Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Este miembro contribuyó a:

    • Dear Sir/Madam,

      Herewith attached my proposal, pl add this.

      regards,

      KHML Amaralal,

      Principal Scientist - Socio-economic and marketing,

      Head, Socio-economic and Marketing Division,

      National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA),

      IODE, National Coordinator,

      Nor-Lanka Blue Project Partner, PI and Work package Leader.

      See the attachments:

    • 2. Knowlege production:

       What actions do you take to align your research to problems and challenges faced by agrifood systems?

      Include operationalize objectives to find out optimal solutions for the development of the system. Then make recommendations for policy makers.

       In what ways are the research questions in your sphere of work framed by academic interests and/or funders’ focus?

      Academic interest

      • To what extent do you feel research and policy-making communities in your sphere of work are united in their understanding of the challenges facing agrifood systems? 

      In my experience they are working parallel way like railway lines.

      • To what extent do you work across disciplines and/or draw on expertise from academic and non-academic actors including Indigenous Peoples and small-scale producers?

      I always work with them because indigenous knowledge is more important to me shape and revisit my recommendations.

      • To what extent, and in what ways, is your research co-produced with other knowledge holders and non-academic-stakeholders important for informing policy in agrifood systems?

      It is important, sometimes research recommendations may not address the inherent situation of the problem. I mean some cultural and norms are with community can be extracted through IK to optimize the solution.  for ex. most of the time with perishable commodities theoretical perspectives do not work as it is, then IK is important to make policies to address the isses.  

    • Question 1

      • Do you have an understanding of how agrifood systems policy is enacted in your country or at the regional or international levels?  I talk about fisheries in Sri Lanka only. Yes, our fisheries policy is prepared with the help of an external country experts and enacted by the government. In regional level there are intergovernmental for example SARC and regional bodies for example IOTC.
      • Are you aware of opportunities to contribute science, evidence and knowledge to policy at national, regional or global levels? Yes, My organization is the research arm of the ministry of fisheries, we contribute to policy by providing science, evidence and knowledge at national, regional and international levels. In addition to that I aware that there are opportunities in universities, institutions, CBOs and INGOS. I attended UNU-FTP fisheries policy and planning, WTO and PEW harmful subsidies in fisheries and IORA blue economy ministerial conference. 
      • What kind of knowledge and evidence is privileged in such processes? Enviromental factors, Economic and social, Indigenous knowledge, ecosystem and resource utilization including patterns.
      • What are the strengths and weaknesses of the processes you are aware of? Less time span, not represent all stakeholders, lack of knowledge in international development, lack of listen to others' ideas, lack of scientific knowledge and real time data and information and lack of coordination.
      • What opportunities and challenges have you faced for drawing from sustainability science, interdisciplinarity and trans disciplinarity to inform policy? As a scientist I had opportunities in all levels but challenges like lack of financial support, institutional support and political will dominated.

      • How can power asymmetries among stakeholders be taken effectively into account in science-policy processes? Educate them and make aware importance of policies to manage resources in sustainable manner.

    • Chapter 5 & 5

      Further my previous comments; geographically some areas reginal economy is state land commercial crops. People are daily workers and low wages. So, they do not have purchasing power to buy high value good quality fish and mostly eat dried small fish species. Difficulties in distribution systems triggered this situation further. 

      Inefficiency in distribution chain also contribute to increase the final price which is not affordable to many people of the country especially in the rural areas. 

      Lack of product diversification at the market hindered the food choice and persuasion to eat fish.

       

    • Comment on chapter 4.

      Through my experience in our society which is multy-racial some racial people prefer some varieties (I am talking about fish species) if those are not available at the market at the time, they come they go home without fish. it is cultural norm. And some days in a week they do not eat fish at all. In some area, especially in Kandy where Tooth relic temple located, people in surrounding area do not eat fish. it is also cultural norm. 

      many people in the society in suburbs and city areas do not like to eat freshwater fish species due to feeling that smell is bad. 

      In the southern part of the country men do not like engagement of women in active fishing and even active supporting to men activities but in Northern and Eastern part the situation is opposite the difference is culture and wealth of the family. 

      political economy still men dominated some restrictions for women. Even men they do not have collateral to access formal financial institutions to get support for investment.