I'd suggest considering 2 additional items:
1. Whose knowledge REALLY counts? Yes, I see the topic on the appreciation and application of diverse knowledge. However, it is one thing to simply explore and talk about this, and a whole new way of thinking requiring humility and re-learning (especially for academicians) to truly value indigenous knowledge and the different ways of knowing. For example, who decides the curricula content of the formal food science and nutrition programs in the Academy? The types of grains, vegetables, etc. to be explored? The types of research worth funding? History gives us confidence that communities all over the world can, and have fed themselves for centuries. It is only when imbalances creep in that some flourish at the expense of others.
2. We need to re-think the cosmetic nature of the agri-food systems. There are many initiatives now seeking to re-purpose food that would otherwise not be "good looking enough" to appear on supermarket shelves in many developed nations. As long as part of the world has the luxury of throwing away food because it does not look as we've been accustomed to, while people in other parts of the world barely have enough to eat, we will continue to chase our tails on the matter of food and nutrition security. A lot of these foods that end up as waste are imported, which means critical resources from the exporting countries were used to produce food for other countries, while domestic markets struggle.
Dr. Morrine Omolo
My experience in working with small scale producers tells me that scientists struggle no learn from and communicate with non-scientists, even in an area as universal as food and ag. This is true in many instances, and COVID taught us that all too well. But more specifically, beyond the science, key stakeholders in the local food system are driven by many factors. The local food movement in the US for example, resulted from consumers wanting to "know the person producing their food". Also, conversations around innovations such as GMOs and CRISPR technologies tend to be high level and ill-designed for the average consumer to understand. People become skeptical about scientists and what we do in the "lab", and how this impacts our global food supply.
I have benefited a lot from hanging my lab coat and investing time in trying to understand the undercurrents that are propelling the growing consumer desire for local, sustainably produced food. I spend time learning from farmers and cottage food producers (manufactures using home kitchens to prepare food for direct consumer sales). Many of them feel that we in the academy don't listen to them and are more interested in furthering the publish or perish agenda, than we are about helping then effectively and safely produce food.
I also get the sense that we in the academy do not get proper training in working with community partners and government agencies, beyond seeking for funding and reporting research progress. This is an important skill set, and it takes humility to enter into spaces as learners rather than the experts. For academicians and regulatory staff to benefit from community knowledge, we MUST be willing to change the way we've always doen things. We have to be willing to make the time and invest the resources necessary to be invited into the spaces where food systems are discussed in practice, rather than designing studies that require food procuers to come to us in our offices.