Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum)

Dear contributors, 

Thank you for your insightful and sharp contributions. 

The HLPE-FSN invites participants to address some or all of the proposed guiding questions, as relevant to their experience, and provide examples as appropriate. The contributions will be compiled and analyzed by the HLPE-FSN experts working on the upcoming report on “Reducing inequalities for food security and nutrition”. 

 The HLPE-FSN is constantly working to address the many issues facing both policymakers and food and nutrition practitioners alike, and your valuable insights are fundamental in our working process, in order to ensure legitimacy and a high degree of scientific quality. Likewise, we look for the incorporation of diverse forms of knowledge and expertise, to make sure that world policy making for food security and nutrition is based upon reliable science and evidence, and science-policy processes ensure that due recognition, acceptance and prominence are given to traditional knowledge. 

We look forward to receiving your valuable inputs and to learning from your experiences.

Best regards, 

Évariste Nicolétis, Co-facilitator of this consultation, Coordinator of the HLPE-FSN 

Proposed box for p.93/94 on agency and power

Case study – Scientific attempt to measure agency – and increase community agency by unpacking power

In Cape Town, a group of community researcher accompanied by students from Humboldt-University in Berlin tried to measure agency (Paganini et al., 2021). This process, and the triangulation of food security findings, empowered the community and increased their agency to play a role in communal food dialogues processes. In triangulating, discussing, and contextualising their research results, the co-researcher team realised the importance of active participation in food governance processes through these dialogues.

Agency was measured by  identifying five domains for inclusion in our assessment of agency, in line with HLPE: diet sovereignty, food production, food processing, food distribution, and voice in food policies and governance. For each domain, we developed a set of questions corresponding to the type of empowerment an individual can have within a domain. We asked the participants about their perception before COVID-19 and now. An increase in the calculated index would potentially translate into a higher status of empowerment or agency in the respective domain (ibid, p.47)

The adjusted Agency Module for the household survey consists of 16 questions and reflects on individual perceptions of own situations, but also on communal situations pre-COVID-19 and “in these days”. For all domains, we asked if the respondents considered themselves as having knowledge, having the opportunity to make choices (for example on what food one wants to eat or what products to grow), having the power to change at the household level, and having the power to make changes in the community (ibid, p.48).

The survey with more than 1800 households showed that there is a positive relation between having a perceived agency and living in a food secure households. Respondents who live in food secure or mildly food insecure households have significantly more agency than respondents in moderately and severely food insecure households. This proves that there is a relation between food security and having a sense of having agency in the food system. Therefore, the quantitative operationalisation of agency in the Agency Module has potential for future refinement. Furthermore, it indicates that the newly introduced dimension of food security agency is related to the FIES, which measures the dimension of food access of an individual or household. In conclusion, having agency in the food system increases access to food and vice versa (ibid, p.93) Socio-economic characteristics such as age, gender, and employment status only play a minor or no role on agency. Variables which strongly influence agency are education and the place in which the respondent lives. Having a formal job or working as an urban farmer, fisher, vendor, community kitchen owner, or spaza shop owner increases agency as well. (ibid, p.94)

From this study, community researchers developed visions, among them to destigmatise hunger, to collaborate in dialogues to increase awareness on the right to food and to rethink community kitchens as hubs for change. These food dialogues held the potential to build on the initial momentum and relationships that had been developed through the Agency study into more established ward level food dialogues (Buthelezi and Metelerkamp, 2022).

Best,
Nomonde Buthelezi & Nicole Paganini

1. Respecto al Derecho Humano a la Alimentación y los Sistemas Agroalimentarios (Sección 6 del documento), es adecuado enfatizar e incidir para que todos los países reconozcan en sus Constituciones Políticas el Derecho Humano internacional de sus poblaciones a una Alimentación Adecuada y Nutritiva, y a los recursos necesarios para tener de manera sostenible una seguridad alimentaria nutricional adecuada. ¡Este paso es fundamental para todos los países, sin embargo, ahora resulta insuficiente!

En Bolivia, hace años que se reconoce el Derecho humano a la Alimentación, no sólo a través de la Constitución Política del Estado sino también a través de una serie de Leyes y disposiciones legales (sobre la alimentación, sobre el cuidado de la madre tierra, sobre el acceso a los recursos productivos y otros). Sin embargo, estas disposiciones quedan sólo en la teoría ya que, por ejemplo, en Bolivia, en el año 2019, existieron disposiciones gubernamentales de cercar las principales ciudades del país para impedir el acceso de alimentos a su población, para de esa manera lograr el objetivo político de que la población urbana suspenda los bloqueos ante la renuncia del presidente (Evo Morales).

En el 2022, también se realizó un cerco a la ciudad de Santa Cruz durante varias semanas, para impedir el acceso de los alimentos básicos a su población que exigía la realización del Censo Nacional de Población y Vivienda; disposición que fue implementada por organizaciones afines al partido de gobierno (medida que supuso no sólo una escasez de alimentos provenientes del sector rural sino también un alza de precios, especulación, disminución del consumo de alimentos de poblaciones pobres y otra serie de consecuencias a nivel productivo y social).

Por lo tanto, se deben elaborar otras disposiciones (o mecanismos) internacionales para obligar a los Estados a cumplir con el derecho humano de acceso a la alimentación en todo momento, de todos sus habitantes, sin discriminación política, ni discriminación de origen, sexo, etc. Es decir, debe ser un Derecho Humano vinculante.

Asimismo, deben estipularse reglamentaciones para que los grupos/instituciones/agrupaciones de la sociedad civil puedan exigir al Estado, el cumplimiento del Derecho Humano a la Alimentación sin ser marginados, enjuiciados, perseguidos.

2. Respecto al contexto internacional en que vivimos por el conflicto Rusia-Ucrania y la crisis de alimentos, desabastecimiento, alza de precios de los productos, comercio internacional, etc; lo primero que deben hacer los Estados es asegurar el abastecimiento interno de alimentos de las poblaciones pobres, rurales y periurbanas; de los campesinos y pueblos indígenas. Y si hay excedentes en los alimentos básicos, recién exportar al mercado internacional.

Un segundo aspecto en el que se debe enfatizar es en la lucha contra la especulación y alza de precios de los alimentos básicos que se efectúa internamente en cada país, ya que hay diversas empresas/individuos especuladores que con el pretexto de la guerra Rusia-Ucrania han ocultado alimentos (e insumos para la elaboración de alimentos para el ganado, por ejemplo) para incrementar los precios internos. Entonces los Estados tienen la obligación de abastecer a los habitantes (como a los productores de alimentos con insumos necesarios) precautelando el abastecimiento adecuado (a través de las reservas de alimentos, compras directas de alimentos de otras regiones, subvenciones al productor, distribución directa de alimentos y otros).

3. Referente a la relación entre pobreza y la (in)seguridad alimentaria nutricional, ésta se genera sobre todo por la desigualdad de acceso a los recursos productivos como tierras y agua de riego; a la capacitación/enseñanza técnica; a la tecnología moderna (y adecuada a las regiones agroecológicas, no la maquinaria inadecuada y depredadora de los recursos naturales); y por la desigualdad de acceso a los insumos, semillas, capital.

En Bolivia, por ejemplo, del total de Unidades Productivas Agropecuarias (UPA) existentes en todo el país, el 76,80% de éstas (que poseen entre 1 y 9.9 Hectáreas) poseen tan solo el 6.14% del total de tierras productivas; mientras que el 10.09% de las UPA (empresas agropecuarias consolidadas y latifundios) poseen el 65.76% del total de las tierras productivas (fuente. Censo Nacional Agropecuario 2013).

4. En la mayoría de los países de América Latina y el Caribe, la seguridad alimentaria nutricional todavía depende de la agricultura familiar de pequeña escala. En Bolivia por ejemplo (país muy rico por su diversidad agroecológica), la participación de la agricultura familiar en el abastecimiento de los alimentos básicos era de más del 78% hace pocas décadas, índice que ha disminuido bastante hasta la actualidad (un poco más del 55% del total) debido sobre todo a las importaciones (y contrabando) de alimentos mas baratos (subvencionados en sus países de origen); al escaso apoyo de las políticas públicas (en proyectos y programas) de los gobiernos nacionales y regionales; y al creciente aumento de los productos de exportación (soya, carne vacuna, caña de azúcar y otras oleaginosas) que inciden en un desplazamiento de las áreas cultivadas de los productos básicos (hortalizas, verduras, frutas) por los productos de exportación, a costa inclusive de la deforestación, el monocultivo, el uso intensivo y creciente de agroquímicos y la quema de la Amazonía. En el fondo, se prioriza un modelo de fomento a las exportaciones más que a un autoabastecimiento y agricultura sostenible; y se incide fuertemente en el cambio climático.

5. Contrariamente, en las otras regiones del país (Altiplano y valles), hay un deterioro creciente de la agricultura familiar campesina y de los Pueblos Indígenas, no sólo porque los costos de producción de sus productos básicos no cubren los precios de venta (no generan un ingreso monetario); sino porque hay un creciente abandono de los poblados y localidades, sobre todo por los hombres adultos y los jóvenes (hombres y mujeres) que migran en busca de empleo e ingresos, recargando el trabajo y la responsabilidad de los hogares en la mujer madre de familia. A eso se añade que hay un uso intensivo de la tierra, la cual no es fortificada ni repuesta, más bien está sobre agotada. Para colmo, hay un uso intensivo, creciente y descontrolado de fertilizantes químicos que contaminan el agua, el medio ambiente, la tierra, matan la biodiversidad, entre otros, incidiendo en la dependencia del país hacia el comercio exterior de agroquímicos, y sobre todo, incidiendo también en el cambio climático.

Hello everyone. I answer the very first question in the affirmative. I fully support the addition of new thematic areas to food and nutrition security. In the sense that the right to food exists but unfortunately only on paper. it would therefore be appropriate for future strategies to combat food insecurity to incorporate this agency concept. I therefore confirm the quintessence of the conceptual framework. 

Mr. Mayi may want to consider the following idea based on his recommendations.

• A good seed policy must be put in place and addressed locally;
• Draw up a list of staple crops and develop a value chain around these crops in order to provide solutions in terms of employment and food security;

For Table 5.1 Actions and the Inequalities they address

Action – Improve the diversity of garden seed products available in all parts of Africa so that all African small farmers have at least the same diversity of garden seed products that are available to the South African home gardener

Inequalities they address –African women small farmers have unequal access to garden seed resources needed to produce new consumer products

A home gardener or small farmer in South Africa has access to a wide variety of garden seed products.  See https://livingseeds.co.za/ or https://www.seedsforafrica.co.za/ . For example, the South African small farmer can grow at least 25 types of melons and 20 types of watermelons using the seeds that are available to South African home gardeners.  This allows the South African small farmer to offer the South African consumer a wide variety of products.  In contrast, far less garden seed products are available in other African countries.

In other parts of Africa, the woman small farmer entrepreneur is very limited by the types of garden seeds available in their country and the difficulty of obtaining seeds available in other countries.  In most parts of Africa women small farmers cannot buy corn seeds that produce corn with strong stalks that are required by the three sisters gardening technique.  They cannot easily import seeds that were developed by Native Americans such as Navajo melons see https://www.nativeseeds.org/products/2023-seedlisting-catalog .  They also cannot easily import  desert melon seeds that were originally grown in Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Namibia to demonstrate African melon heritage to African consumers.  

I have read the V0 report, which has done a remarkable job on the conceptual framework and which sets the scene for the orientations that need to be deepened and enriched by the specific realities and experiences of the targeted regions.

From the outset, when reading the report, it is clear that injustices, inequities and inequalities are not reflected in the same way in the countries of the North and the South. The proof is that malnutrition is not the same in these two poles. In the former, it means obesity, overweight. On the other hand, in the second, it means undernourishment, stunted growth. This precision is worthwhile in order to differentiate the injustices in the targeted regions.

In Cameroon, the issue of food security can be analyzed on the basis of a triptych: macroeconomics, policy and strategy in the agricultural sector, and related issues (policies, employment, education, culture).

The macro-economy of the state as a whole, its vision. Over the past three decades, we see how Cameroon has been pulling the bull by the horns to try to get its head above water, through its multiple strategic documents. First there was the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), then the Growth and Employment Strategy Paper (GESP) and today it is the National Development Strategy 2020-2030 (NDS30) which aim at enabling Cameroon to achieve its emergence in 2035. Unfortunately, while these documents may have the merit of being well elaborated, they do not have the merit of being sufficiently implemented. When I finish saying this, the deterioration of the terms of trade is digging into our trade balance and this added to the weight of the debt, would make it difficult for an underdeveloped state like Cameroon to engage in sharp reforms such as those related to food security and nutrition. In other words, the budgets of underdeveloped countries seem insufficient insofar as the majority already goes into debt payment and structuring projects in terms of infrastructure.

Thus, every year, some 100 billion is allocated to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MINADER) to develop agriculture. There is a problem of policies, strategies and implementation. The proof is that when we take into account the budget of MINADER, the aid programs and the support of the action of MINEPAT, it is a lot of money that apparently is injected every year into Cameroonian agriculture without it taking off.

For a good policy, after having identified the agro-ecological zones and production basins, we should identify the producers according to the speculations, I would even say identify the actors of the value chain by speculation, by recording their production capacities, their needs. This data should enable the government to develop effective policies and adopt better strategies. Unfortunately, nothing has yet been done at this level. Good agricultural policies should be based on the farmer. At the BEDELOR (Bureau d'études pour le développement local et rural), we have created a document called the "carnet du planteur" (farmer's notebook), which provides all the technical and financial information on the farmer (production rate, production quantities per speculation, cultivable and cultivated areas, input requirements, financing requirements, etc.). It is on the basis of this information that we can better orient policies in the agro-ecological zones in general and in the production basins in particular.

The poor orientation of our economy or the extraversion of our economy is still hampering the recovery, or even the real take-off of Cameroonian agriculture. Here are some examples:

• Enormous and constant franchises granted to foreign companies in the poultry sector, when this sector had just been relaunched in 2006 with the ban on the importation of frozen chicken cuts;
• The same goes for aquaculture and fishing, with the quasi-monopoly, if not the monopoly, of a local company (CONGELCAM), which imports fish and frozen food instead of developing this sector locally, which is full of job niches;
• In the 2000s, when the maize crisis occurred, the Government opted for imports instead of reviving this sector locally;
• In the rice sector, Cameroon has an abundance of production basins (Yagoua, Ndop, North-West) but our markets continue to be flooded with imported rice (apparently more competitive in terms of price);
• Tubers are scarce and expensive in the markets, as farmers who are not supported by the state most of the time prefer to sell in more lucrative markets, including in neighboring countries (Gabon, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria), which even come to buy locally.

These few examples reflect the malaise of Cameroon's agriculture, which is struggling to organize and structure itself and consequently cannot ensure the sustainable food security of its populations. We have the impression that the Government, through MINADER, does not anticipate events enough, and when crises occur, chooses rather punctual but cheap solutions instead of projecting itself in a real policy of revival which will develop sectors, set up value chains, real guarantees of a sustainable food security and nutrition and of a perennial agriculture.

Obviously, this has consequences or causes that could justify this state of affairs. First of all, when talking about inequalities, we can mention the administrative and geographical division of land, which has allocated relatively smaller areas to demographically dense peoples who practice intensive agriculture. The variety and variability of climate and seasons also reinforce these inequalities. Not all peoples, from a cultural point of view, have the same relationship with the land. While you have the Grassfields (in the western and north-western highlands), especially those in the west, who are aware of the small areas they have inherited for an overly large population, are determined to over-exploit their land to the point of developing agriculture on the slopes of the mountain ranges that litter this region. Meanwhile, we have the pygmies in the East Cameroon region, who do not exert a considerable impact on the land in particular and the environment in general. Over- or under-exploitation of the land in a given area leads to ecological and environmental impacts in that area. These impacts may give rise to resiliencies or habits depending on the region. Rotational farming, which can be practiced in the central-southeastern zone, may not be possible in the western Grassfields, which are overexploiting land that has become insufficient, leading them to make considerable use of fertilizers. Of course, it is in areas where agriculture is intensively practiced that support is more regular and consistent. In this respect, we can see an unequal distribution of state support and assistance in terms of agricultural materials and inputs. In short, some areas benefit from projects and programs more than others. But it should be noted that all these measures are based on two fundamental reasons:

1) Support measures can be applied to further amplify a production that is developed or growing with a view to feeding the rest of the country (as is the case in the Grassfields region);

2) To address a region plagued by hunger and undernourishment (as is the case in the Far North of Cameroon and the East region, and to some extent the Adamaoua and North regions with the issue of refugees from the Central African Republic), which attracts the bulk of humanitarian and assistance programs.

This mapping of projects and programs sufficiently demonstrates the inequities and inequalities in public action in the different regions of Cameroon. From this point of view, it can be observed that

-The Grassfields region has been able to develop Agriculture because it has better addressed the issue of education. Women and young people have access to education. Thus, this human capital allows it to be the production basin of chicken, eggs, thanks to the mastery of technology and modern methods used in Agriculture. Besides, despite all the assistance and humanitarian programs present in the region, the Far North of Cameroon remains one of the least educated regions, due to cultural relays that do not favor access to education for women and youth.

- The Grassfields region, through its dynamism, has been able to develop value chains and is now home to several agricultural inter-professions (organizations), notably IPAVIC in the poultry sector, but also other inter-professions in the coffee sector, etc. These value chains are at the heart of the development of the region. These value chains are at the origin of the development of jobs (job niches) throughout the country. Bafoussam (capital of the West region and focal point of the greater Grassfields region) is the third most important destination for small and medium-sized industries and enterprises after Yaoundé and Douala. This is because this area has been able to organize and structure a pole of activities that necessarily expresses a demand in terms of services, which offers opportunities to SMEs and SMIs. 

Some recommendations:

• Create a file of producers by production basin and by agro-ecological zone, by speculation, with information on their civil status, cultivable and cultivated areas, needs in inputs and phytosanitary products, needs in financing;
• Communicate statistical data on production to the decentralized services of the State and feed the information back to the central level in order to better develop policies and strategies;
• A good seed policy must be put in place and addressed locally;
• Draw up a list of staple crops and develop a value chain around these crops in order to provide solutions in terms of employment and food security;

Thank you for this very comprehensive and relevant review on food security and nutrition.

In the name of our HFST (Humanitarian Food Science and Technology) international working group, I have two comments:

• Humanitarian issues are not directly mentioned in this review. Yet, because of the many recurring humanitarian crises that strike and will strike the world, they do seem to be a major cause of the many disorders that affect food security in many places and one of the key drivers to tackle them when considered through the humanitarian, development and peace nexus.
• Food Science and Technology (FST) is also not mentioned, even though it may appear as one of the most promising and powerful levers for addressing food insecurity; for example, by controlling food safety, improving the nutritional value and convenience of food, optimizing local resources, providing revenues to low-income families and women through generation of employment opportunities, eased access to the market, etc.

While the role of some food companies has often been blamed for increasing food inequalities due to strategies that seek immediate profit for some rather than sustainable wealth for the majority, this trend could be reversed by raising awareness among stakeholders, including through innovative educational programs and promotion of the specific role FST may play at the various levels of the value food chain, a role that has been poorly understood and emphasized until now.

More information in our paper “The Role of Food Science and Technology in Humanitarian Response: A Review“, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.06.006; other HFST publications: https://www.aifst.asn.au/Humanitarian-Food-Science-and-Technology

Best regards and season greetings

Dominique Bounie

Happy Holidays

In response to Chapter 5 "Actions to reduce inequalities in food and other systems to improve FSN" and  

Question 9 " Can you suggest success stories from countries that were able to reduce FSN inequalities?"

Many African countries have laws that are more suited for medium to large agriculture organizations and not for small farmers. The supplies needed by a small farmer are different that those of a medium or large farmer.  The seed supplies that are offered in many African countries are not diverse, robust, or appropriate if small farmers are to meet FSN needs.  I am pretty sure the lack of appropriate seeds is causing problems for the small African farmer meeting the FSN needs of their country. The FAO needs to clarify their guidance to African politicians so that African seed supplies will meet the FSN needs envisioned by the FAO.

In contrast, the Chinese were able to develop methods between 1979 and 1992 that helped the small farmer provide for the FSN needs in China.  Getting the right supplies to the farmers was addressed by Chinese businessmen while Chinese law makers focused more on land and financial reform.  Some African nations are trending to use the ideas that the Chinese used between 1979 and 1992. Perhaps the FAO can identify exactly what supplies small farmers most need and can afford given their financial constraints so that small farmers can swiftly meet the FSN needs in their country. There was more to the Chinese actions than land and financial reform.

I once tried to grow rare Native American products in South Africa to show cooperation between people of Native American and Zulu descent as a tourist attraction.  The Zulu women farmers with whom I was working considered my ideas as entrepreneurial opportunities that they typically did not get because they were Zulu women.  It took me a couple of years to get permission from the South African government to import a few seeds.  Unfortunately, we ran into a pollination problem that I did not expect. I did not try to export any more of the rare seeds due to my previous agreement on how many seeds I would be allowed to have for export to South Africa.

Success stories from countries that were able to reduce FSN inequalities

Raising goats appears to be the best way for small farmers to get out of poverty and meet FSN needs.  

For those small farmers that cannot afford goats, I recommend that they earn additional income raising onions, sunflowers, green pole beans, and passion fruit first. Small farmers will need to monitor local markets to determine what products offer the best return on investment. They do not want to lose their investment by supplying a particular product that was overproduced. At one time watermelons farming was an excellent investment but there now may be an oversupply in some African countries.

For those small farmers that are in bad shape I recommend that they use the "three sisters gardening technique" to grow corn or sunflowers, green pole beans, and squash. The farmers will need to know how to hand pollinate corn and squash to maximize their production.

Here are some success stories

Goats https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories/refugee-family-finds-hope-after-receiving-gift-catalog-goats

Onions https://www.newvision.co.ug/news/1521373/grow-onions-taste-money

Sunflowers https://www.bukedde.co.ug/agric.%20%26%20environment/114205/how-to-grow-sunflower

Passion Fruit https://www.africa-uganda-business-travel-guide.com/kaduru-and-his-american-wife-find-fortune-in-uganda-passion-fruit-farming.html

Companion planting/Three sisters gardening https://www.renature.co/articles/companion-planting-is-key-to-food-security/

Hand pollinating corn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj4aW-TiD3M 

Hand pollinating watermelons and squash https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqfXPe58Zis and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFRoNfEjDKg

Thank you for considering my comments

Dr. Paul Rigterink

General Comment on the questions stated in this e-consultation, from Dr R D Cooke CFS Advisory Group member, representing the CGIAR System Organisation.

This is a hugely important topic, which confronts many of the challenges to society and to human nature in delivering the SDGs. The conceptual framework (Question 1) is robust and far-reaching, but the risk is that this would lead to an HLPE report that would be too diffuse, inadequately focused on FSN, and re-invent some of the wheels developed by other organisations.  This V0 seeks rightly to focus on FSN drawing on several earlier HLPE reports, but in several areas there are missing references to relevant earlier work by HLPE and other organisations ( comment below on questions 4 & 5).  I have nothing to add to the definitions described in Questions 2 &3; those definitions are serviceable.

Question 4: gaps in the literature and data in the report regarding major inequalities in FSN (chapter 3 of V0).

4.1 The first inequality stated is ‘Inequalities in land, livestock and other food production resources’ (pages 45-52) much space is rightly focused on the inequalities confronting small-scale farmers (the 85% of all farms that have less than 2 ha and have just 12% of total farmed land).  A key missing reference and source of relevant data is the report UN Decade of Family Farming 2019-2028. This highlights the important role family farmers play in eradicating hunger and shaping our future of food. Family farming offers a unique opportunity to ensure food security, improve livelihoods, better manage natural resources, protect the environment and achieve sustainable development.

The Global Action Plan of the UN Decade of Family Farming 2019-2028 aims at accelerating actions undertaken in a collective, coherent and comprehensive manner to support family farmers, and reduce the inequalities cited in V0. That Action Plan comprises 7 pillars: 

Pillar 1. Develop an enabling policy environment to strengthen family farming  

 Pillar 2. Transversal. Support youth and ensure the generational sustainability of family farming  

Pillar 3. Transversal. Promote gender equity in family farming and the leadership role of rural women  

Pillar 4. Strengthen family farmers’ organizations and capacities to generate knowledge, represent farmers and provide inclusive services in the urban-rural continuum  

Pillar 5. Improve socio-economic inclusion, resilience and well-being of family farmers, rural households and communities  

Pillar 6. Promote sustainability of family farming for climate-resilient food systems   

Pillar 7. Strengthen the multidimensionality of family farming to promote social innovations contributing to territorial development and food systems that safeguard biodiversity, the environment and culture.

Pillars 1, 4, 5 and 7 are directly relevant to this e consultation. 

4.2 The second inequality stated is ‘Inequalities in finance and information ; (pages 52-53). These are the sources of major inequalities, but the treatment in V0 is superficial and out-dated. For example the reference to IFAD on finance is from 2015. After the opening paragraph in this V0, more recent text could be added. For example, I quote from the current IFAD web site on rural finance:

“The vast majority of rural people do not have reliable, secure ways to save money, protect and build assets, or transfer funds. This is particularly true for vulnerable groups, such as women, youth, and displaced people. Weak infrastructure, the limited capacity of financial service providers, and low levels of client education all contribute to this complex problem.

For over four decades, IFAD has made significant investments to promote inclusive rural finance (IRF) in more than 100 developing Member States, reaching an estimated 13.8 million voluntary savers and 11.95 million active savers and borrowers in 2019. IFAD has also led and supported the production of a large body of IRF knowledge and evidence; contributed to several global and regional policy processes; and participated in key partnerships such as the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP) and the Improving Capacity-Building in Rural Finance (CABFIN) project. IFAD updated its 2009 Rural Finance Policy in December 2021, titled ‘ Inclusive Rural Finance Policy’.

Financial institutions often perceive small-scale agriculture as being too risky and are reluctant to lend money to farmers and agribusinesses. Farmers themselves are reluctant to borrow for agricultural production because of their difficulty in managing risks such as climate-related shocks and livestock disease. Over the past ten years, IFAD has become a leader in the field of agricultural risk management (ARM). The Fund promotes a holistic approach to protect and strengthen rural economies and food production systems, at the same time as leveraging rural financing and investment in smallholder farmers.”

Apart from IFAD 2021 for the IRF, other pertinent refs are available there, and also from the WB site.

The half page on information also does not do justice to this important source of inequalities. Many recent references are available, for example on ICTs/extension, on the web sites of FAO, WB, GFAR/GFRAS and on the sites of many bilateral development partners and the EC.

4.3 The third inequality stated is ‘Inequalities in value chains and markets’ (pages 54-59). The themes are covered well, but would benefit from some more recent references – not least from two HLPE/ CFS VG reports that are not mentioned here:

i) The CFS Voluntary Guidelines on Food Systems and Nutrition (2021) are structured around seven focus areas encapsulating cross-cutting factors that are relevant for improving diets and nutrition.  The first three focus areas and the associated text are directly relevant to this consultation: 1. Transparent, democratic and accountable governance; 2. Sustainable Food Supply Chains to Achieve Healthy Diets in the Context of Economic, Social and Environmental Sustainability, and Climate Change; 3. Equal and equitable access to healthy diets through sustainable food systems. 

ii) HLPE Report – Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships (MSPs – HLPE 13, 2018). A key MSP mechanism described and also discussed in CFS follow-up meetings in 2019, is the value chain (from farmer to consumer and all the stakeholders and links in between) to deliver on FSN. The challenge is to ensure that these interventions and MSP developments benefit the poor farmers and smallholders. This discussion was informed by documents cited from CGIAR and IFAD, including a then recent book and associated articles from the CGIAR Centres CIP and IFPRI “Innovation for inclusive value-chain development: successes and challenges”: Andre Devaux, Maximo Torero, Jason Donovan, Douglas Horton, (2018). IFAD had produced reports on the ‘Sustainable inclusion of smallholders in agricultural value chains’, and ‘ Public-Private-Producer Partnerships in Agricultural Value Chains’ (Mylene Kherallah, Marco Camagni, Philipp   Baumgartner, 2015 & 2016). Much of that is revisited in IFAD’s current Rural Development Report, 2021 ‘Transforming food systems for rural prosperity’.

References to the SOFI reports 2021 and 2022 could also be included here. 

Question 5&6: structural drivers of inequity, adequate coverage, and key trends.

5.1 Chapter 4 includes ‘climate in-justice’ (page 85-87). Reference to the COP 27 (November 2022) is recommended, either here or in chapter 6 (page 120 which just mentions COP 26), since this included the first ever official Food and Agriculture Pavilion at a Climate Change COP. This was co-hosted by FAO, CGIAR, Rockefeller Foundation, and convened 70 events involving the agrifood systems community. This was driven by the increasingly uncertain future for food, land and water systems, and for vulnerable smallholder farmers, and the need to ensure that they are centred in climate negotiations and action.

5.2 Chapter 4 includes one page on Innovation and Technology, which begins ‘Developments in science and technology have been hugely important for boosting both agricultural yields and the growth of incomes in many low and middle income countries…’ The following paragraphs include old hat on the Green Revolution, and some rather unbalanced comments about recent research topics that imply that smallholders are unlikely to benefit. The only CGIAR ref is from 2012; you may be aware that the CGIAR updated its research and innovation strategy in 2020 and has developed with partners a corresponding research portfolio in 2021. I recommend citing at least that research and innovation strategy. I quote from the web site:

‘This 2030 Research and Innovation Strategy situates CGIAR in the evolving global context that demands a systems transformation approach for food, land, and water systems in a climate crisis. CGIAR designs its work with partners to realize multiple benefits and that transformative change across five SDG-focused Impact Areas: (i) Nutrition, health, and food security; (ii) Poverty reduction, livelihoods, and jobs; (iii) Gender equality, youth, and social inclusion; (iv) Climate adaptation and mitigation; and (v) Environmental health and biodiversity. Recognizing the need to accelerate global progress towards the SDGs, CGIAR will invest in technological and institutional innovations, partnerships, capacity development, and policy engagement across all five Impact Areas.’

All CGIAR Initiatives that constitute the new portfolio contribute to the Poverty Reduction, Livelihoods, and Jobs impact area. The CGIAR web site also describes a selection of those Initiatives that primarily contribute to this Impact Area.

Chapter 5. “Actions to reduce inequalities in food and other systems to improve FSN”

5.3 Page 95 discusses equity/equality sensitive policy and cites 3 tools to that end, including SUN’s multi-stakeholder partnership toolkit. The pre-amble would benefit from ref to HLPE Report – Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships (MSPs – HLPE 13, 2018). 

5.4 Page 97 discusses actions to reduce inequalities in general terms and includes one page (page 101) entitled ‘Boost public agricultural research and other rural public investments, with particular attention to the needs of disadvantaged groups’. While stating that ‘Agricultural growth is effective at reducing poverty (Christiaensen, Demery and Kuhl, 2011) and is also an important factor in reducing income inequality…. the cited references (eg two IFPRI refs in this text from 21 and 12 years ago) are in need of updating. That relates also to my earlier comment in 5.2, above, on the CGIAR strategy.

5.5 Page 102 covers ‘Adapt inclusive value chain approaches to the local context to improve participation and outcomes of disadvantaged groups in value chains’, and cites a Devaux journal article; the book cited in 4.3, above, by the same authors gives a more complete source for those issues. That section includes an IFAD ref from 11 years ago. IFAD’s current Rural Development Report, 2021 ‘Transforming food systems for rural prosperity’, should be cited here.

That IFAD 2021 report notes that the overall goals of a food system’s transformation are to ensure that people are able to consume diets that are healthy, to produce food within planetary boundaries and to earn a decent living from their work in the food system. Livelihoods, nutrition and environmental goals are interlinked. Central to these desired outcomes is the need to ensure that food systems are resilient to shocks from weather extremes, pest and disease outbreaks, climate change and market anomalies. 

The key recommendations of this Report include

A failure of food systems is a failure of governance. National governments play a central role as drivers and implementers of change, yet global markets and geopolitical considerations also play a crucial role. Policymakers, governments and stakeholders can support this transition by taking 7 actions described in the report. 

This 2021 RDR also identified three key ways to ensure rural people benefit from a food systems transformation:  

- Create new employment opportunities and invest in local midstream
food businesses Local SMEs provide new ways to access both markets and non-farm employment opportunities, while supplying healthier foods to meet consumer demand.  

- Invest in agricultural systems by helping small farms become more productive and profitable  

- Focus on social protection measures that encourage better diets and livelihood opportunities.

Chapter 6. ‘Transformations necessary for positive structural change to reduce inequalities in FSN’.

6.1 Page 122 cites ‘Transformative action: data and knowledge revolution’, but should draw on, and cite clearly the HLPE Report 17 on ‘Data collection and analysis tools for FSN’, approved at CFS 50 (2022).

 6.2 The chapter concludes with a section ‘Structural reformation approaches with implications for equity’ which just includes a page entitled ‘Agroecology’ as defined by Altieri, 1995. The commentary is surprisingly out-dated, and very surprisingly overlooks to cite the wisdom of the HLPE Report 14 (2019) on ‘ Agroecology and other innovative approaches’, and the derived CFS policy document  approved at CFS 48 in June 2021.  This section would also benefit from consideration of the FAO report just released: The future of food and agriculture – Drivers and triggers for transformation. The Future of Food and Agriculture, no. 3. Rome (2022). https://doi.org/10.4060/cc0959en. Section 1.9 in that document covers driver 10, Innovation and Science (pages 160-184).

Question 7 is answered above implicitly in the comments for questions 5 & 6. Question 8 : redundant facts to eliminate; no rather a question of updating various sections, as discussed above. Question 9 on success stories from countries is for CFS Member Countries to consider.

Dr R D Cooke

CFS Advisory Group member, representing the CGIAR System Organisation

According to United Nations’ Committee on World Food Security "Food security is achieved when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. According to FAO (The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2021 -doi:10.4060/cb5409en. ISBN 978-92-5-134634-1  nearly 12 percent of the global population was severely food insecure in 2020, representing 928 million people – 148 million more than in 2019. Increase in Food Insecurity could be attributed mainly to shortage of food and high food prices.

Shortage of food to meet the dietary needs and food preferences is closely related to production, and distribution. Food production is determined by many factors. Among these are  land use;  use of high yielding seeds/planting material, effective of soil and water management, control of pests and diseases,  and harvesting at correct times. Distribution in food that was produced is determined by transport of food from the farm and marketing.  Food distribution involves  storage, processing, transport, packaging, and marketing of food. Food-chain infrastructure and storage technologies on farms can affect the amount of food wasted in the distribution process. Poor transport infrastructure can increase the price of supplying water and fertilizer as well as the price of moving food to national and global markets. Ineffective Livestock management also causes food shortage. In this regard rearing of high yielding breeds, availability of animal feeds are important. In all these activities inequalities among food producers/farmers influence food security to a great extent.

Food Security can be broadly categorized to National Food Security and House –hold Food Security.

National Food Security

National Food insecurity (NFS)  is attributed to inadequate food production at national level and high prices consumers have to pay

In general, National Food Security depends on level of food production in a country and is affected by many factors common to the  country. Among these are wild animals such as elephants, monkeys destroying crops, disease such as Chronic Kidney Disease affecting thousands of farmers  in a number of countries , inadequate irrigation water supply due to droughts, lack of reasonable transport facilities, high prices of  seeds, fertilizers and other inputs, ineffective marketing, lowered land productivity . All these issue can be addressed satisfactorily  if the relevant authorities take cognizance of these issues in their endeavors to  increase national food security.

Nations do not have to have the natural resources required to produce crops in order to achieve food security, as seen in the examples of Singapore  where land and water necessary for food production are  limited  but Food Security is at 73.1 (100 is the most favorable) .According to FAO  In 2019, the high cost of healthy diets together with persistent high levels of income inequality put healthy diets out of reach for around 3 billion people, especially the poor, in every region of the world. Ref. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2021. p. 5. doi:10.4060/cb5409en. ISBN 978-92-5-134634-1

One of the important contributory factors for the decline in the productivity of land resulting in lowered Food Security is Land Degradation. Soil erosion, soil compaction, and nutrition depletion, cause productivity of land to decline, making crop production less profitable. (See the publication “Land Degradation- an overview by Stanley Weerarartna, published by Springer- eBook ISBN 978-3-031-12138-8 Print ISBN978-3-031-12137-1

 As indicated above several factors play important roles in food production. Efforts to strengthen the national food security require an integrated approach that combines crop improvement alongside sustainable land and water management, efficient irrigation, application of appropriate fertilizers and other inputs, effective marketing etc. To achieve NFS, the inequalities that cause NFS to be low need to be identified and appropriate straggles implemented. For example in countries/regions where NFS is at a low level due to lack of adequate irrigation water, water supply need to be improved by rain water harvesting, construction of water reservoirs etc, Such strategies are possible only in those countries which are financially sound.

House- hold Food Security

House-hold Food Security is closely related to the economy which has deteriorated during the last few years mainly due to drop-in crop production and several other factors. Prices of most food items have been on a steady rise since the last quarter of 2021 in many countries, and reached a record high in August 2022, with the year-on-year food inflation rate at nearly 94 percent, further limiting the purchasing power of households. ... Small scale farmers are the food producers in many countries. They are characterized by shortage of land, and capital.. Some pawn their gold jewelry to raise money to buy seeds, fertilizers and other inputs. 

Poverty reduction is an integral part of house hold food security. Without FS, poverty becomes a vicious cycle. As a result of poverty, access of people to adequate, good quality food that is required to be healthy is denied. Malnutrition caused by low FS, has serious consequences on health of people. The lack of food security is thus both a cause and an effect of poverty. In a region that is home to more than half the world population, building food security—and sustaining it—is imperative for people’s welfare and the economic growth that drives it. According to FAO, the number of undernourished people has increased from 526 million in 1995–1997to 567 million in 2006–2008.

Improving agricultural productivity is essential for ensuring long-term food security and promoting poverty reduction in households.  Adequate food supply is a fundamental prerequisite for hose-hold food security, especially as the global population is projected to reach 9 billion by2050. Improving farm productivity through better technology and efficiency can help increase food production at  national as well as household level.  Historically, agricultural productivity has played an important role in poverty reduction. As poverty in Asia remains a predominantly rural phenomenon, improving agricultural productivity will have an increasingly large impact on economic development and poverty reduction.

Implementing pogrammes to reduce inequality among households in a country or region is important to achieve a reasonable level of food security. Inequality in health among people result in wide differences in the capacity to produce food and hence Food Security. For example in Sri Lanka a chronic kidney disease, affecting farmers and their house-holds in some parts of the country result in lowered Food Security. In such situations the relevant authorities need to implement relevant programmes to reduce the occurrence of the disease so that the level of Food Security among those house-holds can be increased. In fact, reverse osmosis plants have been installed in affected areas which has reduced level of differences in Food Security level among the households.

Most food producers in Asian countries live in villages. Hence, rural development can contribute substantially to poverty reduction and achieving a higher level of food security. As a majority of the region’s poor live in rural areas, national policy makers are facing a dilemma when choosing policies to stabilize food prices.   Some countries to maintain farm incomes at high levels do not implement practices to reduce high food prices. But, such policies tend to affect the poor non- faming households causing them to have a low food security.   High food prices can also reduce the farmer’s own purchasing power, forcing them to spend a large sum of money on seeds, fertilizers, and other inputs thus further reducing food production and thereby reducing Food Security. Rural economic growth and stable food prices, therefore, are essential in any strategy to increase Food Security.

An integrated approach is necessary to achieve food security. The factors, which cause food insecurity among different communities in the country need to be examined and action taken accordingly.

Dr. Stanley Weeraratna

Former Professor of Agronomy, Ruhuna University, Sri Lanka