flows in one direction:  lab to policy to communities when in fact complex problems such as the ones we currently face require input and expertise from multiple sources.  Finally, culture matters.  What I mean by that is that each of us participating in the knowledge generation process is a product of cultural assumptions and habits.  Natural scientists who study technical issues, say soil science just as an example, are not equipped, nor do they have the time, to be experts on socio/cultural conditions and the interaction between natural science findings and every local circumstance where that work might be applied.  There is a deep need to include social scientists and humanities scholars as well as community members in the research and policymaking process.  Moreover, in East Africa where I work at least, virtually no support is offered for basic social science and cultural investigations of agricultural and rural communities.  Local languages are seldom taught, leaving those who speak them cut off from the scholarly community and sometimes even the policymakers in their own country, just as an example.  

If there was one major contribution the FAO could make to link different types of knowledge together for the improvement of food and agriculture innovation, it would be to fund and sponsor transdisciplinary research and polity teams to study and collaborate with communities and governments to understand local and regional needs and search for appropriate responses.  Scientific innovation is critical to policymaking but it is only one pillar in a successful change process.  We must even be aware that ideas that look great in the lab may be inappropriate at the grassroots level. 

It goes without saying but I will say it anyway, East Africa where I work is full of brilliant young people who could be part of this process if there was international support for research and research translation employment by East Africans.  I am all in favor of international collaboration but at the same time, building a research career in East Africa for citizens of African nations, is very difficult.  Teaching burdens at universities and dependence on short-term funding at research organizations mean that many serious voices move to the Global North or non-research careers for financial security reasons.  This reality makes the kind of policy interface I have described even more challenging to achieve. 

• Innovations in seeds and traits, seed treatment, biological and chemical crop protection, and digital farming solutions for important crops worldwide
• Improvements for climate resilience, biodiversity preservation, precision applications and reduced CO2 emissions
• Empowering small-scale producers
• Promoting good agricultural practices through demonstration plots
• Fostering youth leadership

Greetings, I am the project coordinator- economic empowerment -Isiolo Working with World Vision Kenya. This discussion is timely and very interesting.

For several years, Livelihoods in ASAL areas has been undermined by cyclical barriers including unfavorable market conditions, inadequate infrastructure, limited access to services such as animal health, a poorly developed financial sector, weak implementation of existing policies and governance systems.

I do encourage revitalizing our budget strategies to enable farmers to navigate uncertain climate realities and ensure food production; promoting nutrient-dense crops and reduce exports of staples. Some of the key areas that we can collaboratively look into especially under Public Private Partnerships and community led-participatory approaches include:

1. Promoting inclusive, sustainable agri-business market –led production
2. Building secure livelihoods &  resilience among vulnerable populations and households in more fragile contexts
3. Strengthening environmental conservation