Report on the

Expert Group Meeting on Progress in Achieving SDG 2 in

Preparation for the High Level Political Forum

12-13 June 2017

United Nations Headquarters, New York

2

Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 3

Key Messages from the Expert Group Meeting ...................................................................................................... 4

June 12, 2017, Day 1 ............................................................................................................................................... 6

Opening Segment: Welcome and opening remarks ............................................................................................... 6

Discussion Session on SDG 2.1: End hunger............................................................................................................ 6

Discussion Session on SDG 2.2: End all forms of malnutrition ............................................................................... 8

Discussion Session on SDG 2.3: Double Agricultural Productivity and Incomes of Small-Scale Food Producers . 10

Discussion Session on SDG 2.4: Ensure sustainable food production systems ..................................................... 12

Discussion Session on SDG 2.5: Maintain Genetic Diversity ................................................................................. 14

Reflections and Wrap Up: Implications of Day 1 and dialogues for Day 2 ........................................................... 16

June 13, 2017, Day 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 17

Parallel Session on Means of Implementation...................................................................................................... 17

Parallel Session on Interlinkages with other SDGs ................................................................................................ 21

Parallel Session on Countries in special situations and protracted crisis ............................................................. 24

Closing plenary ...................................................................................................................................................... 26

Lessons learned ..................................................................................................................................................... 27

Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................. 28

3

Introduction

This report informs on the Expert Group Meeting (EGM) on progress in achieving SDG 2 in preparation for the UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), held on 12-13 June 2017 at the United Nations in New York. The EGM was co-organized by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the World Food Programme (WFP)1 . The EGM brought together a diverse group of over 100 experts and stakeholders from nearly 40 countries, representing Member States, farmer organizations, cooperatives, private sector, civil society organizations, social movements, NGOs, academia, CGIAR System, UN System, and other regional and international bodies in an interactive dialogue to assess progress towards SDG 2, to identify challenges and to produce key messages and policy recommendations for the HLPF.2

The EGM met these goals and the discussions and key messages that were produced informed the Member State-led consultations on the Ministerial Declaration and were echoed by different speakers at the HLPF. Also noteworthy is the fact that the EGM brought an in-depth, multi-stakeholder dialogue on food and agriculture to the UN, when most of the conversations around the subject happen in Rome. By involving delegates and UN other actors in this dialogue, the EGM allowed for direct exchanges between the UN/New York and Rome/ the food and agriculture communities. Hopefully, this exchange will stimulate debate on SDG2 outside of the food and agriculture community, and help delegates dwell deeper into the interlinkages between SDG2 and the 2030 Agenda, invite them to bring SDG2 into other discussions, and provide them with relevant information to be used in other aspects of their work at the UN.

The report includes an introduction, the 10 key messages that emanated from the EGM, a session by session summary of key discussion points, and relevant annexes3. This report is meant to be a reference document for experts that participated in the EGM and others that are interested or engaging in the implementation of SDG2 and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development at the global, regional, national, and local levels.

It should be noted that the purpose of the EGM was to stimulate an interactive and constructive dialogue among diverse and, at times conflicting ideas, approaches and solutions to take forward the implementation of SDG2. The organizers did not expect to achieve consensus, but hoped to deepen understanding of key issues and relevant policy options to reach SDG2. Lessons learned from the EGM include:

Advance organizing by partners was crucial. It helped provide the space needed for dialogue, ensured significant participation and buy in into the meeting the EGM from different actors

Diversity adds value: EGM must allow for multi-stakeholder participation and does not need to aim for consensus; its value lies in the dialogue around the views that are brought to the table

Linking constructively with the HLPF: EGM was specifically designed to support the HLPF and the discussions that led to it

1 The EGM was convened in preparation for the HLPF, which took place from 10-19 July 2017 under the theme of “Eradicating poverty

and promoting prosperity in a changing world. The SDGs reviewed in the 2017 HLPF were discussed prior to the forum through a series of events. This preparatory process included EGMs on SDG1 (Copenhagen, May 2017, DESA/World Bank, SDG3 (New York, June 2017, WHO), and SDG5 (New York, May/June 2017, DESA/UN-Women), the ECOSOC Special Meeting on SDG9 (New York, May 2017) and its EGM on Agroindustry and Sustainable Food Systems (Victoria Falls, April 2017, DESA/FAO/UNIDO/UNDP), as well as the Oceans Conference (New York, June 2017)

2 See annexes for programme, concept note, background notes for discussion session, full participant list, and interventions submitted

by experts. All relevant documents, and interventions made by experts when available, can also be found at the dedicated page of the EGM hosted on the website of the FAO Liaison Office to the United Nations: http://www.fao.org/lon/activities/detail/en/c/899983/ 3 The key messages were shared for review with all registered participants in draft form before being presented to Permanent Missions,

negotiators of the HLPF Ministerial Declaration, countries presenting voluntary national reviews (VNRs), and speakers for the thematic review sessions of the 2107 HLPF. The individual session summaries of this report were shared with the contributors for each specific session and their input was incorporated to the extent possible in the final version of the report.

4

Key Messages from the Expert Group Meeting4

1. To reach SDG2, we need to recognize the critical interdependence of poverty and hunger. Addressing these issues requires political commitment, comprehensive, nationally driven and country-specific policies and programmes supported by inclusive, multi-stakeholder governance mechanisms, partnerships and international cooperation. People should be the focus of all efforts to end hunger and malnutrition. Nearly 80 percent of the world’s extreme poor live in rural areas of developing countries. Many of them are landless workers; subsistence, smallholder, family farmers; pastoralists; fisher folk and indigenous peoples. At the same time, the rural poor contribute significantly to food security and nutrition, producing most of the world’s food. Rural people must be considered not only beneficiaries of assistance but also and mainly as agents of change. Rural women play a critical role in food systems, including production, sustaining dietary diversity and providing for the health and nutrition of their families. Adequate pro-poor, nutrition- and gender-sensitive investments and financing, including agricultural support and expansion of access to social protection, which are more explicitly aligned to the SDG1 and SDG2 outcomes must be ensured. Root causes of hunger and poverty must be addressed, such as conflict, inadequate access to land, water, agricultural inputs, finance and markets, natural resource degradation climate change and lack of participation in decision-making. The people and needs of countries in special situations and protracted crises must be urgently addressed to leave no one behind.

2. Transformative change is necessary to reach SDG2. This means transforming our food systems through a holistic approach, from production to consumption, so that they are more sustainable, inclusive and resilient to climate change and support the production, access and consumption of safe and nutritious food for all. Food and agriculture can be part of the solution to climate change, to end poverty and be a powerful driver for the entire 2030 Agenda. But we cannot look only at production and productivity. Transformative change in food and agriculture requires equal consideration to the social, environmental and economic pillars of sustainable development. A transformative approach means moving beyond the Green Revolution to increase production and productivity sustainably for the health and well-being of people, without negative social and environmental externalities in land and water tenure, crop, livestock, fisheries, aquaculture and forestry systems including the loss of biological diversity. Key to transformation is the empowerment of small-scale producers including women, youth, indigenous peoples, pastoralists and fishers, who will continue to make up the vast majority of food producers and natural resource managers globally.

3. The interlinkages between SDG2 and the entire 2030 Agenda need to be understood. Eradicating poverty, hunger and malnutrition go hand in hand. We need a whole-of-society approach to deliver on SDG 2. We need to look at the entire food system, beyond the farm gate. Food security, adequate nutrition and sustainable agriculture will not be achieved without addressing climate change and the loss of biodiversity; using land, water and energy sustainably; tackling food loss and waste; promoting responsible consumption; tapping into the potential of agriculture to create decent jobs; expanding social protection; and achieving gender equality. All this needs to be accomplished within macroeconomic frameworks that pursue equitable development. Interlinkages among conflict, natural disasters and population movement must also be considered.

4. Diversity and diversification are key for achieving SDG2. We must maintain and sustainably use genetic diversity, and ensure the fair and equitable sharing of benefits. We know that diversification of production practices, for example, through agroecology, agroforestry or organic farming will be key for building resilience to climate change, land and water degradation and pests and disease risks. Maintaining and using genetic diversity also needs to be incorporated in policy and program design. Farmers should be placed at the centre of decision making related to use of genetic diversity. Farmers’ rights to genetic resources must be recognized and their traditional knowledge needs to be valorised. The productive capacity of the poorest need to be

4 A first version of these key messages was presented at a briefing to Member States held on 14 June 2017. The final version of the key

messages presented here is the result of further refinements based on comments of from the participating experts. Both versions can be found on the EGM’s dedicated page at the website of FAO’s Liaison Office to the United Nations.

5

enhanced through integrated approaches such as combining social protection programmes with support for agricultural production; exploring options such as public procurement, farmers markets, and different ways to link local production to school meals and other public procurement systems; integrating small-scale producers and family farmers into value chains; and strengthening producer organizations and cooperatives. Efforts should be made to provide market and food access for vulnerable populations in urban and rural areas to ensure the quality, safety, diversity and stability of their diets.

5. Improved policy, investment and regulatory frameworks support delivery of SDG outcomes. Legal frameworks must be strengthened to promote a rights-based approach including the right to food, and secure equitable tenure rights over land, water and fisheries resources. Existing international instruments can provide guidance to countries, such as the Voluntary Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of the Right to Food in the Context of National Security, Voluntary Guidelines on Small-Scale Fisheries, Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure and the Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems. There is a need for increased policy coherence amongst international legal and policy interests to achieve the SDG2 and all the SDGs.

6. Food security and nutrition governance must be more inclusive, at all levels, starting from local communities, going up to the global level and ensuring equitable participation at all levels. Inclusive governance structures should guide the allocation of resources and incentives, use of policy and regulatory frameworks, and promote accountability. Governance of food systems will be essential for shaping food systems that support healthy diets, as well as other social and economic outcomes.

7. Malnutrition in all of its forms is a major cause of the global burden of disease and causes significant costs to the global economy. Dietary simplification underpins the nutrition transition causing malnutrition. Hunger robs millions of people the opportunity of a life with dignity. Overweight and obesity are associated with many non-communicable diseases. Addressing nutrition in the first 1000 days, including the protection of breastfeeding and prioritizing the needs of adolescent girls and pregnant and lactating women, is critical for the eradication of malnutrition. To ensure healthy people we also must have healthy food systems that support healthy diets as called for in the Decade of Action on Nutrition.

8. Family farmers and small-scale producers are central for food systems of the future, as are the local indigenous and traditional food systems they manage and support. Emphasis should be placed on alternative and innovative approaches, including agroecology, organic farming and other more sustainable production systems that balance the social, environmental and economic dimensions. Emphasis must also be placed in promoting equitable sharing of opportunities and equal rights for both women and men farmers and agricultural producers, including youth.

9. Agricultural transformation must become more knowledge intensive to achieve income and productivity targets for small and family farmers. As this happens, the development of science, technology and innovation for agriculture should be increasingly guided by local needs and demands. Methods of assessment and priority-setting must be inclusive, incorporating and building on local traditional and indigenous knowledge, respect the needs of the local population, be context specific, and support the creation or strengthening of dynamic and innovative food systems. Innovation should embrace not only diverse sustainable production technologies, but also institutional change and strengthening, inclusive governance and innovative partnerships linking urban to rural and local to national, as well as innovative ways to promote access to knowledge and engage with the private sector.

10. Urgent action is required to respond to the severe food insecurity and malnutrition crises, famine and threat of famine and to reduce the likelihood of their recurrence in the near future. Water scarcity, natural resources degradation, drought and natural disasters – all driven or exacerbated by climate change – are creating crises conditions and increasing political fragility, food insecurity, malnutrition and distress migration. Urgent action is also needed to accelerate transformational changes to move beyond emergencies towards the development of inclusive, resilient and sustainable food systems for well-nourished and healthy people.

6

June 12, 2017, Day 1

Opening Segment: Welcome and opening remarks5

Opening remarks were given by the Permanent Representative of the Czech Republic and Vice President of ECOSOC, Ambassador Marie Chatardova, and by the Assistant Secretary General for Economic Development of UNDESA, Mr. Leni Montiel.

Ambassador Chatardova underscored the importance of addressing the needs of the extreme poor living in rural areas, called for special attention to be given to the over 100 million people currently affected by food security crises, and asked the participants to consider three important questions: (i) are the actions of Member States adequate to achieve the transformational objectives of SDG 2?; (ii) is the international cooperation supporting the achievement of the SDG 2 sufficient?; and, (iii) are food systems evolving as needed to leave no one behind and eradicate poverty and hunger?

Mr. Montiel provided a snapshot of the global food insecurity situation and underlined the importance of recognising the interdependence of SDGs to pave way to sustainable development, adopting a holistic approach for adequate food security for all and addressing the structural causes of poverty and hunger. He also reiterated the need to tackle food insecurity among the most vulnerable people, namely the rural poor and people living in conflict affected states, and promote agricultural and rural transformation to ensure food security and nutrition and sustainable development.

Discussion Session on SDG 2.1: End hunger

Governments are currently facing numerous challenges in achieving SDG2 and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as a whole. They include difficult macro-economic contexts, working with different interest groups and viewpoints; identifying and responding to root causes of hunger and malnutrition; dealing with conflicts and climate change that exacerbate hunger and undermine development gains; and the need to respond quickly and decisively to seasonal hunger and food crises to avoid leaving people behind without diverting funding from longer-term development needs.

Different approaches to achieving SDG2 reflect different visions of life and production, with different consequences in terms of health, climate change and finance. Participants noted that the industrial food production and smallholder-driven approaches are based on profoundly different visions for sustainable development. Participants agreed that, overall, the achievement of SDG2 will depend on strong nationally driven and country-specific responses guided by a holistic approach to policy development and implementation. Some experts added that these responses should be based on the right to food and adequate nutrition – not on the commodification of food. Lessons learned from the experience of the MDGs, namely the need to switch from top-down to bottom up approaches, address the root causes of hunger, recognise the importance of policy cohesion, and adopt a rights-based approach were considered valuable for SDG2 implementation. Furthermore, participants also agreed that the interlinkages within SDG2 targets and among SDGs should be addressed and that mobilizing means of implementation is essential to ensure no one is left behind.

The importance to recognize differences between countries, within countries at national, local, and household levels, between the rural and urban spaces, and between the different livelihoods of families (landless families, subsistence farmers, urban population with informal jobs) was noted. This will help identify the possibilities and constraints of raising agricultural production and ensuring access to food and therefore, the design and implementation of policies that are contextualized and address these differences.

5 The opening segment was chaired by the Director of the FAO Liaison Office to the United Nations, Ms. Carla Mucavi, representing the

EGM’s organizing partners.

7

From an institutional point of view, experts said that governments should recognise the importance of institutional arrangements to promote inter-sectorial coordination to implement the SDGs. Many participants also emphasized the need to look below the national level to territorial, subnational and local governance arrangements as coordination is needed at all levels. Moreover, speakers highlighted the importance of engaging in inclusive multi-stakeholder processes and partnerships, involving the most affected, and establishing food security coalitions with development partners..

The critical role of data was also discussed. Poverty and hunger data are statistically and causally related: extreme poverty is measured by the income required to purchase a minimum basket of food to survive, while hunger is defined by the calories that must be consumed to live a healthy life. Experts highlighted the importance of defining what gets measured as, to a great extent, this dictated policies and actions. In this regard, some experts cautioned that measuring quantity alone might lead to a greater focus on increasing production and stressed the need to measure not only available calories, but also monitor people’s food insecurity experience and nutritional status.

Recent calculations were shared that estimate that investments of 0.15% of global GDP are currently needed to bring everyone above the extreme poverty line of US$1.9 per day. Measures to achieve this include social safety nets, the provision of basic income etc.

To realise SDG2, it was noted that it is vital to invest in national and international mechanisms to increase agricultural productivity. Examples of areas to invest in that were mentioned include supporting small-scale production, protecting biodiversity and promoting the use of underutilized species to increase food security. Experts also agreed that governments should integrate SDG2 in development planning, ensuring the inclusion and equitable participation of all actors in the planning, implementation and monitoring of development policies.

In this respect, prioritizing the needs of the most vulnerable population, including the rural poor, investing in social protection by setting protective safety net programme that even create assets for most vulnerable, investing in capacity building, enhancing the technological capacity of the small holder farmers, integrating value chains into development, and investing in job creation in rural areas and urban centres will have a catalytic role to play. Furthermore, experts stressed the importance of recognizing family farmers, including indigenous peoples and fishers, as agents of change and not only beneficiaries, whose knowledge, experience and expertise should be used and built upon to find sustainable solutions, combat climate change and implement SDG2.

The serious threat posed by climate change to food security was also noted, as was the need for adaptation and mitigation measures. Efforts should concentrate on implementing the Paris Agreement, promoting reforestation, protecting biodiversity, avoiding natural resources degradation and recognising that agriculture and land use (e.g. forest clearing) are important drivers of climate change. Conflicts were considered as an additional impediment to ending hunger and governments were urged to implement immediate responses, build resilience and preventive mechanisms, and ensure access to food in sufficient quantities and quality, all year long.

Finally, it was noted that ensuring adequate funding by investing in achievement of SDG2, ensuring activities are more cost effective, and enhancing institutions to curb money laundering and corruption, while leaving open the possibility to adopt policies such as public stockholding to ensure food security, will help meet the SDGs and create the Future We Want.

Recommendations for action:

Adequately funded country specific responses to ending hunger and malnutrition guided by a holistic approach, based on the right to food and adequate nutrition;

Increase humanitarian and development funding to ensure access to food before, during and after crisis, without diverting funds from longer-term actions;

8

Establish a clear and widely accepted typology for data on hunger and food insecurity, recognizing differences at regional, national, and household levels, and between rural and urban spaces;

Governments should recognise the relevance of inter-sectorial committees to implement the SDGs, including territorial approaches, subnational and local governance and establish/strengthen supporting structures;

Invest in social protection by setting protective safety net programmes that create assets for the most vulnerable,

Invest in capacity building, and enhance the technological capacity of the small holder farmers;

Include relevant stakeholders, including family farmers and civil society, in designing, implementing and monitoring SDG2 solutions.

Recognise that agriculture and land use (e.g. deforestation) are important drivers of climate change in national climate action plans and proactively address this issue; and

Ensure adequate funding by aligning budgets to SDGs and investing in SDG2; ensuring activities are more cost effective.

Discussion Session on SDG 2.2: End all forms of malnutrition

Experts pointed out that the world is affected by multiple forms of malnutrition, namely undernutrition, overweight and obesity, and vitamin and mineral deficiencies. No country is immune - in fact, many countries and populations suffer from multiple forms of malnutrition at the same time or over the course of a lifetime. Undernutrition, overweight and obesity share a common feature: a nutrition transition from diverse diets to simplified ones. Experts noted that the benefits of acting are large, however, and will have an immediate effect on human capital and health and said that effective solutions to overcome these nutritional challenges already exist. One of the most cost-effective ways to address malnutrition is to work to ensure that the nutrition transition leads to healthy, culturally appropriate diverse diets. In this regard, it was recalled that the Framework for Action of the Second International Conference on Nutrition6 put forward effective nutrition policies and programmes. Experts warned, however, that progress has been uneven and the nutrition targets are likely to be missed in many countries, especially regarding reductions in anaemia. At the same time, the prevalence of overweight and obesity is increasing.

Some experts expressed the opinion that although the food system has the potential to deliver on healthy diets to address the malnutrition challenge, our current food system is broken. Too many producers are encouraged to grow commodity crops using monoculture and input and natural resource intensive methods rather than diversified, environmentally sustainable farming systems that grow healthy food. Experts also noted that energy and nutrients are not always adequately provided to different age and income groups. In some cases, people experience shortage of vitamin, minerals or animal source foods; in others, they consume too much food or foods with high amounts of fats, sugars, salt content or unnecessarily high amounts of animal-source foods. The urban and rural poor have low access to nutritious food and are affected by obesity and diet-related Non Communicable Diseases (NCD). Part of the problem is due to the relatively high prices of healthy foods and low prices of foods high in fat, sugar and salt. As a result, unhealthy diets constitute the top risk factor for the Global Burden of Disease.

Achieving nutrition and NCD targets requires interaction with SDG 1 (poverty); SDG3 (health); SDG 4 (education); SDG 5 (gender equality); SDG 8 (inclusive growth and decent work); SDG 10 (inequalities); SDG11 (sustainable cities); and SDGs 12 (responsible consumption), 14 (sustainable use of oceans) and 15 (sustainable use of terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystems).

6 See: http://www.fao.org/about/meetings/icn2/en/

9

Experts agreed that governments were showing greater political commitment to tackle these issues. The UN General Assembly declared 2016-2025 as the Decade of Action on Nutrition. Around 60 countries have joined the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) movement. Nonetheless, they warned that there is still a lot of work to be done. Nutrition needs to be better integrated in the development agenda, while additional political will and commitment is still required. The coherence of trade and investment policies with positive nutrition outcomes should also be enhanced to lead to positive nutrition outcomes. As farmers at all scales are part of the private sector which, with processors and manufacturers, is the largest actor in the food system that interacts everything that is produced and consumed, the private sector has to become more nutrition sensitive. Critically, production systems cannot be seen anymore to be separate from consumption.

The reduction of malnutrition needs to be accelerated through country-led action and multi-sectoral plans with specific sectoral objectives. The adoption of SMART commitments for the Decade of Action on Nutrition, the development of food-based dietary guidelines that include sustainability criteria and the investment in the capacity building of front-line nutrition workers can be effective measures.

Additional policy solutions to address different forms of malnutrition include improving maternal, infant and young child nutrition, diets, and the food environment. This can be achieved by establishing targets on stunting, wasting, anaemia, overweight, breastfeeding and low birth weight, and considering nutrition policies and programmes in national responses to SDGs 2 and 3. In addition, effective interventions should aim to improve the nutrition of adolescents, especially adolescent girls. The collection of better data on adolescents and of interventions that work for this age group can improve policy design and implementation. In this respect, countries could also consider increasing the coverage of effective nutrition interventions and making them part of Universal Health Coverage.

Furthermore, dietary quality should be recognised as a key element of food security and nutrition. Governments were called to analyse the food environment and review agriculture and food policies to correct dietary inadequacies as well as analyse the nutrition impact of current public investments in agriculture and food systems, and consider revisions. According to the participants, the end goal should be to improve dietary diversity and protect people’s health. Lastly, many experts said that countries should engage with the private sector (small, medium and large business) to improve the availability and accessibility of nutritious foods all year long, but prevent conflicts of interest that might be generated by such engagement

Recommendations for action:

Establish targets on stunting, wasting, anaemia, overweight, breastfeeding and low birth weight, and consider nutrition policies and programmes in national development agendas and national responses to SDGs 2 and 3;

Develop multi-sectoral plans with specific sectoral objectives in line with the ICN2 Framework for Action and make SMART policy and financial commitments for the Decade of Action on Nutrition;

Provide regulatory guidance and reshape their incentives to ensure that the private sector becomes more nutrition sensitive;

Analyse the food environment and review agriculture and food policies to correct dietary inadequacies including dietary simplification, as well as analyse the nutrition impact of current public investments in agriculture and food systems, and consider revisions;

Review trade and investment policies to lead to positive nutrition outcomes;

Promote consumption of foods produced in traditional, local and indigenous food systems replacing stigma of “poor peoples’ food” and lessening the appeal of imported or highly processed foods; associated with non-communicable diseases such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease;

Use data to better inform nutrition policy design and implementation for all age groups; and

10

Promote production systems for diversified, healthy foods raised with agroecological practices. These should include traditional, local and indigenous foods whenever their nutritional quality is superior to foods coming from industrialized production systems integrated with global trade networks.

Discussion Session on SDG 2.3: Double Agricultural Productivity and Incomes of Small-Scale Food Producers

Experts recognized the agricultural sector as a crucial part of many national economies and that small-scale family farmers produce the vast majority of the food consumed, especially in developing countries where more than two-thirds of the rural poor are in the agricultural economy. They argued for policies and programme design that encourage and strengthen productivity and resilience of agriculture, especially concerning smallholder producers and family farmers, focusing on vulnerable populations such as youth, women and indigenous people. Participants emphasized that food and agricultural development policies and initiatives need to address all three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, environmental and social), be context-specific, and improve the linkages between urban and rural economies and livelihoods.

Efforts to improve agriculture productivity and improve smallholder livelihoods should constitute a central part of national strategies designed to eradicate poverty (SDG 1). Experts said that the proposal to declare the decade starting on 2018 as ‘the Decade of Family Farming’ can help countries promote a holistic approach to implement target 2.3 in a way that addresses the other SDG 2 targets and addresses many of the other SDGs, thereby contributing to the achievement of the 2030 Agenda as a whole.

Some experts highlighted that sustainable and environmentally friendly technology was very important for small-scale farmers and that technological innovation adopted by small-scale farmers was a key to success. Agricultural development programmes should enable farmers at all scales to adopt appropriate technology that enhances the incorporation of social and environmental externalities. Some participants expressed that environmentally friendly and sustainable farming systems coupled with social protection systems can make smallholder farming systems more productive, more resilient and more profitable. Integrated approaches can be the foundation for adaptability and resilience in the face of climate change, and meet a wide range of economic, social and environmental outcomes if designed and implemented in ways that are inclusive and farmer-led, even in the poorest regions and most remote rural areas.

Participants advocated that policy approaches and measures should ensure that smallholder and family farmers are able to benefit from expanding market opportunities emerging from higher incomes and urbanization. It was argued that a diversity of market outlets, from local to national and international, requires better coordination across relevant jurisdictions and agencies and ensuring they bear the responsibility of guiding and regulating markets. Moreover, market development, access and governance should engage and include farmers’ organizations, cooperatives, the private sector including small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and other food chain actors. Coordination efforts can include a combination of research and extension services, credit and tax incentives, and cooperative or community-based technical assistance. Mechanisms for participation in inclusive governance, from policy formation to programme design and management, should be strengthened and linked at all levels.

Participants recognized investment in strengthening producer organizations of women, men and young farmers at local, national, regional and international levels as key to effective coordination in food and agriculture systems. Responsible investment can unleash the potential empowerment of millions of farmers in the effort to eradicate poverty by providing more economically stable livelihoods bolstered by enhanced productivity and access to transparent outlet markets. Some experts said that community-based assessment and action plans, with a bottom-up approach to understanding food and agricultural systems, including socio-economic components, should be a part of the investment in inclusive food system governance. Investment should, thus, address capacity development on two levels; first the economic and logistical infrastructure of

11

production, transportation, processing and distribution, and second, the social infrastructure of human resources, knowledge dissemination, supporting organizations and inter-sectoral coordinating mechanisms.

An understanding of the roles for present and future smallholders in the agricultural economy is a prerequisite for achieving SDG 2.3, especially when many agricultural development models are often narrowly focused on commodity production for export by large scale producers. Participants called for a priority focus on increasing smallholder productivity using a comprehensive approach to address their needs. Foremost among needs are secure land and water tenure –the foundation of well-functioning food systems, and access to finance and scale-sensitive agriculture extension and knowledge-sharing that increases the use and practice of sustainable management of crop, livestock fishery and forest farming practices. Experts also addressed concerns about unprecedented levels of corporate concentration that are undermining efforts to build sustainable and resilient agriculture systems. In this context, governments can take steps to protect competition and balance access to markets and technology to ensure that small-scale and family farmers are full agents in the transformation of agricultural production and food systems. A creative entrepreneurial culture should be cultivated, for multi-scaled inclusive food systems which incentivize small-scale and family farmers to start new business or grow their existing ones, and access local, subnational, national, and global value chains.

Recommendations for action:

Link poverty reduction strategies directly to agricultural development with a focus on enhancing access of rural small-scale and family farmers to markets and promoting rural-urban linkages. Specifically, governments should strengthen or promote policy measures at national and subnational levels that:

o Mainstream agrarian, aquatic and forestry reforms to secure land, water and forest tenure rights for family farmers;

o Allow and facilitate family farmers to save, conserve, breed, disseminate their seed varieties;

o Provide resources for small-scale and family farmer engagement in assessing and adoption of new agricultural technologies for production, processing, communication, distribution, etc.;

o Encourage and incentivize farmers to form and strengthen their producer organizations, including cooperatives, at primary, national and federation levels;

o Include start-up funds and special credit windows; find niche markets for diversified, organic, and agroecologically produced products; use public procurement for family farming produce;

o Include farmers’ organizations in agri-related government decision-making processes so that they are real partners in mainstreaming sustainable agriculture and farmer-led agro-based enterprise development to maintain and increase their collective share in the marketplace.

Support the initiative to declare a “Decade of Family Farming” ;

Invest in public extension services and knowledge sharing among and by farmers related to farming practices that are sustainably productive, resilient and adapted to diverse market signals.

Promote measures to context, site and crop specific agricultural practices, including development of agroecological and organic farming systems with affirmative action for women and youth;

Promote policies that maintain local biodiversity while increasing productivity (linking 2.3 and 2.5;

Provide farmer and civil society capacity development to better engage in development of economic and social infrastructure for agriculture;

Prioritize livestock systems to be more sustainable, lowering greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) , improving conditions for livestock and livestock food chain workers, and reducing waste and providing a more positive impact on water and land resources;

12

Encourage community food system assessment and action plans linking biophysical and socio-economic components and using proven methodologies for participatory assessment and planning;

Provide support for implementation of SDG2 targets and interlinkages with other SDGS starting at a local level for greater ease in managing inclusive approaches to SDG implementation

Discussion Session on SDG 2.4: Ensure sustainable food production systems

SDG 2, and SDG 2.4 in particular, can be a driver of sustainable development if food production systems are looked at with intelligence and responsibility. Current food systems are not sustainable across economic, social and environmental dimensions. Experts agreed it is vital to go beyond the Green Revolution, which increased productivity but generated negative social and environmental externalities. Experts agree that transforming food and agriculture systems is necessary to feed a growing global population. Transformation should increase productivity and production, in particular of smallholder farmers, but also address climate change, build resilience of food related livelihoods, and provide ecosystem services to support sustainable development as a whole. Experts and policymakers disagreed, however, on what it means to “go beyond” the Green Revolution. One perspective, dominant in recent decades, primarily focused on production, emphasizing investment in few commodity supply chains. Another perspective, ascendant in recent years, calls for a new paradigm incorporating environmentally friendly agricultural practices and inclusive food security governance, going beyond a single sector, production-centred approach to a multi-sector, ecosystem based approach.

The 2030 Agenda recognizes that agricultural production and productivity must address the three pillars of sustainability – social, economic and environmental - in a coherent and holistic manner. Agriculture can be a game changer if its transformation is considered within a wider food system perspective, encompassing production and consumption, and the interlinkages within SDG 2 targets and across SDGs. In this context, it is important to understand that sustainability does not have an endpoint, it is a continuing process.

Experts noted that a food system approach looks well beyond the farm gate to achieve a sustainable food system, incorporating consumers and markets’ influence to promote healthy foods, greening of agricultural inputs, food transport and processing systems, food loss prevention and waste reduction, etc. Such an approach requires integrated and synergistic policies for different sectors (e.g. crop, livestock, fisheries, aquaculture and forestry) with the participation of different stakeholders (farmers, civil society, academia, the public, financial and private sectors, etc.). Climate change was considered a serious threat to global food security, generating incentives for the promotion of sustainable practices and the recognition and support to indigenous and traditional knowledge to build resilience and address it, as agreed to in the Paris agreement.

Many experts insisted that people, and not just investment returns, should be at the centre of the transformation, with innovative practices and technologies from and for different groups of producers put in place, as well as institutional changes, alternative investments and new of markets. Small-scale and family farmers in particular should be at the centre as they producer up to 80 percent of the food consumed in many countries. Considering that almost 80 percent of the poor live in rural areas of developing countries, it is critical to increase the income of rural producers and ensure its stability; improve livelihoods and market inclusion of smallholders; adapt to and mitigate climate change; and promote the efficient use of natural resources and inputs, and management and recovery of degraded land, water, ecosystems and biodiversity.

A key question asked by experts regarding the means of implementation is who will bear the cost of the transformation towards sustainable agriculture. The interactions, synergies and trade-offs between social and economic interests and the conservation of natural resources should be taken into account. Countries need to commit to concrete and measurable, transformative steps, including the development of enabling frameworks and economic incentives to reduce the costs of adopting practices and technologies to improve sustainability.

Moreover, it was pointed out that change only at the local level will not suffice – it must be scaled up to all levels through established and transparent mechanisms. Experts also stressed that it was critical to connect

13

transformation by building inclusive processes and enabling frameworks from the ground up. It is also important to reinforce that no one size fits all sustainable food production systems, so transformation will require diversity of context-specific interventions and engagement of local communities, including producer cooperatives and organizations in decision-making processes. New kinds of diversity are required for farming practices in farms, forest and fisheries production; diversity of types and forms of knowledge and technology, diversity of markets and multi-level governance, such as food councils and intergovernmental mechanisms.

Experts emphasized that transformation of production practices to achieve productivity increases was not inconsistent with the need to support small-scale farming. Nonetheless, there is considerable tension between the competing paradigms for what kinds of agriculture and food system will meet the requirements of the 2030 Agenda. One manifestation of the tension is between the focus on scaling up agricultural production in a sustainable manner for large global markets and the fully diversified agroecological approach emphasizing “food webs” connecting producers and consumers in different kinds of markets, especially at local level.

Some experts called for a “rainbow revolution” with context specific solutions designed and implemented by stakeholders. The “rainbow revolution” differs from the concept of “greening” the Green revolution because it adds a social dimension – employment, human health, well-being, sustaining peace – to the transformation of food systems and does not take into account only environmental concerns.

Other experts argued that a global “Marshall Plan for agriculture” is needed to use agriculture as a lever for the 2030 Agenda. Overall, governments were asked to assert a leadership role in guiding agriculture sector reform, including building stronger partnerships with the private sector and farmers’ organizations, and encouraging responsible investments. To achieve this, it is necessary to build upon all forms of knowledge and foster investments in research to deliver technology, understand system dynamics, provide relevant metrics, and highlight disagreements and controversies to fuel policymaking through an adapted policy-science interface.

SDG implementation and the transformation of food systems will require new collaborative cross-sector, multi-level mechanisms or partnerships, taking care to avoid potential conflicts of interest. Implementation partnerships should use legal and accountability frameworks as models such as those developed by the Committee on Food Security. Governance partnerships should uphold the rights of right bearers and ensure equitable multi-stakeholder partnerships. In both kinds of partnership, governments have a key role to play and there is increasing guidance from intergovernmental agreements on these issues.

Recommendations for action:

Policy and investment support for sustainable and integrated management of soils, water, biodiversity, ecosystems, use of energy and agricultural inputs, and climate change adaptation and mitigation;

Policy support for ecosystems based approaches to food system management, such as agroecology, and protection of natural resources base;

Policy support to enhance synergies/decrease trade-offs between agricultural sectors – crop, livestock, forestry, and fisheries – and between economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability;

Enhanced extension and knowledge transfer from, to and between smallholder farmers, increasing their ability to fair access to input and output markets;

Rethink consumption and production patterns by improving resource efficiency, strengthening resilience, securing social equity and responsibility through consideration of negative externalities, and supporting local and territorial food systems;

Promote science and knowledge sharing in multi stakeholder platforms to understand and address divergences of perspective on the future of food systems;

14

Use internationally agreed guidelines to promote responsible governance of tenure, the right to food and adequate nutrition, and to support governments' commitment to these issues in national food and agriculture policy and programmes, including public procurement;

Protect the rights of right bearers in the context of multi-stakeholder partnerships

Promote short food chains, directly linking producers to consumers, and promote circular economy and solidarity economy programmes linking urban and rural areas through the food system.

Discussion Session on SDG 2.5: Maintain Genetic Diversity

Climate change is rapidly becoming one of the most critical challenges faced by farmers with a potential impact not only on crop and animal choices, but on whole farming systems dependent on biodiversity, in all its dimensions. Agricultural biodiversity or agrobiodiversity provides the genetic tool kit for farmers to be able to respond to climate change and includes not only the genetic resources for human staple foods, but also the genetic resources found in flora and fauna that include but are not limited to the traditional crops and forage species, insect, microbial, and fungal species that interact with commercially utilized agrobiodiversity. Experts emphasized that conservation does not solely imply protection; what is needed is more use, and especially more inclusive use that recognizes traditional knowledge and the contribution of rural communities and traditional cultures, particularly of Indigenous peoples, in sustaining agricultural genetic diversity. It was noted that agrobiodiversity also offers economic and social opportunities that contribute to livelihoods and maintenance of cultural and social values.

Agricultural biodiversity was considered critical to healthy diets and a healthy environment. In providing the basis for dietary diversity (genetic diversity of fruits, vegetables, pulses, nuts and seeds), agrobiodiversity is a major and direct contributor to nutrition and health. Agricultural biodiversity is also a critical piece of important ecological functions like nutrient cycling, soil formation, water cycling and purification. Our production systems often work against biodiversity by becoming more uniform and promoting greater use of external inputs inimical to biodiversity, such as agrochemicals, and an increasingly consolidated and commercialized seed sector.

The policy agenda on genetic resources focuses on intergovernmental agreements around trade and benefit-sharing of genetic resources. Experts noted, however, that the success of these agreements is heavily debated as on-the-ground agrobiodiversity is less governed by intergovernmental agreements than by the everyday management practices of the stewards of agrobiodiversity. Participants argued for a greater focus on ways and means that national governments and intergovernmental agencies can build policy structures to support diversified farming systems that rely on, and thus enhance, the ecosystem services provided by biodiversity- in essence, agroecological approaches. Conservation of agrobiodiversity must expand beyond ex-situ (gene bank) conservation to recognize in-situ and on-farm conservation for its value to ending hunger, improving nutrition, resilience, and sustainable food systems.

Some experts highlighted that diversified farming systems combining annual and perennial crops and pasture with livestock, agroforestry and aquaculture, for example, in diversified traditional, indigenous, organic or agroecological systems can constitute agrobiodiversity oases. As primary custodians of in-situ agrobiodiversity and beneficiaries of ex-situ genetic conservation, farmers should be at the centre of decision-making related to the use of genetic diversity for the food system. Their rights to genetic resources and the importance of traditional knowledge and farming practices should be recognised.

Some experts noted that health and environmental negative externalities of farming and processing practices are not always accounted for. Their costs then fall upon farmworkers, rural communities, consumers and the public sector. If these costs were included in what our food truly costs, the public sector may structure its social protection systems and food safety nets differently and consumers may consume differently. They called for methods for measuring the external costs or benefits of organic inputs as compared to conventional inputs,

15

ecosystem services, and on-farm diversity and noted that these are still in developmental stages. “True cost accounting” for agricultural production systems is an emerging values-based framework that is beginning to be implemented by farm and food enterprises, including large private sector actors. Part of the true cost accounting includes ways to measure the negative externalities of current farming systems in order to create a more accurate accounting of the true cost of current production systems (including agrobiodiversity and genetic resources), and to measure the positive externalities of diversified farming systems.

Agroecological and cross-sectoral practices – such as agroforestry, silvopastoralism, crop-livestock, crop-aquaculture – encompass more kinds of agro- and biodiversity and will require innovative approaches to agricultural research that can accommodate complex, diversified cropping and forage systems. Participants argued that putting farmers at the centre with farmer-led research networks can have tremendous ripple effects for national and international agricultural research, facilitating the sharing and co-creation of knowledge between farmers and with scientists on the management of genetic resources for food systems. Despite the small scale of investment, impressive results have come from recognizing farmers as decision makers and on-farm researchers in relation to seeds and agricultural biodiversity in many regions of the world.

In the context of climate change and the transformation of agriculture and food systems, experts emphasized that it was important to recognize the value of traditional and indigenous knowledge. Maintaining genetic diversity cannot be accomplished without supporting indigenous peoples many of whom are smallholder farmers, fishers and custodian foresters. Participants noted the limited investments in agrobiodiversity research, resulting in limited scientific support to compare practices that stem from traditional knowledge with those of industrial agriculture. They highlighted that without policy and research, there is no risk protection and few legal institutions to support these important custodians of agrobiodiversity.

Experts noted some progress in the research community on rights-based and values-based approaches that could be integral to goals for genetic conservation. Rights-based approaches include the human right to food and adequate nutrition and recognizing farmers’ rights on sharing and managing genetic resources. Progressive realization of these rights requires more national and international policy support. The values based concept is the one of true cost accounting for agriculture and food.

Experts also noted that there is a need to recognize the relationship between genetic diversity and nutrition, including the scope and potential for genetic diversity to improve dietary diversity and improve diet quality. In this regard, there is an opportunity to take a food systems approach and capitalize on the role of social safety nets and how mainstreaming agrobiodiversity can be incorporated into school feeding, public procurement, and other social safety programs. In the implementation of target issues of diet diversity and diet quality, nutrition, consumption and social safety nets, there is a large opportunity to link to on-farm genetic diversity conservation and agroecological agriculture practices through a food system lens. In order to encourage genetic diversity however, the issue of diversity of genetic resources in agriculture must be brought more directly to policy makers.

Recommendations for action:

Expand thinking beyond ex-situ conservation, placing more emphasis placed on in-situ and on farm genetic resource management and the larger scope of agricultural biodiversity, which includes farmer knowledge and social capital;

Embrace the international legal definition of agricultural biodiversity as more than just genetic resources but diversity at the species and ecosystem levels;

Put farmers at the centre of decision-making related to the use of genetic diversity, recognize farmers’ rights to genetic resources and valorise traditional knowledge, as well as their contribution to conservation of genetic diversity;

Support diversified farming practices such as agroecology and agroforestry that promote the conservation and enhancement of agricultural biodiversity.

16

Provide government support to farmers through extension services, support for alternative markets for products of high biodiversity conservation and better support for ecosystem management and documenting and valuing of centuries-old traditional practices with food, medicine and other benefits.

Measure inclusion of agricultural biodiversity consideration in decision-making processes and institute financial incentives for the use of genetic diversity

Reflections and Wrap Up: Implications of Day 1 and dialogues for Day 27

This session invited participants to reflect on the discussions held during the day and look ahead at the next day’s sessions. Emphasis was placed by speakers on the need for an integrated approach as well as the interdependent nature of the SDG 2 targets and the indivisibility of SDG 2 from the 2030 Agenda as a whole. Political commitment was highlighted as essential, including for access to food for vulnerable rural and urban people and for policies to determine what kinds of food systems will be supported.

Smallholder farmers were understood not simply as beneficiaries, but as agents of change. Many references were made to root causes of climate change, conflict, natural resource degradation, inequality, and of malnutrition as major contributors to the global burden of disease. Experts noted that the need to address root causes through a food systems approach cut across all sessions and was mentioned from all sectoral perspectives. Experts agreed that the dominant food systems are not sustainable and that social and environmental externalities must be considered for a true transformation of food systems.

Participants noted that, from a national perspective, fighting hunger and malnutrition in the context of Agenda 2030, must be integrated into medium and long-term development plans at national and local levels. A call was made to prioritize SDG 2 among other SDGs and to communicate more effectively about the importance of agriculture, food systems, biodiversity and the role of SDG 2 in ending poverty and fostering growth. Countries need encouragement to put into place well-functioning multi-stakeholder processes. Some experts cautioned against an over-emphasis on production and efficiency, which often translates into more resources for larger scale commercial actors with fewer resources for the smallholder farmers and fishers. A paradigm change on how food systems are understood was proposed, in which right holders are recognized as such and participate in the discussions with other stakeholders. This change was considered essential to ensure that local and indigenous food systems are protected and prosper.

The tension and conflict between protection and preservation of food systems on one hand and the pressure for going to scale with new technology and innovation on the other hand were noted by co-organizers. However, progress at the global level was also noted, including the fact that nutrition is now firmly on the international agenda. National progress is what matters at the end of the day and countries need support to move from “aspirational” to “experiential” embrace of the SDGs. Speakers also called for more member state champions to show how they are achieving results, incorporating externalities, and the need to focus on countries in special situations and crisis.

7 The session was moderated by Mr. Zak Bleicher, head of the IFAD New York Officer and Mr. Brian Bogart, WFP Senior Liaison Officer,

on behalf of the organizing partners.

17

June 13, 2017, Day 2

Day 2 of the EGM consisted of parallel sessions that explored the means of implementation (full day), interlinkages among the SDGs (half day), and countries in special situations (SIDS, LDCs, and LLDC) and protracted crises (half day). Each session began with an expert panel with a moderator and four to six speakers and was followed by an interactive dialogue with experts. The means of implementation session was divided into morning (investment, finance, trade and markets) and afternoon (science, technology and innovation, capacity building, systemic issues) segments.

Parallel Session on Means of Implementation

Investment and Finance

Taking as a point of departure the fact that the size of the estimated investment need is very large and recognizing that the key investors in agriculture are the smallholder themselves, this session examined how various institutional actors—governments, IFIs, providers of private banking and financial services, cooperatives— can overcome challenges to facilitate investment in smallholder agriculture. The discussion acknowledged the differences between the investor community and the large numbers of smallholders. Participants examined recent developments, including new initiatives and products in global and regional institutions involved in promoting investment and trade, and relevant initiatives and blended finance models to support rural and agricultural investment and finance.

Experts argued for more optimal policy and regulatory frameworks to provide incentives to all stakeholders to deliver on the 2030 Agenda. Ensuring inclusive governance structures can guide more efficient allocation of resources and the development and implementation of supporting policy and regulatory frameworks. For example, regulatory frameworks for the establishment and development of cooperative enterprises, for increased access to financing opportunities for small-scale producers, for transitioning to more sustainable agriculture practices, etc. Experts called for a revision of regulatory frameworks to help reduce investment risks in agriculture, especially in smallholder agriculture.

Many participants emphasized the need to ensure responsible pro-poor investments and to more explicitly align investments and financing to the SDG2 outcomes (hunger, food security, nutrition, and sustainable agriculture) by screening these outcomes at all levels of investment design. There is a need to recognize and make use of all sources of financing, including public sector resources, Official Development Assistance, private sector financing, local savings and credit associations, and large-scale private investment. The overall level and character of investment matters -- including ensuring an allocation that delivers on the spectrum of SDG targets addressing sustainable agricultural productivity and food systems, inclusive rural development, nutritional outcomes and genetic resources conservation together (linking SDG 2 targets).

Public investment should be used as a tool to leverage private investment, when they are determined to be in the public interest, with appropriate regulation and monitoring to avoid conflict of interest. Some experts noted that opportunities should be explored for local governments (cities and territories) to access international financing directly, and in addition to implementation of the financed projects/programmes, to provide the additional and necessary resources for local development. Farmer-financed, public and private sector investment related to sustainable agricultural and food enterprises should be complemented by public investment to improve smallholder producer incomes and reduce hunger in urban and rural populations simultaneously through social protection programs. Overall, investment instruments need to be tailored to an integrated approach to all SDG 2 targets.

Governments were asked to continue to incentivise domestic resource mobilization through smart taxation that does not undermine local enterprise development and ensures a matching of administrative and fiscal

18

decentralization. It is important to build on and benefit from effective and existing instruments, multi-sectoral partnerships that are already having an impact and provide investment for the achievement of SDG2.

To increase private finance available, mechanisms are needed that can channel larger-scale private financing to smallholder producers, including through intermediaries aggregating smaller scale investments into a larger pool at a scale attractive to larger private investors. This will likely require the investor community to offset potential risks (e.g. through payment of insurance premiums) to attract larger public or private financial support. Adherence to the internationally recognized instruments such as the Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment (RAI)8 and the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure9 should be ensured. Tools such as “nutrition impact analysis” can help incorporate health and social benefits into investment planning and bring production in line with sustainable diets and health targets.

Local savings and financing mechanisms, including cooperatives, should be mobilized to help stimulate on-farm investment and local rural enterprises. Recognition has to be given to the fact that remittances can provide an important source of financing for smallholder investment in the context of other financing options and that mechanisms to facilitate their mobilization should be supported/favoured rather than hampered.

Trade and Markets

Experts defended the need for broader discussion and coherence at global debate across different UN hubs such as Geneva, Rome and New York, in particular with regards to agriculture trade policy and markets and the need to shift from subsidy of commodities to subsidy of the more vulnerable farmers. They stressed the need to recognize that trade policies of both developed and developing countries impact global markets and called for a better understanding of their impact on smallholder producers in the poorest countries. From an equity perspective, it was said that is more effective to subsidize producers through social protection transfers and tools than through trade policies focussed on specific crops/products.

Governments should consider public procurement policies that support local production of healthy diverse foods including small farmers, drawing on lessons from countries where these have worked and not worked. Organizing farmers and supporting their quality compliance was pointed out as essential for smallholder participation in procurement and contracting. Procurement processes should be tailored to producers’ needs, capacities, and cultures to increase their participation and create more attractive incentives. Through policy and legal regulatory frameworks, governments can shape market demand for healthy foods and nutritious diet and help shape structure of food systems at all levels to deliver on SDG2 targets). Beyond infrastructure investments for reaching export markets, there is a continued need for investments to facilitate access to local and national markets such (feeder roads, storage etc.).10 Further, more work needs to be done in some of the ways described above to strengthen policy and regulatory frameworks that can help shape the structure of local food systems to deliver on the SDG 2 targets including policies to promote smallholder access to direct, retail and wholesale markets at territorial, national or international levels.

Science, technology and innovation (STI), capacity building and systemic issues

Participants noted that innovation happens at different levels, and by different actors, not only through large corporations but also among farmers, including women, youth and indigenous communities. An enabling environment is vital to allow innovations that meet the needs of farmers and grassroots innovators. The enabling environment should be a combination of innovation and investment platforms. Technology is a key cross-cutting theme of the 2030 Agenda and 13 of the 17 SDGs specify that technological solutions will be necessary to achieve them.

8 http://www.fao.org/cfs/cfs-home/activities/rai/en/

9 http://www.fao.org/nr/tenure/voluntary-guidelines/en/

10 LINK TO SOFA on FF and CFS Policy to promote smallholder access to markets

19

Some participants expressed caution around the unforeseen risks that new technologies can pose to the food system and the natural environment in general. Moreover, some of these same experts noted that new technologies could reinforce existing inequalities across countries and among different segments of the population.

Examples for assessment of innovation and technology included the Capacity Development for Agriculture Innovation and the Global Overview Assessment of Technological Systems (G.O.A.T.S) framework for stakeholder-driven evaluation of science, technology and innovation. Both examples allow policymakers, researchers, civil society actors including rural peoples’ organizations, the private sector and others to better understand the landscape ahead including potential benefits and pitfalls. The assessment of technology is critical to include people at the centre of knowledge creation, and the products of these and other assessment tools can become supporting contributions to deliberations of the High-level Political Forum.

Innovation is not always technological and the future of agriculture is not necessarily technology-driven even though in many cases it may be driven by or linked to new information or production technology. Dominant innovation trajectories are not sufficient (and may run against) the needs of poorer and socially disadvantaged groups and of environmental sustainability. There is a need for new approaches and pro-poor and inclusive innovation, including by taking a closer look at traditional approaches, alternative forms of knowledge creation and a greater attention to social innovation alongside technological innovation. In this regard, innovation in relation to SDG 2 should extend beyond science and technology to include grassroots levels where more attention and resources are needed to address the policy-science-practice nexus and truly benefit the rural and urban poor. Overall, social, scientific and institutional innovations are also very important for sustainability. Agriculture is becoming more knowledge intensive, and thus there is a need to put users and providers of innovation, including on-farm innovators, on an equal footing with formal scientific researchers in relevant institutions at different levels. Sustainability of scientific and technical innovation, including research and development efforts in both informal and formal settings, requires long-term support since scientific research/innovation requires time.

Systemic issues

Partnerships are crucial for innovation and capacity building. It is important to share best practices for transparency, accountability and access to decision making, as well as to learn more about the factors that contribute to effective partnerships for food security and promote greater synergy among institutions. Needed partnerships are not only horizontal ones between sectors but also across local, national and regional levels. Partnerships should include establishing relationships among universities, civil societies and farmers and creating platforms and pedagogical material that allow exchange of knowledge. Seeing partners as equals and promoting transparency are determinants of success. Participants emphasized that partnerships between civil society and private sector actors are often inherently unequal because of power differences; understanding and accommodating these differences in power are essential if partnerships are to succeed.

Achieving SDG 2 in all countries is linked to reaching other SDGs such as SDG 1, 11, 13 and 15. Decentralization is a common denominator bringing these goals together. The avenues to achieve an integrated approach emphasizing and empowering local and territorial food systems must include paying attention to smallholder farmers and land administration, as well as focusing on the specificities of local food systems. Local resources, people and innovation are often undervalued. With international and national legal and donor support, local adaptation and integration of SDGs will be achieved. Investment is called for in soft and hard infrastructure to access markets in response to and with the full participation of food system actors beginning with smallholder producers. The reality so far is predominantly a top down, centralized approach, which some experts considered is likely to fail. Decentralization can be achieved, if resources and budgets are taken from the international level to the national and/or subnational level directly supporting local food systems. This should become an accepted approach, with a transition to more resilient and responsive investments that place greater priority on strengthening local food systems.

20

Experts agreed that food systems are multifaceted and complex. As such, normative frameworks are needed at a systemic level. But given the long time required to deliver normative policy at a global level, it is important to push forward at national and local levels. Moreover, progress can be made through holistic approaches adopted and linked, where possible, to national frameworks premised on sustainable, inclusive and resilient food systems. The role the UN can play in galvanizing countries to include all food system actors from producers to consumers can be crucial and was highlighted. However, it was noted that there are enormous systemic challenges from the burden of excessive national debt that can devastate food security and agriculture; and inequalities at macroeconomic and local levels in rich and poor countries contributing to the persistence of extreme poverty, hunger and malnutrition. The relentless pace of robotics, artificial intelligence, and new forms of interactive automation, in addition to economic forces that will interact with climate change, biodiversity loss, and increasing protracted crises around the world create a hard to predict set of outcomes.

Finally, experts also noted the tension between the progress of SDG implementation and national fiscal restrictions. They added that even if policy and fiscal space exists, there may be a democratic deficit in which political economies favour elites. There are other governance-related systemic issues that require addressing, one being the tension between policy convergence and policy coherence since policy convergence can be incoherent in terms of human rights. Regulatory interventions need to be scaled up to bridge the gap between the human rights approach and sustainable development, paving the path for a normative democratization of economic governance.

Some participants noted that UN agencies were designed to work at the intergovernmental level and protocols are set for intergovernmental interaction. Implementing projects at subnational or local levels is a challenge that requires new practices and approaches. There is a shortage of innovation in agriculture appropriate for small-scale farmers. Food system innovation should be accessible by small-scale actors, context-specific, available at very low or no cost, and boosted by South-South and peer-to-peer cooperation. Trade and innovation are not the only paths to food security. Intellectual property should balance public interest and need to protect discovery; all too often, it only serves to protect profits of the private sector with limited attention to the public interest. People should be in the centre, not just technology.

Recommendations for action:

Investment focused on the comprehensiveness of SDG 2 and its interlinkages with other SDGs;

Investment platforms and mechanisms that address and seek to reconcile the different challenges and risks of large and small-scale agriculture;

Facilitate access by family farmers and smallholder to direct, retail and wholesale markets at territorial, national or international levels, including by using instruments such as public procurement

Nurture innovation systems that put the needs of farmers at the centre and facilitates linkages between scientists and farmers;

Support greater involvement of women in agricultural science and decision-making processes;

Enhance international cooperation on data, particularly in support of disaster risk reduction;

Responsible investment should pool resources at country levels through transparent multi-stakeholder analysis and inclusive decision-making, targeting local investments that strengthen smallholders;

Linked public, private and family farmer investment approaches can combine productivity increase, farm income increase and reduced hunger and poverty of vulnerable populations;

Cooperative investment structures should help smallholder producers overcome challenges such as access to markets, equipment, seeds, credit, transport, processing, etc.;

Incorporate “nutrition impact analysis” into investment planning and decision-making;

21

Align public funding from external donors with domestic investment to strengthen smallholder agriculture, reduce corrupt and illicit financial flows;

Align subsidy, taxation and social protection programs to the SDGs;

Research the restrictions and barriers (financial, regulatory, cultural) to smallholder farmers who seek to scale up from direct local markets to wholesale domestic or international markets and analyse the relationship of access to international markets and the food and nutrition security of producers;

Refocus on territorial markets as investment targets given their income generation potential for smallholder agriculture;

Use the CFS Guidelines for Responsible Agricultural Investment (RAI) in relation to SDG 2 investment;

Study the types and effectiveness of different kinds partnerships related to SDG 2.

Examine SDG 2 partnerships between geographically linked academic institutions, civil society organizations and farmers to create knowledge institutions and policy coherence; and

Develop further guidance for countries to ensure sustainable development policy and programmes are grounded in or compatible with a human rights-based approach.

Parallel Session on Interlinkages with other SDGs

Mechanisms for accountability are important for moving sustainable development forward. Such mechanisms exist within the 2030 Agenda through the indicators and regional and global-level follow up and review processes including the HLPF and its Voluntary National Reviews, that share national level experiences, and thematic reviews. Experts stressed the importance of examining interlinkages in this process, to help implementing actors move beyond silos. Though data is incomplete for assessing interlinkages, experts agreed that the interlinkages should be addressed when devising programmes across ministries. Experts said that the UN should provide more incentives to the development of integrated SDG approaches.

Much work has already been undertaken to identify nexus issues surrounding SDG 2 and its targets. SDG 1 and SDG 2 are most closely linked; for example, data related to the target on stunting is also a clear indicator of poverty. Many global efforts to eradicate poverty focus on rural people and agriculture, and on smallholder farmers in rural areas in developing countries, but experts stressed that addressing the root causes of poverty and food insecurity in both rural and urban areas requires a holistic approach to sustainable development that must also address many other SDGs.

Nutrition is clearly embedded in SDG 2. It has clear links with all other SDGs but in particular, it is important to strengthen the link with SDG 3, considering that unhealthy diets are the biggest risk factor for the global burden of disease. Overweight, obesity, and the related NCDs are becoming the number one public health concern in many countries.

Gender equality and women’s empowerment (SDG 5) is inseparable from both SDG 1 and SDG 2. The systematic mainstreaming of gender perspectives throughout all the SDGs is crucial. This requires an assessment of the impacts of all policies and processes to end discrimination and marginalization of women and actively contribute to the realization of gender equality. Capacity building for collecting, analysing and using sex- and age-disaggregated data is now a high priority in many countries.

Women are actors and agents of change, and their role as decision makers must be recognized, championed and supported in every facet of sustainable development implementation. Women face more significant barriers than men in at least four critical areas including land and water; extension services and training; inputs and credit; and markets. Women’s access to and control over economic resources is part of an integrated approach to promote access to, as well as use control and ownership of land.

22

Women are primarily responsible for food availability in the family. When women have access to more resources and training they are more likely than men to invest in their children’s nutrition, education, and healthcare. These investments strengthen family and communities over time. Some governments have offered to set up sub-national peer review mechanisms to look at accountability at the local level, and to defend land rights through land tenure and governance.

Small-scale farmers support the livelihoods of some 2 to 2.5 billion people, and manage a large part of the world’s natural resources, including agricultural biodiversity. Agricultural biodiversity and small-scale farmers, who maintain and develop these resources, contribute to improving livelihoods by providing a foundation for household food and nutritional security and offering opportunities for income generation. In most developing countries, smallholder farming accounts for over 75 percent of employment, and is hence critical to the achievement of SDG 8. Cities in these countries already face significant problems due to unemployment and cannot absorb and employ displaced smallholder farmers, because their rural livelihoods are disrupted or are not sufficiently supported. Rural life must become an attractive option.

SDG 2, SDG 13 and 15 cannot be achieved in isolation. Experts noted that biological diversity is being lost at an alarming rate, the most critical being the loss of agricultural biodiversity. Without it, our ability to produce food to feed ourselves is severely hampered, and this can affect our survival. Agricultural biodiversity provides direct benefits for nutrition and health, resilience and stability and important ecological functions e.g. nutrient cycling, soil formation, water cycling and purification. Farmers' varieties and wild species related to domesticated crops are the dynamic pool of genetic diversity that farmers and the global community will continue to rely on for their resistance, tolerance and immunity to stresses and for our ability to adapt to climate and other environmental changes. Furthermore, small-scale farmers are not static holders of unchanging knowledge, materials or management practices nor is agricultural biodiversity in their fields a static collection of resources. Farmers have dynamic systems of experimentation and knowledge associated with the growth and development of crop varieties. As such, experts stated that farmers and their resources are at the frontlines of adapting to climate change and require more support to continue to do so and to ensure the achievement of SDG 2, 13 and 15.

Experts asked for guidance to be given for the functioning of inter-institutional committees at the local level to facilitate coordination among stakeholders. Rural-urban mechanisms, including building alliances among producers and consumers in rural and urban areas, can enable progress in this area. On-going work to build capacity at the local level is facilitating linkages between rural and urban food systems and leading to new multi-stakeholder networks within regions, in some cases. Participants noted that national policies supporting local procurement could shorten the distance between the producer and urban consumer and support agriculturally biodiverse food systems that are the foundation of dietary diversity and healthy diets.

Experts agreed that it was possible to enable social protection and smallholder food systems through supportive policy, programmes and investment by both public and private sectors. Establishment of multi-agency committees that go beyond governments to include NGOs, women’s organizations, the private sector and others in developing comprehensive social protection strategies and social protection floors, where poverty and nutrition aspects are addressed, are underway in some countries. However, applying these national strategies at the community level is challenging.

Practical examples of social protection of territorial food systems through planning that bring urban and rural authorities and actors together can be seen. All these mechanisms require multi-level governmental authorization, on-going financial support, and popular mobilization to be effective and scale up successful strategies to link urban and rural poor with local small- and medium-scale farmers.

At the sub-national level, experts said that the movement toward the localization of food systems can improve success all across the SDGs, but it requires good local and inclusive governance, with enabling policy at national and international levels, and guidance tools. In addition, specific contexts of the root causes of problems related to food insecurity, malnutrition, and agricultural productivity must be understood before

23

effective approaches can be successful. In addition to links with SDG 2 targets, there are other related SDGs that can be integrated in the enabling environment for local food systems at national levels, including sustainable production and consumption, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture through the adoption of ecosystem-based approaches such as agroecology, promotion of reciprocal flows in shorter food chains to make a substantial contribution to reduction in food loss and waste, etc.

Subsidies were considered a major blockage to progress, especially when not targeted at small-scale farming and fisheries management. Industry prevention of food losses and waste is often not addressed as a systemic issue, and losses and waste are consequently much higher in the industrial food chain than in local smallholder producer systems, though post-harvest losses should be addressed at all scales.

Participants noted that the protection of ecosystems and ecosystem-based approaches are common throughout farming, fisheries, forest producers, and pastoralists. A focus on wellbeing is closely linked to lifestyles, agricultural production and livelihoods of smallholder farmers and fishers. Small-scale fisher-folk and pastoralists face many of the same challenges as smallholder farmers11, and should be recognized for their contributions to achieving the SDGs, rather than solely as beneficiaries of development. Yet differences in the ways that common resources are governed can present unique challenges. Work with tribal or indigenous communities, including landless workers, pastoralists, and forest producers may require different approaches than for smallholder farmers. Experts argued that high levels of participation are needed and community-based solutions are critical. Solidarity economy was mentioned as way to increase participation and community-based solutions. In general, different approaches are emerging to address interlinkages, including food systems and ecosystem approaches, and forward-looking scenarios and visions are needed.

Experts added that the conceptual level of interlinkages must be coupled with a practical level of implementation. Overall, moving beyond the identification of what many described as the “web of interlinkages” to understand what actions are needed to effectively address multiple goals and targets simultaneously requires not only integrated, holistic and ecosystem approaches, but also the creation of new institutional structures at all levels. Interlinkages can be also considered as a web of relationships that are dependent on contexts that vary in every country. The need to identify unknown factors and gain a better understanding of the complexities among knowledge, scales, and connections is generally recognized. This knowledge-building process can fuel the policy convergence process at all levels.

Recommendations for action:

Fully integrate national gender equality policies and strategies to ensure success of SDG2 strategies;

Channel efforts to build capacity and ensure educational opportunities for women and girls, progress to see benefits across the SDGs;

Invest in smallholder farmers and agricultural biodiversity, as they are critical to achieving not only SDG 2, but also SDGs related to employment, health, life on land and climate action, amongst others;

Provide opportunities for smallholder access to emerging markets, most of which are domestic and local, requires policy, institutional and technical support that can benefit by being linked to provide ecosystem services of gender equality, sustainable cities, biodiversity protection, climate change resilience and food loss/waste reduction, etc.;

Promote social inclusion, as it is at the heart of addressing food security, nutrition, agriculture and other SDGs in a comprehensive and holistic way;

Engage all stakeholders, strengthen the role of civil society at the national level and accountability of all actors, including private sector;

11 Smallholder crop and livestock farmers produce over half the cereal staple foods, meat and milk in the world.

24

Secure rights to land and other resources especially for family and smallholder farmers, and particularly for women;

Provide resources and incentives to leverage the creation of new institutional structures, and to connect the local level to the national and global levels;

Commit to peace and security to help reduce distress migration and provide stability for youth;

Consider trade-offs and compromises—socio-economic, socio-political, and otherwise— when developing SDG programmes and policies;

Governments should commit to effective means of implementation by setting fair prices for farmers, investing in sustainable land management and governance, focusing on capacity building, and adopting a human rights-based approach to agriculture and fisheries;

Improve data collection and monitoring to inform policy and assessment , ensuring policy makers and other actors have the information needed to ask the right questions; and

Pay attention to the role of technologies—especially emerging ones such as biotechnology, synthetic biology, and robotics—to realize their potential and avoid unforeseen and unintended consequences.

Parallel Session on Countries in special situations and protracted crisis

The 2030 Agenda specifically acknowledges the challenges of countries in special situations, including Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), Small Island Developing States (SIDS), and countries in conflict and post-conflict situations. These countries suffer disproportionately from food insecurity, volatile food prices, limited resources, inequalities, and the effects of climate change. They often face extreme conditions due to their geographic location. Experts in this session agreed that achieving SDG 2 by 2030 is not possible unless the needs of these countries are addressed considering the dramatic growth of migration, conflict, competition and climate change.

The commitment to leave no one behind challenges the international community to collectively respond to countries in conflict and protracted crisis, where humanitarian aid can become blocked and hunger is sometimes used as a weapon. In 2015, 80 million people suffered from hunger and malnutrition in these countries; in 2016 that number rose to 108 million. This year, another 20 million people—mostly children—are at risk of famine in Yemen, Somalia, Nigeria, and South Sudan. In Afghanistan, 40 percent of children are stunted, and 10 percent are wasted.

Roughly 80 percent of the affected populations in these countries rely on agriculture for their livelihoods; therefore, preserving their livelihoods is essential for saving their lives. Yet decades of underinvestment in agriculture have had a devastating effect, experts noted. Water scarcity, drought and natural disasters as a result of climate change have crippled fragile countries and their agricultural systems, resulting in food insecurity, increased rural-urban migration, and disease outbreaks that can affect agricultural production, with financial resources redirected to contain pandemics. Climate change has made SIDS hotspots for natural disasters, especially with the increasing prevalence and intensity of major cyclones, imposing budgetary crises and food security challenges. After a disaster hits, farmers are particularly vulnerable.

Experts said that the collective failure by the international community to prevent famine indicates a lack of capacity and coordination among national, regional and global institutions dedicated to preventing and addressing the root causes of humanitarian crises. Countries in protracted crisis require specific and targeted interventions, with a humanitarian approach to development that builds resilience. Yet, experts noted that responses in countries in crisis often entails lack of coordination and little focus on long-term planning in favour of “quick impact projects”. Government leaders/programmes and donors/aid agencies often fail to

25

effectively coordinate with each other, resulting in a lack of program complementarity and long-term development planning.

Effective implementation of the SDGs must also somehow accommodate the increasing displacement of people caused by disaster and conflict, experts warned. The number of international migrants today is about 244 million; by 2050 the number of international migrants could reach over 400 million, fuelled by inequality, hunger and increasingly harsh environments. Forced migration is high, with around 65 million people currently escaping violence and seeking asylum. The number of protracted crises is on the rise, and the multidimensional interlinkages among poverty, hunger, inequality, disaster, conflict, displacement and migration are correspondingly rising as well. The achievement of SDG 16 is clearly essential for progress. Jordan, for example, is coping with increased food insecurity and stress on economic and natural resources, especially water and agricultural soils, imposed by an influx of Palestinian, Lebanese, Iraqi, Yemeni, and Syrian refugees, who now comprise over 30 percent of the population. Maintaining agricultural production with chronic water scarcity is a major challenge.

The United Nations and the larger international community are increasing efforts to support countries in special situations to localize and domesticize the SDGs. The CFS’ Framework for Action for Food Security and Nutrition in Protracted Crisis and the Global Action Programme for Food Security and Nutrition for SIDS (GAP), which were developed in an inclusive manner, provides those seeking to improve food security with a policy framework that can address the underlying causes of crisis and guide actions toward greater sustainability. The CFS supports implementation through open-ended working groups that align national policies with the SDGs, and provides a platform for countries to review progress made at the national level. GAP recognises the magnitude and complexity of challenges continued to be faced by SIDS and no one agency, organisation or country can address these on their own. GAP promotes greater alignment at the national level and for strengthened international cooperation and partnerships to help SIDS address development challenges.

The role of operational and strategic partnerships are key; institutional arrangements should balance the interests and positions of diverse actors and sectors. National institutions and governments tackling challenges must address complex root social and economic problems, act to increase resilience, and build capacity for data collection and analysis, experts said. Inter-ministerial committees can help to advance implementation by facilitating coordination, and many countries are making progress in this regard. Experts noted that local food systems and local markets were proving to be viable solutions to food security and nutrition for many countries in special situations. Farming networks have proven to be game-changers and, in many countries, investing in family farming and smallholder production is significantly increasing food production.

Recommendations for action:

Urgently bridge the humanitarian and development divide. Development and humanitarian planning must be able to anticipate crisis and conflict in order to prevent it and strengthen resilience against it, particularly with regard to resource-based conflicts;

Combine short, medium, and longer-term programs based on the country-context, to implement family education and social safety net programs for food security and nutrition, invest in basic infrastructure, and develop an enabling an environment for the private sector and NGOs to provide support;

Use internationally agreed instruments to support policy making and action

Ensure international financial support to provide capacity building, education, and provision of basic services for a sustainable long-term approach for migrants and refugees;

Build resilience to the effects of climate change as crucial investment to prevent famine;

Promote sustainable agriculture with a preventative focus as a key way to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change;

26

Implement combined strategies to address climate change, water scarcity, and food insecurity;

Consider population movement, induced by both natural disaster and conflict, in the implementation of SDG 2, including food security related policy development and programme planning;

Urgently invest in agricultural research undertaken at universities located in developing countries;

Promote further research to support evidence-based policy making to address the linkages between conflicts, natural disasters, climate change and population movement;

Implement special efforts at the global, regional, and national levels to ensure adequate financing and ODA to countries in special situations;

LDCs require preferential trade treatment linked to the SDGs to ensure that SDG 2 is achieved;

Engage Regional economic communities so that they can play an important role in ensuring that countries work together to expand their market base;

Create national inter-ministerial SDG committees that include high-level focal points from government, international organizations, civil society and the private sector to help align national agendas with the SDGs, enable the identification of gaps and increase effective coordination;

Promote stakeholder consultations, social inclusion, and building partnerships—including before undertaking projects and programmes, as this is essential for successful progress;

Transform production, looking beyond farm aid toward technology, knowledge sharing, and the political will to provide new solutions for smallholder farmers, including needed legal reforms for large-scale commercial farming, so as to ensure sustainable and resilient changes in economic structures;

Work with local communities and councils to ensure viable municipal markets and, in some countries, to help the agriculture sector support and propel the tourism industry;

Recognize and invest in existing local food systems and community knowledge systems to mitigate climate change risks and promote food security;

Extend the “adopt a school” proposal to the agricultural sector;

Promote South-South Cooperation, especially for knowledge sharing, to combat hunger and malnutrition; and

Engage in the implementation of the SIDS GAP and establish a dedicated facility for SIDS to proactively rehabilitate farmers after natural disasters would be a useful initiative.

Closing plenary12

The closing plenary of the Expert Group Meeting included summaries by moderators and panellists of the parallels sessions held during the day and the identification and the identification of an initial set of key messages from the EGM. These key messages were later refined for the briefing to Member States on June 14, 2017, and for the final set of key messages included in this report. At the closing plenary, the organizing partners thanked the participants and highlighted that the diversity of expertise and background brought to the EGM by the participating experts had been reflected in the richness of dialogues over two days and the many valuable inputs provided to the process of the High-level Political Forum.

12 The closing session was chaired by the Director of the FAO Liaison Office to the United Nations, Ms. Carla Mucavi, and Mr. Juwang

Zhu, Director of the Division of Sustainable Development (UN-DESA), representing the EGM’s organizing partners.

27

Lessons learned

The EGM successfully promoted a dialogue to assess progress and challenges towards SDG 2 and in producing key messages and policy recommendations for the HLPF. This success can be seen in the extent that the EGM was echoed during the HLPF by a variety of actors, and in the language used in the Ministerial Declaration. The EGM outcomes were result of a long preparatory process led by DESA, FAO, IFAD and WFP that involved extensive outreach to ensure adequate participation and in-house work to prepare supporting documents.

Lessons learned from the EGM include:

Advance organizing by partners was crucial. It helped provide the space needed for dialogue, ensured significant participation and buy in into the meeting the EGM from different actors

o Investment in weekly planning for the EGM in weekly meetings over three months was critical

o Organizing setup allowed for adjustments along the way responding to external factors such as the location and timing of the meeting, funding of participants, etc.

o Preparatory work contributed to the constructive dialogues and allowed for the quick turn-around of the initial set of key messages presented to Member States the day after the EGM

Diversity adds value: EGM must allow for multi-stakeholder participation and does not need to aim for consensus; its value lies in the dialogue around the views that are brought to the table

o Intensive outreach during the preparatory process helped identify, invite and ensure presence of invited experts

o EGM carefully balanced participation of different actors, ensuring that Member States, UN actors and the variety of non-state representatives were heard in the different sessions

o Funding for participation of key CSOs was available and necessary to ensure their presence. FAO, DESA, IFAD and UN Habitat all contributed resources to support participation.

o Constant and direct communications with civil society participants helped prepare them for EGM (preparation included pre- and post-EGM meetings organized by the CSOs)

o Decision to stimulate dialogue and not strive to reach consensus on certain issues allowed for rich conversations and relevant inputs to the HLPF preparatory process.

Linking constructively with the HLPF: EGM was specifically designed to support the HLPF and the discussions that led to it

o In the spirit of the 2030 Agenda, EGM looked within and beyond specific SDGs. The combination of in-depth discussion on specific SDG (SDG2) and how it related to the 2030 Agenda as a whole helped ensure a meaningful contribution

EGM going forward

o Consideration should be given to how EGMs can formally contribute to HLPF process

o Careful consideration should be given to what EGMs should be organized and how the organizing partners should engage (in this point, the engagement of DESA, FAO, IFAD and WFP might differ according to the SDGs being reviewed).

o The EGM has been useful for the HLPF preparatory process and the HLPF itself. Hopefully, it will also be useful to Member States and other stakeholders as they continue to implement the 2030 Agenda. The EGM will also be useful informing other processes at the UN (for instance SG Reports and UNGA resolutions and elsewhere)

28

Annexes

Annex I – Programme

Annex II – Concept Note

Annex III – Background notes for discussion sessions

Annex IV – List of participants

Annex V – Interventions submitted by participants