Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum)

Member profile
Browse all members

Ms. Bibiana Muasya

Member since
Organization: Nutrition Specialist-Independent consultant
Country: United States of America
Field(s) of expertise:
I am working on:
• Supporting organizations in analyzing large datasets related to food security and nutrition by utilizing AWS cloud tools for efficient data processing and insights. • Leading nutrition-sensitive programs that integrate cloud-based platforms for implementation, monitoring, and evaluation to improve program outcomes. • Designing cloud infrastructures tailored for organizations focused on food security, enabling effective data management and real-time monitoring of food systems. • Assisting in modernizing agricultural systems by leveraging cloud solutions, promoting sustainable practices, and optimizing resource management.

This member contributed to:

    • Introduction

      This submission provides input and recommendations regarding the draft concept note and prototype of the Agrifood System Technologies and Innovations Outlook (ATIO) Knowledge Base (KB). The feedback reflects the perspectives of potential users, including policymakers, researchers, agripreneurs, extension agents, and grassroots organizations, as identified in the consultation.

      1. Use Cases for the ATIO KB

      The ATIO KB has the potential to fill knowledge gaps by providing a centralized, structured, and open-access repository of agrifood systems technologies and innovations. Below are specific use cases illustrating its value:

      • For Policymakers: Policymakers could leverage the KB to identify and compare technologies based on readiness, contextual appropriateness, scalability, and impact. For example, a policymaker may search for sustainable irrigation systems suitable for low-income regions. The KB could provide details on adoption rates, readiness levels, environmental impacts, and cost-effectiveness.
      • For Extension Agents: Extension agents could use the KB to identify grassroots innovations tailored to small-scale farmers’ needs. For instance, they might search for low-cost, farmer-led solutions for pest control, complete with implementation guides and field-tested results.
      • For Agripreneurs and Investors: Entrepreneurs and investors could use the KB to discover scalable innovations in food processing technologies, complete with data on market readiness and adoption trends.
      • For Researchers: Researchers could analyze correlations between inclusivity or co-design of solutions and their adoption levels, using KB-provided metadata on user demographics, participatory development processes, and implementation success stories.

      2. Policy Innovation and Social Innovation

      Including policy and social innovations will enhance the KB’s relevance. Examples include:

      • Policy Innovation: A case study from Kenya where policies incentivized smallholder adoption of solar-powered irrigation systems. The KB could provide policy details, adoption metrics, and lessons learned.
      • Social Innovation: Documentation of farmer cooperatives creating shared water harvesting systems. The KB could include the social structure, funding mechanisms, and resulting productivity improvements.

      Such content should be presented in case-study format with key takeaways, implementation guidance, and links to further resources. These examples could serve as templates for replication or adaptation in other regions.

      3. Importance of Grassroots Innovations

      Grassroots innovations are critical to ensuring inclusivity and addressing localized challenges. To enhance their representation, the KB should:

      • Include detailed descriptions of the origin, context, and impact of grassroots innovations. For example, “A farmer-developed drip irrigation system in Rajasthan, India, which reduced water use by 40%.”
      • Document key dimensions such as cost, required resources, scalability potential, and cultural acceptability.
      • Provide multimedia content (e.g., videos, diagrams) to facilitate understanding and adoption.

      4. Featuring Branded Commercial Products

      Branded products should be featured in a way that maintains neutrality and supports comparison. Suggested approaches:

      • Categorization by Innovation Type: Group branded products under broader innovation categories (e.g., solar-powered irrigation systems).
      • Comparative Tables: Provide side-by-side comparisons of product specifications, costs, and performance metrics.
      • Innovation Unit: Balance granularity by featuring both individual product models and broader innovation units (e.g., categories of technology).

      5. Taxonomies

      The proposed taxonomies for innovation types and use cases are sufficient to start but should be modular and subject to iterative refinement. Specific recommendations:

      • Involve stakeholders in reviewing and updating taxonomies regularly.
      • Ensure taxonomies cover non-technical dimensions such as gender, inclusivity, and environmental sustainability.
      • Align with existing systems like AGROVOC for interoperability.

      6. Search Capability

      Both filter-based and chatbot-style searches should be available to cater to diverse user preferences:

      • Chatbot Search: Useful for handling complex queries, e.g., “Find grassroots innovations in Sub-Saharan Africa addressing post-harvest losses for maize.”
      • Filter-Based Search: Ideal for refining broader searches, with filters such as region, innovation stage, and use case.
      • Hybrid Option: Allow users to toggle between both options based on their needs.

      7. AI Contributions

      AI-generated descriptions add value but should be transparently marked and editable. Recommendations:

      • Clearly label AI-enriched records with an “AI stamp.”
      • Enable users to suggest edits, ensuring accuracy and contextual relevance.
      • Regularly audit AI-generated content to maintain quality.

    •  Different ways of defining resilience

      Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations:

      Holistic Balance: Resilience is defined in a holistic manner, focusing on the balance between people, the environment, and cultural practices. It emphasizes sustainability, community solidarity, traditional knowledge, and the ability to adapt to environmental changes while maintaining cultural identity.

       Other key rights holders:

       Human rights and equity focus: For human rights organizations, resilience includes ensuring equitable access to resources and opportunities, protecting human rights, and reducing vulnerabilities across different population segments.

      Types of vulnerabilities facing food supply chains

      • Climate change and extreme weather events
      • Economic and financial crises
      • Social and political instability
      • Pandemics and health crises:

      Inequities and power imbalances in food systems; Large corporations often dominate food production and distribution, marginalizing small-scale farmers and producers. In addition, inequities in access to land, water, and financing disproportionately affect smallholder farmers, women, and marginalized communities. To add on workers in the food system, especially in developing countries, often face poor working conditions and low wages.

       Resilience frameworks to explore

      1. Socio-ecological resilience framework focuses on the interplay between social systems and ecological systems, emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and community-based resource management.

      2. Community resilience framework highlights the role of social networks, inclusive infrastructure, and civil society organizations in building resilience at the community level.

      3. Food system resilience framework addresses the entire food supply chain, from production to consumption, considering diverse factors like environmental sustainability, economic viability, and social equity.

      Weak points in global food systems include;

      • Over-reliance on single supply channels
      • Lack of local infrastructure hinders the ability to support local production and distribution.
      • Inequitable access to resources disproportionately affects marginalized groups, reducing overall resilience.

       Understanding and mitigating trade-offs in shocks

      1. Adaptation vs. Fragility; Enhancing resilience to one type of shock (e.g., droughts) may create vulnerabilities to another (e.g., floods). Balance and holistic approaches are needed.

      2. Impact on resilience programming; Different understandings of food security (e.g., focusing on nutrition vs. the four pillars) can influence the design and effectiveness of resilience programs.

       

    • Barriers include:

      • Limited access to decision-makers and policy-makers
      • Limited resources for research and dissemination of findings with a bias to informing policy
      • Limited understanding of policy-making processes among scientists and other knowledge holders as well as limited involvement of the researchers on policy making and governance
      • Limited engagement and collaboration between scientists, policymakers, and other stakeholders

      Opportunities include:

      • Increasing use of digital technologies to connect scientists and policy-makers
      • A joint consultation between scientist/researchers and policy makers should so policy gap analysis is a good opportunity on where to start; which policies are in place, which ones should be enacted what are the bottle necks, what information is missing that needs research done, what scope
      • Growing recognition of the importance of evidence-based policy-making
      • Increased funding for research on sustainable agrifood systems and involving policy makers in the process
      • Growing interest in interdisciplinary research to address complex challenges in agrifood systems
      • Growing demand for stakeholder engagement and participation in policy-making processes
      • Researcher and scientist should derive their research questions based on challenges policy makers are facing so that once the research is conducted it addresses a specific policy gap in agrifood systems

      It is important for scientists and other knowledge holders to proactively engage with policy-makers and other stakeholders, to build relationships, and to communicate their findings in a clear and accessible manner. Additionally, there should be more opportunities for scientists to be embedded in policy-making processes to provide real-time scientific research that speaks to policies within agrifood systems

       

       

    • In my opinion gender empowerment should first start in changing perceptions that are strongly rooted in the minds of everyone and not just rural communities.

      I recently took mental note of gender mainstreaming in families around me and it was saddening to realise that basic women empowerment issues like access to family finances within a home, property ownership of shared property is low, mind you this is families that have high levels of literacy.

      More civic education in my view should be enhanced in all masses not just targeting a section of women in rural areas, true they are most times producers in terms of agriculture and their empowerment is key for achieving food security goals, however if empowerment is done to all masses all gender (male and female and non binary) it will be key to see real change.

       

    • In order to achieve the global nutrition targets by 2025 it is vital for intergration to be embraced in Nutrition and food security. UN should include in programming a more intergrated approach to tackling malnutrition. This should be done in consultation with the public and private actors as a concerted effort with a clear cut goal.

      In my opinion Poverty is a key impediment to tackling malnutrition. Economic empowerment should be considered as part of the key activities in the intergration. In food security a wholistic approach should be sort. Stating with climate smart interventions that help to conserve water to provide a condusive environment for crops and livestock production. When all these fundamental nutrition sensitive programs have been layered nutrition specific interventions will be dealt with as well. The key is to support the safety nets.