Консультации

Инструменты для сбора и анализа данных в целях обеспечения продовольственной безопасности и питания — онлайн-консультация по нулевой версии проекта доклада, предложенного Руководящим комитетом ГЭВУ и проектной группой

During its 46th Plenary Session (14-18 October 2019), the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) adopted its four-year Programme of Work (MYPoW 2020-2023), which includes a request to the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (CFS-HLPE) to produce a report on “Data collection and analysis tools” for food security and nutrition, to be presented at the 50th Plenary session of the CFS in October 2022 (to access the MYPoW, please click here).

The report, which will provide recommendations to the CFS workstream “Data collection and analysis tools”, will:

  • Identify the barriers impeding quality data collection, analysis, and use in decision-making;
  • Identify specific high priority gaps in data production and analysis not covered by ongoing initiatives;
  • Highlight the benefits of using data and the opportunity costs of not using data for decisions;
  • Illustrate initiatives that have encouraged evidence-based decisions in agriculture and food security across the public, private, and academic sectors as well as approaches that have not worked;
  • Provide insights into how to ensure data collection and its utilization give voice to the people most affected by policies stemming from that data, including farmers and other food producers.

To implement this CFS request, the HLPE is launching an open e-consultation to seek views and comments on the V0 draft of the report

The report will be presented at CFS 50th Plenary session in October 2022. As part of the process of elaboration of its reports, the HLPE is organizing a consultation to seek inputs, suggestions, and comments on the present preliminary V0 draft (more details on the different steps of the process, are available here). The results of this consultation will be used by the HLPE to further elaborate the report, which will then be submitted to external expert review, before finalization and approval by the HLPE Steering Committee.

HLPE V0-drafts of reports are deliberately presented early enough in the process - as a work-in-progress, with their range of imperfections – to allow sufficient time to properly consider the feedbacks received in the elaboration of the report. E-consultations are a key part of the inclusive and knowledge-based dialogue between the HLPE Steering Committee and the knowledge community at large.

How can you contribute to the development of the report?

This V0 draft identifies areas for recommendations and contributions on which the HLPE would welcome suggestions or proposals. The HLPE would welcome contributions in particular addressing the following questions, including with reference to context-specific issues:

1. The V0-draft introduces a conceptual framework that orders the components of the food security and nutrition ecosystem based on their proximity to people’s immediate decision making sphere, from the macro to the individual levels, and describes a four-stage data-driven decision making cycle for food security and nutrition (FSN), from priority setting to data utilization. Use of the two is illustrated through a matrix template that facilitates the concurrent operationalization of the conceptual framework and data driven decision-making cycle to address issues relevant for FSN.

  1. Do you find the proposed framework an effective conceptual device to highlight and discuss the key issues affecting data collection and analysis for FSN?
  2. Do you think that this conceptual framework can indeed contribute to providing practical guidance for data collection for FSN?
  3. Do you think that this four-stage data driven decision making cycle for FSN addresses the key steps in the data collection and analysis process for FSN? Where do you see the more relevant bottlenecks in the data driven decision making cycle for FSN?
  4. Can you offer suggestions for examples that would be useful to illustrate in a matrix template that facilitates the operationalization of the conceptual framework and data driving decision-making cycle to address issues relevant for FSN?

2. The report adopts the broader definition of food security, proposed by HLPE in 2020, which includes the two dimensions of agency and sustainability, alongside the traditional four of availability, access, utilization and stability.

  1. Does the V0-draft cover sufficiently the implications of broadening the definition of food security for data collection, analysis and use?
  2. What type of data will be most useful in measuring food security dimensions such as “agency” and “sustainability”?

3. The V0-draft reviews existing FSN data collection and analysis tools, initiatives and trends.

  1. Do you think that the review adequately covers the existing ones? If not, what would you add?
  2. Do you think that the trends identified are indeed the key ones in affecting data generation, analysis and use for FSN? If not, which other trends should be taken into account?
  3. In particular, can you offer feedback on how digital technology, internet of things, artificial intelligence, big data, and agriculture 4.0 affect FSN? What is their likely impact in the coming decades?

4. The report discusses capacity constraints at local, national and global levels, with a special focus on statistical and analytical capacity.

  1. Do you think that the V0-draft covers all the issues – and their consequences - of capacity constraints at the different levels?
  2. If your answer a. was “no”, then what additional issues regarding capacity constraints should be added to the analysis?

5. The V0-draft discusses the role of new and emerging technologies in data collection and analysis tools for FSN.

  1. Do you think that the presentation of new and emerging technologies captures the main trends? What other new and emerging technologies could be discussed in the report?
  2. In what other ways can new and emerging technologies be relevant to each of the stages/aspects of the FSN data value chain/data lifecycle (i.e., Define evidence priorities and questions; Review, consolidate, collect, curate and analyze data; Translate and disseminate results and conclusions; Engage and use results and conclusions to make decisions)?
  3. In what other ways can new and emerging technologies be relevant to each of the FSN dimensions (i.e., Availability; Access; Utilization; Stability; Agency; Sustainability)?
  4. What are some of the issues with respect to ethical use of data, access, agency and ownership linked to these new and emerging technologies that should be further discussed in the report?

6. The report reviews issues concerning institutions and governance for data collection, analysis and use, with a focus on data governance principles, data protection, transparency and governance of official statistics, the implications for governance of an increasingly digitalized world, and examples of initiatives addressing governance challenges.

  1. Are there any issues concerning governance of data for FSN that have not been sufficiently covered in the draft report?
  2. What are some of the risks inherent in data-driven technologies for FSN? How can these risks be mitigated? What are some of the issues related to data privacy, access and control that should be carefully considered?
  3. What are the minimum requirements of an efficient FSN data system and how should these be prioritized?
  4. Which mechanism or organization should ensure good governance of data and information systems for FSN? How to regulate and mitigate potential conflicts between public and private ownership of data?
  5. What are the financing needs and the financial mechanisms and tools that should be established to allow all countries to collect, analyse and use FSN data?

7. Drawing on HLPE reports and analysis in the wider literature, in the next draft the report will outline examples of potential policy pathways to address challenges to data collection and analysis tools for FSN.

  1. What data do the global community and international organizations need in order to gain an appropriate insight into the current state of world food security and to agree on and design international action to improve it?
  2. What data do countries need for more effective decision-making for food security and nutrition and to inform policies for the transformation of food systems?
  3. Please suggest references to cases that illustrate policies and initiatives aimed at:
    • improving equity in access to data for FSN policies and decisions, including at grassroot and local levels;
    • enhancing capacities with respect to data generation, access, analysis and use by different actors;
    • specifically harnessing of traditional and indigenous/first nations knowledge.
  1. Please provide references and examples of success: good data leading to good policies (context-specific), or any lessons to be learned from a failed data collection/utilization attempt.
  2. Please also suggest any initiative and good practice aimed at addressing:
    • the specific constraints of generating a minimum set of indicators in conflict and disaster- affected areas;
    • capacity gaps of local institutions, farmers’, producers’ and workers’ organizations in generating, sharing and analysing good quality data, as well as in using data to inform decision-making in food systems;
    • capacity gaps at country level to generate and use data in policy-making processes, monitoring and reporting related to SDG2; including with respect to financial resources, human resources, data management, legislation and the enabling environment and FSN governance.
  1. Please also provide any additional references with respect to:
    • minimum data requirements (baseline) for FSN at country level;
    • qualitative data;
    • data representing traditional knowledge.

8. Please provide your feedback on the following:

  1. Are there any major omissions or gaps in the V0-draft?    
  2. Are topics under- or over-represented in relation to their importance?    
  3. Are there any redundant facts or statements that could be eliminated from the V0-draft?
  4. Are any facts or conclusions refuted, questionable or assertions with no evidence-base?

We thank in advance all the contributors for reading, commenting and providing inputs on this V0 draft of the report. We look forward to a rich and fruitful consultation!

The HLPE Steering Committee

В настоящее время это мероприятие закрыто. Пожалуйста, свяжитесь с [email protected] для получения любой дополнительной информации.

* Нажмите на имя, чтобы ознакомиться с комментариями, оставленными участником, и свяжитесь с ним / ней напрямую
  • Прочитано 55 комментарии
  • Развернуть все

As an FAO Expert in Mozambique I developed the concept -- “Agrometeorological approach for crop early warming & drought monitoring with reference to Mozambique under family sector”. This was later as WMO Chief Technical Advisor in Ethiopia applied this methodology to Ethiopia. Details relating to collection and analysis tools for food security and nutrition were presented in project reports. Some details are presented in the following books:

Reddy, S. J. (1993): “Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As Applicable to Dry-Land Agriculture in Developing Countries”, 205p. -- this is available online and available in FAO & WMO libraries. The 2nd edition with the same title was published by Brillion Publishing, New Delhi (2019), 372p.

Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

Formerly Chief Technical Advisor - WMO/Un & Expert - FAO/UN

Hyderabad, TS, India

Internal auditing should be conducted on a repeated to make external auditing a smooth running process. Seconding the aforementioned information, it has been extremely pressing on the researchers and the personnel involved with the work to change the mind sets of producers, consumers and retailers regarding the advancement of food waste management methods and their coping with it. The priority should lie in maximizing food sales, and giving away or selling foods past their prime involved risks that may undermine sales.

That said “reducing the food waste is one heck of a target of this hostile present day world”. We should, however, understand that it is achievable on financial terms. More than that, we should change our age old perceptions about the morphology of the foods we eat. It has been understood that a large amounts of food waste in the United Kingdom and most of Europe comes from packaging alone. Educating the consumers and bringing changes to the supply chains will aid us well in solving this issue. However, there will be evidences where consumers dump the trash to avoid paying for the food waste management programs.

I understand there in my chosen area of research, lies work in abundance to be done in order to evaluate and incorporate the initial phases of the food system. The agricultural sector, in the most recent times has had a major impact on environmental degradation, and it will keep having an impact in the near future, owing to the large contributions towards resource requirements, emissions and waste production. This brings us to addressing the food system of the present day and chalking out plans and proposals to modify it. 

We should, hence, march ahead towards adopting a holistic approach for food security and global health. The FSRI - Food System Recycling Index will best serve as an indicator of systemic sustainability in the near future. It is mainly concentrated on giving the whole picture of the amount of available food recycled in the acceptable levels of waste management. We should also understand that food and health security is not only concerned with lack of food availability. The environmental health and our well-being solely and surely depend on how efficiently we produce our food and how best we handle the associated wastes.

Overall, this is a very useful report on the types of data needed, and problems with collection of good quality data in a timely fashion. 

I have one general concern and that is not enough attention paid to government vs private sector in data collection.

Writing from the Indian experience, an excellent statistical system has been slowly eroded. More and more of data collection is by private agencies or NGOs and this raises serious questions about (i) privacy and use of data (ii) quality and (iii) cost of availability. Such data may not be open access.

I think there needs to be a strong commitment from governments to collect important items of data, and also to be transparent about the same.

International funding for basic data collection will thus be an important recommendation for many countries to ensure good and regular collection of data.

Secondly, a reference that may be useful in the discussion on digital divide (section 3.1.2). In a special volume of CSI Transactions on ICT on ICT and Agriculture edited by M. S Swaminathan and me, we have brought together experiences of use of different forms of digital access from computers to tablets to phone sms message to reach the poorest and most vulnerable farmers and fishers in India. What the papers showed is that the digital divide can be addressed with special effort but at the same time, digital tools cannot address pre-existing forms of economic and social inequality (such as caste discrimination in India).

http://59.160.153.188/library/sites/default/files/ICT%20and%20agricultu…

Madhura Swaminathan

Karin van de Braak

Sustainable Aquaculture Solutions
Netherlands

What I miss is the relation between nutrition and production costs.

With production costs, I also mean the externalized costs, such as GHG-emission, environmental degradation, use of pesticides, AMR, but also social issues, such as increasing inequalities through increasing efficiency and intensification and consolidation.

The ultimate aim to nutrition security and at the same time no degradation but regeneration.

Kind regards

Karin van de Braak | SAS

Nutrition as a basis for good health is greatly under stress due to the high inflation rate which has left families vulnerable to malnutrition. Farmers as food producers find it difficult to sell their farm produce and purchase other food items at reasonable prices. It then beholds on the government and the financial systems to give concessions to food import bills and reduce taxes on food items to make it easy for rural farmers and community workers to engage in profitable agriculture, good livelihood and adequate nutrition intake.

Governments should support agriculture and rural development by supporting farmers with minimal farming equipment, dryers, millers and fertilizers. Rural farm roads should be constructed and farms should have adequate security for the safety of farmers. Financial institutions should grant farmers financial support to do their farm businesses and the system should develop markets to enable farmers sell their produce at good prices.

Experts should work closely with farmers to develop communication tools to step down extension services and information to and from farmers to manufacturers, consumers and value additions to ginger participation of all and sundry in the business of food production as a business.