Capital and Lower Case Letters Capital Letters Weeks 8-11 Created by: P. Bordas Play.
Title (NOT ALL CAPITAL LETTERS)
621
The e-Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security Collection of the contributions received from the 19 th November 2012 to 10 th January 2013 This thematic discussion is led by FAO and WFP in collaboration with “The World We Want” www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Transcript of Title (NOT ALL CAPITAL LETTERS)
The e-Consultation on Hunger,
Food and Nutrition Security
Collection of the contributions receivedfrom the 19th November 2012 to 10th January 2013
This thematic discussion is led by FAO and WFP in collaboration
with “The World We Want”
The consultation is facilitated by the Global Forum on Food Security
and Nutrition (FSN Forum)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 2
Table of contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
E-Consultation................................................................................................................................................................................. 15
Contributions Received............................................................................................................................................................... 16
1) Lizzy Nneka Igbine, NIWAAFA (Nigerian Women Agro Allied Farmers Association), Nigeria.....16
2) Thomas Mokake, Cameroon [first contribution]...............................................................................................16
3) Arul Murugan Palannichamy, India.........................................................................................................................16
4) Thomas Mokake, Cameroon [second contribution].........................................................................................16
5) Muhammad Khalid Jam, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations , Pakistan....17
6) Sachin Kumar Jain, India [first contribution]......................................................................................................18
7) Mark Smulders, FAO, Italy...........................................................................................................................................18
8) Freddy Leonardo Arias Guerrero, Asociación de Ingenieros Agrícolas de Colombia – ASIAC, Colombia................................................................................................................................................................................... 19
9) Vishwambhar Prasad Sati, Department of Geography and Resource Management Mizoram University, India.................................................................................................................................................................... 21
10) Sachin Kumar Jain, India [second contribution].............................................................................................22
11) Carlos Villán Durán, Asociación Española para el Derecho Humano, Spain.......................................22
12) Mohammed Saleh Ali, ZAWI & PANITA, United Republic of Tanzania..................................................23
13) Daniele Marcomin, Italy.............................................................................................................................................24
14) Julio Antonio Balbuena Batista, CONALECHE, Dominican Republic......................................................24
15) Dejo Olowu, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa....................................................................26
16) Todd Post and Scott Bleggi, Bread for the World Institute, USA.............................................................26
17) Guadalupe Valdez, Cámara Diputados/Frente Parlamentario Contra el Hambre, Dominican Republic.................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
18) Aruna Sharma, Government Official and practitioner Development Economist, India [first contribution]........................................................................................................................................................................... 28
19) Prashant Anchal, Aide et Action International, India...................................................................................29
20) Jose Luis Vivero Pol, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium...........................................................30
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 3
21) Codrin Paveliuc Olariu, Young Professionals in Local Development, Romania [first contribution]........................................................................................................................................................................... 31
22) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [First contribution]................................................................................32
23) Mohammad Habibi Najafi, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran.........................................................33
24) Ross Bailey, WaterAid, United Kingdom............................................................................................................33
25) Marie Appleton, Canada.............................................................................................................................................35
26) Final Year Economics Students, University of Guyana.................................................................................35
27) Roldán Gonzalo, Argentina.......................................................................................................................................36
28) Anil Rupakheti, Nepal.................................................................................................................................................36
29) Piero Conforti, FAO, Italy...........................................................................................................................................37
30) Becky Jebet, Beacon, Kenya......................................................................................................................................37
31) Summary of the first week, WFP - FAO Facilitation Team.........................................................................38
32) Simon Ross, Population Matters, UK [first contribution]...........................................................................39
33) Dominic Glover, Wageningen University, Netherlands...............................................................................39
34) Chencho Norbu, Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Bhutan..................................................................40
35) Aderemi Adetoro Kejinaus, Nigeria......................................................................................................................41
36) Sergio Tripi, Good News Agency, Italy................................................................................................................41
37) Pie Ntakarutimana, IDED, Togo [first contribution].....................................................................................41
38) Anonymous..................................................................................................................................................................... 42
39) David Michael, Wondu Business & Technology Services, Australia.......................................................43
40) Claudio Schuftan and Natalie Eggermont, PHF, Viet Nam..........................................................................43
41) Pankaj Kumar, ICAR, India........................................................................................................................................43
42) Stella Joy, Active Remedy Ltd, United Kingdom..............................................................................................44
43) Agha Mohsin Ali Khan, Youth in Action Balochistan, Pakistan.................................................................44
44) Archana Sinha, Ashoka Innovators for the Public, India.............................................................................44
45) Vladimir Jovcev, WFP, Zimbabwe..........................................................................................................................45
46) Elvis Njabe, Denmark..................................................................................................................................................45
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 4
47) Triatno Yudo Harjoko Gotty, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia..............................................................45
48) John Kurien, International Collective in Support of Fishworkers, India..............................................46
49) Miguel Velez, Honduras.............................................................................................................................................47
50) Victor Howard Liberia, EFA Technical Committee LETCOm INC, Liberia...........................................49
51) Maria del Pilar Valledor, University Rey Juan Carlos, Spain......................................................................49
52) Ernest Udeze, Global Youth Plan Against Malaria, HIV/AIDS, Nigeria..................................................49
53) Andrea Martínez, Argentina....................................................................................................................................49
54) International Presentation Association, USA...................................................................................................50
55) Parvez Babul, Bangladesh.........................................................................................................................................52
56) John Teton, International Food Security Treaty Association, USA.........................................................54
57) Summary of the second week, WFP - FAO Facilitation Team...................................................................54
58) Jan Willem Eggink, Agri-ProFocus, Netherlands............................................................................................56
59) Scott Bleggi, Bread for the World, USA...............................................................................................................56
60) Simon Ross Population Matters, United Kingdom [second contribution]...........................................56
61) Juan Pablo Ojeda, Argentina....................................................................................................................................59
62) Economist views on the go, University of Guyana [first contribution].................................................60
63) Emily Levitt Ruppert, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team.....................................................................................60
64) Johanne Lewis, Bexbase Media Technology, UK.............................................................................................61
65) Sahib Haq, WFP, Pakistan.........................................................................................................................................61
66) Fred Ojok, Grassroots Reconciliation Group, Uganda..................................................................................62
67) Eusebio Melo, Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de la Pesca Marino Mercante, Dominican Republic.................................................................................................................................................................................... 62
68) Abubacker Siddick Syed Mohammed, M.S.Swaminathan Research Foundation, India.................62
69) Bhavani R Vaidyanathan, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, India...........................................63
70) Ajay Kumar VB, RIGHTS, India................................................................................................................................64
71) Sachin Kumar, Jain Media for Rights., India......................................................................................................65
72) Economist views on the go, University of Guyana [second contribution]...........................................65
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 5
73) Barack Ondanya, Miriu Integrated Project, Kenya.........................................................................................65
74) Revinder Naik Vankudothu, Agriculture University, India........................................................................66
75) Bhavani R Vaidyanathan, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, India [second contribution]....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66
76) Joyce Wendam, Department of Agriculture, Philippines............................................................................67
77) Saul Vicente, Foro Permanente de Naciones Unidas para las Cuestiones Indígenas, Mexico.....68
78) John Moor, Population Matters, United Kingdom..........................................................................................70
79) Hélène Delisle, WHO Collaborating Centre on Nutrition changes and Development, Canada...70
82) Ugo Gentilini, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team.....................................................................................................75
83) Codrin Paveliuc Olariu, Young Professionals in Local Development, Romania [second contribution]........................................................................................................................................................................... 75
84) Codrin Paveliuc Olariu, Young Professionals in Local Development, Romania [third contribution]........................................................................................................................................................................... 75
85) Amador Gómez, Acción Contra el Hambre, Spain..........................................................................................76
86) Mohan Munasinghe, MIND, Sri Lanka..................................................................................................................77
87) Mahesh Moodley, South Africa...............................................................................................................................77
88) Diane Mulligan, CBM, United Kingdom...............................................................................................................78
89) Jorge Stanley, Movimiento de la Juventud Kuna, Panama..........................................................................80
90) Maria Sfarra, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team......................................................................................................81
91) John Stollmeyer, Caribbean Permaculture Consultants Ltd., Trinidad and Tobago.......................81
92) Jose Swala, MOLD, Kenya..........................................................................................................................................82
93) Peter Webster, BSTA, Barbados.............................................................................................................................82
94) Dennis Baker, Canada.................................................................................................................................................84
95) Kalekristos Yohannes, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research , Ethiopia................................84
96) Edwin Tamasese, Soil Health Pacific Ltd, Samoa............................................................................................85
97) John Baaki, Women Environmenal Programme, Nigeria............................................................................86
98) Maria Sfarra, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team......................................................................................................87
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 6
99) Materne Maetz, France...............................................................................................................................................87
100) Pie Ntakarutimana, Burundi [second contribution]...................................................................................89
101) Mahadeva Shanmugaratnam, UN/FAO Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka..................................................................90
102) Mike Matsimbe, Malawi..........................................................................................................................................91
103) Patrick Webb, Tufts University, United States of America......................................................................91
104) Kevin Morgan, Cardiff University, United Kingdom...................................................................................91
105) Rocio Danica Condor Golec, FAO, Italy.............................................................................................................92
106) Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público - Unidad de Asuntos Internacionales de Hacienda, Mexico........................................................................................................................................................................................ 92
107) Colin Sage, University College Cork, Ireland..................................................................................................95
108) María del Socorro Yánez Miranda, Mexico.....................................................................................................95
109) Ferdousi Begum, FANTA, FHI360, Bangladesh.............................................................................................97
110) Mariana Vargas, Mexico..........................................................................................................................................97
111) Gonzalo Roldán, Argentina....................................................................................................................................97
112) Pricilla Nakyazze, Uganda......................................................................................................................................98
113) Haribondhu Sarma, icddr,b, Bangladesh.........................................................................................................98
114) David Gustafson, CIMSANS, United States of America...............................................................................99
115) Odette Nzeyimana, PCFS, Burundi.....................................................................................................................99
116) All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development in the UK Parliament, UK....................................................................................................................................................................... 99
117) Denu Tsegaye, Adama University, Ethiopia.................................................................................................104
118) Faustin Kopangoye, ONG Gabon Environnement, Gabon......................................................................104
119) Julieth Galdames, UdeC, Chile............................................................................................................................108
120) Adilson Santos, Brazil............................................................................................................................................108
121) Rachael Shenyo Alticultura, Guatemala........................................................................................................109
122) Bettina Prato, IFAD, Italy.....................................................................................................................................109
123) Pablo Esteban Aguilar Castro, Costa Rica.....................................................................................................112
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 7
124) Julien Custot, Food for the Cities, FAO, Italy................................................................................................112
125) Ellen Meleisea, Australia......................................................................................................................................114
126) Simon Mansfield, ECHO, Sudan.........................................................................................................................117
127) Lawrence Haddad, Institute of Development Studies, United Kingdom.........................................117
128) Fabiana Menna, Gran Chaco Foundation, Argentina...............................................................................118
129) Abdikarim Bashir Ahmed, Dolow Farmers Co-operative Society, Somalia...................................118
130) Mariam Al Jaajaa, The Arab Group for the Protection of Nature, Jordan........................................118
131) Faustino Cervera Burriel, Spain........................................................................................................................118
132) Francescah Munyi, Kenya Organic Finest Aromas Ltd, Kenya............................................................119
133) Etienne Tournesol Bama, Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development, Central African Republic.................................................................................................................................................................................. 119
134) Corinna Hawkes, World Cancer Research Fund International, UK...................................................120
135) Kamila Mukhamedkhanova, Center for Economic Research, Uzbekistan......................................122
136) PA Lakshmi Prasanna, India...............................................................................................................................125
137) Subhash Mehta, NGO Association for Agriculture Research in Asia-Pacific (NAARAP), India.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 126
138) Ashok Pillai, Online Volunteer, India..............................................................................................................127
136) Beyond 2015 Campaign, United Kingdom...................................................................................................127
139) Iris Krebber, DFID, UK.......................................................................................................................................... 128
140) Mariela Contreras, UNICEF, Honduras..........................................................................................................131
141) Lisa Kitinoja, The Postharvest Education Foundation, USA.................................................................132
142) Emily Levitt Ruppert, FAO/WFP Facilitation Team, USA......................................................................132
143) Australian Government........................................................................................................................................133
144) International Diabetes Federation, Belgium...............................................................................................136
145) Belén Verdugo, CERES-COAG, Spain...............................................................................................................138
146) Gino Brunswijck, Africa Europe Faith and Justice Network (AEFJN), Belgium...........................138
147) Mwadhini Myanza, IRTECO, United Republic of Tanzania...................................................................142
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 8
148) Werner Schultink, UNICEF, United States of America............................................................................143
149) Angela Estevez Peralta, Saluvid Nutricocina, Dominican Republic..................................................143
150) Nourishing Ontario Research Group, Canada.............................................................................................146
151) Save the Children International, United Kingdom....................................................................................147
152) Thiago Jota TJ, Cahermo Pescados, Brazil....................................................................................................155
153) Elva Barrios López, Peru......................................................................................................................................156
154) Caritas Internationalis, Vatican City...............................................................................................................160
155) IFSN and Action Aid...............................................................................................................................................166
156) IBON International, Philippines........................................................................................................................175
157) Benjamin Graeub, Biovision Foundation / Millennium Institute, Switzerland...........................177
158) Noemie Gerbault, ORU-FOGAR Core group sécurité alimentaire, France......................................180
159) Benjamin David Patterson, International Development Law Organization, Italy......................180
160) International Dairy Federation, Belgium......................................................................................................181
161) Noemie Gerbault, ORU-FOGAR Core group sécurité alimentaire, France......................................181
162) Coalición Clima, Congde, Campaña Derecho a la Alimentación Urgente, Spain.........................182
163) Urgency,France........................................................................................................................................................ 182
164) Samir Chaudhuri, Child in Need Institute (CINI), India..........................................................................183
165) Rahul Goswami, Centre for Communications and Development Studies, India..........................184
166) Jennie Bever Babendure, Arizona State University and Friends of the WHO Code, United States of America................................................................................................................................................................186
167) World Vision International United States of America.............................................................................187
168) D. Hien Tran Landesa, United States of America.......................................................................................187
169) Simon Vilakazi Economic JusticeNetwork of the Fellowship of Christian Councils in Southern Africa, South Africa............................................................................................................................................................188
170) Action pour le Développement Durable au Sahel Niger.........................................................................188
171) Claudio Schuftan PHM, Viet Nam [second contribution].......................................................................190
172) Roy Anunciacion, People's Coalition on Food Sovereignty, Philippines.........................................192
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings / 9
173) Richard Grant, United Kingdom........................................................................................................................197
174) Marta Andrich, Argentina....................................................................................................................................197
175) Louise Croot, New Zealand.................................................................................................................................216
176) Sergio Tripi Good News Agency, Italy............................................................................................................217
177) Lesha Witmer BPW International, Netherlands........................................................................................217
178) Hugo Bayó, Costa Rica...........................................................................................................................................218
179) Vedabhyas Kundu, Gandhi Smriti, India.......................................................................................................219
180)Krishna Kant Jha, L.N.Mithila University, Darbhanga, Bihar, India, India.......................................219
181) Abdikarim Bashir Ahmed, Dolow Farmers co-operative society, Somalia....................................220
182) Manuel Darío Zanón Sierra, Spain...................................................................................................................220
183) Lourdes Benavides, Intermón Oxfam, Spain...............................................................................................221
184) Cristina Grandi, IFOAM, Italy.............................................................................................................................232
185) Subhash Mehta, Devarao Shivaram Trust, India.......................................................................................235
186) Isabel De Felipe, Universidad Politecnica Madrid, Spain.......................................................................245
187) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [third contribution]..........................................................................246
188) Action Against Hunger, France..........................................................................................................................247
189) Paul Larsen, WFP, Norway..................................................................................................................................251
190) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [fourth contribution].......................................................................252
191) Emily Levitt Ruppert, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team...............................................................................254
192) Mohammad Monirul Hasan, Institute of Microfinance (InM), University of Bonn, Germany254
193) Maria Eugenia Rinaudo Mannucci, Environmental Analyst, Venezuela.........................................256
194) Sébastien Paque, WFP, Ecuador.......................................................................................................................258
195) Simon Ross, Population Matters, UK [third contribution]....................................................................260
196) Saba Mebrahtu, Univcef, Nepal.........................................................................................................................264
197) Climate Emergency Institute, Canada............................................................................................................264
198) Subhash Mehta, Devarao Shivaram Trust, India.......................................................................................267
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
10
199) Jean-Christophe S. Djiman Toudonou Ingénieur Agroéconomiste, Benin.....................................268
200) Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance, Switzerland...............................................................................................269
201) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [fifth contribution]............................................................................276
202) Martine Weve STOP AIDS NOW!, Netherlands...........................................................................................281
203) CIRASTIC "Collectif Inter-Associatif pour la Réalisation des Activités Scientifiques et Techniques Jeunes au Cameroun", Cameroon.......................................................................................................282
204) FAO Gouvernance Study Team, FAO, Italy...................................................................................................287
205) Paul Sommers, California State University, USA.......................................................................................289
206) Stockholm International Water Institute, Sweden...................................................................................290
207) Faustine Wabwire. Bread for the World Institute, United States of America...............................296
208) Sonja Vermeulen,CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, Denmark............................................................................................................................................................. 298
209) A. Nielsen, New Zealand.......................................................................................................................................300
210) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [sixth contribution]..........................................................................300
211) Vahid Maharramov, Economic Research Center, Azerbaijan..............................................................302
212) World Society for the Protection of Animals, UK......................................................................................303
213) Martine Vergnol, France.......................................................................................................................................305
214) Ed Werna, ILO, Switzerland................................................................................................................................306
215) Alade Adeleke, Nigerian Conservation Foundation, Nigeria................................................................306
216) Nestor Ngouambe, MINADER, Cameroon.....................................................................................................307
217) Memoona Manzoor, Pakistan.............................................................................................................................308
218) Concern Worldwide, Malawi and Zambia....................................................................................................309
219) Conchi Quintana, World Rural Forum, Spain..............................................................................................311
220) George Kent, University of Hawai'i (Emeritus), United States of America....................................315
221) Ariane Marcar, Warwick University, United Kingdom...........................................................................316
222) Ariella Rojhani Rojhani NCD Alliance, United States of America.......................................................316
223) Angela Cahill, Ireland.............................................................................................................................................317
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
11
224) Anna Hudson, Ireland............................................................................................................................................317
225) Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition [GAIN] Switzerland...............................................................317
226) Pamela Morrison International Board Certified Lactation Consultant, United Kingdom.......320
226) Roxanne Howdle, United Kingdom.................................................................................................................321
228) Juanita Jauer Steichen, IBFAN/LLL FRANCE/COFAM/REGAAL, France........................................321
229) Felicity Savage World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action and Infant Feeding Consortium, United Kingdom.................................................................................................................................................................. 323
230) International Baby Food Action Network, Switzerland.........................................................................323
231) Carmen Florentina Radu, Start Focus, Romania........................................................................................332
232) Unilever, the Netherlands...................................................................................................................................332
233) Secretary General for International Development Cooperation at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, Spain.....................................................................................................................................334
234) Alison Linnecar, IBFAN, Switzerland..............................................................................................................336
235) Peter Greaves, United Kingdom........................................................................................................................337
236) Kaija Korpi-Salmela, FAO, Italy.........................................................................................................................337
237) Concern Worldwide, Ethiopia...........................................................................................................................339
238) Jodine Chase, Breastfeeding Action Committee of Edmonton, Canada...........................................340
239) Richie Alford, Send a Cow, United Kingdom................................................................................................340
240) Slow Food, Italy........................................................................................................................................................341
241) Nathalie van Haren, Both ENDS, Netherlands............................................................................................342
242) Carol Bartle, Te Puawaitanga Ki Otautahi Trust , New Zealand.........................................................343
243) Directorate General for Development Cooperation / Istituto Agronomico per l'Oltremare Italy........................................................................................................................................................................................... 354
244) WWF International, Switzerland......................................................................................................................358
245) Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Switzerland 362
246) Phyll Buchanan, Breastfeeding Network, United Kingdom..................................................................366
247) Ronald Vargas, FAO-Global Soil Partnership, Italy...................................................................................366
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
12
248) HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation, Switzerland.....................................................................................366
249) Kathleen Kurz, DAI, United States of America............................................................................................368
250) Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, United States of America...............................................................................369
251) Lou Pingeot, NGO Working Group on Food and Hunger at the United Nations, United States of America................................................................................................................................................................................... 369
252) Jennifer Peddlesden, Canada..............................................................................................................................370
253) Nikki Lee, Self-employed, United States of America................................................................................371
254) Thomas Forster, New School for Public Engagement, United States of America........................371
255) Ann Yarwood, United Kingdom........................................................................................................................372
256) Paula Hinson, La Leche League, United Kingdom.....................................................................................373
257) Lai Yin Stenqvist, Sweden....................................................................................................................................373
258) Sara Wuehler, Micronutrient Forum secretariat, unofficial comments, Canada.........................373
259) Maria Alexandra Cadena Fernandez Cor Pro Adulto Mayor NGO, Colombia................................374
260) Marcos Arana Cedeño, Observatorio Ciudadano por el Ejercicio del Derecho a la Salud – IBFAN, Mexico......................................................................................................................................................................379
261) Juan Carlos Garcia y Cebolla, FAO, Italy.........................................................................................................382
262) Eminence and Bangladesh Civil Society Network for Promoting Nutrition (BCSNPN), Bangladesh............................................................................................................................................................................ 384
263) Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security, Canada................................................................................................................................................................. 386
264) Martin Wolpold-Bosien, FIAN International, Germany..........................................................................387
265) Cyprus Island-wide NGO Development Platform (CYINDEP).............................................................390
266) Marielle Dubbeling RUAF Foundation, Netherlands...............................................................................394
267) Anna Herforth Independent Consultant, United States of America [first contribution].........394
268) France...........................................................................................................................................................................396
269) PAHO/WHO, Brazil.................................................................................................................................................405
270) National Movement Women and Mothers against Violence, Bulgaria............................................406
271) Barbara Burlingame, FAO, Italy........................................................................................................................407
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
13
272) Anna Herforth Independent Consultant, United States of America [second contribution]. . .407
273) Alfredo Arturo Corredor Becerra, Colombia...............................................................................................408
274) Tracy Gerstle, CropLife International, Belgium.........................................................................................409
275) Jean Laurent Bungener, France.........................................................................................................................413
276) Aruna Sharma, IAS, India [second contribution].......................................................................................413
278) People’s Health Movement, Viet Nam............................................................................................................415
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
14
Introduction
As the target date for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) approaches, a number of processes have been put in place to seek inputs from country, regional and global levels, into the “Post-2015 Development Agenda and Framework”. For more background information click here .
This is your opportunity to help identify the actions, goals, targets and indicators needed to achieve food and nutrition security, and the eradication of hunger, in a post-2015 world. Many food security and nutrition policies, strategies and action plans have been written over the past number of years. Challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in a sustainable way have been identified, and many countries are making good progress. Nevertheless, close to 870 million people around the world remain undernourished and do not have access to a healthy diet. It is time for everyone to take urgent action – in a concerted manner – and to elaborate a new development agenda around lasting concerns of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.
The outcome of this e-consultation, together with the proposed CFS consultation, will feed into the high level experts consultation to be hosted by the Government of Spain in March 2013.
Ultimately, your contributions will feed into the UN General Assembly discussions beginning This is YOUR OPPORTUNITY to contribute to this global debate.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
15
E-Consultation
Over the next four weeks, FAO and WFP will facilitate this e-consultation in drawing on the widest possible group of stakeholders and interested parties on how best to address hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition at all levels, and to seek your inputs on the elaboration of a new agenda for action beyond the current MDG framework. The consultation will be facilitated by FAO and WFP.
We also invite you to submit papers, findings, or on-going work on the topic of hunger, food and nutrition security.
We seek your inputs on the following three themes:
Theme 1: (i) What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition? (ii) What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Theme 2: What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
Theme 3:For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
16
Contributions Received
1) Lizzy Nneka Igbine, NIWAAFA (Nigerian Women Agro Allied Farmers Association), Nigeria
This is a good opportunity and a welcomed development, we will do justice to it.
I am sending my congratulations for discussing food security and hunger free targets as key issues in millennium development goals. We will also extray the level of poverty and pro poor developments in developing nations, and the negative growth indices.
Thank you and expect my sincere contributions.
LIZZY N IGBINENATIONAL PRESIDENTNIWAAFANIGERIAN WOMEN AGRO ALLIED FARMERS ASSOCIATION.
2) Thomas Mokake, Cameroon [first contribution]
Dear Moderator
The objectives under theme 3 should be time-bound or else according to basics, they are not SMART (cf letter highlighted in italics). How then shall we make meaningful evaluation of them?Thereafter being time-bound they may require fine-tuning.Will write more later.best,Thomas MokakeBuea, Cameroon.
3) Arul Murugan Palannichamy, India
I wish the process of creating awareness about food security and food wastage management should start at primary education level.School children should understand what future is going to be for them with out food or agriculture.policies at government level should start focusing about advocating children on food security.Like science or history, food chain management should start at primary education level in a bigger way.this can include climate change, food security, agriculture, sustainable development, malnutrition and so on.. all new world challenges can be put into a subject and educated.Only children can make a new world.so educate the children about what past had,presents holds and future offers.
4) Thomas Mokake, Cameroon [second contribution]
Dear Moderator
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
17
On Theme 1b: The main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years? Here is my initial take:There is need to limit this geograpgically. As an african, I would like to see this limited to Sub-Saharan Africa, because different broad geographical regions have specific challenges and opportunities, some of them being compromised by the leadership and the greedy elites and at times by the local population. If a people do not want development, what can be done by the international community? The MDGs shall remain a" revolving door", whose achievements shall remain highly marginal with certain cases having imperceptible incremental progress. Of course some countries have made genuine progress. A key element in ensuring food and nutritional security at national levels within SSA and later at regional level for SSA countries should take seriously the AU Maputo declaration that requires SSA countries to devote 10% of country GDP as Agriculture's budget. We all know what budgetting means on paper in some of these countries. Does this 10% quote mean "Effective Budget consumed" accounted for and outputs verifiable with objective indicators to be srcutinised by AU? What happens when the required budget level is not met? What can the AU do about such failures? This brings me to the point that, whether at the level of the UN or AU or whatever regional or sub-regional grouping, policy dialogue to meet the challenges of Food insecurity and Malnutrition, in SSA countries remains a "revolving door". The soveriegnty of nations makes it difficult to ensure that this policy dialogue pays, paving the way for a better life for posterity --- the case of SSA. Every now and then there is an alarm of food insecurity and malnutrition, in most instances the situation is blamed on "Climate Change" , lack of "Contingency Plans" and Emergency Preparedness. For humanitarian reasons it may be very difficult to accompany these lofty MDGs of the UN, or Goals of the AU-NEPAD with legally binding instruments to ensure their achievements. What can be done to a Government or Regime whose interest is to stay in power and specialise in "Crisis Management" : when food insecurity and malnutrition arise in the country, that will be recipe for attracting international aid and blindfold the electorate with handouts in order to eternalise the regime. In all of the above, the Elite, Government and the Population must work together and sincerely with oversight provided by the UN or AU. The people would like to know the performance made in meeting the Challenges and Opoortunities, and real rewards given, accordingly. Best regards,Thomas Mokake,Buea, Cameroon.
5) Muhammad Khalid Jam, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations , Pakistan
Dear Moderator, All three thematic areas are comprehensive but there are some general consideration which need to be addressed before compiling such a huge (expected) feedback from around the world.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
18
i- All themes need to be specific with reference to geographical or economical or political system distribution. as the hunger, food and nutrition are generally linked with the economical and political condition/system. ii- Goals (theme-3) would be more effective if the achievables are linked with time. iii- FAO and WFP from the UN system organizations are the key player regarding the hunger, food and nutrition agenda. I would also request to include many other well-known actors in the world working on the same lines with huge experience and innovations. Thanks and best regardsJam Khalid EDO-ERCU, FAO-UN Pakistan
6) Sachin Kumar Jain, India [first contribution]
Please find here my contribution for discussion. I would like to understand why the challenges of childhood hunger and malnutrition are given less space while policies, especially in the context of growth, are being prioritized.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Malnutrition%20Politics-1Edited.doc Sachin Kumar JainIndia
7) Mark Smulders, FAO, Italy
Dear FSN Forum participants, In regard to the first theme of this consultation, there is an interesting document produced by the UN Task Team on the post 2015 development agenda with lessons learned from the overall MDG process. It summarises strengths and weaknesses - and provides useful lessons on how we can go about developing a better development agenda beyond 2015. It highlights the importance of a bottom-up approach, country-level consultations and the need to consider goals, targets and indicators that reflect continental, even country-level differences. It also recognises the importance of local conditions and the need to take into account the complexity of the development process. These are all good points. The question is: how can these lessons help us do better in formulating the next longer term (25-year?) development agenda? The report does not say much about hunger, food security and nutrition issues. Hence, it would be good to hear from those of you working at country and regional levels on what are some of the specific lessons on this topic. For example, to what extent has the hunger target under MDG1 been a useful instrument for achieving food and nutrition security objectives in your country or region? Are there other, more effective ways, of ensuring food security and nutrition concerns are brought to the top of the policy agenda? And, beyond policies and programmes, what will it take to make a real difference at household - or even individual - level? The full MDG lessons learned report can be found here:http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/untaskteam_undf/mdg_assessment.pdf
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
19
Looking forward to a great discussion!Mark Smulders, FAO/Rome
8) Freddy Leonardo Arias Guerrero, Asociación de Ingenieros Agrícolas de Colombia – ASIAC, Colombia
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Muy buenos días. Desde la óptica que represento, que es un gremio técnico profesional, va la reflexión en el tema del recurso humano como factor clave del desarrollo, enmarcado dentro de la formación profesional. Siempre hemos creído que la lucha contra el hambre, la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional, son factores que afectan a la especie humana, o sea, son los hombres (como genero) a los que debemos alimentar bien. Sumado a lo anterior, son los hombres, los que deben realizar acciones que garanticen el alimentar bien a los hombres. El lograr garantizar que la especie humana no desaparezca, donde debe incluir el tema de la sostenibilidad del planeta, el garantizar que el hombre y las especies que la habitan lo puedan hacer por muchos años. Me quiero centrar en la parte de que el hombre es el que debe desarrollar acciones para producir alimentos y materias primas de manera sostenible, acotando al tema de profesiones agrícolas, agropecuarias, alimentarias y forestales (Ingeniería Agrícola, Agronomía, Zootecnia, Ingeniería Forestal, etc). En un País como Colombia, la oferta de los programas agrícolas es importante, casi todos los departamentos en sus Universidades regionales, ofrecen programas de esta índole, teniendo en cuenta que el imaginario en el País, es que el sector agrícola es el que tiene más potencial para el desarrollo del mismo. Y creo como representante de esta organización que “SI” lo tenemos, por que contamos con factores que favorecen esto, sin embargo nos falta desarrollar lo más importante para tener un sector agrícola fuerte “EL RECURSO HUMANO”. El párrafo anterior no se entiende, tenemos buena oferta en programas universitarios para el sector agrícola, pero no tenemos recurso humano para desarrollar lo, una paradoja interesante. Dentro de esto quiero contextualizar un poco, nosotros llevamos dos años realizando una encuesta de desempeño de la Ingeniería Agrícola y venimos comparando con otros profesionales del sector y los resultados son muy parecidos. Del ciento por ciento de los profesionales aproximadamente el 50%, no se desempeña en labores en las que fueron formados y mucho menos en el sector agrícola. De la oferta de programas universitarios, más del 90% son de universidades públicas, o sea, hay un esfuerzo del estado por formar profesionales, pero en el desempeño se pierde este importante recurso humano para el sector agrícola, donde los factores son muchos y vale la pena discutirlos, pero quiero centrarme sobre todo en el tema de la formación. Nosotros como especie humana, en los países en via de desarrollo como Colombia, debemos analizar el sector agrícola, y con nuestras universidades ver que tipo de modelo de profesionales necesita el sector para afrontar los retos actuales (tratados de libre comercio, cambio climático, exigencias de una
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
20
población cada vez mas urbana, etc), donde le brindemos a la sociedad esa persona que puede mejorar los sistemas productivos, teniendo en cuenta la sostenibilidad del planeta. Creo que este es un reto, que con la ayuda de todos, y el esfuerzo de diversas instituciones lo podemos sortear, y al tener un RECURSO HUMANO, competente, con ideas, con entusiasmo pero sobre todo con compromiso, podemos cumplir las metas, disminuyendo el hambre, garantizando la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional, conservando el planeta. Un cordial saludo, Freddy Leonardo Arias Guerrero, InAg.Presidente
[English translation]
Good morning,
From the perspective of the professional technical guild I do represent, I would like to share my thoughts about the importance of human resources for development, within the framework of professional training.
We have always believed that the fight against hunger and the food and nutritional security affect the human beings. Therefore, mankind must be properly fed, but also undertake the necessary actions to guarantee this status. We need to ensure that human beings do not disappear, inhabiting a sustainable planet for many years.
I want to focus in the work to be developed to sustainably produce food and raw material, delimiting the issue of agricultural, farming, food and forestry professions (Agricultural Engineering, Agronomy, Animal Sciences, Forest Engineering, etc).
In a country like Colombia, there is an important range of available agricultural programs. Taking into account that the country believes that the agricultural sector has the highest potential for its development, almost every department in the regional universities offers these programs. As a representative of this organization, I believe we “DO” have this potential given the favourable factors. However, we need to develop the key element for having a strong agricultural sector: the “HUMAN RESOURCES”. The above paragraph is contradictory. Although there is a good range of university programs for the agricultural sector, we lack the necessary human resources for its development. An interesting paradox. Putting the situation into context, we have been conducting a survey of agricultural engineering performance and comparing it with other professionals during the last two years. Results are very similar. Approximately 50% of the professionals do not work in activities for which they have been trained, nor even in the agricultural sector.
Over 90% of the university programs are offered by public universities. In other words, the government is strongly committed to professional training. However, this important human resource for the agricultural sector is lost during this effort. Several factors are involved and it is worth discussing them, but I would specially like to focus on training.
As human beings, in developing countries like Colombia we must analyse the agricultural sector and, with the cooperation of our universities, determine what professional profile does it need to address
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
21
the current challenges (free trade agreements, climate change, demands of an increasingly urban population, etc), offering the society the appropriate individuals for the improvement of the production systems, taking into account the global sustainability.
I believe we can address this challenge with everyone’s help and the effort of several institutions. Having competent, imaginative, enthusiastic and, above all, committed human resources we can meet the targets, reducing hunger, ensuring food and nutritional security and preserving the planet.Best regards,
9) Vishwambhar Prasad Sati, Department of Geography and Resource Management Mizoram University, India
This note looks into the traditional knowledge based agriculture and its relevance to enhance food and nutrition security in the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR). Traditional subsistence agriculture has been practiced in the IHR for the centuries, which carried enough food security and nutrition. There were many ethno-botanical plants – cultivated and wild, used as medicinal plants. Local health care system was dependent on this practice. This system was eco-friendly, obtaining high agro-biodiversity. In due course of time, as population increased tremendously and the impact of global changes fell on the traditional knowledge based cultivation of subsistence agriculture, the farmers of the region were more inclined towards cultivation of cash generating crops and largely for the cultivation of paddy and wheat. The entire shift in the cropping pattern and the reducing number of the farmers, which were engaged in the practice of traditional knowledge based agriculture, mostly on the valley regions and mid altitudes, the traditionally cultivated subsistence crops were no more in use in these areas. Along with cultivation of paddy and wheat, chemical fertilizers were used largely to increase the production of crops. Until several years, it worked satisfactorily and supplied reasonable amount of food to the inhabitants but, this practice could not remain continue because, soil fertility started declined with increase in uses of chemical fertilizers. Meanwhile, the farmers also started cultivating various types of cash generating crops and fruits in different mountain niches. This practice too, did not earn any progress due to lack of market and transportation facilities. Here, it is inevitable to discuss on the availability of cultivable land, upon which the further discussion will rely. The cultivable land in this region is below 12% of the total geographical area. Further, whatever the cultivable land is available; the landscape is steep and fragile and henceforth, soil erosion is high. The scope of extension of farmland on the mountain niche is too little. To feed the vast number of population, the present cultivable land and agricultural practices are not sufficient. Water resources are abundant but at the same time water availability for all purposes is less thus, water scarcity prevails everywhere. Under such circumstances, what would be the possible measures to enhance food and nutritional security in this region are discussed below:
1. Agricultural practices are the main stay of the population and any practices other then agriculture and animal husbandry is just impossible because the slope and landscape do not permit to commence them.
2. Traditional knowledge based agriculture of subsistence crops should be retained for the two reasons: The first reason is its nutrition and medicinal values. Here, traditional subsistence crops can be grown in all climatic conditions and zones without requiring enough irrigation facility. Second, it is ecologically fit and obtains high agro-biodiversity.
3. About 75% of the geographical land is covered by vegetation where numbers of medicinal plants grow and many other non-timber forest products are found. These forest based products can be utilized largely for food security.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
22
4. Along with subsistence agriculture, substantial cultivation of cash generating crops should be assured as the agro-climatic conditions in this region is considerably very suitable for cultivating them. This practice will also restore ecology and landscape and will prevent excessive soil erosion.
5. All above that the policy interventions for harnessing these niche based products more smoothly, are off course is the need of hours. Market facilities for selling medicinal plants and non timber forest products should be assured so that the farmers may enjoy the fruits of their hard work. There are instances when several times, farmers stopped cultivating medicinal plants only owing to non availability of market.
6. Irrigation is essential for rice and wheat crops, thus, water resource management, either through traditional wisdom or new technology, may enhance food productivity and thus food security.
With summing up, crop diversity is essential for food security in this region. This may be attended while opting the traditional wisdom as well as the current practices of agriculture.
Prof. Vishwambhar Prasad Sati
10) Sachin Kumar Jain, India [second contribution]
Dear Friends,
Government of India is in a process of enacting the National Food Security Act, as part of the efforts to eliminate hunger and food insecurity in India. But the main concern is that Government is strongly following a targeted approach; which means: a particular group of people will not be entitled for food security as per law; but a particular group called Primary Households (who are identified as poor) will be given subsidized food grain; where as another group called General Households will get smaller quantity of food grains at relatively higher prices. And rest will be left out.Please see the note: http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/CLRA%20Children%27s%20Rights%20to%20Food%20nov%20dec%2012%20(2).pdf
Sachin Kumar Jain
India
11) Carlos Villán Durán, Asociación Española para el Derecho Humano, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Estimados:
Soy un academico y un activista en DIDH comprometido, entre otras cosas, con la consecucion del derecho a la alimentacion para todos. A la vista del fracaso de las politicas experimentadas en los ultimos años para reducir a la mitad la cifra de hambrientos en el mundo conforme a los ODM, a mi juicio se impone cambiar drasticamente de estrategia.
Como jurista les reitero mi convicción de que solamente progresaremos si conseguimos establecer obligaciones más claras para los Estados y las Organizaciones internacionales en la lucha contra el hambre. Las directrices voluntarias no bastan. Pero se pueden aprovechar para la redacción de un
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
23
(segundo) protocolo facultativo al Pacto Internacional de Derechos Economicos, Sociales y Culturales, enteramente dedicado a la regulación internacional del derecho a la alimentación. En tal protocolo se podrán precisar las obligaciones de los Estados, entre otras, la adopción de politicas publicas efectivas para la erradicacion del hambre tanto en sus respectivos paises como en el mundo, a través de la cooperación internacional para el desarrollo.
Adjunto para su informacion un trabajo de mi autoria sobre esta materia.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Obligac%20E%20Cordoba%2007.doc
Cordiales saludos
Carlos Villán DuránPresidenteASOCIACIÓN ESPAÑOLA PARA EL DERECHO INTERNACIONALDE LOS DERECHOS HUMANOS (AEDIDH)
[English translation]
Dear all:
I'm an academic and an activist in International Human Rights Law (IHRL) committed, among other things, with the realization of the right to food for all. In view of the failure of policies to halve the number of hungry in the world –as established in the MDGs- experienced in recent years, in my view a drastic change of strategy is necessary.
As a lawyer, I reiterate my conviction that we shall make progress only if we can establish clearer obligations for States and international organizations in the fight against hunger. The voluntary guidelines are not enough. But they can be of use for the drafting of a (second) optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, entirely dedicated to the international regulation of the right to food. In this protocol, the obligations of States may be specified, among others, the adoption of effective public policies to eradicate hunger both in their countries and the world, through international cooperation for development.
Find enclosed for your information a paper I wrote on this subject.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Obligac%20E%20Cordoba%2007.doc
Best regards
Carlos Villán DuránPresidenteASOCIACIÓN ESPAÑOLA PARA EL DERECHO INTERNACIONALDE LOS DERECHOS HUMANOS (AEDIDH)
12) Mohammed Saleh Ali, ZAWI & PANITA, United Republic of Tanzania
The key lessons learnt is that not all planned systems can be implemented as planned due to either time lapse or need to change modalities. In our case, disability issues as well tend to hamper inclusive
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
24
desires and often exclusive nurtured ways have to be combated or changed in order to have acceptable inclusive rights and opportunities targeted to beneficiaries; often what is desired and what is implemented do not have the same tune, the same time, and more or less those who fight to implement are not those who benefit. Changes take time and actors of change hardly are the real beneficiaries on the same being placed up for change. MDG are a challenge that is taken up by governments only when they are well versed with the strategy and when actually it is tax payer money being used to build up on the goals with that of the development partners. This is when we realized that MDGs in themselves are a cross cutting issues depending each other for successful turnout. Making Hunger, Nutrition, Poverty, Illiteracy, Malnourishment, Meaningful agriculture rely on Education, Health, Agriculture, Social welfare to reach such goals. However, society and communities do not understand well these unless conformed in their specialized spheres of influence and often governmental channels are not looked with a kind face by the beneficiaries on the ground. These very cross cutting issues are for advanced minds and therefore total participation by all is limited to the many being led by a few giving gaps of corruptive elements taking their show on the same stage that otherwise would not have occurred if the beneficiary were literate enough to know their rights and opportunities within established laws and regulations. A change of supervision in the programs causes changes that sometimes deter progressive elements and discourage continuance thus making initial investment measures redundant where manpower has to relocate in other spheres or work in other countries. Measurably is hard to pin investment returns as were viable enough nor sustainable as many programs have timelines that are not suitable for sustainability measures to be appreciated fully by all stakeholders. Government systems stag much on developing Management Information Systems MIS that often strategize earlier or later changes especially when financially squeezed or under financed. It is very hearty to note that nutrition efforts responses organizationally if civil society is given chance to be actors of change. These past two years under the SUN movements guidance in Tanzania A partnership of Civil Organisations has been created to combat malnutrition that is called PANITA Partnership for Nutrition in Tanzania; many people now understand the basic core and what needs to be done easily via those they trust most on the ground, Civil Society and its organizations.
13) Daniele Marcomin, Italy
We have to create market opportunities and then it will work itself out.
14) Julio Antonio Balbuena Batista, CONALECHE, Dominican Republic
[Original contribution in Spanish]
¿Qué funciona mejor?
En nuestro país, la Republica Dominicana fue creado en los años 80 el Instituto Nacional de Estabilización de Precios (INESPRE), con el objetivo de ofrecer a la población productos alimentarios a bajo precio por el hecho que se eliminaba la intermediación y de ese hecho, la población podía tener acceso a alimentos más baratos.Esa iniciativa que promovía los mercados de productores directamente al consumidor tenía el merito de reducir las perdidas post-cosecha y de evitar la especulación, contribuyó a una reducción significativa del hambre no solo en las ciudades donde la población pudo obtener alimentos a mas bajo costo, si no en los campos donde el pequeño productor obtuvo un incremento de recursos por la venta de sus productos.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
25
Esta experiencia cayó en desgracia fruto de los ataques de la todopoderosa corriente liberal que con el pretexto de que los productos alimenticios también debían obedecer al libre juego de la oferta y la demanda, condenando al hambre una parte importante de la población.
Me parece evidente que en países pobres, el comercio de los alimentos lejos de ser únicamente el resultado de la fría ley de la oferta y la demanda, debe ser considerado como prioritario por los gobiernos afín de brindar una protección a la población mas vulnerable.En nuestros países, el desafío del hambre debe ser abordado por los gobiernos creando iniciativas para acercar productores y consumidores, aún a costo de contradecir los potentes sectores comerciales.
Como abordar la mal nutrición?La mal nutrición tiene una importante dimensión cultural y educativa. Es sorprendente que los programas escolares en nuestros países carecen de Nutrición como materia fundamental y de instrucciones y programas sobre una nutrición adecuada. Proponemos que la nutrición forme parte de los programas escolares al mismo nivel que las otras materias y desde la más temprana edad.Además de la existencia de una ley sobre la seguridad alimentaria, necesitamos que el derecho a una alimentación suficiente y de calidad sea consagrado en la constitución como un derecho fundamental. Julio BALBUENA, Ph.D.
[English translation]
What works best?
In our country, the Dominican Republic, the National Institute for Price Stabilization (INESPRE, in its Spanish acronym), was established in the 1980s with the aim of offering cheap food to the population thanks to the savings derived from the lack of brokers.
This initiative promoted farmers markets offering products directly to consumers and had the advantage of reducing post-harvest losses and avoiding speculation. It also contributed to a significant reduction of hunger, not only in cities where cheap food was made available for the population, but also in the field, where smallholders increased their income by selling their products.
This experience failed due to the attacks of the powerful liberal mainstream that, claiming that food products should also be subject to the laws of supply and demand, brought hunger to a significant proportion of the population.
It seems clear to me that, in poor countries, food trade, far from being just the result of the insensitive laws of supply and demand, should be considered a priority for the governments in order to protect the most vulnerable population.
In our countries, the challenge of hunger must be addressed by the governments with initiatives to bring producers and consumers closer, even at the cost of contradicting the powerful commercial lobbies..
How to address malnutrition?
Malnutrition has an important cultural and educational dimension. Surprisingly, school curricula in our countries do not include Nutrition as one of their main subjects and lack instructions and programs on adequate nutrition.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
26
We suggest that nutrition is part of the school curricula at the same level as other subjects and from earliest childhood.
Apart from a law on food security, the right to adequate food in terms of quantity and quality should be included in the constitution as a fundamental right.
Julio BALBUENA, Ph.D.
15) Dejo Olowu, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa
The lessons learnt are that for potential solutions to the food crisis to be realised, flagrant violations of all human rights, including the rights to food must be recognised and prevented, and that participation of all stakeholders – including vulnerable women, youth, indigenous people and other marginalised population groups – in the formulation, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of all development planning and programmes results in fairer access to means of production and better dividends for the poor from national economic growth.
Among the key lessons learnt from all available indices is that in a world that is richer than ever before and that already produces more than enough food to feed the global population, we need political solutions, rather than complicated technical solutions to get rid of hunger. The global food crisis has reinforced two issues about the future of agriculture: the first is that a growing world population, higher incomes and changes in diet are pushing up global demand for food faster than farmers can supply it, and the second is that throwing up new barriers to farm trade on this congested planet is not the path to solution. Getting rid of hunger should therefore not only be a question of finding resources and developing new technologies. It is also a question of challenging structural inequities, imbalances in gender relations and other socio-economic inequalities. The overarching premise of my argument is that an integrative rights-based approach is sine qua non to effectively curtail hunger.
16) Todd Post and Scott Bleggi, Bread for the World Institute, USA
Bread for the World Institute’s 2013 Hunger Report, Within Reach – Global Development Goals, was recently released. The report argues that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are within reach by 2015. With three years left before the goals are set to expire, now is the time to double down and focus on getting the job done.
In the report we highlight the good news—and there is plenty of it. In 2012, for example, we learned that the MDG poverty target has already been met. We’re not on track to meet the hunger target, but we are closer than we thought we’d be just a couple of years ago. To reach the hunger target, the share of the world’s population that is hungry would have to fall to 11.6 percent. At the current rate, we would expect 12.5 percent to be hungry in 2015.
The keys to achieving the 2015 targets depend on investments in smallholder agriculture and social protection. Most of the people in the world who are hungry are smallholder farmers. They may grow enough to feed themselves and their family but earn no more than $1.25 per day and in some cases much less. Poverty prevents them from diversifying their diets, investing in their children’s education, taking advantage of health care and other services. By providing smallholders with farm inputs such as seeds and fertilizer, preventing post-harvest losses by building basic storage facilities, or roads that
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
27
allow them to gain access to a larger market, they can earn the additional income they need to improve their living conditions.
Social protection is another key piece of puzzle that we focus on in the Hunger Report. Social protection is a broad term but it basically means systems of support that allow vulnerable people to manage risks. Poor people are highly vulnerable to risk. No one is more exposed to the risks associated with climate change than a smallholder farmer. When poor families are better able to manage the risks in their life, we find they are more inclined to invest in their children’s development: sending them to school, for example, rather than to the fields.
There is a gender dimension to achieving the MDGs that we also discuss in the report. Women do the majority of farming in poor countries. By supporting smallholder farmers we are supporting women—and their children. We know that when assistance is provided directly to women more of it goes towards improvements that benefit the whole family.
Beyond 2015, the post-MDG agenda should include new development goals. Goal 1, once again, should be focused on hunger and poverty. The Hunger Report calls for the eradication of hunger and extreme poverty within a generation. As recently as a decade ago this may have sounded like a pipe dream. But not any longer. In light of the progress so many countries have made in recent decades, we’d be underestimating our own capacity by shooting for less. We don’t have to spend trillions of dollars or wait for scientific breakthroughs that have eluded us. The tools are already available, but we have to be willing to deploy them. Mostly it depends on a concerted and sustained push by government leaders and civil society organizations working together.
The U.S. government has a role to play in this and we highlight that in the report. U.S. government leadership won’t be the decisive factor in whether we meet the hunger goal by 2015 or eradicate hunger in a generation, but as the most generous donor of development assistance it can set an example for other donors and alert partners in developing countries that we intend to be reliable partners in the realization of these goals.
Todd Post and Scott Bleggi, Bread for the World Institute
17) Guadalupe Valdez, Cámara Diputados/Frente Parlamentario Contra el Hambre, Dominican Republic
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Los temas planteados en la consulta son relevantes para la lucha contra el hambre en el mundo.
Un aspecto sobre el que me gustaría se tratará en la Consulta es la formulación que se hicieron de los ODM, la forma como fueron trabajados en relación o vinculación con los otros ODM, y los resultados que hemos obtenido en el mundo, sobre todo en el ODM 1 Erradicar la pobreza extrema y el hambre así como el ODM 4 Reducir la mortalidad de los niños.
En cuanto al tema 2, sería interesante abordar la experiencia desde los parlamentos en cuanto a marcos legales vinculados a la erradicación del hambre. Y de manera particular en lo institucional y en cuanto a la asignación de recursos para políticas públicas contra el hambre, la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en los Presupuestos generales del Estado.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
28
[English translation]
The issues raised in the consultation are relevant for the fight against world hunger.
One aspect that I would like the consultation to address is the MDGs formulation, their interrelationships, and the results obtained worldwide, especially for the MDG 1 (Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger) and MDG 4 (Reduce child mortality).
Regarding topic 2, it would be interesting to address the legal frameworks linked to hunger eradication from the parliamentary experience. Especially from an institutional approach and with respect to resources allocation in the General State Budget for public policies against hunger and supporting food and nutritional security.
18) Aruna Sharma, Government Official and practitioner Development Economist, India [first contribution]
Theme 1: The MDG framework did remain a rhetoric to considerable extent. The number of children suffering from hunger and malnutrition have not shown decline in the desired ratio. The reason being:
Hunger is not issue of only food availability and health care but it is an issue that needs to be handled in Convergent manner inclusive of livelihood, habit formations, health care, right kind of food availability and focused approach. Thus, the main challenge is to have effective format to bring out this Convergence of Resources and implementation outcome oriented plan.
Theme 2: As it is important to have only rights based approach, it is equally important to make a working holistic model. Many of the courtiers having still high percentage of mal-nutrition or food related issues do not suffer from lack of food, having legislation or programs and schemes---the real issue is lack of resource convergent implementation plan focused and targeted, each is working in their silo. The strategy is therefore to have convergent plan to enhance livelihood of targeted families, IEC for awareness and habit change for healthy life, health care and gaining access for food requirements. Such experiments have shown successful sustainable results.
Zero-hunger challenge initiative launched is the right way of approaching as it inbuilts zero tolerance to get sustainable outcomes of interventions. However, even sounding repetitive I will insist on switchover to convergence approach for balance three years of MDG. In CFS the convergent model can be demonstrated.
Theme 3: To ensure achieving the listed set of objectives put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round : It needs paradigm shift from 'having access' to 'gaining access'. To explain, the countries with high presentation of reported hunger and malnutrition do have enough food grain stocks, programs, schemes and legislation but it only ensures 'having the access' The challenge is how to we ensure that the target group do 'Gain access' so as to take advantage of the efforts of concerned Government, UN agencies and NGOs.
b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old: It is not just a case of Medical Intervention but also need support system for ensuring enhancement in livelihood opportunities and access to systematic health interventions.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
29
c. All food systems are sustainable: Food systems are sustainable challenge is to ensure gaining access as explained at point a.
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income : This is vital, to prescribe individual model to each beneficiary instead of sweeping schemes. IT is important that extension staff works as MDG doctor to give correct prescription for sustainable income.
e. Zero loss or waste of food: It is important to have zero tolerance on food loss and each country be made mandatory to have systems laid for warehousing and transportation to ensure the same.
I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER MY SERVICES TO DEVELOP THIS MODEL AS I FEEL PAINED THAT 2015 SHOULD NOT BECOME A RHETORIC AND CORRECT SYSTEMS ARE PUT IN PLACE IN THE COMING THREE YEARS
Dr Aruna SharmaDevelopment EconomistSenior Government employee with 30years of success experienceFrom India
19) Prashant Anchal, Aide et Action International, India
Dear Moderators,
Thanks for providing such platform. Here are few of my thoughts to address the issue. The basic issues like health and malnutrition in Madhya Pradesh are summarized asFollows: The state has highest rate of infant mortality and malnutrition among children. Nearly 55 percent of all children below 3 years are under weight, 51 percent are stunted, 20 percent are wasted and 75 percent are anaemic. Various reports of UNICEF state that out of every thousand live births 100 children die in the developing countries. Preventable diseases cause the deaths. Moreover, in M.P. a child dies every 5 minutes. Proportion of children receiving immunization against all preventable diseases in the age group 12-24 months is only 22.4 percent. Only 25 percent of children 6-35 months having received at least one dose of Vitamin 'A'. Maternal mortality rate in the State, which is second highest in the country i.e. 379 per Lakh live births. IMR is also highest at 72 per thousand live births.One has to understand the fact that the high level of Maternal Mortality also contributes to the high level of Infant Mortality. Medium term health sector strategy for Madhya Pradesh-2006 has recognized the MMR at the rate of 400 per lakh but no projections has been made to reduce it by three quarters till 2015 in order to achieve the MDGs.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
30
Some thoughts to address the issue of hunger/malnutrition 1. Community based integrated weighing mechanism for children2.Effective educational materials to be given to mothers on Child's Health3. Support the families to start home gardening to grow fruits and vegetables which helpful for the child's growth4. Provide a Computer to the Centre to keep the records of all the children in the village. For this we should train a health volunteer to maintain this data base5. We can also train Volunteers on Health and Hygiene of the Child and the mother6. Each of these volunteers can be assigned number of families and they should have mobiles. If there is any issue for a child in their areas - sickness or any other issue, they should update the centre with a SMS, and the central data base will be updated. I am working on a concept note for effective implementation of activities to address the issues of hunger/malnutrition, would be sharing on this platform soon. Thanks and Regards PrashantAide et Action International
20) Jose Luis Vivero Pol, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium
Dear FSN participants, A.- I would like to propose a binding FOOD TREATY as a legal instrument to help reducing hunger to zero by the rule of law, increasing accountability, transparency and participation of those countries and their constituencies that are willing to do it. It would be a hard-law agreement amongst those who are really committed to end hunger (countries having food insecure people and countries willing to eradicate hunger from Earth). You can find below a list of links to the proposal and herewith attached a summary brief of main features and the rationale (to be read in 3 min). B.- This is a concrete idea, that goes very much in line with the Zero Hunger Challenge launched by Ban Ki Moon, and that is anchored in the right to food. A summary can be found in the following link HUNGERPOLITICS (Blog in english) http://hungerpolitics.wordpress.com/2012/05/28/a-food-treaty-to-secure-food-for-all-in-the-future/ C.- During 2009, the idea of a Food Treaty to fight hunger by the rule of law was developed and distributed to a wide group of practitioners in the food security and nutrition domains so as to get their reactions and the feasibility of the proposal. The proposal was even presented to the Committee on World Food Security and to high-profile developmental officers. But political timing seemed not to be adequate at that time. Now with the post-2012 debates heating up, it may be considered as a worthy idea. The strategic goal is to make it widely known and mature enough to become a serious possibility for the post-MDG talks. It might be the time of hard law agreements, as the soft ones have proven a failure to address global problems. I would appreciate to have the proposal broadly discussed in the FSN forum, so as to get reactions from different constituencies and groups of interest (i.e feasibility, appropriateness, suggestions to proceed, etc).
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
31
1.- The Food Treaty idea was initially disclosed in 2009, and endorsed by several NGOs such as OXFAM and More and Metter http://www.moreandbetter.org/en/news/common-actions-for-commitments-to-eradicate-hunger-and-malnutrition 2.- It was then presented in a more elaborated way in 2010, as it can be in the link below: http://km.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/fsn/docs/The%20Governance%20of%20Hunger%20_AM%20%20JLV_%20FINAL%20_3_.pdf 3.-This proposal was then formally published in a book on the right to food. MacMillan, A. & J.L. Vivero (2011). “The governance of hunger. Innovative proposals to make the right to be free from hunger a reality”. In: Martín-López, M.A. & J.L. Vivero, eds. New challenges to the Right to Food. CEHAP, Cordoba and Editorial Huygens, Barcelona. http://issuu.com/joseluisvivero/docs/the_governance_of_hunger__am__jlv__book_huygens_20 4.- And, very recently, there has been a working document in a Spanish Think Tank were I have updated the previous version. Vivero, J.L. (2012). A binding Food Treaty: a post-MDG proposal worth exploring. OPEX memorandum n°173/2012. Fundación Alternativas, Madrid. http://www.falternativas.org/opex/documentos/memorandos/a-binding-food-treaty-a-post-mdg-proposal-worth-exploring In this paper, the rationale has been enriched to justify a Treaty and its most prominent features are highlighted. Additionally, a previous account of former binding Treaties and recent movements towards more hard treaties on Health and Climate Change are also presented. 5.- The idea of a binding Food Treaty was already mentioned by the former UK Environment Secretary, Hilary Benn during the 2008 food crisis peak, with no great success at that time I presume. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/10/food-foodtech 6.- Since May, several developments have positioned the Zero Hunger Goal high in the international debates: a Brookings Institution paper and the Ban Ki Moon’s Zero Hunger Challenge are both pointing out the same goal (links below), although no means are presented whatsoever. I think the binding Food Treaty could be helpful in that sense. Not only by providing the means, but also by anchoring the Zero Hunger challenge in the human rights international framework. This Treaty could help transiting towards more sustainable food production and consumption systems. http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2012/4/17%20millennium%20dev%20goals%20mcarthur/0417%20millennium%20dev%20goals%20mcarthur http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=42304#.UFBFrvXAYtg I would like to exchanges ideas on the content, the way forward and the political options to become a proposal to be seriously considered. Furthermore, any suggestion on where, how and when it could be further disseminated would be highly appreciated. Best regards Jose Luis
21) Codrin Paveliuc Olariu, Young Professionals in Local Development, Romania [first contribution]
What is food security? While I was following on October 29th the P.1.1. session on “National Food Security” of the Second Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD 2012) which discusses Partnerships to Achieve Food and Nutrition Security, I was asked this question.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
32
The definition of food security shifted in the past 50 years dramatically. The World Food Summit in 1996 gave a simple definition. It stated that “Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”. This definition encompasses several widely accepted points related to food security such as food availability, food access, utilization and stability. But, unfortunately, it does not give the right to a good food governance back to the stakeholders involved in the agri-food chain and the right to food security. The Right to Food is not a new concept, and was first recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. In 1996, the formal adoption of the Right to Adequate Food marked a milestone achievement by World Food Summit delegates. It pointed the way towards the possibility of a rights based approach to food security. Currently over 40 countries have the right to food enshrined in their constitution and FAO estimates that the right to food could be judicial in some 54 countries. In 2004, a set of voluntary guidelines supporting the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security were elaborated by an Intergovernmental Working Group under the auspices of the FAO Council. But RIGHT TO FOOD ≠ RIGHT TO FOOD GOVERNANCE. As was mentioned several times during the discussions in different panels at GCARD 2012, a multi-stakeholder approach might represent the way through which food governance can be introduced. Representing a multi-regional approach to fighting global hunger, joining forces through a coalition building process, and giving the right to food governance to the agri-food chain stakeholders can be realized through the creation of a GLOBAL FOOD POLICY. Coordinating at global level the efforts of fighting hunger, we can reduce the stress level that volatile food prices can bring on the world economy. World Bank President Robert Zoellick stated in February 2012 that “there is a real stress point that could have social and political implications”. With corporations and farmers’ organizations reaching out, United Nations system bodies and National governments working together on a single common goal, there is the possibility of creating a Global Food Policy that could encompass policy matters on both agricultural productivity and competitiveness, agricultural research for development (AR4D), food trade and food waste. The Global Food Policy presents several advantages to present food security approach: It moves toward an integrated systems approach, with instant inclusion of all stakeholders in the global, regional and national programs; It does not affect sovereignty of countries, taking into account all national specificities and being implemented together with National governments;
It can better use all available resources at local, national, regional and global levels through the integration of the stakeholders and measures in a systems approach, while also moving away from the present “giving food aid” solution of solving the hunger issue;
It takes into account both the smallholder farmer, the corporations, the educational system and extension services as part of the solution for ending global hunger.
The question now is : Why should we NOT go for a Global approach to a Food Policy for ending hunger?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
33
22) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [First contribution]
As a member of the People's Health Movement, I have for long been involved in the issues of the MDGs. We have praised the MDGs where due, but have also criticized it for its clear shortcomings.I invite you to follow the attachment below (http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/MDGs%20for%20lecture.doc) and this link (http://www.wphna.org/2011_july_col_claudio.htm) to look at the outlines of a class and a blog I wrote a short while ago on the topic of the MDGs. It is more important than ever to look at them critically so we do not fall into some of the same shortcomings post 2015.
Claudio
23) Mohammad Habibi Najafi, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran
Microorganisms and their Impact on Food SecurityThere is already a food security crisis in parts of the world, but with more people, less water and land and fewer inputs, we have to find a way to give the growing global population access to safe, nutritious and affordable food. There will be no one solution to the food security challenge. It demands a broad-spectrum approach, and microbiology has a key and central role to play in this. Food security is not just about increasing food productivity; it is also about wasting less. Furthermore, supplying safe, nutritious foods must be achieved in a sustainable manner with minimal impact on the environment and animal welfare.Microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, viruses, protozoa, algae and archaea) and their activities are involved at every step of the food chain. Understanding the role of microbes at all steps in the process of plant and animal production, soil and water management, and harvesting, storage and processing of agricultural products is necessary. History records that microbiological research has delivered major advances in food security and safety. Important milestones include:˜Identifying and applying of safe processes for food preservation, such as canning and pasteurization, and understanding the biology of pathogenic and spoilage microbes to reduce their transmission in the food chain, leading to developments of safer foods with a longer shelf life.˜Exploiting antimicrobial substances produced by naturally occurring microbes as weapons against plant and animal pathogens.˜Developing vaccines to improve the health of livestock and reduce transmission of animal pathogens to humans.˜ Exploiting microbial processes to manage or reduce waste.˜Producing novel food products, including probiotics and nutritionally enhanced foods, through fermentation.
24) Ross Bailey, WaterAid, United Kingdom
WaterAid’s submission to the UN post-2015 thematic consultation on food and nutrition
WaterAid an international organisation working to transform lives by improving access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) in the world’s poorest communities. We work with partners in 27 countries in Africa, Asia, Central America and the Pacific region, and influence decision-makers to maximise our impact.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
34
In addition to the contribution that WaterAid’s programmes make to the health and wellbeing of the communities in which we work, an important strand of WaterAid’s advocacy work is to promote the positive health impacts of access to WASH and highlight the importance of access to WASH in realising the Millennium Development Goals, particularly those relating to healthand nutrition. WaterAid contributes to the generation of evidence on the links between health and WASH through its research initiatives and partnerships.WASH plays a fundamental role in improving nutritional outcomes. A successful global effort to tackle under-nutrition, in particular childhood under-nutrition, must therefore incorporate elements of WASH.
1. Links between WASH and under nutrition
Direct links: WHO estimates that 50% of malnutrition is associated with repeated diarrhoea or intestinal nematode infections as a result of unsafe water, inadequate sanitation or insufficient hygiene
Diarrhoea, largely caused by lack of water, sanitation and hygiene, is the second leading disease cause of death in children under-five globally, and its constant presence in low-income settings contributes significantly to under-nutrition.
Nematode infections such as soil-transmitted helminthiases, caused by lack ofsanitation and hygiene, affect around 2 billion people globally and can lead to diarrhoea, anaemia, protein loss and growth retardation.
Environmental (or tropical) enteropathy is a syndrome causing changes in the small intestine of individuals living in conditions lacking basic sanitary facilities and chronically exposed to faecal contamination. These changes to the intestine can lead to poor absorption of nutrients, stunting in children, and intestinal perforation.
Indirect links: The time taken to fetch water, and the cost of water purchased from vendors when it is not readily available in the home, impact on the amounts and quality of water consumed as well as on hygiene practices, which in turn impact on nutrition. Additionally, time spent sick with water-borne diseases or collecting water impedes educational attainment, which has a significant impact on health, well-being and poverty over a lifetime and potentially over multiple generations.
2. WASH and nutrition post-2015
Clear outcome goals are essential for generating the political will, accountability and resources needed to tackle global development issues. An outcome goal that clearly sets out the vision for reducing global under-nutrition should therefore form part of the post-2015 development framework. Moreover, we have seen that outcome goals alone are insufficient to put in place the measures needed to achieve them, or to address challenges of inequalities within and between countries, which require customisable and ambitious approaches. A goal on nutrition should therefore be accompanied by time-bound targets that mitigate the challenges that contribute to under-nutrition, including those linked to behaviour change and the realisation ofhuman rights. Given the considerable impact of WASH on nutritional outcomes, it is crucial that such targets include WASH aspects.
Although the current MDG framework includes a standalone target on drinking water and sanitation, its separation from the outcome goals on health, nutrition and education contributed to a fragmented approach to these goals, encouraging vertical approaches and discouraging integrated, cross-sectoral approaches that can deliver greater and more sustainable impact.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
35
WaterAid believes it is essential that the current discussions on the post-2015 development framework address these challenges, and formulate a framework that results in long-lasting improvements in nutrition and health, and ultimately, in elimination of poverty and attainment of overall well being.
WaterAid believes that any post-2015 goals must better reflect the central importance of WASH to human health, education, welfare and economic productivity and ensure their interconnectedness is reflected.
WaterAid recommends that the post-2015 goal framework should:
Include a goal on universal access to basic water and sanitation services as a fundamental human right.
Specify a target date for achieving universal access to basic water and sanitation services by 2030.
Ensure WASH targets and indicators focus explicitly on reducing inequalities by targeting poor and disadvantaged groups as a first priority.
25) Marie Appleton, Canada
Hello from Canada,
I think that no one in the World should go hungry, if anything the UN should make sure that the hunger never happens also they should think of always making Food go to the Countries that are in need.
The rich should be helping out the needs of hungry people.
26) Final Year Economics Students, University of Guyana
Theme 1
Lessons Learned:
1. One of the key lessons learned during the current MDG framework, as it relates to hunger, food security and malnutrition is the fact that each country has its own capacities, constraints and challenges. Ending poverty requires setting ambitious targets in each country, but a “one size fits all” target is senseless when countries have vastly different starting points. With each country at a different point at the time of implementation, some countries were at the desired objective while to some it was impossible.
2. The goals were designed using a ‘Top down approach’ and hence the inputs of those directly affected by hunger and poverty were ignored.
3. Another lesson learned, especially in developing countries is that the measurements for the progress of the goals require extensive quantitative information which are, in some, cases unavailable and in others, inaccurate.
Future challenges:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
36
1. If strict regulations are not in place regarding the quality of food produced, the expansion of food production may result in the use of harmful chemicals to enhance quantity produced.
2. Secondly, if countries are not careful of population growth, future food security and hunger reduction faces a tremendous challenge. This is so because if the population and food production are growing at the same rate, ceteris paribus, there will be no significant reduction in the number of people faced with hunger and malnutrition.
3. Thirdly, with alternative uses of food (as inputs to the manufacturing of other goods, for example fuel), this leaves less for consumption and hence the challenge to food security.
Recently, there has been much talk of labour mobility from agricultural sector to other sectors. This could be a positive move if the movement is merely the surplus labour in the agricultural sector. However, it is very likely that much needed labour is transferred to other sectors. It has been observed that this is largely due to the mentality that agriculture is somewhat a socially degrading occupation and fewer entrants to the labour force wish to be agriculturally involved /employed.
Future opportunities:
The vast literature on agricultural based countries indicates that those countries are less developed. With the growing demand for agricultural production, due to the MDG food security agreement will help develop those small agrarian countries. It provides them with comparative advantage and also provides them with a favorable trade balance.
27) Roldán Gonzalo, Argentina
[Original contribution in Spanish]
En primer lugar mis más sinceros saludos desde Argentina. Creo que debemos repensar cada uno de los programas y acciones entendiendo que el cambio debe ser estructural. Desde el cambio climático, que afecta a todos, pero principalmente a las poblaciones más pobres, hasta entender que debemos acompañar a todos los programas de desarrollos sostenibles con acciones concretas que soluciones problemas concretos en el presente. Creo que este debería ser el punto de partida para llevar adelante acciones concretas a la par del fomento de proyectos, como podría ser el programa que se lleva adelante e mí país que es Prohuerta.
Saludos con afecto.
Profesor Gonzalo Roldán
[English tranlsation]
Firstly, kind regards from Argentina. I believe we should reconsider every program and action as the change should be structural. From climate change -affecting everyone but especially the poorest population-, to sustainable development programs with specific solutions to concrete existing problems. This should be the starting point for adopting concrete measures and promoting related projects, as the one being currently developed in my country (Prohuerta).
Kind regards,
Professor Gonzalo Roldán
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
37
28) Anil Rupakheti, Nepal
The Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security is a serious issues globally, somehow all this is related with poverty. Urgent action is required by both the Government and development partners, to ensure that immediate food security, combined with longer term growth in agricultural production, becomes critical and sustained prioritization. To overcome the challenges identified, the four key are of; agricultural production; trade and marketing; economic development; safety nets; and nutrition should become the focus of a comprehensive long term food security plan for all insecure population of the hunger. Eliminating hunger involves investments in agriculture, rural development, decent work, social protection and equality of opportunities. It makes a major contribution to peace and stability and to the reduction of poverty. It will contribute to better food, nutrition for all.
29) Piero Conforti, FAO, Italy
Current UN projections indicate that world population could increase by more than two billion people from today’s levels, reaching 9.15 billion by 2050. Incomes will grow even faster. To meet increased demand, FAO projects that global agricultural production and consumption in 2050 will be 60 percent higher than in 2005/07. This is a smaller increase than the agriculture sector has achieved over the past half century; but it still poses a main challenge in terms of how it can be achieved sustainably.
Population and income growth will spur demand, but significant parts of the world will approach saturation of per capita consumption levels. Demand will increase in both developed and developing countries, even where current levels appear adequate and additional growth may cause health concerns. This may happen even in countries where undernourishment remains significant. By 2050, some 52 percent of the world’s population may live in countries where average calorie intake is more than 3 000 kcal/person/day, but the total number undernourished is expected to be still 318 million or 4 percent of world population in 2050. Many countries will have to face a double burden, of under-nourishment and mal-nourishment.
How is production expected to respond to this demand-side picture and what are the opportunities to be leveraged on that side? More than 85 percent of the expected increase in production by 2050 may derive from improved yields. Higher yields and cropping intensity are economically preferable, given competition for land for other uses; and yield growth has been the mainstay of historic production increases. Spare land, instead, is often not readily accessible due to lack of infrastructure and is concentrated in a small number of countries. Water is another critical resource, that contributed much to past yield production growth. While water resources are globally abundant, they are extremely scarce in the Near East and North Africa, and in northern China, where they are most needed.
Yields increases can raise income from farming, provided that adequate signals are transmitted through markets; and that the policy and market environment in which farmers operate is conducive. At the same time, they need to be achieved with sustainable and climate-smart practices, to avoid increasing the pressure of agriculture on natural resources. In several regions of the world there is room to increase factor productivity and incomes from agriculture without exerting additional pressure on natural resources. Investment in research and extension, however, must pursue these objectives, probably with more efforts compared to what has happened over the last decades.
More information at http://www.fao.org/economic/esa/esag/en
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
38
30) Becky Jebet, Beacon, Kenya
My suggestions:
1. Supporting small scale farmers through farmer education/extension services
2. Increasing governments budgets to above 10% as in the Maputo Declaration of 2012 for extension services and input subsidies to small scale farmers
3. Landlessness and land fragmentation as a challenge that needs to be addressed among the small scale farmers
4. Governments should support research into ecologically adaptable seeds especially in Africa
31) Summary of the first week, WFP - FAO Facilitation Team
Over the past week, 22 participants kicked off the consultation focusing on the lesson learned from the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.
MDGs have been recognized for the role they played in bringing development problems to the attention of many. Participants also reminded us of extraordinary success that some countries had in realizing the goals and in increasing food security and nutritional wellbeing among their citizens. However the same goal is still out of reach in many parts of the world.
Some commented that since MDGs are meant to be universal and are formulated in a very broad way, this makes it difficult to enforce them. Too often success is subject to the political will of a national government to tackle food insecurity and malnutrition. Without full buy-in by governments and by the population at large, even very active civil society organizations find it difficult to drive the change needed. The universal nature of the goals also constitutes a strong limitation as countries and regions can be very diverse and global or national goals risk becoming little more than a wish list.
According to the participants, in order to be successful, development objectives need to be linked closely to the local realities and need to be developed following a bottom up approach. For this to take place, awareness needs to be built among the general population starting in school and local professionals need to be put in the position to apply the acquired skills in their regional context.
As the central government often does not enjoy the full trust of the citizens it is important to involve civil society and grassroots organizations as much as possible, while ensuring that the formulation of the development agenda is respectful of prevailing conditions such as the local environment and traditional agricultural practices.
Some participants also proposed a global food policy and more binding legal frameworks such as the creation of an expanded Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights or of a binding food treaty, which would create clearer obligation for the states.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
39
Consensus emerged that hunger needs to be tackled in a comprehensive way including livelihoods, health, habits, infrastructure, education, gender equality, etc. and resources from all involved actors need to converge on a common practical plan of action.
Safety nets to mitigate shocks need to be put in place to increase the resilience of food insecure people; food should also be treated differently from other commodities and preferential trade arrangement could be put in place to increase access by the poor.
Participants also identified decent infrastructures and safe storage facilities, which allow producers to efficiently access local markets with their produce, as conditions for increasing food security.
Here national parliaments can play an important role by making sure that public policy measures aimed at rural developing and social protection find their way into national government budgets.
I take the occasion to thank all participants for their contributions and to renew my encouragement to further participate in the discussion.
In particular participants may wish to further address the following specific questions:
1. Considering that several comments highlighted how malnutrition and food insecurity should be addressed in a integrated and comprehensive way, which are the main challenges in enabling this approach to be enforced? How different stakeholders could and should contribute to this effort?
2. Which are the main lessons learned at national levels to be used as a basis for building the future framework so that it fully reflects local realities and strengths?
3. How can we use current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS ?
We look forward to receiving your contributions
Anna RappazzoWFP - FAO Facilitation team
32) Simon Ross, Population Matters, UK [first contribution]
The key challenges to food security include rising demand for food, climate change and rising demand for energy, water and land. All are a consequence of rising per capita consumption and population numbers. Only by limiting the rise in demand can be guarantee food security.
We should therefore encourage greater equity to allow the poorest to improve their consumption without increasing overall human impact on the environment. We should also provide universal access to rights based family planning and encourage female employment to reduce the birth rate in all countries to sub replacement levels.
Simon Ross
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
40
Population Matters
www.populationmatters.org
33) Dominic Glover, Wageningen University, Netherlands
I suggest that a key challenge for the post-2015 period is to ensure that there is closer integration of agricultural research and agricultural extension within the agronomy profession, and closer cooperation of both of these functions with small and marginal farmers and rural people themselves.
The aim of agronomic research and extension organisations ought to be transformed from the routine development and dissemination of 'technology packages' in a top-down manner, but working more collaboratively in support of farmers and field-level scientists and technicians (whether from agricultural universities, extension agencies or NGOs/CSOs) to help them analyse, prioritise and address agricultural problems and opportunities at local levels.
This would involve scientific and government agencies working with farmers and rural people in a much more responsive, demand-led, problem-oriented, horizontal manner; where problems are framed and priorities set in sincere collaboration with the people most affected by agricultural challenges.
A target for this proposal could be that x per cent of poor and marginal farmers have real access to/contact with scientific expertise. Possible indicators should not be in the form of inputs adopted or yields increased, but measures of simultaneously improved productivity (which is an input:output measure, not the same as gross production/yield) and sustainability.
34) Chencho Norbu, Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Bhutan
Theme 1. :
1. Challenge is how to influence or convince the different sectors or ministries of the government that food and nutrition security is the number one priority and we all must address it as a team! This is because every head of the sector or ministry always thinks his/her sector must receive highest prority.. etc. We need to get our policy right!
2. The capacity building is important but in many cases, candidates who go for training are usually not from implementing agencies or departments. For example, we need to focus ( capacity building) on our extension and health colleagues who are close to our farmers. We need to shift focus from policy/decision makers to field colleagues. They ( field colleagues) can make difference!
3. We must target awareness, education and advocacy on food and nutrition security at all levels: from politicians to farmers living in remote areas.
4. Food and nutrition insecurity issues are influnced by culture, and local governance/environment. FAO should not come up with precriptive meaures that fits for all!
Theme 2:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
41
1. We must pay attention to sanitation and hygiene issues of our community while addressing Food and nutrition security. There is no point of addressing issues separately..( currently addressed by two or three ministries in many countries)
2. There is a need to study and understand local food customs to enrich or change old dietry habits.
3. Communities respond positively to new farming technology if access to market and access to inputs are improved.
4. Access to community postharvest facilities can make a big difference ( prevent from pest and diseases losses).
Theme 3:
1. First we must define our own national, sub-regional or regional targets using existing data from health, trade and agriculture.
2. Using these information, we can project global targets.
3. We also need to think how we can make our small farming more attractive and sustainable given that all cheap food ( subsidies provided by the developed countries) flooding the global markets!
35) Aderemi Adetoro Kejinaus, Nigeria
In real sense of it all. The problems of artificial poverty created by the leadership platform must be addressed in various countries. Nigeria as a case study, people that do not have nothing on their table will not in any form contribute to the socio development of any nation in term of millennium development goals .They don’t even know these agenda .The government do not even go by these also in practical terms, So if the trend of bad governance should be addressed it will mark the trend of any good initiative effectively working in the life of several people in the world and that will also mark the trend of people working together for peace and harmony.
36) Sergio Tripi, Good News Agency, Italy
Unity-in diversity and Sharing are the two emerging values that are at the basis of all MDGs. They reveal the key to further and accelerated progress by matching each milestone of each MDG with the choice people are asked to make: will we free the financial resources needed for these milestones by diverting them from the military expenditure? Very tangible examples would enhance the crucial importance and responsibility of each specific choice. For instance: how many schools can be established by converting the expenses for a battle aircraft into a program of education?This approach of reiterating the choice and the relevant responsibility for its implications can gradually establish a constructive attitude on part of the public opinion based on a better understanding of the value of each choice - - in any field and for all MDGs. People's awareness of the huge financial resources that can be converted gradually from the military to development could well be at the basis of all MDGs' programs, thus projecting on each choice a tangible evidence of its relevant repercussions. And each program of each MDG, with its accent on the responsibility of the choice
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
42
connected to it, would contribute to the building of a critical mass that would increasingly make a difference and ignite a spontaneous evaluation of the choices that will have to be made in all fields.
37) Pie Ntakarutimana, IDED, Togo [first contribution]
[Original contribution in French]
Dans la zone ou je me trouve, le paysan qui cultive la terre a trois principaux défis (i) la rareté des terres cultivables occasionnées par la démographie galopante et la prise
de conscience n'est pas encore là à cause de l'absence de politique dans ce sens, (ii) le délabrement de terres et le vieillissement de cultures occasionné par l'absence de
recherche sur les engrais et les cultures qu'il faut mais faut il aussi que le paysans ait accès
(iii) la question en rapport avec les méthodes, la technologie c'est toujours les pratiques de l'antiquité. au regard de l'évolution technologique du monde actuellement, il serait difficilement acceptable que certains droits sont universels.
Si réellement, nous voulons opérer des changement, il faut investir au niveaux des périphéries. dans les pays pauvres c'est là ou l'agriculture est pratiqué comme une agriculture de survie. nous devons être armé de courage pour briser des barrières qui empêche de construire un monde d'égalité, de liberté et de dignité
[English translation]
In the area where I am based, the farmer that cultivates the land faces three principal challenges: (i) The insufficiency of cultivable lands, due to galloping population growth, and
awareness of this has not yet developed due to the lack of politics in this regard, (ii) the dilapidation of land and the out of date crop species as a result of the lack of
research on seeds and the appropriate crops, but also, it is necessary that these are accessible to farmers,
(iii) the problem is that the methods and technologies are from the past. Concerning the evolution of technologies in today´s world, there is not always acceptance of universal rights of access.
If we really want to make changes, we have to invest at the periphery. In poor countries, agriculture is practice as a means of survival. We have to be courageous to break down the barriers which prevent the building of a world of equality, freedom and dignity
38) Anonymous
Theme1
I think that the main challenge in my region(Sahelian Africa) is to address animal production with some seriousness. Neglect of this sector has gone on for too long. Livestock is the backbone of peoples’ economy in this region.Saving
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
43
livestock translates into saving people. Feed security will lead to food security. It is many times cheaper to afford for fodder security than food security. Money devoted for food aid and logistics of, should be channeled into fodder production and Ranching.
Theme 2
Advances in animal production are necessary for social security throughout rural Africa.Good governance is necessary for a clever reallocation of resources, sound financial and accountability procedures.Lessons learned from Sudan's tragic experiences are many, but the single most clear message is that WE CANNOT PROGRESS IN THE ABSENCE OF DEMOCRACY.
Theme 3
I find the objectives logical and achievable.We need considerable efforts to do that. This includes commitment from both sides: donors and receivership not think that we have to worry about time as long as E MAKE A GOOD START AND SET THE BALL RUNNING FOR COMING GENERATIONS.
39) David Michael, Wondu Business & Technology Services, Australia
This is a link to our report on “Food security, risk management and climate change”. While relevant to all three themes it is possibly most applicable to Theme 1.http://www.nccarf.edu.au/publications/food-security-risk-management-and-climate-change
This report is about food security, climate change and risk management. Australia has enjoyed an unprecedented level of food security for more than half a century, but there are new uncertainties emerging and it would be unrealistic – if not complacent – to assume the same level of food security will persist simply because of recent history. The project collected data from more than 36 case study organisations (both foreign and local) operating in the Australian food-supply chain, and found that for many businesses, risk management practices require substantial improvement to cope with and exploit the uncertainties that lie ahead. Three risks were identified as major constraints to adaptive capacity of food organisations operating in Australia: risk management practices; an uncertain regulatory environment – itself a result of gaps in risk management; climate change uncertainty and projections about climate change impacts, also related to risk management.The integrated and global nature of food supply means that food security is releveant to both developed and developing countries.
40) Claudio Schuftan and Natalie Eggermont, PHF, Viet Nam
If we have made so much progress on the MDGs, then why is the central message after twelve years the same? We are still facing a world with hunger, widening inequalities and continuous destruction of our planet. Instead of jumping into the process of defining new goals we need to analyze why, behind the numbers and statistics of progress, the situation has not changed. MDGs focus on ends while being silent on the means. The values and principles expressed in the Millenium Declaration were lost in translation and we were left with a set of quick wins in which
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
44
progress was measured in terms of country averages. The MDGs were defined and implemented in a top-down process and issues of governance, participation and empowerment were insufficiently addressed. World leaders have tried to solve our problems by simply doing more of what caused these problems in the first place. We cannot realistically expect more of this to get us out of it. If we want the next set of goals to change the situation we need to have the courage to make a radical turn in our approach.We will elaborate further on this in future postings.
N. EggermontC. Schuftan
41) Pankaj Kumar, ICAR, India
Now we are talking about post-MDG! Surprisingly we are not able to grasp with the real issue. Is the UN or the FAO the right platform to deal with hunger. As we know, it was 27 years ago when, for the first time, world leaders accepted the collective responsibility of the international community to abolish hunger and malnutrition within a decade (Rome United Nations World Food Conference, 1974). The much hyped talks in World Food summits later has not been successful in reducing poverty and thus hunger. SO now, 37 years later, we need a new Global governance strategy for eradicating poverty. We need to first question, Is UN and its agencies capable? Are UN efforts worthwhile? Did UN effectively contribute in improvement of food security? Has a difference been made? If not, what were the reasons? What can be an alternate global Governance strategy for food security? Then only a viable discussion on post 2015 strategies can hold ground.
42) Stella Joy, Active Remedy Ltd, United Kingdom
I wish to share this information with you concerning food security and hope it may be of interest and assistance.
Food Security is utterly dependent upon fresh water security. For an adequate supply of fresh water it is vital to understand, protect and regenerate the global fresh water cycle and the natural ecological factors, which maintain it.
There seems to be a severe lack of attention being focused on this matter and feel it to be critically important that it be raised as a vital issue to be dealt with within the global agenda. It is immensely important to recognize the key roles that ecosystems, especially mountains, mountain forests and wetlands play in maintaining fresh water quantity and quality globally. It is important that supportive efforts that protect, sustainably manage and restore these ecosystems are given major focus.
"We recognize the key role that ecosystems play in maintaining water quantity and quality and support actions within the respective national boundaries to protect and sustainably manage these ecosystems." (UNCSD Rio+20 2012 ‘The Future We Want’ Paragraph 122)
Food security is vital for the continuum of humanity and could conceivably be realized if concerted action to protect and secure the worlds fresh water is taken.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
45
http://activeremedy.org.uk/pages/?s=watercycle_paper
Former World Leaders Call on UN Security Council to Recognize Water as a Top Concernhttp://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Water%20Security%20Launch_press%20release_FINAL.pdf
43) Agha Mohsin Ali Khan, Youth in Action Balochistan, Pakistan
In flood affected areas of Pakistan the food security situation is very alarming due to non support from donor agencies.
44) Archana Sinha, Ashoka Innovators for the Public, India
In response to Theme 1, a key challenge is to engage entrepreneurs/experts/organisations from various sectors for addressing the malnutrition problem. The key opportunity here is creating a platform to crowd source innovations to address malnutrition and to provide support for scaling them up. This way we can cross-pollinate ideas across regions as well. http://www.changemakers.com/nutrition
45) Vladimir Jovcev, WFP, Zimbabwe
By enforcing the rule of law, demanding accountability from governments and enabling the environment for markets to function.
46) Elvis Njabe, Denmark
Dear Moderator, Cultural difference is itself a global challenge in an integrated society. This challenge is overcome with the unique global agenda on humanitarian issues such as food security and hunger. So far, great work is done already in the fight against hunger and food security but more is still needed to be done especially in area suffering from these crises like in most parts of Africa and Asia. Looking at policies both at international and national levels, are so far good but implementation, monitoring and evaluation sectors especially in regional level in areas mostly affected by hunger still a big challenge. Secondly, international agricultural researchers need to pass on leadership skills to locals by training and working side by side with local groups especially in rural areas. Most areas still find themselves in situation where political leaders coordinate agricultural sector. There is a great need for a well skilled and devoted leadership; these challenges still stand as blocks to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to relevant hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. Working together, we can make the world a better place. Elvis NJABE.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
46
47) Triatno Yudo Harjoko Gotty, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Combined issues are population, poverty and local knowledge/technology. I do not want to give examples or lesson learned, because these are an enigmatic issues that compound socio-cultura-political issues. In order for the poor to be able to eat (have jobs) people should be empowered in socio-economic-political aspects. Population - how to control population growth, how to provide knowledge and skills to the low income? Unless there is a goodwill and political justice there will be no improvement. understanding local knowledge and issues are paramountly more important than simply asking. It must relate to the people's culture. What education should relevant to certain type of community? This is not at all a charity endeavor. How we boost moral and confidence to the poor to rely on themselves based on their norms and values, while the political authorities support the need of the common? Are the people constituted by a duality of society (modern/capitalist versus traditional/bazaar)? If they are, does the respective 'society' enjoy equal share in terms resources including life cycle space (urban or rural)? Poverty - where is the focus of the poverty cycle or trap? Urban and/or rural? What are the opportunities for poor to get access for education and jobs? What is the government strategy to alleviate or reduce it? What the government has done that really affect the poor? In a very micro aspect the poor demand equal shares for space to participate in economic and political engagement. The poor should have equal access to urban services (including transport) and 'business activities'. Local Knowledge and Technology - we have to explore people's knowledge as well as technology they have (emic approach). How we enhance, improve what the people already have? Do not dictate them with an alien knowledge and technology. Cases have shown this impositon will not sustain since they lack of knowledge as well skills to maintain. In short, knowing yourself to overcome problems and get the most suitable solutions.
48) John Kurien, International Collective in Support of Fishworkers, India
Dear Moderator
Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security - The Role of Fish and Fisheries
The discussions, debates and policy making process with regard to food security around the world are largely centred on cereals, pulses and meats. Food policy is largely terrestrial oriented. This is primarily due to the fact that they account for the larger source of calories needed for daily human consumption. Little is said about fish – even in countries where fish is central to people’s diets, irrespective of their income levels and social status. This is unfortunate to say the least. The pivotal role which fish can play in direct food security is not adequately recognised. Just as fish is not directly visible to fishers as it lives and grows, it also seems to be only on the periphery of policy makers’ concerns. Often it is even a ‘policy blind spot’!
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
47
In the context of hunger -- and obesity -- the role of fish as a wholesome and inexpensive food source for achieving food security merits serious consideration.
Humans cannot live by fish alone. But today there is growing evidence that small quantities of fish in human diets can make the crucial differences in early brain development; help development of bone and muscle tissue; ensure that blindness is prevented; prevent heart attacks and cancer and also mitigate the effects of HIV/AIDS. Fish certainly contributes to nutritional security.
Where there are aquatic resources, there fish can be found naturally. Fish can also be easily cultured in different aquatic milieu. In rivers, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, floodplains, coastal waters and the open sea – fish and other edible aquatic organisms and plants are in plentiful supply.
Most developing countries are blessed with a large share of such aquatic resources making the potential for development of fisheries a natural choice. With small, dedicated and ‘quality-investments’ of time and money, the returns in the form of fish can be substantial. Thus, contrary to popular notions, the potential for harvesting and growing fish and making a direct contribution to increasing food supply, decreasing hunger and contributing to food security is considerable.
In this context, it is important to highlight that fish is not a homogenous product. Species diversity, and consequently physical form, is vast and manifold. However, the common feature of all fish species pertain to their relatively similar nutritional quality – i.e. the percentage of protein, fats, minerals, vitamins which one can obtain from a unit quantity of fish.
Therefore, if the concern is with fulfilling nutritional needs of the hungry, then an undue pre-occupation with ‘white flesh’ fish or species such as shrimp needs to be replaced with active publicity for more ‘small, skinny, oily’ species. These fish can be eaten whole or mixed with the staples such as rice, wheat, maize, sorghum, cassava and banana.
There are also indirect ways of achieving food security by the creation of employment and income earning possibilities in fishery related activities. When people have creative work opportunities and adequate income, they are in a position to make informed choices about their food.
In many developing countries the possibilities for raising the employment-intensity in fisheries is high. In several countries there are many small and medium sized water bodies into which fish can be introduced – if it has not already been done. If people in the rural areas are provided the training, appropriate fishing equipment, or credit to buy them, they can undertake fishing and earn a livelihood.
Global estimates suggest that for every job in the harvesting of fish, there are three or four created in the upstream activities of processing and marketing. For example, in many sub-Saharan countries, where hunger and food insecurity abound, just a minimal improvement in the road infrastructure and provision of labour intensive or animal drawn transportation vehicles (cycles, carts etc.) will vastly improve the scope for operating a distribution network for fish into the neighbouring hinterlands. The same can also be said about processing methods like drying and smoking which are favoured by poorer African consumers. Such choices provide jobs for hundreds and fish at affordable prices for thousands.
Though the potentials are vast, the concrete reality of fish in many developing countries today leaves much to be desired. In many countries, the crisis of the economy and the need for quick foreign exchange has resulted in fish exports becoming an easy way to earn foreign exchange. The domestic supply shortages have resulted in a market situation which ‘priced-out the poor’. Some of the highest
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
48
rates of malnutrition, particularly among children and mothers, have been reported from countries which export fish. Examples abound from Latin America, Africa and South Asia. Policies to ensure that the compulsions of international trade do not create domestic hunger must be enacted.
So, wherever and whenever there is a discussion on hunger, food and food security we need to check out to see that the rightful role of fish is included. John KurienMember, International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF)
49) Miguel Velez, Honduras
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Nadie discute la necesidad de una campaña “Cero hambre”. El problema está en los detalles: Que y como producir y cuáles son las consecuencias de la decisión. Insistimos - al menos algunos - que la tierra está llegando a su límite en cuanto a su capacidad de sostenernos (ya lo advirtió el Club de Roma en 1972). Y qué hacemos? Más de lo mismo. Tenemos que hacer y a responder preguntas incómodas. Pero dejamos la investigación, que es la encargada de hacerlo, a la industria, que lógicamente tiene su agenda propia. Basta con ver un mapa sobre la erosión (p. ej.: www.madrimasd.org), o más fácil, con ver el color de nuestros ríos después de una lluvia. La FAO recomienda una pérdida máxima de 1.8 t de suelo/ha/año, en el 2010 el USDA dice que se perdieron 9.75 en el cinturón del maíz y que la pérdida es sostenible. Quien tiene la razón? En Centroamérica relegamos la producción de alimentos básicos a laderas donde la erosión es tremenda (en El Salvador unas 40 t/ha/año según el MAG) y producimos los postres en los mejores suelos planos; en Puerto Rico la erosión en un suelo con 40% de pendiente con caña quemada fue de 9 t/ha/año y dejando la hoja como mulch de 2 t. Qué valor tiene el suelo perdido y cómo incluirlo en el precio del etanol o del grano o del ensilaje? Cuanta energía hay en un melón, en un banano o en una manzana? Cuanta energía se gasta en producirla y llevarla a un consumidor al otro lado del globo? Estará el costo ambiental incluido en su precio? Seleccionamos vacas que son verdaderas farmacodependientes: hormonas en lugar de alimento para que ciclen, desparasitantes en lugar de resistencia genética con incalculables consecuencias para la fauna del suelo por sus residuos en las heces, etc. La eficiencia de la producción de energía con ensilaje de maíz o con caña de azúcar para forraje no debe ser muy diferente a la eficiencia para la producción de etanol de 1:2 y 1:8, respectivamente (en el primero se incluye el valor alimenticio de los DDG y en el segundo la energía en el bagazo quemado). Cuantas publicaciones científicas aparecen en nuestro medio sobre el uso de uno y otro? Sería una lástima que este foro se quedara en un análisis de principios como muchos anteriores. Saludos.
[English translation]
Nobody questions the need for a "Zero Hunger" campaign The problem lies in the details: What and how to produce and what are the consequences of the decision. We insist -at least some- that the earth is reaching its limits in terms of its ability to sustain us (as the Club of Rome warned already in 1972).
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
49
And what do we do? More of the same. We must ask and answer uncomfortable questions. But we put the research -in charge of solving these questions- in the hands of the industry, which logically has its own agenda.
Just take a look at an erosion map (eg.: http://www.madrimasd.org), or easier, see the color of our rivers after a rainfall. FAO recommends a maximum loss of 1.8 tons of soil/ha/year. In 2010, the USDA informed of 9.75 tons/ha lost in the corn belt and that the loss is sustainable. Who is right? In Central America we push basic food production to slopes where erosion is tremendous (in El Salvador about 40 tons/ha/year according to MAG) and produce fruits in the best flat lands. In Puerto Rico, soil erosion with 40% slopes with burnt sugarcane was 9 tons/ha/year and leaving leafs as mulch 2 tons. What is the value of soil loss and how to include it in the price of ethanol or grain or silage? How much energy is in a melon, a banana or an apple? How much energy is spent in producing it and bringing it to a consumer across the globe? Will the environmental cost be included in the price?
We select cows that are true drug addicts: hormones rather than food for regulating the cycle, deworming instead of genetic resistance, with untold consequences for soil fauna by their residues in feces, etc..
The efficiency of energy production with corn silage or sugarcane for forage should not be very different from the production efficiency of ethanol of 1,2 and 1,8, respectively (the first includes the nutritional value of the DDG and the second the energy of burning bagasse). How many scientific publications do exist on the use of both?
It would be a pity that this forum will limit itself to concept analysis, as happened in many previous forums
Regards.
50) Victor Howard Liberia, EFA Technical Committee LETCOm INC, Liberia
I think the issue of food security in Africa has been driven from the point of focus because nowadays African farmers are no longer producting foods to sustain their nations, but now food is being produces just for weekly meals making it difficult to sustain generations however, this can only be achieved if we can start to teach people how to farm for future and donors aids should also be able to support these processes to encourage continuity.
51) Maria del Pilar Valledor, University Rey Juan Carlos, Spain
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am working on a thesis on the legal protection of the right to adequate food in Spain. I found this issue very interesting because almost nothing has been written about hunger in developed countries. Unfortunately, some European countries have seen their poverty rates dramatically increased due to the current economic crisis. Spain, with the highest unemployment rate in the whole European Union, is a good example.
I am conscious that, in comparison with the situation of other countries, the European nations have more resources, but the figures are there and the situation won't get better in the short term.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
50
In conclusion, I propose to draw attention to the situation of some developed countries in order to make the corresponding governments to consider the social impact of the economic measures they are currently adopting (cutting social benefits, pensions, etc.)
Thank you very much,
Pilar Valledor
52) Ernest Udeze, Global Youth Plan Against Malaria, HIV/AIDS, Nigeria
The issue of food security cannot be handled as a single entity. Borrowing a leaf from Africa, Nigeria is a case study: greater population of the masses suffer abject hunger occasioned by unemployment, bad government, natural disasters, crisis, terrorism etc just to be precise, and all this adversely affect the actualization of the MDGs. In Africa, where people are more prone to famine and starvation, people result in eating just anything to cushion the debilitating effect of hunger, lots of malnourished people litter many streets in several African countries. In my many years social work in tropical Africa on malaria, I discovered that more people are more susceptible to malaria attack due to poor feeding situations and people rarely develop to full stature due to poor feeding. It is quite appalling that even in the presence of vast arable land in tropical Africa, Agricultural practices still suffer due to lack of support from various African government and other development partners. I so much believe that if grand mechanized farming is introduced in Africa, the issue of global food security will be achieved.
53) Andrea Martínez, Argentina
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Saludo cordialmente a todas las personas de estas diferentes organizaciones como la FAO y PMA que hacen de su trabajo la lucha por un mundo mejor y sin personas que sufran uno de los peores males existentes tal como es el hambre. Asi mismo agradezco los esfuerzos que realizan. Abordando la temática número 2 propuesta, creo fundamental que la ONU y demás organizaciones internacionales comprometan a todos sus países involucrados (y tambien a los que están fuera de ellas) por medio de los gobiernos y las economía a realizar un desarrollo sustentable de la producción característica de cada región, una distribución equitativa del mismo y un porcentaje obligatorio a donar por mes a FAO (el porcentaje de cada país dependiendo de sus posibilidades de producción) a una reserva común a fin de ser distribuido a las zonas mas perjudicadas de todo el mundo. Asi mismo considero muy importante imponer con la colaboración de otras organizaciones internacionales medidas de intercambio económico que impidan el flujo de mercado de armas de manera tal de reducir el conflicto armado que tanto daño hace a la humanidad y entre uno de sus aspectos a la alimentación de las personas. Tambien considero muy viables la implantación de energías renovables de las que todos conocemos sus beneficios en zonas de riesgo de manera tal de lograr un abastecimiento mas sostenido en el tiempo y en posibilidades. Por ejemplo tal es el caso de agua y electricidad. Esto puede ser logrado a partir de un esfuerzo conjunto con organismos como Greenpeace y demás. Doy las gracias nuevamente por darme la posibilidad de realizar esta contribución y espero sinceramente pueda ser leída y tenida en cuenta.
Muchas gracias.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
51
[English translation]
Kind regards to all the employees from organizations like FAO and WFP that work for a better world without hunger, one of the worst existing evils scourging its population. I sincerely appreciate their efforts.
Regarding topic number 2 proposed for discussion, I believe it is essential that the UN and other international organizations commit all the countries involved (and not just their members), by means of their respective governments and economies, to sustainably develop the characteristic production of each region, fairly distribute its outcome and compulsorily donate a portion to FAO every month (this percentage depending on the production capacity of each country) for a common fund to be allocated to the most disadvantaged areas worldwide.
With the cooperation of other international organizations, I consider very important to implement economic measures to impede arms trading and minimize armed conflicts, so detrimental for mankind and food in particular. Developing renewable energies would also be highly advisable, as their benefits in risk areas would enable a more sustainable supply of, for example, water and electricity. This can be achieved jointly cooperating with Greenpeace and other organizations. I reiterate my gratefulness for the opportunity of sharing this contribution and I sincerely hope it can be taken into account.
Thank you very much.
54) International Presentation Association, USA
Good practice on Participatory approach to Food security and Nutrition and alleviating hunger
The article, From Food Security to Food Justice by Ananya Mukherjee, Professor and Chair of Political Science at York University, Toronto, illustrates a good practice on food and nutrition security, in the State of Kerala, India, that enables people-living-in-poverty to exercise their rights and responsibilities in improving the quality of life for women and their families www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article2848305.eceIn this article, Ananya tells the story of the research on an experiment, SanghaKrishi (group-farming), a part of Kerala State Government’s anti-poverty programme, Kudumbashree (prosperity of the family) initiated in 2007 (www.kudumbashree.org ).This experiment was seen as a means to enhance local food production. As many as 44,225 collectives of women farmers lease fallow land, rejuvenate it, farm it and then sell the produce or use it for consumption.Kudumbashree is a network of 4 million women mostly below poverty line. Kudumbashree is not merely a ‘project’ or a ‘programme’ but a social space where marginalized women can collectively pursue their needs and aspirations. The primary unit of Kudumbashree is the Neighbourhood Group (NHG). NHGs, consisting of not more than 20 women, are for an overwhelming majority their first ever space outside home. NHGs are federated into Area Development Societies (ADSs), and these are in turn federated into Community Development Societies (CDSs) at the panchayat (local governance) level. Today, there are 213,000 NHGs in Kerala. Kudumbashree office-bearers are elected. A crucial process for its members, these elections help to bring women into politics. And they bring with them a different set of values that can change the face of politics.The NHG is very different from a self-help group (SHG) in that it is structurally linked to the State (through the institution of local self-government). This ensures that local development reflects the needs and aspirations of communities who are not reduced to be mere “executors” of government
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
52
programs. What is sought is synergy between democratization and poverty reduction, and this occurs here through the mobilization of poor women’s leadership and solidarity.This experiment is transforming the socio-political space that women inhabit, and results in three major consequences: First, there is a palpable shift in the role of women in Kerala’s agriculture. Thousands of Kudumbashree women - hitherto underpaid agricultural laborers - have abandoned wage work to become independent producers. Many others combine wage works with farming. Second, it has enabled women, in particular women from the marginalized communities, to salvage their dignity and livelihoods amidst immense adversity. The survey of 100 collectives across 14 districts found that 15 per cent of the farmers were Dalits and Adivasis and 32 per cent came from the minority communities. Third, it is producing important consequences for the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) in Kerala. Given Kerala’s high wages for men, MGNREGS in Kerala has become predominantly a space for women (93 percent of the employment generated has gone to women whereas the national average is 50). One of them said, “We have created life… and food, which gives life, not just 100 days of manual labour.”The above excerpt from the article, From Food Security to Food Justice, underscores the following:
Participatory forums at the neighborhood level, small enough for people living in poverty to come together to have an ongoing say in decisions that affect their lives, ensure inclusion and are productive
Neighborhood level participatory forums, when federated at various levels, result in collective participation at wider levels resulting in good governance
Government programmes, when implemented in partnership with people at local level through such federations of neighborhood forums, result in people-centered development.
The existing forums for participation - in India, parliamentary constituencies, State legislative assembly constituencies and gram sabhas (local governance assemblies) - are not adequate for engaging people-living-in-poverty to have an ongoing effective say in decisions that affect their lives
Bottom-up, inclusive and accountable governance
The key issue in Good practice on Participatory approach to Food security and Nutrition and alleviating hunger is one of governance.The UN SG’s High level Panel on Global Sustainability too noted that “Democratic governance and full respect for human rights are prerequisites for empowering people to make sustainable choices.”The Report of the Civil Society Reflection Group on Global Development Perspectives too has called for “a change in the tone of multilateral governance from one that prescribes solutions and then institutes legal and financial frameworks to implement them or ensure compliance, to one that protects bottom-up governance.”Bottom-up governance not only refers to the directions of influence from the local to the global. It also calls for more governance space and implementation to be retained at local and sub-national levels. It is to enable, for instance, small farmers and peasant communities to exercise their rights in retaining their seeds, growing nutritious foods without genetically modified organisms, and accessing medicines without paying unaffordable prices set by transnational companies and protected by intellectual property rights.Bottom-up democratic governance requires not only the strengthening of civil society in governance skill but also a re-focusing and re-structuring of governance institutions and the overcoming of governance gaps at national and global levels. Hence we urge that the Post 2015 global development agenda reflect the following:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
53
Consider Planning-by-People Processes such as that of Kudumbashree to ensure participation of people-living-in-poverty in decisions that affect their lives
create enabling environments for the realization of the right to participate which is already enshrined in the international instruments
re-focus and restructure governance institutions to overcome related governance gaps at local, national and global levels.
International Presentation Association of the Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin MaryNGO in special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council
55) Parvez Babul, Bangladesh
Poverty, hunger and malnutrition of women and children
Experts have recognized that most of the poor of this world are women. We know that healthy and happy women make their families happy. But if women suffer from poverty, hunger and malnutrition — how will they make their families happy? Rather those women are treated as the burden of families. Those malnourished women give birth of low-weight children who also suffer from malnutrition. As a result, both the mothers and children have to fight for living.
Those malnourished, sick women are unable to perform all the household jobs; and cannot do extra jobs outside of their households. As they are poor, so they cannot arrange nutritious food, and do not get necessary treatment. As a result, want of food is the companion of daily lives of those women. It causes family feud as a regular basis. They cannot take care of their beloved children properly. Day by day the bad luck of those women and children turns into worst. The husbands are reluctant to keep their wives, some divorce, and some demand extra money as dowry. Those women cannot provide dowry their families break up. Even they cannot take legal action against their husbands, because the poverty makes them helpless to do so! Then the abandoned women and children take shelter in the streets.
These are the bitter reality of the poor, hungry, malnourished women and children of Bangladesh as well as the poor countries in South Asia. In fact, poverty, hunger, food insecurity, illiteracy, disempowerment, lack of health and nutrition education, less participation in decision- making, negative impact of climate change, early marriage, gender inequality and inequity, familial and social taboos attack those women so greatly like octopus that they cannot exit from these common vicious cycle.
To prevent these problems and to solve the existing unacceptable but preventable situation, the governments, donors, NGOs, civil society organisations, women and children rights activists, development partners, development workers, international and national forums need to take holistic approaches. Long term plan of activities is a must. Certainly more research on these issues is the need and demand of the time. The findings of research/ studies should be directed to promote capacity-building and technology transfer to the public and private sectors.
IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) pointed out in its Global Hunger Index 2012, “Women’s low status in South Asia contributes to children’s poor nutritional outcomes in the region because children’s development and mothers’ well-being are closely linked. Women’s poor nutritional status, low education, and low social status undermine their ability to give birth to well-nourished babies and to adequately feed and care for their children.”
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
54
Good nutrition is the key to sustainable economic growth. And social protection is crucial for accelerating hunger reduction. To accelerate hunger reduction, economic growth needs to be accompanied by purposeful and decisive public policies. An improved governance system, based on transparency, participation, accountability, rule of law and human rights, is essential for the effectiveness of such policies.
World Development Report 2013 of the World Bank mentioned, “Many millions more, most of them women, find themselves shut out of the labour force altogether. Looking forward, over the next 15 years an additional 600 million new jobs will be needed to absorb burgeoning working-age populations, mainly in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Too often, they are not earning enough to secure a better future for themselves and their children, and at times they are working in unsafe conditions and without the protection of their basic rights. Together, nutrition, health, and education form human skills and abilities that have been powerfully linked to productivity growth and poverty reduction in the medium to longer run. Also, better health brings, directly, higher labour productivity.”
Considering the problems — poverty, hunger and malnutrition of the poor women, and children and the poor people as well, I found that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 01: eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; 03: Promote gender equality and empower women; 04: reducing child mortality; and 05: improve maternal health — are interlinked. According to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) Report of 2012, “The goal of gender equality remains unfulfilled, with broad negative consequences, given that achieving the MDGs depends so much on women’s empowerment and equal access by women to education, work, health care and decision-making.” So, let us come forward to turn these challenges ahead into opportunities. We believe that together we can make a change. Therefore, feed the hunger to reduce their anger and to prevent unrest. Because hungry people are angry people.
Parvez BabulJournalist, columnist and authorBangladesh
56) John Teton, International Food Security Treaty Association, USA
International Food Security Treaty Gaining Traction
The International Food Security Treaty (IFST) imitative continues to gain traction in the global communities of experts in international law, human rights, the United Nations, and religious and political leaders. The IFST aims to place the human right of freedom from hunger under the protection of enforceable international law.
The draft treaty and endorsements of the IFST from Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, former UN Under-Secretary General Maurice Strong, former US Asst. Secretary of State for Human Rights John Shattuck, Physicians for Human Rights Executive Director Leonard Rubenstein, US Senator Dianne Feinstein, and many others may be found at www.treaty.org.
The capacity of a fully adopted and implemented IFST to aid the work of existing anti-hunger organizations has been sharply underappreciated, in part because too few of those active in the food security arena are aware of the proposal. The case for the IFST is spelled out in the current edition of the Yale Journal of International Affairs, which has published such experts as Tony Blair, Joseph Stiglitz, Samantha Power, David Brooks, Gen. Stanley McChrystal and two US Secretaries of Homeland Security.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
55
All those interested in food security and hunger eradication in particular would be well advised to read the article titled The Armless Hand: The Call for Anti-Hunger Law and the International Food Security Treaty at http://yalejournal.org/category/journal/articles/.
57) Summary of the second week, WFP - FAO Facilitation Team
Key lessons learned during the current MDGsParticipants shared several lessons on the current MDG agenda, which both enrich and also echo those already included in the Report to the Secretary General entitled: Realizing the Future We Want for All. These include:
MDGs are flawed by their top-down nature; there is need for a much more participatory approach for targets to be successful – and this is precisely what this e-consultation is for;
The “one size fits all” approach that, while good for advocacy, does not consider the diversity of countries and regions;
Focus of the MDGs is limited to the ends with no mention of the means; Over-reliance on objectives that require extensive quantitative information has proven to be
very difficult, with data lacking altogether in some countries; The segmented nature of the MDGs risks perpetuating the tendency of ministries and
development organizations to handle some underlying issues separately from others, while in practice, there are strong linkages (such as between, food security, health and nutrition).
Complexity of the fight against hunger requires a concerted effort by all actors and stakeholders.
Challenges and opportunities for achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years
Participants shared a wide array of challenges that future development objectives need to take into consideration in order to be successful. The demographics of the world population are a big challenge, as a growing (and less poor) global population will increasingly put stress on the current food systems. Furthermore, changes in demand and in food consumption habits, often in already food secure populations, overconsumption might lead to a double burden of both over- and under-nutrition. Food losses put further strain on food availability. To counter this trend, safe storage and further study of the impact of micro-organisms on the food chain need to be part of future development agendas.Participants also mentioned that the pressure on resources such as water and land will be increasing, and their protection and availability needs to feature prominently and across sectors in a future development agenda. Building on outcomes of the RIO+20 conference, the statement: "We recognize the key role that ecosystems play in maintaining water quantity and quality and support actions within the respective national boundaries to protect and sustainably manage these ecosystems." (UNCSD Rio+20 2012 ‘The Future We Want’ Paragraph 122) was mentioned as a way forward. Degradation of land, due to soil erosion, the growing of inappropriate crops and climate change was also identified as a major challenge that needs to be faced head-on. Rights-based aspects such as landlessness, gender inequality and unequal access to education were also identified as future challenges; participants argued that is not possible to tackle food and nutrition insecurity without also tackling poverty. Policies and good governance are key for making progress in these fields and this aspect needs to be explicitly included in the development agenda.Participants also argued that the integrated and global nature of the food systems means that food security in both developed and developing countries is interdependent. Risk management mechanisms
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
56
are needed everywhere as some important challenges, such as climate change, are not yet fully understood.
What works best and how to go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on?
For the post-2015 Development agenda, to make progress, participants suggested that eliminating hunger involves investments in agriculture, rural development, decent work, social protection and equality of opportunities. Current public expenditure should be revised and governments should increase the portion of their budgets devoted to agriculture to over 10%, as agreed upon in the Maputo Declaration of 2003. In particular, it was suggested to increase support for small-scale farmers through education and extension programmes.
Emphasis on people
Local culture, customs, production techniques and eating habits need to be considered in future development activities. Awareness raising should take place at all levels but well-functioning local systems should be maintained and strengthened, as they are mostly highly specialized and widely accepted by the population.
Realizing gender equality and protecting the farmers through granting land rights is also felt as being of paramount importance.
The Post 2015 Development agenda should support participatory and planning-by-people processes to ensure participation of those living in poverty in decisions that affect their lives.Livestock and fisheries sectors need to be better recognized in achieving food and nutrition security Livestock needs to be protected as the livelihoods of many poor people depend on them. Intervention to secure “fodder security” of the animals might in some cases be more sensible and less disruptive then focussing only on the food security of their owners.
Fisheries. The pivotal role which fish can play in direct and indirect food security is not adequately recognised. Little is said about fish, even in countries where fish is central to people’s diets, irrespective of their income levels and social status and where the potential for increasing fishery related activities is still high.
58) Jan Willem Eggink, Agri-ProFocus, Netherlands
Our network organization focuses on promoting farmer entrepreneurship in developing countries, but the point I want to make here is that for a worldwide sustainable food system and to prevent food prices to skyrocket in the coming decades, a massive long-lasting campaign to change feeding habits in the richer parts of the world towards less meat and more vegetables is vital. Make it sexy to eat (almost as a) vegetarian. Create a global coalition of chefs for a sustainable food system, invest in a global campaign with all kind of national/regional sub-campaigns and events adapted to the situation and food-culture. Low costs, high impact if taken as a well directed campaign on a global scale.
59) Scott Bleggi, Bread for the World, USA
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
57
The Lancet series on Maternal and Child Nutrition laid out and defined "nutrition-specific" interventions, and got the whole world to start thinking about nutrition. You could say that everything else in development assistance that affects nutrition is "nutrition-sensitive". But there is no general agreement on how to define nutrition-sensitive actions. What are they in agriculture? What are they in food security? Clearly defined nutrition-sensitive programs are critical to aligning and coordinating efforts to scale up nutrition, building the evidence base, and maintaining momentum that has been reached. Especially in the context of the development of the post2015 agenda on hunger food security and nutrition it is vital that we keep pushing for the inclusion of this aspect. Key policy decisions on how much, when, where, and how to invest in nutrition-sensitive development will be facilitated by reaching a consensus on definitions. As food for thought I would like to share with you Bread for the World Institute's effort to build some consensus and get policy makers and program implementers "on the same page", Implementing Nutrition-Sensitive Development: Reaching Consensus http://www.bread.org/institute/papers/nutrition-sensitive-interventions.pdf
60) Simon Ross Population Matters, United Kingdom [second contribution]
Theme 1:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The world population increased during that period by over one third i.e. two billion people. Until we stabilize population numbers, we are always trying to hit a moving target which is moving away from us. We are also putting ever more pressure on limited resources, particularly land, water, energy and fisheries. The key lesson is that we should seek to limit demand for food as well as increase supply of it.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
One of the main demand side challenges continues to be population growth. During the period 2015-2030, the UNDESA Population Division medium projection is that the population will grow by 14% or over one billion people. This assumes a continued reduction in the global birth rate; the actual growth in population could well be more than that. Another demand side challenge is dietary change with a move in some strata of developing countries to a more meat based, input intensive diet. On the supply side, one of the principal groups of challenges is to key agricultural inputs. These include:
- Loss of productive land through urban development, desertification and overuse.- Loss of productive land to biomass production
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
58
- Loss of aquifers and river water through overuse due to increased demand, pollution and saltwater infiltration
- Increased energy costs, particularly of fuel oil, whose portable nature makes it particularly suitable for agricultural machinery and distribution, due to increased demand and limited supply
- Increased fertilizer costs due to higher energy and mineral costs.
Depletion of marine and freshwater fish stocks by pollution and modern fishing methods is a challenge which should be considered and addressed. Increased impact of plant pests and disease due to monocultural farming practices and growing resistance to pesticides.Climate change has the potential to affect food productivity in major, though uncertain, ways:
- Sea warming, leading to reduction or migration of edible species- Increased scale and quantity of natural disasters- Increased severity and quantity of extreme weather events- Greater uncertainty of rainfall and other weather patterns- Reduction in glacial supplies of water for irrigation.
These are opportunities in the greater use of appropriate technologies. Another opportunity is to accelerate the declining birth rate by promoting rights based family planning, women’s empowerment and the benefits of smaller families.
Theme 2:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
One important strategy to addressing these challenges should be to reduce and ultimately halt the growth in demand for food. This should be done in two ways:
- Encourage the adoption of healthy diets which have limited calorie intake and are balanced between different food groups
- Seek to limit and then stabilize human population growth.
The latter can be achieved through rights based family planning, women’s empowerment and through promoting the personal and social benefits of smaller families.
Theme 3:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
59
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
These seem to be valid objectives and all of them would be easier to achieve with slower or no population growth. The following additional objectives address this point:
1. It seems important to have maximum population size as a goal.The UN DESA Population Division medium (most likely variant) projection for 2030 is 8.3 billion. Limiting numbers to 8 billion is a modest difference, but would establish the principle of the world population limitation goal. Moreover, it will still require a marked fall in the birth rate (see below).
SDG: Limit the world population to 8 billion by 2030. 2. The birth rate. The UN DESA Population Division projects (medium projection) the Net
Reproduction Rate (daughters per women) to fall from 1.08 in 2005-10 to 1.02 in 2025-30.
SDG: Limit average total fertility rate to 2 children per woman.3. Access to family planning is critical in empowering people to manage their fertility.
SDG: Universal access to a full range of affordable family planning commodities and services.4. Employment of women motivates couples to limit their family size.
SDG: Ensure gender parity in employment rates.5. We support contraction and convergence between the rich and poor, as this would tend to
reduce the birth rate. Under the MDGs, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty i.e. under $1.25 per day fell by half from 1990 to 2010. However, a smaller proportion of a larger number can still be a larger number, as has happened in Africa; and it is numbers of people, not rates or proportions, that need ever-increasing food, water, soil, energy etc.
SDG: Reduce the number of people in extreme poverty by half.6. Increasing workforce participation would serve to reduce the demand for additional births and
is inherently more sustainable. Currently, 200 million people are unemployed (ITUC).
SDG: Reduce the number of unemployed and under-employed by half.7. Secondary education for women increases female workforce participation. Gender parity of
participation in primary education was achieved by the MDGs.
SDG: Achieve gender parity in secondary education.8. Child marriage undermines women’s employment options, and increases birth rates.
SDG: End marriage under the age of eighteen.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
60
9. We should not subsidize larger families in general in order to lower the birth rate.
SDG: End payments or other benefits related to the number of children except for reasons of health, education and targeted poverty alleviation.
10. A reduction in the desired family size is essential to reduce the birth rate. Social marketing should be used to encourage smaller families.
SDG: Achieve a majority preference for a family size of two or fewer.11. Sex education is important in birth rate reduction, though hard to measure.
SDG: Provide universal sex and relationships education, including family planning.12. Safe abortion is an essential contingency preventing unwanted pregnancy where contraception
fails. With good family planning services and education, abortion should be legal, safe, and increasingly rare.
SDG: Provide access to legal and safe abortion on demand.
Simon RossPopulation Matters135-137 Station RoadLondon E4 6AGUnited Kingdom
61) Juan Pablo Ojeda, Argentina
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Hola,
quería compartirles una experiencia que viví en Misiones en la Localidad del Dorado. Allí vivían campesinos que eran asalariados de la empresa forestal Arauco ( o Alto Parana) en donde trabajaban muchos y cobraban bajos sueldos. Ellos solo utilizaban su terreno para plantar una que otra verdura ( lo hacían la mujeres y los chicos). Fue a partir de que se genero un grupo de pro huerta del INTA en donde de empezaron a generar proyectos comunitarios con relación a la agricultura en pequeña escala y producción de dulces. A partir de ese pequeño inicio se termina generando una cooperativa de productores que se asocian para tener más representatividad frente al gobierno. Los avances son muchos, cada uno de los productores vive de su trabajo de forma autónoma e independiente, tienen muchos agua corriente, electricidad y mandan a sus hijos a la escuela. Un joven de ahí me decía que antes no había futuro ahí mientras que ahora se puede pensar en ir para adelante y quedarse en campo en vez de ir a buscar una mejor vida en la cuidad. Muchos proyectos son financiados por la Subsecretaria de Agricultura Familiar.
Me parece que el cooperativismo y el Estado dando el apoyo necesario para despegar son fundamentales.
Un Abrazo
[English translation]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
61
Hello. I want to share with you the experience I had in the town of Dorado, Misiones. Most of the farmers living there were employees of the forestry company Arauco (or Alto Parana) where many people worked, earning low wages.
They only used their land for growing a few vegetables (usually women and children where in charge). Since then a group of Prohuerta was created by the Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), and started generating community projects related to small-scale agriculture and the production of sweets. That modest start ends up creating a cooperative of producers associated to have more representation in front of the government.
The improvements are many: each of the producers can make a living autonomously and independently, many have running water, electricity and send their children to school. A young man told me that before there was no future in the place, but now they can think about progressing and staying in the field rather than going to seek a better life in the city.
Many projects are funded by the Under Secretariat of Family Farming. I find essential that the cooperatives and the State give the necessary support for taking off.
62) Economist views on the go, University of Guyana [first contribution]
Greetings from Guyana!
Theme 3
Most countries have varying economic, social and political climate which pose severe challenges towards achieving the MDG’s within the bounded time frame. In addition, one of the main problems with the initiative was that it failed to address the unique individuality of each country as such, while some countries were on the fast track of achieving the goals, others were stagnated.Given this problem, it would be essential that policies be designed in a specific framework taking into account each country’s economic, social and political climate. In addition, time-bounds should be greater for developing countries who lack sufficient capital needed to undertake investment in the necessary areas so as to achieve the goals.
63) Emily Levitt Ruppert, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team
Dear all,
My name is Emily Levitt Ruppert and I am contributing to the discussion as a member of the FAO/WFP Facilitation Team with a specific interest in nutrition. In reviewing the submissions so far, and with specific reference to Theme 1 (Opportunities and Challenges) and Theme 2 (“How” should malnutrition challenges be addressed?), I've picked out a few lines I think deserve further discussion. One quote I find particularly thought provoking is:
"...there has been knowledge that the war against malnutrition can only be fought at the community level, but the community-based and decentralization approaches are seriously missing in all actions."
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
62
How might we as a development community with 'high level' goals such as the MDGs/SPGs address this global call for greater local-level planning (e.g. decentralized approach) to improve hunger, food and nutrition security? Are there country models that any one of you could highlight as good practice?
Looking forward to your feedback on the above.Emily Levitt Ruppert, M.S., Ph.D.Coordinator, Agriculture-Nutrition Community of PracticeFAO - WFP Facilitation TeamPost 2015 FSN Forum discussion
64) Johanne Lewis, Bexbase Media Technology, UK
Research shows there exists rural communities with a surplus of agricultural produce which goes to waste. It would be great if some of these agricultural produce could be relocated to areas where there is less food.
The Agricultural Network Project (http://agnetpro.wordpress.com) is a working prototype of how this could be achieved technologically. http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/AgriculturalNetworkProjectNCJAL.pdf
65) Sahib Haq, WFP, Pakistan
The respective governments have no commitment to meet the MDG targets. This led to the current situation instead of improvement, going to more worst condition in terms of poverty, hunger, food insecurity and over all vulnerability to shocks. Nothing went well in the past decade because of low priority, despite struggle and support by donors and UN agencies. The low level of commitment spoiled the initiatives. In many countries including Pakistan, there is no policy to take care of the population but even did not try to balance the terms of trade between various livelihoods, geo-locations and types of population groups. The best strategy could be to put more pressure on the government and even make a condition for donation/aid/loan to adopt/implement certain measures leading to improve food security.The goals for 2015 are very optimistic and they don't seem to be met in many developing countries.We should go step wise, otherwise, the whole concept of MDG, especially of food security will lose its importance.
66) Fred Ojok, Grassroots Reconciliation Group, Uganda
The MDG of reduction and eradication of hunger and through improving household food security had been done well in some countries but some other countries almost failed because bad governance and accountability for some of the projects meant to improve agriculture infrastructural development
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
63
67) Eusebio Melo, Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de la Pesca Marino Mercante, Dominican Republic
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Los gobierno deben de hacer programas al junto de todos los productores nacionales y poner a funcionar una maquinaria humana de técnico a trabajar juntos a los agricultores y los productores agrícolas para una mayor producción. También se debe de pensar que en los años 80, se hablaba de la peste verde, que era de poner a producir los campos, pero también, entendemos que se debe de hablar en estos momentos de la peste azul la cual significa más política estratégicas de los gobiernos, sobre la crianza de pescados, a través de estanques y represa. Crear una capacitación a nivel mundial y crear las felicidades de romper la barrera para su intercambio.
[English translation]
Governments should create programs together with all domestic producers and put their technicians to work with farmers and agricultural producers for greater production.
Bear in mind that back in the 80s, people talked about the green fever, which consisted in putting the land into production. We also understand that we should talk now about the blue fever. which means more strategic policies from governments on fish breeding through ponds and dams.
We must introduce training at global level and create the joy of dismantling trade barriers.
68) Abubacker Siddick Syed Mohammed, M.S.Swaminathan Research Foundation, India
Thematic Area 3: Following Interventions focusing rural women with the objective of improving Household nutrition will help achieving ZHC 1. Establishing Home gardens in every home with a plan for nutritious veg/ greens 2. Creating awareness on Nutritious food and improved cooking methods using available resources retaining nutritional values 3. Preparation and issuance of Food and Nutrition Entitlement Cards to each family and its follow up work.
69) Bhavani R Vaidyanathan, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, India
Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security
Theme 1:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
64
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
The gap between intent and policy and practice is a major challenge to achieving the goals we set ourselves. In India for instance, a major challenge has been ensuring implementation and delivery of the food and nutrition security safety nets that are in place like the public distribution system, midday meal scheme and integrated child development services.
The policies of globalisation and opening up of markets from the last decade of the 20th century has impacted negatively on local level food security with commerce taking precedence over consumption!
Shrinking of investment in agriculture has impacted on production and productivity and affected food availability. In India, the rate of growth of food grain production in the decade of the 1990s fell below the rate of growth of population and per capita availability of foodgrains has come down over the years!
Access to safe drinking water, sanitation and affordable healthcare facilities for all is still not a reality in many developing countries and negatively impact on nutrition status. Investment by the state in these areas is again the main issue.
Unless nutrition security is prioritised and made a national agenda and pursued seriously with commitment, the goal of food and nutrition security will remain a dream.
Theme 2: What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
Generating awareness on entitlements among the community at large can be a major step forward. In India for instance, effective use of the Right to Information Act by people on utilisation of funds allocated for specific programmes has in many cases made a malfunctioning system work.
Media and ICT tools should be effectively used for generating awareness, so that more people start demanding their rights and entitlements and thereby contribute to effective delivery.
In India again, the public interest litigations on the right to food has led to a series of orders by the Supreme Court of India to make the public food delivery systems spruce up and deliver.
Improved governance is at the heart of effective implementation of state schemes for food and nutrition security. It can come only with political commitment to ending hunger (like the zero hunger programme of Brazil) and not just lip service.
Local level food security systems should be encouraged like for instance community foodgrain banks in tribal areas of India that provide support during periods of seasonal or transient hunger. Consumption of tubers and wild foods by indigenous communities is another practice of fostering local food security.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
65
Nutrition literacy drives in schools and at community forums addressing both men and women and training champions from the community to take the messages forward have an important role.
Theme 3:For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
a. Has to be availability of adequate and safe food for a balanced dietb. 100% access to safe drinking water, sanitation and healthcare facilities are crucial for
addressing malnutrition. c. The majority of landholders in developing countries being small and marginal farmers,
increasing their production and productivity definitely have to be the focus. d. Zero loss or waste of food should encompass the entire gamut from the farmers’ field to post-
harvest processing to consumption on the table. e. Effective postharvest technologies and infrastructure to ensure effective processing of surplus
produce is very crucial both for improving farmers’ incomes and addressing loss due to spoilage.
f. Adaptation to climate change is important in the post 2015 global development framework. g. While the overall objectives can be generic, some objectives will of course have to be country-
specific to address immediate priorities.
BhavaniM S Swaminathan Research Foundation
70) Ajay Kumar VB, RIGHTS, India
It is important to evaluate MDG on the basis of government performances/ actual execution of the commitments they made . How far or in what extent the states are able to convert MDG to their own respective national policies, budgetary provisions and institutions. Take examples of India the number of poor remain same (people living less than 2 dollar per days) for last decade and 50% India’s children’s are malnourished. Is it possible prepare an international Index based on 3-4 parameters of MDG?
71) Sachin Kumar, Jain Media for Rights., India
Dear all,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
66
Please find enclosed a document for discussion on various structural aspects of childhood hunger and malnutrition.
http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/The%20ABC%20of%20Childhood%20Hunger%20-a%20conceptual%20agenda%5B1%5D.pdf
Sachin Kumar Jain
72) Economist views on the go, University of Guyana [second contribution]
Dear Moderator, With regards to Theme 1: Key to the success of any initiative is an integrated approach by all stakeholders. In Guyana - South America, while we have had some amount of success with the “Grow More Food Campaign”, we have learnt that if we are to contribute significantly to reducing hunger, and attaining food security, we must collaborate with other nations who are in pursuit of same. With that being said, I was pleased to learn that official from Trinidad and Tobago visited Guyana in November to discuss plan to establish a “food security facility” in Guyana. It is widely known that Guyana has the potential to produce food to supply the entire Caribbean; however, over the year we have been faced with some challenges. Just to highlight a few:
- low levels of technical personnel/skills necessary to develop the agricultural sector - provide nutritious foods as affordable prices - inability to cope effectively with climate change - low levels of mechanization in the agricultural sector
I would like to think that many developing countries are in a similar position, and thus, by joining forces with other nation, the MDGs can be achieved. Thank you and best regards
73) Barack Ondanya, Miriu Integrated Project, Kenya
Dear Fellows,
Let me take it with great honour to thank you very much on the efforts you are laying to ensure that we live in A World We Want. Each and every time ,we have a dream to be in A World free from hunger and diseases.
During the current MDGS' as in Theme 1, there are some lessons that I came to learn as I observe from within my country the situations pertaining hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition:
Most communities still go without food. For example, there is a lot of hunger in most regions of North Eastern Province, an area which is seriously affected by drought. Most families can’t afford even a meal a day as they survive majorly on donations and support from well wishers. Kenya is a country with
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
67
varied climatic conditions hence can produce food in some areas as some go without. Generally, hunger as a disaster is still common among the communities in the world.
Food security has also not been achieved in Kenya. In case of severe famine, Kenyans do face severe hunger as we still have poor systems of food conservation. There are common disasters, which tend to affect the famers hence destroy the productivity of the country. Floods and drought will always destroy crops within the fields hence lowering the harvests leading to severe hunger.
Due to high level of poverty within the country, most children die due to malnutrition. For example, in Turkana where in the recent past, some families were recorded as they feed on bitter fruits of which some were poisonous. Other communities were also feeding on cats after a long severe drought. These children die due to marasmus.
In general, food security and hunger have not been dealt with in the recent past according to the current MDG 1.
74) Revinder Naik Vankudothu, Agriculture University, India
The commitment to achieve MDG s is encouraging but unless the issue of food security is solved one cannot find the other way out.
The possible ways could be:
1 to encourage the nutritional/kitchen garden in rural areas where they have low purchasing power and sizable area would be vacant;
2. to invest more in agriculture R&D so that research could be intensified in the areas where it needs focus;
3. to utilise the ICTs for reaching the rural areas where the need is more;
4. crop specific need based management of the crops with the existing technology;
5. beyond all these things the scientific / agriculture research society should recognise knowledge as additional fifth factor of production in addition to the existing factors of production.
75) Bhavani R Vaidyanathan, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, India [second contribution]
In addition to what I have already sent in, additional points that need attention are:
Control of food price inflation and effective social protection measures to shield the poor and vulnerable from it.
Investment in agriculture and agricultural infrastructure like irrigation. Giving a pro-nutrition focus to agriculture through an integrated crop-livestock farming
system that is tailored to address the nutrition situation of the community on the ground. Regional initiatives like the proposed SAARC food bank in South Asia need to be
operationalised.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
68
Attention to water conservation and recharge. Special focus on women and children.
76) Joyce Wendam, Department of Agriculture, Philippines
Addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on:
The Department of Agriculture (DA) in the Philippines under the competent leadership of its Secretary, Hon. Proceso Alcala, has formulated a framework known as the "Agri-Pinoy" Framework. This framework is the over-all strategic framework in pursuit of its mandate to promote sustainable agricultural growth and development. It is aimed at increasing the productivity and incomes of farmers and fisherfolk, and providing consumers with adequate, affordable, and nutritious basic food commodities.
It serves as a guide of the personnel of the DA in carrying out their duties and responsibilities in order to meet the Philippine need. With this framework, programs, projects and activities are focused, concentrated and directed towards the attainment of the DA's goal of achieving 100 per cent food security and self-sufficiency by the year 2013.
Guiding Principles
The guiding principles of Agri-Pinoy are centered on: food security and self-sufficiency; sustainable agriculture and fishery; natural resource management; and, local development.
The first principle - food security and self-sufficiency - underscores our objective to minimize depence on imports to meet national food requirements. Hence, we have to vigorously develop our capability to produce all staples, particularly rice and corn and other basic food commodities.
To achieve, the DA's goal of 100 per cent self-sufficiency by 2013, two major strategies were developed: increase rice production; and, decrease rice consumption through the promotion of alternative staple food such as rootcrops like sweet potato, cassava; banana; white and yellow corn; vegetables, and others.
The second guiding principle is that our commitment to food security and self-sufficiency should be anchored on sustainability. The true test of this is the capability to withstand two major challenges: climate change; and, global market. The principle of sustainability also applies to the required number and quality of our farmers and fishers. We have an aging farming population, thus we are promoting appreciation of agriculture among schoolchildren through the "Gulayan sa Paaralan." For young people to be attracted to agriculture and fisheries, there is a need for them to see and interact with productive and prosperous farmers who may serve as role models.
"Gulayan sa Paaralan" also complements the feeding program for the schoolchildren wherein safe and nutritious foods are being produced by the schoolchildren themselves. This may also serve as source of income of the school by selling the excess production and utilize the proceeds for the improvement of the facilities. This "Gulayan sa Paaralan" should involve not only the teachers and students but also the parents and the community for project sustainability.
Also, we are helping small farmers and producers to become farmer-technicians and farmer-scientists, helping them to acquire business skills and facilitate their linkages to markets.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
69
To address climate change concerns, organic agriculture is also being promoted. To increase the resilience of agricultural communities, development of climate change sensitive technologies is a necessity. Likewise, support services should be provided to the most vulnerable communities.
Da assistance programs cover the "from seeds to markets" spectrum. Food self-sufficiency and sustainability are not only about ensuring supply. It also includes demand-side management, especially in highly urbanized areas. Consumer education is imperative to promote a better appreciation of the agriculture and fisheries sectors, and for the promotion of responsible consumption.
The principle of sustainability is closely linked to the third and fourth guiding principles: natural resource management; and, local development.
Bridging the gap, touching the heart
Due to devolution, as a result of the implementation of the Local Government Code of 1991, the DA has field personnel up to the regional level only. This has resulted to a gap which must be appropriately addressed. We need to bridge the gap between the DA and the local communities through forging of partnerships with the Local Government Units (LGUs) and the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). The Agri-Pinoy has a theme "Bridging the gap, touching the heart." Meaning, the personnel of DA and also the stakeholders should show sincerity and commitment to deliver efficient and effective basic services to the farmers and fisherfolks for the improvement of the their productivity and profitability.
As DA's over-all strategic framework, Agri-Pinoy exemplifies both continuity and change.
Reference:
Department of Agriculture "Agri-Pinoy" Framework
77) Saul Vicente, Foro Permanente de Naciones Unidas para las Cuestiones Indígenas, Mexico
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Buenas noches desde Juchitán, Oaxaca, México.
Es un placer saludarles y decirles que es de mi mayor interés compartirles mis comentarios.
1.- Desde la perspectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas, quisiera comentarles que fue muy importante que la FAO haya adoptado en el año 2010 una Poítica sobre Pueblos Indígenas y Tribales. Particularmente, porque en ella recoge los elementos sustanciales de derechos reconcidos en la Declaración de Naciones Unidas sobre los Derehcos de los Pueblos Indígenas.
Lo lamentable del caso es que durante el proceso de negociación sobre las Directrices Voluntarias sobre la Gobernanza responsable de la tenencia de la tierra, la pesca y los bosques en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria nacional, aprobadas por el Comité de Seguridad Aliemtnaria Mundial, hayan eliminado del documento el marco de instrumentos jurídicos internacionales sobre la cual se fundamentan tales Directrices, entre ellas la "Política de la FAO sobre Pueblos Indígenas y Tribales".
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
70
Aún así, la aprobación de las Directrices fue un avance importante debido a los procesos de Consulta previa realizada, de la inclusión de representantes de la Sociedad Civil durante los debates y la negociación incluyendo a representantes de Pueblos Indígenas. Sin embargo, al final, quedaron algunas Directrices que tienen menos alcance que lo dispuesto en la Declaración de Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y en la Política de la FAO sobre Pueblos Indígenas y Tribales.
Por citar un ejemplo: en el caso del apartado 14 de la Directrices sobre restitución de Tierras, en la parte que corresponde a Pueblos Indígenas (14.3), señala que la restitución de tierras debeerá darse en el contexto nacional y con arreglo al derecho nacional. Lo cual tiene un alcance menor que lo establecido en el Artículo 28 de la Declaración de Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas.
Por lo tanto es necesario que la FAO retome su "Política sobre Pueblos Indígenas y Tribales" y que el Comité Mundial de Seguridad Alimentaria revise tales Directrices y que se armonice con los estándares internacionales sobre derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas.
Así mismo es necesario que se explicite en dichas Directrices cuál es el marco internacional de instrumentos jurídicos de derechos humanos, sobre el cual se funadmentan las mismas.
2.- Así mismo fue un avance el que la 36 Asamblea Regional de la FAO de América Latina y el Caribe aprobara iniciar las discusiones en cada país de esa región, sobre el derecho de Soberania Alimentaria de los Pueblos. En consecunencia, es necesario que dichas discusiones incien cuanto antes; de la misma manera, sería conveniente que las demás Regionales de la FAO tomaran la misma resolución y, en General la FAO central debiera aprobar una resolución en este sentido. Este es uno de los temas que nos llevarían a encontrar soluciones a los problemas del hambre en el mundo y a producir alimentos sanos, nutritivos, culturalmente pertinentes, en calidad y cantidad suficientes y producidos de manera sustentable y sostenible, lo cual también nos llevaría a elaborar mejores estrategias para enfrentar los efectos del Cambio Climático, que afecta particularmente a los productores de alimentos de pequeña escala, en la que se encuentran los pueblos indígenas, los pescadores artesanales, los pastores nómadas, pequeños agricultores, entre otros.
[English translation]
Greetings from Juchitán, Oaxaca, Mexico.
I am glad to greet you and explain that my main interest is to share my comments.
1.- From the perspective of Indigenous Peoples, I wish to tell you that it was very important for FAO the adoption in 2010 of a Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples. Particularly, because it lists the main elements of Rights recognized in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
The sad part is that during the negotiation process on the Voluntary Guidelines on responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security, adopted by the Committee on World Food Security, the international legal instruments on which these guidelines are based have been removed from the document, including the"FAO Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples".
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
71
Yet the adoption of the guidelines was a major breakthrough because of the previous consultation processes undertaken, the participation of representatives of civil society in the discussions and negotiations, including representatives of Indigenous Peoples. However, in the end, there were some guidelines with less scope than the ones in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the FAO Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.
One example: in the case of paragraph 14 of the Guidelines on Land Restitution, in the section on Indigenous Peoples (14.3), it points out that land restitution should be in the national context and in accordance with national law. This has less scope than Article 28 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Therefore it is necessary that the FAO resume its "Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples" and that the Committee on World Food Security reviews these guidelines and harmonize them with the international standards on the rights of Indigenous Peoples.
The Guidelines also need to make explicit on which international framework of human rights legal instruments they are based.
2. - Another breakthrough was that the 36th FAO Regional Conference for Latin America and the Caribbean approved to start discussions in each country of the region, on the Right to Food Sovereignty. It is therefore necessary that these discussions start as soon as possible. Similarly, it would be desirable that the other FAO Regional Offices took the same resolution and overall, FAO headquarters should pass a resolution in this context.
This is one of the issues that would lead us to find solutions to the problems of world hunger and produce safe, nutritious, culturally acceptable, in sufficient quantity and quality and produced in a sustainable way. This will also lead us to better strategies to address the impacts of climate change, affecting particularly small-scale food producers, including indigenous peoples, artisanal fishermen, pastoralists and smallholders, among others.
78) John Moor, Population Matters, United Kingdom
The amount of food required for a country depends on the population of that country. For example in Niger, currently suffering hunger, the population is growing very rapidly with a fertility rate ( average number of babies a woman bears) of 7. The UN should give help in family planning in all countries which have a high fertility rate.
79) Hélène Delisle, WHO Collaborating Centre on Nutrition changes and Development, Canada
Comments on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security Post 2015 Development Agenda Framework
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to express our views on these topics. However, we cannot organize our comments around the three themes on which inputs were sought.1. Global challenges call for global approaches. There is a need for merging or at least converging or consolidating initiatives for post-2015 plan of action. At the present moment, we observe an inflationary trend. Only for insiders is the complexity of plans and consultations understandable. Several consultation processes are going on in a somewhat parallel fashion, on health, on food, on
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
72
sustainable development. Responding to these separate consultations is not highly productive, and it is not known how the comments are processed. Avoiding the ‘silo’ consultations would be imperative.The Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN), led by FAO, launched this e-consultation led by FAO, WFP and ‘The World We Want’, on a development agenda framework. Recently, the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) launched another e-consultation on CFS Global Strategic Framework (until October 2012) also through the Global Forum on FSN. Now what is the difference between the ‘Development Agenda Framework’ and the ‘Global Strategic Framework’, if any? The report on comments on the Global Strategic Framework is 98 page-long. How is this consultation to impinge on the present consultation on Hunger, food and nutrition security in the next development agenda framework? The following are just a few more documents that would need to be taken into account if we are to integrate food systems, food (and nutrition) security, and nutrition through the lifecycle, sustainable development, and health in plans, frameworks, objectives, indicators, and targets.• On food security and nutrition:- The Zero Hunger Challenge – Comprehensive framework for action, by the High Level Task Force on Global Food Security, 2011 (as alluded to in the invited comments);- UNSCN Statement on Nutrition Security of Urban Populations (2012);- WHO, Draft Comprehensive Implementation Plan, Maternal, Infant and Young Child Nutrition (2012);• On sustainable development:- The Future we Want (2012)- Climate change – Food and Nutrition Security Implications (SCN News 2010) • On non-communicable diseases:- Global Action Plan for NCDs Zero Draft (2012)- Draft Comprehensive Global Monitoring Framework Including Indicators and a set of Voluntary Global Targets (2012)• On health and social determinants of health:- Health in the Post-2015 Development Agenda (Consultations 2012-3)- UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda – Health (UNAIDS, UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO, 2012)- Outcome of the World Conference on Social Determinants of Health, Rio 2011There has to be some way of integrating these, and nutrition may be a key, as it provides a link between food systems and health. All segments of food systems would have to be considered, as well as the interesting notion of ‘nutrition value chains’ for food systems. Regarding nutrition and health, the lifecycle approach should be revitalized, in order to avoid the current tendency to link undernutrition with maternal and child health, and nutrition-related chronic diseases with ‘adult’ health.
2. Concepts have to be clear and a shared vision is needed. Food security and nutrition (security) are still not clearly defined and one wonders if consensus is achieved, in spite of a recent report on the terminology, advocating ‘food and nutrition security’. ‘Food security and nutrition’ (not nutrition security) was used in the consultation on CFS Global Strategic Framework. This makes a difference. Nutrition security implies adequate access to health services and a healthy environment. The underlying issue is the negative impact of infection on nutritional status, particularly of children. It is not so relevant for adult nutritional problems, including nutrition-related chronic diseases. ‘Food and nutrition insecurity’ still refers primarily if not exclusively to undernutrition, undernourishment, hunger. The term ‘malnutrition’ continues to mean undernutrition (and specific nutrient deficiencies, ‘hidden hunger’) and not to ‘overnutrition’ (a misnomer), at least for the general public. Furthermore, the concept of food security would have to be broadened to integrate environmental sustainability and social equity, like in the WHO-Europe’s criteria of food security. It is now established that food and nutrition insecurity are also linked with non-communicable diseases such as obesity, diabetes and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
73
cardiovascular disease. Undernutrition and micronutrient malnutrition in mothers and in infants, in particular, are a risk factor for these non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in adult life. NCDs are no longer associated with affluence, even in low-income countries, and NCDs themselves contribute to poverty. Why not consider the term ‘dysnutrition’ to encompass global undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, overnutrition, and dietary imbalance? 3. A great deal is being said and written about action frameworks, but to our knowledge, no conceptual framework has been proposed to integrate food systems, nutrition and health since the UNICEF produced its causal model of 1990. Can’t this conceptual model be broadened and updated to take into account the new challenges and emerging forms of ‘malnutrition’ (nutrition-related chronic diseases), as well as the environmental issues?
4. As we already brought up on several occasions, the key importance of high quality professional training of the workforce in nutrition, right in low and middle-income countries has to be more emphasized. If international organizations, NGOs and NGIs are not satisfied with existing university programs, they should strengthen these programs in a coordinated way, instead of having their own informal training activities, which may not be sustainable in the long run. Initial training, continuous education and international accreditation structures (to establish norms and standards) for nutrition training programs would be required. It would be difficult, for instance, to strengthen national nutrition policies and action plans and implement the Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health unless more human resources are well trained in nutrition at all levels. Advocacy for health and nutrition promotion also calls for high-level human resources.
5. The MDGs galvanized the efforts and helped mobilize resources. A new set of development goals is needed for post-2015. The goals that were not achieved should remain. Some others would need to be more explicit, for instance: food and nutrition security; NCDs; education and professional training. Women should continue to be the focus of at least one goal, to improve not only their health and their equality, but also their resources, their well-being and their participation in public life as citizens. We would see the relevance of goals focusing on the following:
- Agriculture for health, equity and environmental sustainability- Governance- Protracted crises.
Hélène Delisle, Ph.D., ProfessorHead of TRANSNUT, WHO Collaborating Centre on Nutrition changes and DevelopmentDepartment of Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal
80) S.Mahadeva Shanmugaratnam, FAO, Sri Lanka
Any country it may be country with high human fertility or low human fertility country, ensuring self employment through agriculural & livestock productions at least to one member of a vulnerable family with mobile assistance in all aspects to attain our objective of ensuring food all void of malnutrtion. Land availability of vulnerable group shall not be a constrain in ensuring the self employment of agriculural nature in a selected smallest area representing a particular community with appropriate crop and livestock selected for that community.
81) Hélène Delisle, WHO Collaborating Centre on Nutrition changes and Development, Canada
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
74
Comments on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security Post 2015 Development Agenda Framework
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to express our views on these topics. However, we cannot organize our comments around the three themes on which inputs were sought.1. Global challenges call for global approaches. There is a need for merging or at least converging or consolidating initiatives for post-2015 plan of action. At the present moment, we observe an inflationary trend. Only for insiders is the complexity of plans and consultations understandable. Several consultation processes are going on in a somewhat parallel fashion, on health, on food, on sustainable development. Responding to these separate consultations is not highly productive, and it is not known how the comments are processed. Avoiding the ‘silo’ consultations would be imperative.The Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN), led by FAO, launched this e-consultation led by FAO, WFP and ‘The World We Want’, on a development agenda framework. Recently, the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) launched another e-consultation on CFS Global Strategic Framework (until October 2012) also through the Global Forum on FSN. Now what is the difference between the ‘Development Agenda Framework’ and the ‘Global Strategic Framework’, if any? The report on comments on the Global Strategic Framework is 98 page-long. How is this consultation to impinge on the present consultation on Hunger, food and nutrition security in the next development agenda framework? The following are just a few more documents that would need to be taken into account if we are to integrate food systems, food (and nutrition) security, and nutrition through the lifecycle, sustainable development, and health in plans, frameworks, objectives, indicators, and targets.
• On food security and nutrition:- The Zero Hunger Challenge – Comprehensive framework for action, by the High Level Task Force on Global Food Security, 2011 (as alluded to in the invited comments);- UNSCN Statement on Nutrition Security of Urban Populations (2012);- WHO, Draft Comprehensive Implementation Plan, Maternal, Infant and Young Child Nutrition (2012);
• On sustainable development:- The Future we Want (2012)- Climate change – Food and Nutrition Security Implications (SCN News 2010)
• On non-communicable diseases:- Global Action Plan for NCDs Zero Draft (2012)- Draft Comprehensive Global Monitoring Framework Including Indicators and a set of Voluntary Global Targets (2012)
• On health and social determinants of health:- Health in the Post-2015 Development Agenda (Consultations 2012-3)- UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda – Health (UNAIDS, UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO, 2012)
- Outcome of the World Conference on Social Determinants of Health, Rio 2011There has to be some way of integrating these, and nutrition may be a key, as it provides a link between food systems and health. All segments of food systems would have to be considered, as well as the interesting notion of ‘nutrition value chains’ for food systems. Regarding nutrition and health, the lifecycle approach should be revitalized, in order to avoid the current tendency to link undernutrition with maternal and child health, and nutrition-related chronic diseases with ‘adult’ health.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
75
2. Concepts have to be clear and a shared vision is needed. Food security and nutrition (security) are still not clearly defined and one wonders if consensus is achieved, in spite of a recent report on the terminology, advocating ‘food and nutrition security’. ‘Food security and nutrition’ (not nutrition security) was used in the consultation on CFS Global Strategic Framework. This makes a difference. Nutrition security implies adequate access to health services and a healthy environment. The underlying issue is the negative impact of infection on nutritional status, particularly of children. It is not so relevant for adult nutritional problems, including nutrition-related chronic diseases. ‘Food and nutrition insecurity’ still refers primarily if not exclusively to undernutrition, undernourishment, hunger. The term ‘malnutrition’ continues to mean undernutrition (and specific nutrient deficiencies, ‘hidden hunger’) and not to ‘overnutrition’ (a misnomer), at least for the general public. Furthermore, the concept of food security would have to be broadened to integrate environmental sustainability and social equity, like in the WHO-Europe’s criteria of food security. It is now established that food and nutrition insecurity are also linked with non-communicable diseases such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Undernutrition and micronutrient malnutrition in mothers and in infants, in particular, are a risk factor for these non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in adult life. NCDs are no longer associated with affluence, even in low-income countries, and NCDs themselves contribute to poverty. Why not consider the term ‘dysnutrition’ to encompass global undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, overnutrition, and dietary imbalance?
3. A great deal is being said and written about action frameworks, but to our knowledge, no conceptual framework has been proposed to integrate food systems, nutrition and health since the UNICEF produced its causal model of 1990. Can’t this conceptual model be broadened and updated to take into account the new challenges and emerging forms of ‘malnutrition’ (nutrition-related chronic diseases), as well as the environmental issues?
4. As we already brought up on several occasions, the key importance of high quality professional training of the workforce in nutrition, right in low and middle-income countries has to be more emphasized. If international organizations, NGOs and NGIs are not satisfied with existing university programs, they should strengthen these programs in a coordinated way, instead of having their own informal training activities, which may not be sustainable in the long run. Initial training, continuous education and international accreditation structures (to establish norms and standards) for nutrition training programs would be required. It would be difficult, for instance, to strengthen national nutrition policies and action plans and implement the Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health unless more human resources are well trained in nutrition at all levels. Advocacy for health and nutrition promotion also calls for high-level human resources.
5. The MDGs galvanized the efforts and helped mobilize resources. A new set of development goals is needed for post-2015. The goals that were not achieved should remain. Some others would need to be more explicit, for instance: food and nutrition security; NCDs; education and professional training. Women should continue to be the focus of at least one goal, to improve not only their health and their equality, but also their resources, their well-being and their participation in public life as citizens. We would see the relevance of goals focusing on the following:
- Agriculture for health, equity and environmental sustainability- Governance- Protracted crises.
Hélène Delisle, Ph.D., ProfessorHead of TRANSNUT, WHO Collaborating Centre on Nutrition changes and Development
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
76
Department of Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal
82) Ugo Gentilini, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team
Dear Participants,
What a great debate and contributions! My name is Ugo Gentilini and I’m social protection specialist at WFP. As a member of the FAO-WFP facilitation team, let me propose a question under theme 3, particularly around the “objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.” In this regard, one of the objectives put forward by the UN Secretary-General under the Zero Hunger Challenge is to ensure “100% access to adequate food all year round”.
But how to achieve such a key objective? One way could be to strengthen national social protection systems, as advocated by some of you. For example, Todd Post and Scott Bleggi from Bread for the World Institute argued that “the keys to achieving the 2015 targets depend on investments in smallholder agriculture and social protection”.
So let me ask you, what do you think would be the role of social protection to ensure that all people have always access to adequate food? What are some key constraints that governments and their partners may face in providing social protection? And what might be the opportunities?
Looking forward to your views!
Ugo Gentilini,FAO-WFP facilitation team
83) Codrin Paveliuc Olariu, Young Professionals in Local Development, Romania [second contribution]
For Ugo Gentilini, To answer your question: The social protection system can be used in principle to ensure access to food, but it is not recommended. As the food aid and food stamps (just to name a few) systems showed us so far, giving food is just a start and a way to alleviate immediate danger to human health, but not a solution to solve M1 and to get to "Zero Hunger". If we want to prevent future food crisis, we must ensure sustainability of the access to food (increase competitiveness of smallholder farming, access to markets, decreased unemployment in rural areas, better water management etc.). To start with, access to information and innovation would be good. After that we should exploit what we have. See the attached article on how we should plan better.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Rural_Urban_interactions.pdf
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
77
84) Codrin Paveliuc Olariu, Young Professionals in Local Development, Romania [third contribution]
For Emily Levitt Ruppert Although a descentralization approach has been pushed on countries and local communities in the past several years and globalization has forced us to think this way, we forgot to focused specifically on the needs and development of the local community. This can be done either through centralized policies adapted to local specificities or the local development strategies that ensure a perfect grasp of the environment. In both cases, we must assess the need and develop detailed strategies.
See attached a framework for a possible needs and development analysis applicable to local communities.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Conceptual_model.pdf
85) Amador Gómez, Acción Contra el Hambre, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
La nutrición como inversión. Mejorar la nutrición debe considerarse como un estímulo y prioridad en el proceso de desarrollo y una estrategia que conduce a la reducción de la pobreza.La voluntad política empieza a aparecer y se extiende el convencimiento de que proteger el derecho a una nutrición adecuada como una responsabilidad central de los gobiernos y los demás actores.Por otro lado, la evidencia técnica sobre como prevenir y tratar la desnutrición existe. Es el momento de establecer prioridades en la lucha contra el hambre. La lucha contra la desnutrición infantil debe ser la máxima prioridad de gobiernos y donantes internacionales, como la mejor inversión. Demostrar los logros. Más demanda de análisis y capacidad diagnósticaDemostrar los logros se convertirá cada vez más en el centro de todas las organizaciones y actores implicados en la lucha contra el hambre y la seguridad nutricional. Donantes y gobiernos esperan ver una clara demostración de lo que se está logrando en cuanto a progreso e impacto. Se hace necesario mostrar resultados que sigan facilitando la toma de decisiones y la priorización de estrategias.Es necesario sumar evidencia económica y política a la evidencia técnica contra la desnutrición. Debemos incorporar otro tipo de estudios y diagnósticos, desde enfoques económicos y políticos. El agua en clave nutricional. Los enfoques y estrategias de agua, saneamiento e higiene son claves en la lucha contra la desnutrición infantil y el fomento de la seguridad alimentaria-agua que riega: el agua como impulsor de la seguridad alimentaria,-agua que sana: el agua contra las enfermedades diarreicas,-agua que nutre: el agua como nutriente.La integración sistemática de un paquete mínimo "WASH" (water, sanitation andhygiene) en los programas de nutrición y seguridad alimentaria son necesarios pararomper el círculo vicioso diarrea-desnutrición y para desarrollar una agricultura quevaya más allá de la subsistencia. El ordenamiento de los recursos hídricos y eldesarrollo de tecnologías de bajo coste que facilite la irrigación a baja escala son claves para diversificar y aumentar las fuentes de producción de alimentos. Prestar atención a la desnutrición recurrente
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
78
La desnutrición estacional es previsible y evitable, es necesario incorporar enfoqus de proteccion de los mecanismos de adaptación y de la ecnomia de las familias y comunidades expuestas a riesgos recurrentes. Incorporando paquete de intervenciones estacionales que tengan en cuenta la dimensión recurrente de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición mitigando el riesgo y el deficit de resiliencia
[English translation]
Nutrition as an investment. Improving nutrition should be considered as an stimulus and a priority in the development process and as a strategy that leads to poverty reduction.
Political will begins to appear and the conviction to protect the right to adequate nutrition as a core responsibility of governments and other actors is growing.
Furthermore, the technical evidence about preventing and treating malnutrition exists. It's time to prioritize the fight against hunger. The fight against child malnutrition should be the top priority of governments and international donors. It should be considered the best investment.
Demonstrating achievements. More demand for analysis and diagnostic capacityDemonstrating achievements will be increasingly at the center of all the organizations and actors involved in the fight against hunger and nutrition security. Donors and governments expect to see a clear demonstration of what is being achieved in terms of progress and impact. It is necessary to show results that continue to facilitate decision making and prioritization of strategies.
It’s necessary to add economic and political evidence to the technical evidence against malnutrition. We have to incorporate other diagnostics and studies, from economic and political approaches.
Water as a nutritional tool. The approaches and strategies for water, sanitation and hygiene are key in the fight against child malnutrition and the promotion of food security
-Watering-water: water as a driver for food security,
-Healing-water: water against diarrheal diseases,
-Nourishing water: water as a nutrient.
The systematic integration of a minimum package "WASH" (water, sanitation and hygiene) in in nutrition and food security programs is needed to break the vicious circle of diarrhea and malnutrition and to develop agriculture beyond subsistence. The management of water resources and the development of low cost technologies to facilitate small-scale irrigation are key to diversify and increase food production sources.
Paying attention to recurrent malnutritionSeasonal malnutrition is predictable and preventable, it is necessary to incorporate protection approaches for the coping mechanisms and the economy of families and communities exposed to recurring risk. Incorporating seasonal packages of interventions that take into account the size of recurrent food insecurity and malnutrition, mitigating risk and resilience deficit.
86) Mohan Munasinghe, MIND, Sri Lanka
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
79
See attached article: “MILLENNIUM CONSUMPTION GOALS ARE ESSENTIAL FOR GLOBAL FOOD SECURITY: Applying the Sustainomics Framework”
87) Mahesh Moodley, South Africa
When we think of hunger one thinks of the bodies mechanism to instruct ourselves to seek for nutrients that will sustain and grow us as a species .However this endeavor has been complicated in this day in age. We come to an understanding that money is required to obtain resources so that we can create a life for ourselves and our families. And this "money" we speak of is created by selling resources to each another. But we then question how much money is enough to create a life we want ?We must realise we live in a physically finite planet. So do we walk a path were more is more which will lead us to ruin by placing profits before sustainability or do we adhere to a framework of enhancing our sustainability as a species by identifying a carrying capacity so we all can live a life of equality based on communication across boudries, borders and states so that resources can be managed collectively for the betterment of everyone. To truly eradicate hunger ,conflict ,apathy, famine, disease, crime and inequality we need to achieve a post scarcity society. A society were economic models are superfluous. I have uploaded a document called "The Way Upward". http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/The%20Way%20Upward.pdf
In this document I go into detail on how to achieve such a world. It is thus in the best interest of the United Nations to review the recommendations in the named document I thank you for your time Regards Mahesh Moodley
88) Diane Mulligan, CBM, United Kingdom
Disability, hunger, food and nutrition security – a contribution by CBM There are an estimated one billion persons with disabilities worldwide[1]. Persons with disabilities are particularly at risk to the effects of climate change, such as food security. In order to be effective, any framework or action plan in relation to the post-2015 MDGs must incorporate disability-inclusive development principles. Disability is both a cause and consequence of poverty. The impacts of climate change (extreme weather, sea level changes and agriculture productivity changes, leading to food insecurity) will affect the world’s poorest people[2]. They are some of the most vulnerable to environmental degradation and changes. It is estimated there will be at least 200 million people displaced by climatic events by
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
80
2050, of whom at least 30 million are likely to be persons with disabilities (15% of population). There are many others who are left behind to struggle for a livelihood in degraded environments[3]. The health status of millions of people, including persons with disabilities and the prevalence of disability are projected to be affected by climate change through increases in malnutrition[4]. Persons with disabilities and their families living in poverty are facing reduced access to: clean water; fertile soils and suitable growing conditions for cropping and livestock; to fuel-wood and other energy sources; to wild foods, medicinal plants and other natural products related to their livelihoods[5]. Persons with disabilities and their families face real barriers in accessing food[6]. The gender dimension is being addressed by programmes increasingly working with women in: improving food security; social protection through livelihood activities; sustainable, small scale, climate-smart food production; and improved access to markets[7]. These programmes also need to address disability exclusion by ensuring active participation of persons with disabilities and their families. Food insecurity and malnutrition can lead to long term and/or permanent impairments. There are strong links between childhood malnutrition and acquiring impairments. Malnutrition is estimated to cause about 20 per cent of impairments[8]. Conflict is a leading cause of physical and psychological disability. Conflict attributable to climate change will increase[9] , because food and water resources will become increasingly scarce or hard to access. The “responsibilities of States to respect, protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedom for all” is now formally recognized in final outcome document of Rio 2012[10]. This can be achieved by including people with disabilities and adopting a rights-based approach. The right to food security, water rights and sustainable agriculture would assist in improving food quality; ensuring appropriate utilization of food; and involving crisis prevention, preparedness and management. Mechanisms for the assessment and monitoring of malnutrition and food crisis need to be established as a minimum requirement in food security and humanitarian programmes. In addition, indicators related to the capacities of the affected population to participate in food chains, processing and production need to include groups particularly at risk, such as persons with disabilities. In poor regions of the world population growth rates continue to place pressures on the poorest people for food and other resources. In sub-Saharan Africa population growth rate was 2.54% in 2010, (global rate 1.16%). Higher food prices due to climate change combined with urbanisation trends will lead to more households being net food consumers; this too will affect (urban) poor people more[11]. CBM works in partnership to ensure persons with disabilities are included in food security emergency response programmes in the ‘Horn of Africa’ and Sahel Region of West Africa, where over 20 million people have been in need of assistance from the worst droughts experienced over the last 60+ years. For more information contact: Diane Mulligan [email protected]
Case Study by CBM: The ‘Survival Yard’ programme in Niger, West Africahttp://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Case%20Study%20by%20CBM%20for%20hunger%20consultation.docx References
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
81
[1] World Health Organization and World Bank (2011) World Report on Disability. Geneva: WHO Press.[2] Eighty per cent of the 300 million people who live within 5 meters of sea level are in developing countries. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Debate on Sea-Level Rise: Critical Stakes for Poor Countries: February 2, 2007. http://blogs.cgdev.org/globaldevelopment/2007/02/the-ipcc-debate-on-sea-... (accessed 13 February 2012).[3] International Organisation for Migration. Migration, climate change and environmental degradation: a complex nexus.[4] IPPC (2007).[5] European Commission (2007) Environmental Integration Handbook for EC Development Cooperation.[6] World Health Organization and World Bank (2011) World Report on Disability. Geneva: WHO Press, page 10. ‘Households with a disabled member are more likely to experience material hardship – including food insecurity, poor housing, lack of access to safe water and sanitation, and inadequate access to health care’.[7] Food and Nutrition – ‘Security for All through Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems’; Note from the United Nations System High Level Task Force on Global Food Security, March 2012, www.un-foodsecurity.org[8] Department for International Development (DFID) (2000) Disability, Poverty and Development, DFID, UK.[9] IPCC (2007) Fourth Assessment Report. Working Group II. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability.[10] http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/727The%20Future%20We%20Want %2019%20June%201230pm.pdf , Paragraph 9.[11] Skoufias, E., Rabassa, M. & Olivieri, O. (2011) The Poverty Impacts of Climate Change: A Review of the Evidence, Policy Research Working Paper 5622, The World Bank.- collapse | read on a separate page
89) Jorge Stanley, Movimiento de la Juventud Kuna, Panama
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Para los Pueblos Indígenas, es fundamental que la FAO, el PMA, el FIDA, implemente la Política de la FAO sobre Pueblos Indígenas, la Declaración de la ONU sobre Pueblos Indígenas.
Es saludable que la FAO inicie la implementación de las Directrices Voluntarias sobre la Gobernanza Responsable de la tenencia de la tierra. Así mismo, consideramos que los Estados deberían iniciar su proceso de implementar estás guías voluntarias y el Marco Estratégico Mundial en donde la sociedad civil, los gobiernos y el sector privado contribuyeron a elaborar estos documentos consensuados dentro del Comité de Seguridad Alimentaría Mundial.
Prontamente, se iniciará las consultas sobre Inversión Agrícola Responsable y será fundamental la participación de los movimientos sociales, los pequeños productores, pescadores artesanales y los pueblos indígenas, no solo en estos debates globales, sino en el monitoreo de los acuerdos alcanzados por todas las partes interesadas.
Salud.
[English translation]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
82
For the Indigenous Peoples it is essential that FAO, WFP and IFAD do implement the FAO Policy on Indigenous Peoples and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
It is positive that FAO starts the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land,. We also believe that State members should begin the process of implementing these voluntary guidelines and the Global Strategic Framework where civil society, governments and the private sector contributed to developing these consensus documents within the Committee on World Food Security.
Consultations on Responsible Agricultural Investment will begin shortly and participation of social movements, small farmers, fisherfolk and indigenous peoples will be critical. Not only in these global discussions, but also in monitoring the agreements reached by all stakeholders.
Regards
90) Maria Sfarra, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team
Dear Participants,
Thank you so much for your contributions to-date. With specific reference to Theme 3, I wanted to draw your attention to The Lancet medical journal’s 2008 series http://www.thelancet.com/series/maternal-and-child-undernutrition on maternal and child under nutrition which describes the scale and consequences of under nutrition and identifies proven interventions and strategies for reducing this burden. The Lancet has indicated that if under nutrition can be overcome, especially during the first 1,000 days from the start of pregnancy to a child’s second birthday, not only can lives be saved, but children can also grow to realize their full potential.
How can UN agencies, governments, civil society, the private sector and individuals best join forces to overcome the many challenges posed by under nutrition ? How can we collectively move closer to a future where all human beings have access to adequate nutrition, enabling them to develop to their full potential and live healthy lives ?
Maria SfarraFAO-WFP Facilitation Team
91) John Stollmeyer, Caribbean Permaculture Consultants Ltd., Trinidad and Tobago
Theme I
Key lessons learned:
- that small - medium sized mixed farms that encourage high biodiversity are the most productive when it comes to broad nutritional value.- that villages and neighbourhoods represent the appropriate scale for effective human relations.Challenges:- the level of urbanization resulting from failure of the so called "green" revolution.- the dis-inclination for governments, no matter how much they pay lip service to the goal of de-centralization, to implement autonomy for bioregions.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
83
Opportunities:- urban and suburban organic gardens
Theme II
What works best:
- mainstream permaculture principles, re-create productive ecosystems - get children reconnected to wilderness,
Thene III
we will never address the predicament of hunger and malnutrition as long as we stay on the treadmill of "feeding" the growing population. The 1st Law of Ecology: All life on earth is food.The 2nd Law of Ecology: Population size is proportional to food availability.Every year for the past 6,000 years agriculture (sic) [waging war on biodiversity to grow humans' favorite foods] has produced a food surplus which has fueled the explosion of the human biome at the expense of other species and ecosystems services.Let the UN and the WTO put a cap on food production and make sure every human gets an equal share. The population will stabilize in a decade. Then start to bring down production to reduce the population to the carrying capacity of the planet.
92) Jose Swala, MOLD, Kenya
Theme 1
Key challenges seen around especially in combating food insecurities as be as result of poor policies and laxity in implementation of result oriented policies. Year in year out most governments have dependent on rain fed agriculture, owing the importance of irrigation. Insecurity has been seen as major hindrance in ASAL areas where resources such as livestock may be of greater importance. Most analysts have considered crops as a case for food security thereby forgetting the contribution of other importance sectors in food provision such as livestock, water and even the co-operatives.And a more pronounced challenge is the changes in climate where most arable lands are rendered dried day by day. I may also consider the rising of conversion of arable land into structures such as skyscrapers, buildings e.t.c. You will realize most of these building have been constructed in fertile lands better for agriculture. This will require better policies on construction. Poor leadership especially in most developing nations has been influencing food insecurity with frequent tribal wars and displacements of persons.
93) Peter Webster, BSTA, Barbados
I strongly recommend that FAO and others involved follow a logical approach to planning for these topics. Such an approach is step by step yet iterative and utilises planning tools like stakeholder and problem analyses that facilitate the accurate determination of the current (present) situation, the goals we need to achieve and the best activities to achieve these goals. I fear that an unorganized think tank type, scatter shot approach will not instill any confidence in the results.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
84
A preliminary review of the stakeholder and problem analyses for hunger and food security tells me that the two are separate and distinct topics with conflicting interests. The root cause of hunger is poverty not availability of food. Producing more, cheaper food does not solve the problem of poverty. To achieve food security farmers and producers need to get better returns on their labour and investment which means higher prices. FAO needs to determine which of these two subjects is part of its mandate. Surely FAO’s mandate cannot cover both.
The following is an article that I wrote on World Food day in 2011 in response to the FAO’s Director General’s Statement. That I must regurgitate this suggests that I wasted my time.
NO FOOD DAY
October 16, 2011 designated as “World Food day” has come and gone – or has it? For too many of the billion hungry people the world over, most days are “no food day”. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) promoted the theme “Food Prices – From Crisis to Stability” to highlight a worldwide trend that is “hurting the poor consumer, the small producer and agriculture in general” because “food prices which were stable for decades have become increasingly volatile”. They concluded that “controlling prices was key to the fight against hunger”.FAO further lamented that “Agriculture cannot respond fast enough with increased food production because of long-term under-investment in research, technology, equipment and infrastructure”.The statement by the FAO Director General, Dr. Jacques Diouf, leaves several unanswered questions: Why did FAO emphasize the volatility or fluctuation of food prices and not the fact that the prices were higher although fluctuating? How do higher prices hurt producers and agriculture in general? Why does FAO concern itself with the hungry? Since when are the interests of food producers the same as those of consumers? Could the high price of energy be a contributing factor to high food prices? and Why is there under-investment in agriculture?
It is unfortunate that the FAO statement does not distinguish between the food producers and distributors. Promoting more investment in agriculture is like “pushing rope” since it deals with an effect and not the cause! Food producers around the world have repeatedly increased their production when they are adequately rewarded for their investment. Our experience in Barbados supports this. When our government in 1971 taxed all of the nasty profits out of our highly efficient sugar industry (over $50 million between 1974 and 1981) the result was dwindling capital investment in the industry with productivity falling by 50% from a high of over ten tonnes of sugar per hectare to the five tonnes per hectare currently being achieved.
Our people supposedly abhor agriculture but several are reputed to be cultivating marijuana in discreet nooks and crannies around the island despite the risk of imprisonment. Why are they not growing sweet potatoes and yams? Could it be that cultivation of the latter is not lucrative enough?We need to stop expecting the food producers to feed the poor and hungry - this is society’s responsibility not the food producers who are trying to earn a living!
I strongly recommend that FAO focus on its mandate to promote food production and leave the job of feeding the hungry to those with that conflicting mandate. In the process FAO should ensure that OXFAM and other food-aiders feed the hungry with fresh, healthy food from their poor countries like rice, yams, sweet potatoes, vegetables and coconut water instead of over-processed and unhealthy wheat flour and powdered milk. This would promote food production in the very countries where most of the hungry are located. Unfortunately, such action would put the food-aiders out of work and we cannot have that, can we?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
85
I recall hearing President Bush (the son) admit in the dying days of his Presidency (October, 2008) that the USA had made a mistake in providing food-aid to poor countries. He concluded that the USA should have helped the countries to produce their own food instead. At the time I thought “Wow! I wonder how many people have heard and will remember this”. Obviously not many!FAO also supports the “elimination of trade-distorting agricultural subsidies in rich countries”. Rubbish! Agricultural subsidies have been practiced by the rich countries for centuries. It is one of the reasons why they are rich! Their economies are not bled by having to import billions of $ in foreign food. Subsidies promote their agricultural industries, maintain their producers’ standard of living and contribute significantly to their economies by providing value added opportunities which amount to more than the value of their agriculture. They also promote their countries’ food security. Such subsidies only distort trade in agricultural commodities when the surpluses they tend to produce are dumped on the world market at less than their real cost of production. It is the act of dumping that distorts the trade not the subsidies!
Governments the world over subsidise housing, health, education, transport, and utilities for the poor but are not supposed to subsidise the most basic and important item needed by the poor – food ! Logic seems to be lacking. Furthermore, if the subsidies are eliminated where would the food-aiders get their cheap food to feed the hungry? Round and round we go….!Peter Webster
NB: Peter Webster is a retired Portfolio Manager of the Caribbean Development Bank and a former Senior Agricultural Officer in the Ministry of Agriculture.
94) Dennis Baker, Canada
In my opinion We need to replace the fossil fuel power plants, the primary source of GHG. Now!
At a scale required to accomplish this task :Ethanol starves people : not a viable option.Fracking releases methane : not a viable option.Cellulose Bio Fuel Uses Food Land : not a viable optionSolar uses food land : Not a viable optionWind is Intermittent : Not a viable optionAll Human and Agricultural Organic Waste can be converted to hydrogen, through exposure intense radiation!http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DennisearlBaker/2012-a-breakthrough-for-r_b_1263543_135881292.htmlThe Radioactive Materials exist now, and the Organic waste is renewable daily.Ending the practice of dumping sewage into our water sources.Air, Water, Food and Energy issues, receive significant positive impacts .Reducing illness / health care costs as well !
Dennis Baker 106 - 998 Creston AvenuePenticton BC V2A1P9
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
86
95) Kalekristos Yohannes, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research , Ethiopia
Theme 1
The MDG brings a lot of bright in fighting of food insecurity. The key lessons of the MDG shows us that if one can make things to change for a better thing then the output is good. Ethiopia one of the country facing the food insecurity problem for a longer period and still facing the challenge of minimizing such conditions. Together with the MDG and the governmental plan the minimization of the poverty in the country shows a progress. The main causes of the poverty in the country are the insufficient education, agricultural production, road and transportation, health and water source. Fighting such root causes of the poverty minimize the food insecurity in the country. Now a day agricultural production is increasing even though still the agrarian production is leading, which is the still lead to food insecurity, hunger and malnutrition during the drought season. Even though there is a production sometimes people are still facing the challenge to purchase what they need due to the low money purchase power and lack of knowledge on the access of the food. The availability of the agricultural product does not mean that there is no food insecurity. For instance we can see in the rural areas there is production of agricultural products but due to lack of knowledge on nutrition they are facing the malnutrition problem.
The challenge of the Ethiopia in the fighting of the poverty is that, Ethiopia is struggling to achieve different objectives at once for instance the road construction, fighting hanger, making available power source for the country, education, the challenge of fighting HIV/AIDS and other health problems and some other developmental activities.
The other challenge of that Ethiopia in fighting of hunger is the loss of the agricultural production during harvest and post harvest. The loss of the post harvest of agricultural product reaches to more than 40% of the production especially on the perishable agricultural products. The lack of the skilled persons working on the post harvest and nutrition lead the country to even loss the production. There are different challenges beside the above like link between the NGOs and GOVs and the local producers or the farmers. Different findings aimed to help those in needs, but when we see through the fund for the farms is nothing when we consider the fund given for the organization and for fee of the NGOs and GOVs employee's. There for there need to be given a special re-assessment for such miss leading gap to achieve the goal of the MDGs.
Themes 2
To address the food insecurity, hunger and malnutrition problem in the coming future the link between the GOVs, NGOs and the local farmer need a strong linkage. This link will minimize the gap and minimize the knowledge gap. The main focuses that need to be seen to achieve food security are one to produce agricultural products sufficiently by use of the irrigation. The second thing is to process and use the agricultural product efficiently by minimizing the loss during harvest and post harvest. The third thing is to exchange knowledge on the nutrition, processing, value chained and food science role in the country. Finally reassessment of the information with the local farmers, in building smooth relation.
The Zero Hanger Challenge is one that faces Ethiopia now a day. Hunger due to lack of food, Hanger due to lack balanced diet, hanger due to lack of knowledge and others have direct or indirect impact on the reduction or eradication of hanger. As I have mentioned above to achieve this goal Zero hanger the Farmers, NGOs and GOVs should work together; to increase agricultural production; minimize loss of agricultural products; increasing a person income to attained purchase ability; give a good path in the
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
87
value chain of agricultural products; building a market access for consumers; increasing once country knowledge on FOOD SCIENCE, NUTRITION, POST HARVEST, MARKETING AND OTHERS.
Theme 3
The objective put by the UN under the Zero Hanger Challenge outstanding. The problem is that most of the objectives are regional and country specific. For instance when we consider Africa to achieve such objectives first it need to fulfill other major objectives, even though some countries in Africa are well developed as compared to the least developed once. Putting the major objective as in the UN ZHC each region and country should develop their own sub objective to achieve the major objective.
96) Edwin Tamasese, Soil Health Pacific Ltd, Samoa
Dear all,
It is heartening to see calls for decentralized approaches to addressing the war against malnutrition. From my perspective and the company that I work for, I feel that there is a serious need to put the needs of the customer first and foremost who in this case is the small holder farmer.Without assigning blame or pointing fingers, because for all intents and purposes activities are performed with the best of intentions, assistance to farmers in my region is piecemeal, incomplete and ineffective. In general programs look at working with volumes of farmers with numbers under 1000 generally not considered. There is no problem with this except when you take into consideration the funding levels that are assigned to assisting these numbers of farmers and the structure of the programs that ensue.
What I mean by this is that we will have a seed and basic equipment distribution to farmers to assist with increasing production. There is nothing wrong with this, but too many times they are supplied to farmers that do not have access to effective irrigation for example. The end result is crop failure. In other cases the need is not seeds or tools, but agronomy support and training. However under these large unwieldy programs because of the nature of the funding this is not supported effectively.Rather than this mass one shoe fits all approach there needs to be a call out to the community to ask what each INDIVIDUAL farmer needs.
The model that I work with in the Pacific and in Samoa to be specific is to identify champions in each of the village communities. We do this by driving through communities and identifying those farmers who are actively participating in the sector. Our total company focus is making our farmers more successful. We then ask this farmer if he would like to work with us and if he/she agrees we discuss a farm plan. Our first question - What is holding you back? This gives us the base to work off. In most cases the initial issue is yields from his/her current crop. We then propose a program, present the farmer with forecasts and costing and on agreement we begin.
We work on the principal the success breeds success. We know how our communities work. When they see that something is working for a neighbor they will copy this. From a commercial perspective each of these farms is a marketing platform in each village. Within very short time frames other farmers from the area start calling and asking to be involved and we bring them into the program. In addition to this we are continually training our farmers (we are a biological organic company). We invest a lot of time and effort in up-skilling our champion in the village. They become an in-trenched field consultant to the other farmers and a knowledge sharing base in the community.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
88
End of the day it is working. My take - smaller, properly funded programs according to the farmers needs. Stop trying to heal the world in a single program. We discard too many "small step" programs because we think that they take too long. However if we had been working that way from the beginning we wouldn't be having this discussion now.best regards,
Edwin TamaseseManaging DirectorSoil Health Pacific Ltd
97) John Baaki, Women Environmenal Programme, Nigeria
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF ACHIEVING FOOD SECURITY AFTER 2015
The Millenium Development Goals expire 2015 but national governments with their economies continue to exist beyond that. Whether the MDGs will be renewed or given another name entirely, the goal will still be similar to what we have at present. The very first goal of the MDGs which seeks to eradicate extreme hunger and poverty is a goal that will be pursued as long as people continue to dwell on the planet earth. Achieving food security is putting the right structures in place that will ensure the production, processing and distribution of the right type, quantity and quality of food. In as much as everyone eats food, the duty of ensuring food security is that of national governments. The major area I see as a great challenge and which will be a good opportunity for food security is the development of rural infrastructure. More than half of the food produced in any developing country is produced in the rural areas. The youths and women make up to 70% of the farming population in Nigeria for example. Unfortunately recently, there is mass migration of the youths from the rural areas to urban areas to take up non agricultural profession leaving agriculture in the hands of the aged. This is evident in the fall in food production and exportation recently than compared to what was obtainable in the 1960s-1980s. Government programs on agriculture do not address the rural areas seriously, hence the sustained migration. My opinion as a development worker working with women and youths in the rural areas is that, food security programs should not dwell on provision of farm equipment and seeds or training and incentives alone. Any food security program or policy that does not target the development of critical rural infrastructure is bound to fail. In my opinion, if rural areas are opened up alone, every other aspect of food security will naturally take shape. In addition to that, agro-processing industries should be located in rural areas to give value to their produce. This is the only thing that will keep the farming population back in the rural areas. Develop rural infrastructure and every other thing will follow if food security must be achieved
98) Maria Sfarra, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team
Undernutrition entails huge economic costs in terms of forgone gross domestic product (GDP). For example, a study titled “The Cost of Hunger” estimated that, in Central America and Dominican Republic, the costs stemming from child undernutrition were about US$ 6.7 billion, or more than 6 per cent of countries’ GDP. The study, jointly produced by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and WFP, is available at http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/32669/DP_CostHunger.pdf.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
89
While these statistics are grim news, they also show the strong connection between child under-nutrition and economic growth. From this perspective, how can we ensure that these linkages are recognized and measured in the post-2015 agenda?
Maria SfarraFAO-WFP Facilitation Team
99) Materne Maetz, France
Dear all, I have been following with great interest the discussion. My feeling is that we tend to give too much emphasis to the technical aspects of food security and neglect the political side of the issue. We also tend to mix the two very different questions of i) reducing - now eradicating - hunger and ii) producing sufficiently for all. On the first point, we have to realize that the conditions in countries have been - in favor of agriculture in rich countries (e.g. farmers better represented politically and well organized to defend their interests; consumers are ready to pay relatively high food prices as food only represents a small share in their expenditure; subsidies for agriculture affordable because of reduced share of agriculture in the economy) - unfavorable in poor countries (farmers have no political weight on political regimes that for long have been undemocratic, they are disorganized and cannot influence policies, agriculture is a big share of GDP and costly to subsidies; liberalized policies imposed through structural adjustment programmes have been prevented to change because of WTO membership; food is a big share in household expenditure in urban areas where they can put pressure on governments through demonstrations; the option of food aid has given a disincentives to governments to invest limited funds into agriculture). This has resulted on the one hand in high subsidies and protection for agriculture in rich countries, and poor support in non industrial countries. The limited support and services available for farmers in poor countries are benefitting to few better off farmers, while the majority of farmers, those who are the most food insecure, have been excluded. So for me the main challenge, to reduce hunger, is to find a way to include these people so that they can improve their standard of living. 2012 is the international year of cooperatives, but while it is said that 1 billion out of the 1.4 billion farmers are part of cooperatives or groupings, we have to admit sadly that most of these groupings are either non-functional or dominated by the local rural elite and do not operate in favour of the smaller farmers. So this is an area where support is needed as, if better organized, farmers can be stronger on markets, get access to cheaper equipment/inputs, be influential on policies. There are of course good experiences to learn from, and we need to apply lessons from them. Authentic democracy can also help to change the political balance that is unfavorable to farmers by giving them opportunity to propel representative leaders to Parliament and/or Government.We also need to do more for those rural dwellers (particularly the land less) to have more job opportunities or less trouble in migrating to urban areas, where towns can offer jobs. Regarding the two questions (hunger, more production), there is clearly a need to continue increasing production. But not in any way:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
90
- First we need to use more environmental friendly technologies. - Second they should be easily accessible to poor farmers. That requires more funds for independent public research (private research seeks to produce goods that can be sold and that are given characteristics of private goods - exclusion in particular - such as fertilizers, pesticides, hybrid or GMO seeds/ public researchers financed by private firms tend to develop what these firms want). Research has proven to be the most profitable investment in agriculture. Independent public research should focus on crop/animal management that is labour-based (a key asset of poor farmers), knowledge intensive (a potentially public good) and requires limited purchased inputs (poor farmers do not have cash to buy them). In this way, improved technology kill two birds with one stone (although I don’t think we should kill birds...): be at the same time more friendly to poor farmers and to the environment. Unfortunately, when people start thinking increased production, they tend to think that we should do more of what we are already doing (input intensive agriculture, work with larger commercial farms). That may help to reach the 70% target of increasing world production, but at a huge and intolerable environmental and social cost! Furthermore, I am not sure that we really need to increase food production by 70% as we have now more food today than what we need of feed the world and that more than 1/4 of what is produced is wasted or lost. Part of the discussion is also the need to adopt food consumption patterns (less meat in particular, less waste) which will have less of an ecological foot print and be more healthy. I stop here for now. For those who read French, I invite you to have a look at my website www.lafaimexpliquee.org for more information. Regards to all, Materne
100) Pie Ntakarutimana, Burundi [second contribution]
[Original contribution in French]
Je salue cette initiative, qui occasionne le moment d'echanger sur comment nourrir les habitats de notre planète. à l'état actuel du développement technologique et des avancés en matière des droits de l'homme. il est impensable et déplorable que de milliers de personnes particulièrement d'enfants meurent chaque jour par la faim ou de la malnutrition. je considère cela comme une honte pour l'humanité. j'ai été témoin dans ma vie de militant des droits de l'homme, de plus de trois hommes chefs de ménages qui sont donné la mort parce que qu'ils étaient incapables de trouver la nourriture pour ses enfants et leurs femmes. ça c'est passé au Burundi en 1999 dans une province du Nord dénommé Kirundo, il y avait la famine causée par la sécheresse. Nourrir le monde et lutter contre la faim est à la fois facile et complexe:1. Gouvernance mondiale opérationnelle et exigeant à tout les etats et mettre en place un mécanisme de contrôle efficace2. Reformer la FAO pour plus d'efficacité sur le terrain;3. Faire la question de lutte contre la faim, un axe transversal dans les planifications UNDAF et DSRP dans tous le pays;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
91
4. Adopter une stratégie internationale pour changer systématiquement les méthodes agricoles, l'actualisations régulières des intrants et la fertilisations des sols;5. Adopter une stratégie d'échanges bilatérales et / ou multilatérales des cultures;6. Créer des fonds, des lignes budgétaires etc. pour promouvoir l'agriculture, la transformation; bref promouvoir les industries alimentaires
[English translation]
I welcome this initiative, which gives rise to an opportunity to discuss ways to feed the inhabitants of our planet. Given the present state of technological development and advances in terms of human rights, it is unthinkable and deplorable that thousands of people, especially children, die each day from hunger or malnutrition. I consider that to be shaming for mankind. I have been witness as a militant for human rights to more than three men, heads of families that have ended their life because they were unable to find food for their children and their wives. That happened in Burundi in 1999, in the Northern Province of Kirundo. There was a famine caused by drought. To feed the world and to fight hunger is both easy and complex:1. Operational global governance and insisting that all states put in place an efficient control mechanism;2. Reform FAO so that it can achieve better results in the field;3. Make the fight against hunger a cross- organizational axis in the plans of UNDAF and DSRP in all countries;4. Adopt an international strategy to change agricultural methods systematically, with regular up-dating of inputs and soil fertilizations;5. Adopt a strategy of bilateral/multilateral exchanges of crops;6. Create funds, lines of finance etc. to promote agriculture, and processing; in short, to promote food industries
101) Mahadeva Shanmugaratnam, UN/FAO Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka
Dear Friends, It has been a quite interesting and a learning processing to read all the contributions, I as well posted my contribution on 11/12/2012 which I feel needs further elaboration in order to emphasize the need of a grass-root level planning that addresses the issues from bottom to top rather than that goes from top to bottom. "Any country it may be country with high human fertility or low human fertility country, ensuring self-employment through agricultural & livestock productions at least to one member of a vulnerable family with mobile assistance in all aspects to attain our objective of ensuring food all void of malnutrition. Land availability of vulnerable group shall not be a constraint in ensuring the self- employment of agricultural nature in a selected smallest area representing a particular community with appropriate crop and livestock selected for that community" Further elaborating on this, the major limitation in implementing of such a self-employment agricultural & livestock and project for a particular community is lack of self-owned land by the vulnerable families.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
92
If a vulnerable family is owning a land could not involve in self-reliance for food production for other reasons such as lack of irrigation and other inputs necessary for the farming, the mobile unit moves into address the needs of that particular family on short term basis as well as on long term basis. The important part is that particular vulnerable family is inducted and induced into the project at the earliest possible disseminating the knowledge needed by them. When it comes landless vulnerable families, which is obviously the most vulnerable group for hunger and malnutrition community farming system is undertaken to address the 10 to 15 land less families selected to be assisted by an organization or by the government itself of an famine vulnerable country to lease a land on a long term basis and the self-employment agricultural project implemented as for the self-owned land families. One or two members of a vulnerable family will work in that particular community farm based on the size of the land that would support conspicuously more than the number of individual members of families the community farming system is intended for. The assistance providing mobile organization will bear in mind that this is a self-employment project apart from addressing food need and malnutrition will establish a cooperative system within the community farming system so that produces and output are evenly distributed amongst the member families. Based on the success of a particular community farming system, the cooperation criteria will be extended to the other community farming systems as well with individual self-owned farming system The objective of this elaboration is to stress the need of grass-root level planning towards the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition and Zero Hunger Challenge. The need of a Vulnerable Family who is most likely to involve dedicatedly in such projects , a community of vulnerable families, a village of vulnerable communities and finally many villages of a country is addressed which ensures gradual control over what is done and what is not done towards the final objectives in a country through an organization.
102) Mike Matsimbe, Malawi
I know that a lot of people have discussed food security so I just want to add something on dealing with Malnutrition especially in relation to the issue of stunting. I believe if we could concentrate on animal protein intake boosting in countries like Malawi we could reduce stunting and other nutrient deficiency related problems. There is quite high intake of Carbohydrates and vegetables but very minimal on the animal protein. If the food security intervention were around small animals which could be easily consumed at household level then children would also benefited. Let interventions in the next period incorporate this.
103) Patrick Webb, Tufts University, United States of America
Regarding theme 3 on targets and indicators, I wholeheartedly agree with a target such as 'b' framed around zero stunting under 2. That is arguably, the highest priority overall in nutrition going forward, viable, and if done correctly, sustainable. It does, of course, require child stunting to be a primary indicator, which all the implications that carries in terms of cost, training, and reporting--but I sense that the global community is ready for that to happen. That said, stunting of children older than 2 needs to be tracked (so the indicator should arguably call for height for age to be collected and reported for <5s, with <2s separated out, and by gender). What is
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
93
more, there needs to be a parallel focus on some additional, equally critical elements of the nutrition problem which can't be assumed away by a single-minded focus on the 1,000 days. These would include: a) key micronutrient deficiencies, b) childhood obesity, c) maternal nutrition and IUGR, and d) wasting (treatment as well as prevention). Yes, these overlap with stunting, but not fully and not consistently--and success in achieving zero stunting in children under 2 can be compromised where these other dimensions are not addressed simultaneously. The approach taken should therefore be one focused on net gains across these key dimensions of nutrition, not gross gains in one area at the expense of, or without, gains in each of the others.
104) Kevin Morgan, Cardiff University, United Kingdom
Key lessons from MDG framework? Lack of political commitment from governments and neglect of the gender dimension. Key challenge for the future of food and nutrition security? Sufficient political commitment from governments.
What works best? Social safety nets in the short term to ensure sufficient access to food and nutrition security. In the longer term there is no substitute to investment in smallholder agriculture, organisational learning through producer associations and better infrastructure for producing, storage and distribution to boost output and reduce wastage.
Post 2015 targets? Who can have confidence in any target, promise or commitment from any government given the way the right to food has been consistently violated? Governments need to earn credibility on the food security front before they expect citizens to take their targets seriously.
105) Rocio Danica Condor Golec, FAO, Italy
Theme1:I think that targets should be evaluated in a short term, not more than 10-12 years, and revised it frequently.The challenge in the coming years is related with the growing number of population, the production methods to cover these needs, and the sustainability of growth. This 3 issues linked to each other will probably determine achieving food and nutrition security.
Theme2:To address the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges, country level political awarness is needed. The question is, does politicians are interested in this challenges? are they fully aware?.Global initiatives are interesting I hope they are really focus on country needs.
Theme3:I think globally main objectives need to be address, however, specific indicators should be country-specific.
106) Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público - Unidad de Asuntos Internacionales de Hacienda, Mexico
[Original contribution in Spanish]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
94
Comentarios de la Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público de México a la consulta electrónica sobre "El hambre y la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional"
En lo que se refiere a la pregunta ¿Cuáles considera los principales retos y oportunidades para lograr la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en los próximos años? contemplada en el primer tema de la presente consulta, en el marco del G20 México ha planteado que es necesario atacar los siguientes grandes campos para alcanzar la seguridad alimentaria:
- Incrementar la producción y productividad agrícola - Asegurar la sostenibilidad de la producción agrícola - Adaptación al cambio climático - Atención a la Volatilidad de los Precios de Materias Primas
En segundo lugar, respecto al cuestionamiento contenido en el tema 2, acerca de qué funciona mejor y teniendo como base los conocimientos actuales, al responder cómo deberían abordarse los desafíos por venir del hambre, la inseguridad alimentaria y la malnutrición, así como hablando de la importancia que tienen las cuestiones de mejora de la gobernanza, los enfoques basados en los derechos, la responsabilidad y el compromiso político para lograr la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición, México está convencido de la importancia de la seguridad alimentaria para lograr un crecimiento sostenido e inclusivo.Nuestro país destaca el incremento de la productividad y de la producción, así como el mejoramiento del funcionamiento y la transparencia de los mercados de materias primas, como las mejores políticas para fortalecer la seguridad alimentaria y para reducir tanto la volatilidad excesiva de los precios de materias primas, como los efectos negativos de dicha volatilidad sobre la economía y el bienestar de la población. Durante la Presidencia Mexicana del G20 en 2012 se estableció como prioridad en la agenda el tema “Fortalecimiento de la Seguridad Alimentaria y Atención a la Volatilidad de los Precios de Materias Primas”.
Algunas experiencias que vale la pena destacar en torno al tema, son los principales compromisos establecidos por los Líderes del G20 en la Cumbre de Los Cabos:
- Los líderes dieron la bienvenida al lanzamiento de la Iniciativa “AgResults”, encaminada a alentar la inversión en la innovación agrícola mediante el diseño de incentivos financieros para agentes de los sectores público y privado para investigar, desarrollar y proveer productos y servicios destinados a mejorar la agricultura de pequeños productores agrícolas. Además, se comprometieron a dar continuidad a distintas iniciativas del G20, incluyendo la Plataforma de Agricultura Tropical (cuyo objetivo es fortalecer la construcción de capacidades y el intercambio de conocimiento en material agrícola), iniciativas de investigación para cultivos de trigo, arroz y Unidad de Asuntos Internacionales de Hacienda maíz, y el Programa Global de Agricultura y Seguridad Alimentaria (que tiene como propósito atender la escasez de financiamiento para los planes estratégicos de inversión en agricultura y seguridad alimentaria de los países).
- Los Líderes apoyaron los Principios de Inversión Agrícola Responsable y alentaron la implementación de la Guía Voluntaria sobre Gobernanza Responsable de Tenencia Agrícola, Pesquera y Forestal en un Contexto de Seguridad Alimentaria Nacional. Asimismo, reconocieron la aportación del reporte “Crecimiento Sostenible de la Productividad Agrícola y Reducción de Brechas para Pequeños Agricultores”, elaborado por distintas agencias y el cual
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
95
contiene recomendaciones en las cuales los países podrían enfocar sus esfuerzos de cooperación.
- Los líderes apoyaron el desarrollo y mayor uso de tecnologías, mejores prácticas y técnicas agroforestales, mejoramiento de la fertilidad de los suelos y labranza mínima, entre otras. Asimismo, hicieron un llamado a las Organizaciones Internacionales para elaborar un informe sobre opciones para mejorar la eficiencia en el uso de agua en la agricultura.
- Los Líderes acogieron el progreso hecho en la implementación del Sistema de Información del Mercado Agrícola (AMIS, por sus siglas en inglés). Este mecanismo ayudará a crear un sistema de intercambio de productos agrícolas más estable, predecible, libre de distorsiones, abierto y transparente, lo cual a su vez ayudará a fortalecer la seguridad alimentaria. Los Líderes además apoyaron las conclusiones del Reporte del G20 sobre Impactos Macroeconómicos de la Volatilidad Excesiva de los Precios de Materias Primas, el cual identifica distintos efectos de cambios bruscos en los precios de materias primas, así como opciones de política que los países podrían considerar para mitigar tanto la volatilidad en precios como sus consecuencias. Los Líderes del G20 solicitaron a los Ministros de Finanzas informar en 2013 sobre el progreso en la contribución del G20 para facilitar un mejor funcionamiento de los mercados físicos de materias primas, y reafirmaron su compromiso para incrementar la transparencia y evitar el abuso en los mercados financieros de dichos bienes. Finalmente, los Líderes también reafirmaron su compromiso con mercados de energía transparentes y efectivos.
[English translation]
Comments from the Mexican Secretariat of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP) to the electronic consultation on "Hunger and food and nutrition security"
Regarding the question “What do you think are the main challenges and opportunities for achieving food and nutrition security in the upcoming years?” raised as the first topic of the current consultation, within the G20 framework Mexico considers that the following major targets should be addressed to achieve food security:
- Increasing agricultural production and productivity - Ensuring agricultural production sustainability - Adapting to climate change - Monitoring commodity prices volatility
Secondly, we answer the question “What works best?”, raised as the second topic for discussion: Building on the existing knowledge and looking for ways to address the upcoming hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges, and considering the importance of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security, Mexico firmly believes in the importance of food security to achieve a sustained and inclusive growth.
Our country highlights the increase in agricultural productivity and production, as well as the improvement in performance and transparency of commodities markets, as the best policies to strengthen food security and reduce both the excessive volatility of the commodities prices and the negative effects of such volatility on the economy and the population welfare. During the Mexican G20 Presidency in 2012, the topic “Strengthening Food Security and Monitoring Commodity Prices Volatility” was considered as a priority on the agenda.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
96
Some related experiences worth noting are the main commitments agreed by the G20 Leaders in the Los Cabos Summit:
The leaders welcomed the "AgResults" Initiative launch, established with the purpose of fostering investment in agricultural innovation by designing financial incentives for public and private sector agents to research, develop and supply products and services aimed at improving agriculture for smallholders. Additionally, they committed themselves to continuing several G20 initiatives, including the Tropical Agriculture Platform (aiming at strengthening the capacity building and knowledge exchange on agricultural equipment); research initiatives for wheat, rice and corn crops; and the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (targeting funding support for strategic investment plans in the national agriculture and food security).
The Leaders supported the Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment and encouraged the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security. They also recognized the contribution of the report " Sustainable Agricultural Productivity Growth and Bridging the Gap for Small Family Farms ", prepared by several agencies and featuring recommendations on which countries could focus their cooperation efforts.
The Leaders supported, amongst others, the development and increased use of technologies, improved agroforestry practices and techniques, enhancement of soil fertility and minimum tillage. They also called on international organizations to prepare a report on the alternatives for improving the efficiency of water utilization in agriculture.
The Leaders welcomed the progress achieved in the implementation of the Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS). This tool will help create a more stable, predictable, distortion-free, open and transparent exchange system for agricultural products, which in turn will help to strengthen food security. The Leaders also supported the conclusions of the G20 Report on Macroeconomic Impacts of Excessive Volatility in Commodity Prices, which identifies the diverse effects of sudden changes in commodity prices, as well as policy options that countries may consider to mitigate the price volatility and its consequences. The G20 Leaders requested the Finance Ministers to report in 2013 the progress of the G20 contribution to facilitate a better performance of the commodities markets, and reaffirmed their commitment to increase the transparency and avoid the abuse of such commodities in financial markets. Finally, the Leaders also reaffirmed their commitment with transparent and effective energy markets.
107) Colin Sage, University College Cork, Ireland
Key lessons? That setting targets is a largely meaningless exercise if the process for achieving them is not sufficiently robust. There is now overwhelming evidence to demonstrate that the consequences of climate change is placing agriculture under significant pressure in different parts of the world, leaving tens of millions more vulnerable each year. Until governments begin to demonstrate some real leadership on climate change, setting targets to reduce hunger seems like arranging deck chairs... While all of the objectives of Theme 3 seem laudable, a strong and unwavering commitment to building sustainable food systems seems to me the right place to begin and one that might subsequently deliver on the other objectives. This would require rolling out programmes in support of
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
97
agro-ecological farming methods at one end, while working to refashion food consumption norms around the world at the other, and particularly those of the world's richest societies.
Addressing the Faustian bargain of the modern food system: connecting sustainable agriculture with sustainable consumptionhttp://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/IJAS%20Commentary%20v10n3.pdf
108) María del Socorro Yánez Miranda, Mexico
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Soy de Hermosillo, Sonora; México agradezco esta oportunidad que tenemos la población del mundo para expresar propuestas o ideas sobre tan importante asunto de sobrevivencia humana. Este complejo asunto es a mi juicio necesario enfrentarlo a través de un cambio de paradigmas muy sencillos y que tienen que ver con el concepto de desarrollo y sustentabilidad que tiene el uso de los recursos naturales. Es importante rediseñar los programas de educación para que los niños y los jovenes conciban que hoy más que nunca necesitamos valorizar a los cuatro elementos : tierra, agua, aire y fuego como los insumos básicos y que nos permitiran tomar conciencia y priorizar nuestras necesidades humanas. Este cambio de paradigmas nos permitira la atención de la tierra no como un espacio de suelo donde desarrollar de manera indiscriminda el mercado inmobiliario, comercial e industrial, que destruyen suelo cultivable, bosques fauna y flora que necesitamos para el equilibrio ecológico y armónico para los otros elementos: agua, aire y fuego. Este cambio lo considero de caracter estructural debido a ser el eje rector que nos permitira dirigir nuestro pensamiento hacia los recursos y la población que dispone de ellos de una forma u de otra; produciendo y controlando el mercado de alimentos o los hambrientos que no tienen para comprarlos y estan cada día más a expensas de la ayuda subsidiaria o asistencialista de gobiernos u organizaciones. El otro gran cambio es diseñar programas para impulsar las granjas y los huertos familiares, promover y capacitar la profesionalización para la producción de alimentos de autoconsumo, promover la producción de vegetales, de ganado y de pescado por granjas familiares y microempresas. En todo esta idea concebimos que la tecnología y la ciencia son las grandes aliadas para que sirvan como herramientas al servicio de las personas tanto para ayudar en la organización, admnistración e intercambio de información interplanetaria.
[English translation]
I am from Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico. I appreciate this opportunity you are giving to the people in the world to express suggestions or ideas on this important issue for human survival.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
98
In my view, it is necessary to address this complex issue through a very simple paradigm shift, that has to do with the concept of development and sustainability of the use of natural resources. It is important to redesign education programs for children and youth to learn that today, more than ever, we need to value the four elements -earth, water, air and fire- as basic inputs and became aware of and prioritize our human needs. This paradigm shift will allow us to pay attention to the earth not only as ground to develop indiscriminately the real estate, commercial and industrial markets, destroying arable land, forest, vegetation and wildlife we need for the ecological balance and harmony with the other elements: water, air and fire. I consider this change is structural because it is the guiding principle that will allow us to turn our thoughts to the resources and the people exploiting them in one way or another, producing and controlling the food market. Or to the hungry, who cannot buy food and are increasingly at the expense of the subsidiary or welfare assistance from governments or organizations. The other major change is designing programs to promote farms and family gardens, promoting training and professionalization of for food self-sufficiency, promote production of vegetables, livestock and fish in family farms and small businesses. Throughout this proposal we think that technology and science are great allies as tools at the service of people, to assist in the organization, management and information exchange at global level.
109) Ferdousi Begum, FANTA, FHI360, Bangladesh
Dear All Theme 1: Key lessons learned are -Malnutrition is not well visible phenomena, moreover in Bangladesh and in many other developing countries it doesn't link with GDP, again food security doesn't always mean all types of food security needed to prevent malnutrition by all which is vital to prevent malnutrition and finally like all others goals this goal didn't get equal attention by policy makers in the initial years while the goal was set like other goals. Challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years is the strong sustainable political commitment toward this goal. Theme 2: Increase community ownership and awareness about the impact of malnutrition is the key. So develop long term sustainable TV commercials on IYCF and also addressing life cycle approach as malnutrition is inter generational problem which will help to increase demand and will ultimately guide improve governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and finally achieve political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security Theme 3: Yes country specific regional objectives, target and indicators need to be set along with the UN Secretary-General objectives to tackle hunger, food security malnutrition. Again strong and sustainable political commitment, development of strategy to ensure visible involvement of multi-sectoral including private sector are the key here.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
99
Best regards,
Ferdousi
110) Mariana Vargas, Mexico
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Los puntos a tratar son muy importantes, sin embargo también pienso que deben incluir, como se mencionaba en otro comentario asegurar la producción agrícola sostenible, sabiendo que las tierras de cultivo pierden su fertilidad. Mi pregunta es si ya tienen contemplado este tema, que piensan hacer para que estas tierras sean más productivas? O cuando dejen de usarse para cultivo que otro uso es apropiado darle? Hay que pensar en el cuidado del medio ambiente también.
[English translation]
The talking points are very important, but I also think that they should include, as mentioned in earlier comments, sustainable agricultural production, knowing that the farmland are losing its fertility. My question is if this is already being looked at and what actions are planned to make these lands more productive? Or, once stopped being utilized for crowing crops what other use would be appropriate? It is necessary think of preserving the environment, too.
111) Gonzalo Roldán, Argentina
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Hola a todos, luego de leer y debatir a lo largo de este debate, creo que es indispensable pensar en hechos concretos. Fomentar programas agrarios contribuyendo con los mecanismos básicos para llevarlos a la práctica. Lo que creo que es indispensable cambiar de lógica del actual sistema capitalista.
[English translation]
Hi all,
After reading and discussing this extensively, I think it essential to start thinking about concrete facts. Promoting agricultural programs and contributing to the basic mechanisms for implementing them. What I think is essential, is to change the current capitalist system.
112) Pricilla Nakyazze, Uganda
Social protection is a huge factor in food security.
Consider all the people who are displaced in camps that cannot be involved in agriculture. It should also be considered that the people who have access to land are worst affected by malnutrition and food insecurity. Because even though subsistence farming is the pillar to fighting hunger today many
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
100
youth are shunning any form of farming as a job for the poor and selling off their land to buy cars and motorcycles and move to towns.
In Uganda most farming or rearing for family consumption is done by the females in the family while the males are more into cash crops but most women do not own land and mostly use a male relations land there is always the possibility of being thrown off the land especially with the death of a husband even in cases where women have as many as 10 children. With the displaced people due to rebel activities in the area and general political unrest.
There is never enough time to cultivate as the people fear for their lives ,the rebels steal their food or they have to move to another town where there land less and cannot produce any food for the family. The role the government can play to ensure food security would include ground work or a bottom up Approach where solutions and problems are sought from the stake holders. Research on seed varieties that are adaptable to the weather and more pest resistant so farmers do not lose money and morale with heavy looses Education in form of conferences on best farm practices at the village (muluka) level for maximum impact. Low interest loans. Good quality farm equipment by not allowing substandard quality into the county Politically enabling environment.
Gender biases need to be addressed Preservation at the village level also needs to be put in place because there times of plenty and waste since we rely on seasons so small scale manufacturers should be encouraged Small corporations of farmers producing the same products are the best means of intervention for study groups and loans It is an all round achievement to attain food security.
There is an opportunity of employment and earning an income from being involved in food
113) Haribondhu Sarma, icddr,b, Bangladesh
During formulation of current MDG plan of action, the social cultural and political issues have been ignore, which was one of the main reasons not to achieve MDGs at the optimum level. The hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition should be considered in both away: from micro and macro perspective. Local issues should have scope to explain local perspective rather considering from global perspective. I think more investment should be considered for generating local knowledge, invention and innovation rather giving prescription from global perspective.
114) David Gustafson, CIMSANS, United States of America
Please see the attached description of the new Center for Integrated Modeling of Sustainable Agriculture & Nutrition Security, whose planned areas of work are highly relevant to both Themes 1 and 3.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/cimsans_description_16december2012.pdf
I would be happy to provide additional information on current CIMSANS activities, including a round-table on "modelling of sustainable nutrition security," which will be held in Dublin on 10 April 2013, immediately preceding food security meetings planned by CGIAR and the EU, also to be held in Dublin.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
101
We also hosted a round-table at FAO in October 2012, and I gave a presentation on certain aspects of this topic at Doha last month. Thanks – Dave
115) Odette Nzeyimana, PCFS, Burundi
For the first theme; It is remarkable that during the current period the decision‐makers and policymakers in countries responsible for the development and implementation of policies and programmes for delivering food security and nutrition and the progressive realization of the right of adequate food are not fulfilling correctly their task. For the second theme, we can contribute by enumerating opportunities, in our regions the climate is favorable ,we have unexploited lands, we have three kinds of seasons a year, abundant lakes and rivers As solutions to have food security, Mobilising campaigns for the population to raise productivity by implementing the strategies of water conservation, irrigation, seed conservation centres ,adopting the techniques of transformation of food for a better conservation( dry system)
116) All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development in the UK Parliament, UK
Summary
1. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Agriculture and Food for Development welcomes this online consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security - toward a post-2015 development agenda. The APPG calls for any Post-MDG process to consider the livelihoods of smallholder farmers of paramount importance to addressing global hunger and eradicating poverty. Acknowledging that giving smallholder farmers rights and assistance to create viable businesses, is a key component of a coherent food system, and should form part of any Post-MDG framework. Addressing food insecurity means empowering smallholder farmers to move from subsistence farming, through public and private sector support - with strong information and technology transfer - to profitable small businesses. There is a broad spectrum of policy interventions needed to ensure the emancipation for smallholder farmers; however, once this intervention has been made, the opportunity for smallholder farmers to thrive without further overseas development assistance is possible. This requires reliable financing, strong public sector support and an enabling environment for private sector investment which will underpin the transformation from subsistence farmers to successful small businesses. The Post-MDG Framework must consider the 450 million smallholder farmers worldwide as central agents to reducing global hunger and, given the right support, able to grow themselves out of poverty, for good.
Introduction
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
102
2. The APPG on Agriculture and Food for Development brings together Parliamentarians concerned with agriculture, nutrition and food security in the developing world. The Group promotes support for the developmental needs of the 450 million smallholder farmers who feed 2 billion people worldwide. It engenders progressive and informed debate within Westminster and beyond by bridging the gap between policy makers, agricultural development specialists and practitioners in the field.
3. The APPG was established in October 2008 in response to growing concerns over the heightened Food Crisis and a steady decline in the funding of agricultural development both by bilateral and multilateral organisations over nearly two decades. Chaired by Lord Cameron of Dillington, the APPG is a cross-party initiative drawing members from both Houses of the UK Parliament which brings together Parliamentarians concerned with both the technical, and social science, of agricultural development in poorer parts of the world. It uses its cross-party membership to raise the understanding of developmental needs of smallholder farmers and other stakeholders in developing countries and hence facilitates debate on the level of support given by the British Government and other major donors. In doing this, the APPG recognises the pivotal role that agricultural research outputs have in helping smallholder farmers to increase their productivity and in eliminating global poverty.
4. Although the MDGs have acquired unprecedented political and financial support, they have also been justifiably criticized (Pollard et. al. 2011). They overlooked many key aspects of development which are today essential in promoting the health and wellbeing of poor communitites in developing countries. A primary example of this is the complete lack of any focus in the MGDs on the agricultural or any other productive sector, and the impact of these sectors on the livelihoods of poor people. The voices of farmers, must be heard. Engagement with rural communitites including smallholder crop farmers, pastoraslists, fisherfolk, processors, and agro-businesses more generally are vital to ensure that their needs and interests are reflected in a post-MDG framework. Allowing smallholders to be active agents in developing solutions to their problems is a key requirement for a successful Post-MDG planning and development process, and should be recognised as such.
5. The World Development Report in 2008 stated, “Improving the productivity, profitability and sustainability of smallholder farming is the main pathway out of poverty in using agriculture for development.” Clearly then a post-2015 consultation should put smallholder farmers at the centre of the agricultural development paradigm. It means consulting those farmers in rural and remote areas, not just those who have access to major cities or good links with government officials. It means fostering an active partnership between the public and private sector to ensure that smallholders are given the assistance they need to improve their production and gain access to markets, so that they can flourish into profitable and viable businesses.
6. Currently the world is letting MDG 1 to halve of the number of people who suffer from hunger globally slip through its fingers and further out of reach. Even if we can reverse this trend of increasing hunger and somehow manage to meet this target in the remaining few years of the MDGs, which seems highly unlikely, what next? Little attention is being given to the global needs beyond 2015 – such as the need to double agricultural production by 2050 if the most basic requirements of an expected global population of 9 billion people are to be met. In addition there is an urgent need to reduce food waste, increase access to food of the hungry (through the better distribution of food), and also a need to find ways to increase production in a sustainable way.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
103
7. It is notable that many successes in tackling food security in the developing world have resulted from co-operation at community farming level and the very highest political level. In Brazil, Bangladesh and Mozambique by way of example, concentrated effort at both levels has created remarkable results, reducing hunger and under-nutrition over the past 10 years. It is essential that agriculture and food security, with a focus on the importance of smallholder farmers, is central to any Post-MDG framework. This should lead to a food system which is equitable and promotes a favourable environment in which even the smallest farmers can grow themselves into a viable business. Sustainably raising agricultural production, improving knowledge access to inputs for poor farmers to grow sufficient nutritious food and cutting post-harvest losses should also form part of this focus on tackling hunger, addressing food security, and helping poor smallholder farmers build small-scale businesses.
8. Evidence collected by the recent APPG inquiry report “Growing out of Poverty” indicates that in some countries, as much as 90% of the population are subsistence farmers. But it also demonstrates that, given the right support they can be transformed into productive, economically active, well-fed contributors to their country’s GDP and national food security (APPG, 2011). The policy interventions that the Post-MDG Framework should consider in addressing food security through smallholder farmers. A number of these are outlined below.
9. More and better support for smallholder agriculture can boost the economic and social status of women, who are the majority of smallholder farmers. This support should empower them to make decisions about their own lives and those of their families. Evidence shows that farmer parents who move from subsistence to surplus tend to spend any available cash on educating their children – thus enabling women to earn more income from agriculture would benefit the education of future generations. More diversified and increased agricultural production can also reduce the nutritional shortcomings of expectant and new mothers whilst simultaneously boosting the physical health and cognitive well-being of their children. So good quality agricultural investment returns not only healthy citizens, capable of achieving their full potential and less likely to require healthcare interventions, but also increases labour productivity, which in turn will lead to economic and social progress.
10. Sustainable agricultural practices also improve the resilience of farming communities to weather shocks and foster environmental sustainability. Therefore, by turning subsistence agricultural systems into a vibrant, profitable and sustainable rural sector, countries can make progress towards virtually all of the current Millennium Development Goals.
11. It is crucial that any Post-MDG process includes a focus on public investment in smallholder agriculture, sustainable agricultural practices, and the importance of smallholder farmers’ rights and respective national food security targets. Governments must ensure that policies, laws and regulations are put in place that will enable smallholder farmers to build viable enterprises. Smallholder farming systems provide employment and food for most of the developing world – yet smallholders seldom have a voice in discussions and decisions on these issues. The Post-MDG framework must address this problem by ensuring smallholders are given a voice in any national discussions on a new framework.
12. Land tenure and ownership are also important but sensitive issues for agricultural development, comprising a complicated web of customary practices and modern law. The Post-MDG framework should acknowledge that farmers will not take risks on their farm unless they have secure land tenure agreements. Smallholder farmers, including pastoralists, face competition for their land from other resource-intensive industries such as mining, tourism, agro-fuels, and housing, as well
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
104
as land speculators Secure land tenure and agrarian reforms can unlock economic growth and empower women, giving them access to and control over finance and other crucial inputs. A post-MDG framework should therefore include land tenure security for women.
13. The Post-MDG Framework should encourage Governments, with assistance from donors, to create conditions that attract pro-poor private sector investment to secure and sustain the livelihoods of smallholder farmers. This by its very nature needs to be a long-term venture. Government’s role in kick-starting commercially-viable smallholder agriculture should include the building of transport infrastructure such as rural feeder roads; ensuring that inputs are available and affordable; and frameworks for coordination and cooperation of public sector partnerships with the private sector (such as the commodity exchange set up in Ethiopia to allow easier and standardised trade for smallholders). The provision of public goods in areas such as agricultural research, extension and training are also part of the long-term role of governments. If these aspects of the wider ‘agricultural development’ agenda are prioritised, the Post-MDG Framework will have more chance of succeeding in reducing poverty.
14. Public and private sector investments in small-scale farming require consistency. Some investments may only see returns in the medium to longer term and a long-term commitment (minimum of seven or eight years) is often required for smallholder farmers to lift themselves out of poverty (APPG 2011). Although private enterprise will drive investment in the agricultural sector, governments have an important role to play as providers of public goods as well as targeted support and facilitating an enabling business environment. Any targets to ensure food security and create an equitable food system must involve the private sector – without which innovation, funds and market access will remain elusive for many smallholder farmers.
15. A business oriented approach to the integration of smallholder farmers into agricultural market chains will also contribute to food security and poverty reduction if large numbers of smallholders are empowered to become commercially viable and earn a fair return on the labour, knowledge and capital they invest on their land. For example, involvement of smallholders, after training in suitable business skills, in activities such as small-scale seed-production enterprise has proved effective in increasing the uptake and dissemination of improved, locally adapted new seed varieties in Nepal (Whitcombe, et.al. 2010). Private sector investments along agricultural value chains can open up new market opportunities for smallholder farmers. However, many are still missing out on these opportunities, and a post MDG-framework should include a focus on developing their ability to link to markets on fair terms.
16. In recent years, innovative partnerships between the public, commercial and voluntary sectors have helped to identify the critical policy, regulatory, coordination and investment actions needed from the public sector to develop productive, competitive, profitable and equitable agri-food systems in sub-Saharan Africa. These partnerships put smallholder farmers at the centre of their business strategy as they acknowledge the central role that smallholders play in contributing to the food system across the world. An example of this is the C:AVA (Cassava : Adding Value for Africa) project where, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a partnership has been forged between smallholder farmers in Ghana, Tanzania, Uganda, Nigeria and Malawi. This is in partnership with public universities and research institutes in UK and Africa, and private sector processors and end users to develop value chains to manufacture and distribute high quality cassava flour.
17. The Post-MDG Framework should recognise the complementary nature of agriculture and nutrition to ensure food security. Food price rises and increasing volatility in food commodity
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
105
markets continue to impact upon smallholder farmers: this is particularly true regarding economic access to a stable nutritious diet, meaning that more people going hungry than before. Estimates suggest that on top of the one billion hungry people worldwide there are a further one billion who suffer from hidden hunger. It is therefore important that in order to achieve a sustainable agricultural sector, in which smallholders play a leading role, the Post-MDG framework should ensure a complementary focus on nutrition and agricultural development. Without this smallholders will not be able to afford sufficient nutritious food in times of food price spikes and this can severely impact upon their labour productivity, as well as impacting on the physical and cognitive development of their children.
18. Specific indicators for a Post-MDG framework which seeks to promote improved food security through development of small scale agriculture could include a practical set of situational, outcome and sustainability indicators that truly reflects the complex and multifaceted contribution of agricultural development to poverty reduction and food security.
19. A Post-MDG framework which calls on all sectors of society to work towards global food security and poverty reduction should provide smallholder farmers with the tools and opportunities needed work themselves out of poverty. If the Post-MDG Framework sets out a clear agenda, to offer targeted support to smallholders by creating a favourable investment and knowledge transfer environment, smallholders will be given the opportunity to become self-sustained businesses, which will contribute to poverty reduction and food security.
20. The Post-MDG Framework should seek to integrate smallholders into markets, and at the same time recognise the need for investment in public goods and an enabling environment in which public and private sectors are able to complement each other to encourage a working food system which allows smallholder farmers to realise their businesses’ potential.
---For further information, or if you wish to receive oral evidence from the APPG’s Chair - Lord Cameron of Dillington - please contact the Group’s Coordinator, Dominic Foster [email protected]
References
All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development (2010) “Why No Thought for Food?” A UK Parliamentary Inquiry into Global Food Security http://www.agricultureandfoodfordevelopment.org/Growing%20Out%20of%20Poverty%20-%20APPG%20AF4D%20Inquiry%20Report.pdf
All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development (2011) “Growing Out of Poverty” A UK Parliamentary Inquiry into supporting and developing African agriculture http://www.agricultureandfoodfordevelopment.org/Why%20No%20Food%20for%20Thought%20-%20A%20Parliamentary%20Inquiry.pdf
Aryeetey, E. (2012) “Towards a New Post-2015 Development Agenda” http://www.unicef-irc.org/research-watch/Post-2015--What-Next-/907/
Pollard A., Sumner A., Polato-Lopes M. and de Mauroy A. (2011) 100 Voices – Southern perspectives on what should come after the Millennium Development Goals, London: CAFOD and Brighton: IDS.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
106
Vandemoortele, J. (2012) “Advancing the UN development agenda post-2015: some practical suggestions.” Report submitted to the UN Task Force regarding the post-2015 framework for development
Witcombe,J.R., Devkota, K.P. and Joshi, K.D. (2010). Linking community-based seed producers to markets for a sustainable seed supply system. Experimental Agriculture, 46, pp 425-437
The World Bank (2008) World Development Report: Agriculture for Development. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2008/Resources/WDR_00_book.pdf
Yamin A.E. (2012) Post MDGs: what next for a global development agenda that takes human rights seriously? http://www.unicef-irc.org/article/899/
117) Denu Tsegaye, Adama University, Ethiopia
Poverty and hunger are deep rooted in most of African countries triggered by economic, social, and political factors. I believe that a region and country specific targets might help in achieving the targets. I do appreciate and stand for all the goals set by FAO to end hunger and poverty.
118) Faustin Kopangoye, ONG Gabon Environnement, Gabon
[Original contribution in French]
Nous avons le plaisir et l'honneur de participer a la consultation en ligne sur l'agenda du développement après 2015 sur la sécurité alimentaire mondial. Thème 1. Question 1 :quels sont les principaux enseignements ? en 2015 nous n'atteindrons pas les OMD, c'est une réalité et les principaux enseignements en ce qui me concerne sont les suivants. les aides a mon avis n'arrivent pas en totalité aux destinataires finaux par la faute des intermédiaires. la FAO et le PAM devraient revoir les systèmes d'aide et d'encadrement des organisations paysannes, associations et ONGsur la question d'accaparement et l'utilisation des terres par les grandes multi nationales , sachant que leur production est sélective les bons produits sont pour un marché des personnes plus aisés et les produits de mauvaises qualités sont consommé par le plus grand nombre, et ce plus grand nombre est privé de la terre pour cultiverQuestion 2: quels sont les défis et opportunités ?les défis et les opportunités sont nombreuses, parlos des défis,les Etats et les gouvernement devraient mettre en place des vrais plan d'affectation des terres cultivables au bénéfice des populations rurales, et villageoises, faire protégé les terres des villageoisaccompagner ces populations villageoises par des expertes agricoles et élevages pour une bonne production
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
107
pour les opportunités , mettre en place des plans d'actions de compagnonnage dans les domaine de l'agriculture, l'élevage et la commercialisation.au lieu de vivre la situ action d'accaparement de des terres par les multi nationales toutes puissantes , mais plutôt des partenariats seront établie entre toutes les parties prenantes et des quotas seront fixés, les taches seront bien repartis, et les terres seront mis aux profit de tous. Thème 2. Question 1: quelles sont les mesures les plus efficaces ? a mon avis les mesures c'est de prendre tous les acteurs a une valeur absolu et dans le respect, la mise en place des partenariat les villageois vivant sur les terres et les multi nationales disposant des moyens Question 2: quelles seraient les mesures les plus efficaces ? les mesures les plus effilassent sont les partenariats entre les autochtones et les investisseurs.le problème connu est bien celui des investisseurs qui sont souvent égoïstes avec un seul objectif se faire du bénéfice en détruisant les terres avec des produits qui appauvrissent les terres. a) comment tirer le meilleur profit des initiatives ? mètre en place des systèmes de transparences et faire le choix de bonne personnes morales et physiquesb) faire une bonne mobilisation de fonds , de matériels, et des ressources humainesc) responsabilisés les réseaux comme les notre, nous accompagné dans les renforcements des capacités opérationnels, managériales, commerciales.d) mettre en place des relations direct, hors souvent les initiatives sont souvent bloqué par certain états et gouvernement, car les aides sont détournés pour d'autres fins . Thème 3: Programme de développement pour l'après 2015, des objectifs, des buts et des indicateurs 1) nous devons d'abord savoir situé les problèmes, qui souffrent de la fai, et la pauvreté ?? qui meurent de faim ? et dans quels contiment ? quels sont les conditions climatiques ? la stabilité politiques .2) avant de mettre des nouveaux programmes pour l'après 2015, nous devons au plus rapide faire des études sociaux éconimiques dans les pays et continent atteint par la famines et la pauvreté.3) mettre en place des systèmes d'aides directs auprès des populations atteintent mais bien organiser les réseaux nous disons que nous sommes capable et disposer pour une implication totale pour atteindre les objectifs du défis faim zéro suivants: a.100% d'accès a une alimentation adéquate toute l'annéeb. éro enfant de moins de deux ans souffrant d'un retard de croissancec. tous les systèmes agro-alimentaire sont durablesd.100%augmentation de la productivité et de revenus des petits exploitantse. zero perte ou gaspillage de produits alimentaires NB. ici vous avez une vision très élargie, mais dans les jours qui suivent je vous ferrai parvenir à une échelle propre a une région du centre du Gabon et du pays
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
108
Cordialement Faustin KOPANGOYESecrétaire GénéralONG Gabon Environnement
[English translation]
We are pleased and honored to participate in the on-line consultation on the development agenda post 2015 for global food security.
Theme1.
Question 1: What are the key lessons?
In 2015 we will not be awaiting the MDG, it will be a reality and the main lessons, as far as I am concerned, are the following:
Aid inputs do not reach intact those to whom they are finally destined due to the intermediaries.FAO and the WFP should revise the aid and managerial set up of farmers’ organizations, associations and NGOs.
On the question of cornering and use of land by the big multi-nationals, one knows that their production is selective , that the good products are sold to better-off people and that the products of lower quality are consumed by the majority and that this majority are deprived of land to cultivate.
Question 2: What are the challenges and opportunities?
There are many challenges and opportunities. Let us talk about the challenges:
States and governments should introduce real allocation plans for farmland which will benefit the rural and village populations, and should protect the land belonging to the people living in villages.Support the village people with agricultural and animal husbandry specialists for better production.
As for the opportunities, introduce action plans for “buddy systems" in agriculture, animal husbandry and commercialization.
Rather than living with the system of land cornering by the powerful multinationals, partnerships should preferably be established between all parties involved and quotas fixed. Tasks will be well divided and the land will be used for the benefit of all.
Theme 2.
Question 1: What steps work best?
In my opinion, the measures to be taken are: to treat all involved with respect and at their real value; to set up partnerships between the village people occupying the land and the multinationals which have the means.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
109
Question 2: Which would be the most effective measures?
The most effective measures are partnerships between the indigenous people and the investors.
The well- known problem is that often investors are selfish and have one objective only: to reap the benefits while destroying the land with products which impoverish it.
a) How to get the most benefit from the initiatives? Set up transparent systems and choose good legal and natural persons.b) Create a thorough mobilization of funds, materials and human resources
c) Give responsibility to networks like ours; support us in the reinforcement of operational, managerial and commercial capacities.
d) Establish direct relationships, without which initiatives are often blocked by certain states and governments, because the aid has been redirected to other ends.
Theme 3.
Development programs for post 2015, objectives, goals and indicators.
1) In first place, we should know how to quantify the problems, who is suffering from hunger and poverty? who is dying of hunger? and in which continent? what are the climatic conditions? the political stability?
2) Before introducing new programs for post 2015, we should as quickly as possible make socio economic studies in the countries and continents affected by hunger and poverty.
3) Introduce direct aid systems to the populations affected but organize the distribution channels properly
We say that we are able and willing to be totally involved in order to achieve the following objectives of the zero hunger challenge:
a.100% access to adequate food all year roundb. zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. all food systems are sustainabled.100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. zero loss or waste of food
NB. I have given you here a very broad view, but next I will send it correctly scaled for a region in the centre of Gabon, and for the country.
Sincerely
Faustin KOPANGOYEGeneral SecretaryGabon Environment NGO.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
110
119) Julieth Galdames, UdeC, Chile
[Original contribution in Spanish]
1. Fortalecer la agricultura, es la base de la disponibilidad de alimento fresco y saludable para todos. Instruir a la gente, sobre todo de comunidades pequeñas en formas de agricultura sustentable y conservación natural de alimentos.
2. Prohibir definitivamente aditivos dañinos para la salud en el procesamiento de los alimentos, desde su cultivo hasta su envasado.
3. Crear una red global de pesquisa y transporte de alimentos, desde donde se sobre-produce hasta donde escasea, con la voluntad de países y empresarios, para que en el mundo no se siga desechando alimento mientras otras personas mueren de hambre.
[English translation]
1. Strengthening agriculture is the basis of the availability of fresh and healthy food for all. Educating people -especially in small communities- about the ways of sustainable agriculture and natural food preservation.
2. Prohibiting once and for all additives in food processing that are harmful for health, from cultivation to packaging.
3. Creating a global network of research and transport of food, from places with overproduction to where it is scarce, with the will of countries and businesses. The world should stop disposing food while some people are starving.
120) Adilson Santos, Brazil
[Original contribution in Portuguese]
Poucas palavras = boa vontade
[English translation]Few words = goodwill
121) Rachael Shenyo Alticultura, Guatemala
I am a Master's degree student in agricultural & resource economics, and I have been doing my field research on the impact of climate change on crop loss, regional food prices, and familiar impacts in marginal environments located at high altitudes in rural Guatemala. I stongly feel it would be a terrible mistake to not consider climate change impact in any discussion of regional or national or world food security. Crop losses, increased pestilence, changes in yields, loss of soil fertility, loss of arable land, and rising food prices have significant effects on ability to grow and/or purchase food. Our group believes that regional market empowerment is necessary to provide the flexibility in adaptive practices required to reduce risk of climate change impact; but trade policies, monopolies, and genetic
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
111
rights laws that favor use of imported seeds and varieties have been a key stumbling block in this endeavor.
I would be happy to discuss my findings more. It should be noted that the region we work in has one of the highest child malnutrition rates in the world.
122) Bettina Prato, IFAD, Italy
Dear all, Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this very important discussion. Much has already been said by other contributors that I have found interesting and often quite compelling. As someone who works in an organization dedicated to eradicating rural poverty and hunger, with particular focus on smallholder agriculture, I was particularly impressed, most recently, with the comprehensive contribution made by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development in the UK Parliament. Without wishing to restate points already stressed by other commentators, I would just like to share the following few thoughts, in the order of the three themes on which inputs have been solicited. Theme 1: in my opinion, one important lesson from the pursuit of the MDGs is that working towards food and nutrition security is, I would say, the quintessential cross-sectoral (possibly even “all-sectoral”) issue, which is very much affected by what is done (or not done) in areas too often discussed without a “food security lens”. This includes, for instance, economic growth, employment and decent work, investment, energy, water, education, governance, and so forth…. In discussing a framework to replace the MDGs, it is very important not to discuss food and nutrition security as a theme that can be addressed in any sort of isolation from the other themes currently being discussed. More than any other theme (except for poverty, to which it is of course closely linked), food and nutrition security needs to be “mainstreamed” into all other discussions, in order to come up with meaningful pathways and targets on all relevant fronts. This means, of course, also that there needs to be an open “dialogue” between this particular consultation and other thematic, regional, and national consultations on the post-2015 and sustainable development agendas. As an earlier contribution to this e-consultation stated, silo discussions are very much to be avoided in this context. Also important to take home from the MDG experience is the need to focus more attention and resources on rural areas, rural-urban inequalities – in incomes, in nutritional status, as well as in access to clean water, electricity, infrastructure, education and health services, etc, rural data and indicators, and so forth. Rural development and overcoming rural-urban inequalities are central to boosting food security, but these issues were not much in focus in the first MDGs, and they are not yet emerging significantly in the post-2015 discussion. Conversely, reducing these inequalities and fully integrating rural areas into more sustainable, resilient, and inclusive patterns of growth are preconditions for achieving sustainable food and nutrition security for all. Also concerning theme 1, I would say that, besides obvious issues such as growing investment in agriculture, more policy attention to food security, ongoing technological developments, and so forth, one key challenge (but also opportunity) for achieving global food and nutrition security has to do
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
112
precisely with the transformation of rural areas and how rural-urban dynamics evolve. On the challenge side of this we can place the increasing deterioration of the natural resource base in many rural areas, the impact of climate change (which may redesign very significantly the geography of entire areas of critical importance for global food production and/or for the struggle against hunger), the ageing of rural and agricultural populations in several parts of the world and the high proportion of young people in other parts, rapid urbanization coupled with slow growth of urban economies and governance and service networks, and so forth. On the opportunity side, we have the growing integration of rural and urban economies linked to diffuse small-scale urbanization, integrated territorial development experiences, migration and remittance flows, the emergence or popularization of new technologies and opportunities for decentralized rural energy supply, information and communication networks, and so forth. And of course, the change in agricultural and rural markets and value chains, at country, regional, and global levels, represents both an opportunity and a challenge. So if I were to name one major area where work is needed to ensure future food and nutrition security, I would say changing the face of rural areas around the world, to turn them into hubs of inclusive and sustainable growth, with plenty of decent employment opportunities – many of them linked to agriculture in its broadest sense, areas where today’s rural youth want to and are proud to live, and where they can fulfil their aspirations in terms not only of food security but of overall quality of life. Concerning theme 2, many other contributors have highlighted key success factors, from genuine political commitment and broad-based ownership to partnerships, accountability, human rights- approaches, cross-sectoral approaches (notably around nutrition), and yet other. Here I would just like to offer three points. First, I am not convinced that there is a “best” approach to the challenges of food and nutrition security. There are many good practices, but no blueprints, and this is particularly important to remember as we increasingly strive for positive impact “at scale”. As a result, it is critical to encourage and cultivate space for innovation, learning (and knowledge sharing), and systematic approaches to scaling up success, for progress to be sustained. This sort of space should be cultivated both within and across countries in my view. Second, it is important to work on the transformation of food systems in a holistic manner, simultaneously aiming for greater sustainability, productivity, and capacity to generate inclusive (and indeed pro-poor) economic and social benefits. Recent experience shows that this transformation is possible, provided that the key stakeholders (including rural communities and farmers) have the incentives to change (i.e. appropriate pricing, rewards for positive environmental externalities, market opportunities, etc.) and the tools to mitigate and better manage risks. Third, and final, among the many things that have proved effective to improve food security and nutrition, women’s empowerment and gender equality – in terms of access to productive resources, rights of tenure and use over land (and water), education, citizenship, and so forth – deserves singling out for greater emphasis and concrete attention. In this regard, perhaps it would be appropriate to consider gender-equal access and rights over land as a worthwhile global target for food security. Coming now to theme 3, the Zero Hunger Challenge offers no doubt an ambitious and inspiring set of goals, which constitutes a vision towards which different context-specific objectives (certainly including time-bound objectives) can be developed. The one element of the agenda that could perhaps be strengthened in its ambition and also better harmonized with the other elements concerns the
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
113
doubling of smallholder productivity and incomes. In this regard, I would offer the following observations. First, doubling smallholder productivity is not quite the same as doubling incomes – in fact, the relationship between increase in smallholder incomes and increase in their (agricultural) productivity may be complex and not at all straightforward. Second, in some contexts a doubling of smallholder productivity (however defined) may be an overambitious goal, while in others it is possible and appropriate to be more ambitious than this. As a result, it may be best to refrain from defining such a quantitative target for smallholder productivity growth a priori and with universal value. Third, decisions concerning productivity growth are to be made by the stakeholders directly concerned – first and foremost smallholders and other investors in agriculture – as they result from their investment decisions, which are in turn shaped by many factors. Fourth, many smallholders derive their incomes from a mix of sources, including but not limited to agriculture. An increase in the incomes may not represent an increase of income from agriculture, and this should also be acknowledged in some way. Fifth, for the many smallholder farmers who live below one or the other poverty lines, a doubling of income may be a rather modest goal, not quite on a par with the other elements of the Challenge, which are quite bold and inspiring. Finally, smallholder agriculture is the predominant form of agriculture globally, and therefore a key pillar of food systems. This means that it is also at the core of any efforts to achieve “100% access to adequate food all year round”, “all food systems are sustainable”, “zero loss or waste of food”… Etc. So, what may be a concrete suggestion to address all these points? My suggestion is two-fold:
1) Explicitly position smallholder agriculture in the other elements of the Challenge2) Revise the specific element on smallholder agriculture in a more ambitious manner – perhaps
along the lines of “zero smallholder farmers live in poverty or food insecurity” Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment! Bettina Prato, Ph.DResearch Coordinator Office of the Chief Development StrategistIFAD
123) Pablo Esteban Aguilar Castro, Costa Rica
1. Link farming with global Greenhouse Gases cuts targets. This is not easy, but must be a priority. We now have "severe weather" as a normal in the Earth's, but we have time to mitigate global warning. To make these objective work the world need actions such as: a. Stop deforestation because of crop and cattle expansion. We can protect the forests and feed the people at the same. The only think needed is searching best practices such as community grown farms, payments for protecting forests, and a best soil management (if we do not overuse the soil it can be used more time, so no farm expansion needed).b. Change the actual farming system. Finding alternatives to burning (that is one of the most used system in the world) would help the world to cut CH4 and CO2 emmissions.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
114
c. The establishment of a good local farming system is a good step to make stop the dependency on imported products... and our adicction to fossil fuels.d. STOP ALL bio fuels that comes from crops. Bio fuels are a good alternative to fossil fuels if they come from wastes, but the ones that are from, for example, corn farms causes many GHG emissions... and are a threat to food security. We need the corn and the soy to eat. Food security is more important that fueling our vehicles. It is urgent to governments to stop promoting bio fuels (and an international veto would be good). 2. Promote family and community-managed agriculture as a priority over large scale and corporative farming. The Earth has enough natural resources for a future with a very good food security. What we need is that these resources be managed accuratelly in the present... and the future. When agriculture lands is in hands of the communities (villages, town, cities, ect) its more easy to make them sustainable. 3. Creating policies that control food wasting is a must. 4. For a best future, we need to develop urban farming. Growing food products in cities is good practice. Most cities have spaces that would able (or are being used) to farm. Terraces, gardens, etc. All objectives must be in a global scale, because hunger and food security are an international problem, not only of a few countries.
124) Julien Custot, Food for the Cities, FAO, Italy
Dear all, Urbanization is, with climate change, among the greatest challenges of the XXIst century. Today, already more than 50 % of the population lives in urban areas. By 2050, urban dwellers will make about 70 % of the 9 billion people. All the increase of population will in fact take place in cities, in Asia and Africa. There has been many examples in the recent years - from the food riots in 2008-2009 to the Arab Spring - that food insecurity in cities can lead to civil unrest or conflicts. Development goals regarding food and nutrition security have to consider explicitly the urban areas. Theme 1: Because poverty is measured mainly through money, the MDGs may have been partially blind on food and nutrition security for the urban dwellers. Indeed, in a specific country, 1$ often does not have the same value in a rural area or in a city. Besides, in a rural area, there are often still a lot of non-monetary economy (in low but also in high income countries) while a city is mainly a market place. Moreover, in a city, you have to pay for housing (even in informal housing and slums), transportation, health and education, even before thinking about food. More comprehensive indicators need to be designed to better measure poverty in urban settings. Among the challenges, we can then suggest:
The need to address food and nutrition security for the urban dwellers, include with a gender perspective,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
115
Within a city or a metropolis, indicators should not only look at individual and household status but they should also consider the level of inequalities between the richest and poorest. Higher inequalities will impact access to food for the most vulnerable,
The volatility of the food prices should also be consider as an indicator leading to food and nutrition insecurity.
Theme 2: Local authorities need to be involved in and committed for food and nutrition security for the realization of the right to food. Local authorities should be fully engaged in the governance process, in relations with the National Government. We may seriously consider promoting local food councils as an effective and most progressive way to get all stakeholders together at sub-national level. At municipal level, accountability of the mayors is linked to a close and daily contact with the population. The “Zero Hunger Challenge” offers a great opportunity as it implicitly include cities:
100% access to adequate food all year round, including urban dwellers, with access to staple food as well as fresh food for a sustainable diet. It should include an indicator on the biodiversity and seasonality of the food available.
All food systems are sustainable: it must include both rural and urban areas and consider the dynamics across the rural-urban continuum of the local food systems. The role of consumers as drivers of the food systems should be acknowledge. Food systems should not only be sustainable but also resilient. They include management of natural resources.
Zero loss or waste of food: waste is mainly done by households in urban areas.The first version of the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/026/ME498E.pdf) identifies, among the “issues that may require further attention” (page 36), the “ways to boost rural development to strengthen food security and nutrition in the context of rural‐urban migration”. It is indeed a priority. Theme 3: The Post-2015 Global Development Framework, objectives, targets and indicators should also be at the local level. To make the Zero Hunger Challenge more operational, the objectives should be time-bound, with intermediate goals, standing somewhere between 0 and 100%. The linkages between food and nutrition security and agriculture with the management of natural resources should be more directly reflected in the development goals to further promote sustainable diets.
125) Ellen Meleisea, Australia
Theme 1:
Question:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
116
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years? Answer:
Key lessons:
The key lesson learned during the current MDG framework was that there are only two things that are important: people and the environment. Nations should NOT focus on “building their economies” or “generating economic growth”. That path has been tried, and it has failed.
If the ultimate goal of society is to improve the well-being of all humans on our planet so that people are able to lead happy, healthy and productive lives, there are only two objectives to be achieved:
(i) Uphold human rights (i.e. ensure equality under the law for women, minorities, LGBT, etc).(ii) Safeguard natural resources (ie. ensure clean water, clean air, healthy soil, etc)
If these two objectives are achieved, all other objectives (reduction of poverty, reduction of maternal mortality, etc) will also be achieved.
For example, if women’s human right to equality (with men) is achieved, women’s health will improve, maternal mortality will drop, education of women will increase, women’s participation in the economy will increase, etc.
Likewise, if the resources on which human lives depend are safeguarded (through preventing water, air and soil pollution, ending dependence on polluting fossil fuels, farming without using polluting pesticides and other chemicals, etc) human health will improve and people will have the resources they need to grow safe and nutritious food. Challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security:
Challenges: Climate change is a key challenge – it will destroy many countries and make it impossible for many people to grow food. Instead of focusing on “climate change mitigation”, nations should focus on stopping climate change. To do this they need to switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy, right now. This switch will be challenging as there are powerful corporations who will oppose this change (because they will lose money) but if the ultimate goal is to improve the well-being of all people on the planet, these corporations must be opposed.
Opportunities: There have been great improvements in human understanding of our planet’s climate, ecosystems and soil and it has been proven that organic, labour-intensive and sustainable farming systems produce high yields with low pollution. Such systems use only the locally-available inputs, they do not rely on imported inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, machinery, etc). People benefit from such systems by not having to spend money to buy inputs (therefore avoiding debt) and by having a healthy and productive life. This will not make people “rich” but neither will “conventional agriculture” which usually results in people becoming indebted, the soil being destroyed, waterways depleted and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
117
polluted, and much misery for the people involved (who then move to the cities where they suffer even further).
Theme 2:
Question:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
Answer:
Improved governance and rights-based approaches are essential in achieving food and nutrition security. Accountability and political commitment are vital in achieving improved governance and ensuring that approaches are rights-based.
The Zero Hunger Challenge is an excellent initiative as it focuses both on human rights (access to food) and safeguarding natural resources (food systems must be sustainable and there should be zero waste of food).
The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition is not useful as it still focuses on “economic growth” and “investment by stakeholders” rather than on upholding human rights and safeguarding natural resources. The core values of this strategic framework are not in line with the ultimate goal: that all people should be able to lead happy, healthy and productive lives. Theme 3:
Question:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
118
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound? Answer:
The Zero Hunger Challenge objectives that I think are the most useful in terms of achieving the ultimate goal (“all people should be able to lead happy, healthy and productive lives”) are:
a. 100% access to adequate and nutritious food all year roundc. All food systems are sustainablee. Zero loss or waste of food. The other two “objectives” are just indicators of whether the above three objectives have been achieved or not.These two “objectives” will be achieved if the three other objectives are achieved:
b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldd. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income For “objective” d, I would remove the words “and income”. The focus should NOT be on increasing income or wealth. The focus should be on improving peoples’ quality of life. An increase in productivity can represent an increase in quality of life (greater reward for the same work) but an increase in income does not necessarily represent an increase in quality of life, as income increase is often accompanied by an increase in debt. Apart from the three objectives I listed above, nations should also strive to achieve the following objectives:
i. Equality in the law for women and menii. Zero discrimination against women, minorities and LGBT (in accordance with internationally-agreed norms of what constitutes “discrimination”)iii. 100% protection of water, air and soil resources (in accordance with internationally-agreed standards) Thus, there would be six objectives in total:
I. 100% access to adequate and nutritious food all year roundII. All food systems are sustainableIII. Zero loss or waste of foodIV. Equality in the law for women and men (equal rights, equal pay, equal access to education)V. Zero discrimination against women, minorities and LGBT (in accordance with internationally-agreed norms of what constitutes “discrimination”)VI. 100% protection of water, air and soil resources (in accordance with internationally-agreed standards) All objectives should be global and all nations should aim to achieve them within 10 years.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
119
126) Simon Mansfield, ECHO, Sudan
NB: Views are mine, not those of ECHO
Theme 1: The key lessons are that food insecurity (poverty) is caused by unequal wealth distribution, and that aid has zero effect. The key global challenge is reducing populations size while increasing earnings, wealth and job security (without migration) of the poorest. This is a political challenge because it can only be done by redistributing wealth. There is no role for aid agencies such as FAO or WFP.
Theme 2: Political change is the only way forward. This means action to confront wealthy vested interests at every level from local through to global. There is no technical solution nor is there any role for aid organisations. The technical solutions you refer to (zerohungerchallenge) are functionally the same as doing nothing.
Theme 3: Global Gini coefficient of 25? 99% of the wealth of the top 1% redistributed to the poorest 10%? In the meantime limit current international aid to directly saving lives. For example focus on addressing wasting (MUAC, not WFHz), with food aid for households with MUAC wasting only.
127) Lawrence Haddad, Institute of Development Studies, United Kingdom
I really welcome the Zero Hunger Challenge. I think it is the right level of ambition and aspiration. It has dimensions that apply to all countries, not just the poorer ones--everyone has a role and a responsibility. The components on stunting, waste and smallholder productvitiy may be able to be applied at country level, but the sustainable food systems and adequate food all year round are more internationally determined. 2040 seems like a good time horizon, with maybe a set of mid term goals in 2025. I think the key is the Zero-just as we have to think about an end to aid, we have to begin talking about an end to hunger. The more we talk about it as a possibility, the more we will internalise the challenge. My biggest problem with ZHC is that there is no accountability--we don't know whether different actors are pulling their weight. That's why I would like to have some indicators relating to measuring commitment to reduce hunger (national level actions on spending, policies, charters, for example). You might want to check out a blog I did on the MDGs in general (which talks about accountability) http://www.developmenthorizons.com/2012/11/global-development-goals-end-of.htmland a recent blog on where does nutrition fit in the MDGs. http://www.developmenthorizons.com/2012/12/the-mdgs-where-does-nutrition-fit.html
128) Fabiana Menna, Gran Chaco Foundation, Argentina
We can´t work on food security without strengthening local organizations. In many cases, food security or food sovereignty are related not only with poorness but especially with marginalization, cultural crisis and colonialism. In my experience in the Gran Chaco region, indigenous people has malnutrition
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
120
problems because they lost their culture, their knowledge and consumes the worst food of western society. We must work on strengthening their own organizations, to build a multi-actors context, more plural.
129) Abdikarim Bashir Ahmed, Dolow Farmers Co-operative Society, Somalia
We there to eradicate poverty all over the world and we are glad of that everyone tries his or her best. I am a sure we can make it through joint hands against food insecurity.
130) Mariam Al Jaajaa, The Arab Group for the Protection of Nature, Jordan
Protracted crises , both armed conflicts and natural disasters, are one of of the main factors contributing to the unacceptably high degree of hunger. 20% of the undernourished people in the world are living in countries suffering from protracted crises. The relationship between Crises and food and nutrition insecurity creates a vicious that needs to be broken through tackling the root and driving causes of such a relationship. Both conflicts and natural disasters should be treated separately with designed assistance. I have attached for you the outcomes of a global civil society consultation that took place in Rome prior to the CFS HLEF on Protracted Crises. Among the many recommendations, accountability of all actors during , before, and after a crisis, was stressed upon, where local communities are put at the center of the accountability mechanism.
131) Faustino Cervera Burriel, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
No creo que yo pueda aportar demasiado. Sin embargo, creo que para solucionar el problema debemos tender a:
1. Aumentar la variación de cultivos en las áreas donde el monocultivo es predominante.
2. Permitir la explotación de tierras a agricultores pobres que no dispongan de tierras propias. Para ello se podrían poner a su disposición microcréditos de dinero que puedan permitirles la compra de tierra, semilla y material de cultivo.
3. Potenciar el uso de semillas autóctonas, adaptadas a las condiciones climáticas de los territorios de cultivo. Esto se podría llevar a cabo mediante la potenciación de bancos de germoplasma en países en vías de desarrollo.
4, Potenciar el consumo de vegetales (hortalizas, frutas, verduras, cereales y legumbres) frente a productos cárnicos, para evitar el exceso de gasto de energía que supone criar el ganado.
5. Mejorar los abastecimientos de agua en regiones áridas, mediante sistemas de pozos y riego.
Un saludo.
[English translation]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
121
I do not think I can contribute too much. However, I believe that to solve the problem we aim to:
1. Increasing crop variation in areas where monoculture is predominant.
2. Allowing exploitation of land by poor landless farmers. This could be possible by making available the necessary microcredit to enable the purchase of land, seed and planting material.
3. Promoting the use of native seeds, adapted to the climatic conditions of the growing areas. This could be carried out by strengthen germplasm banks in developing countries.
4. Promoting the consumption of vegetables, fruits, grains and legumes versus meat products, to avoid the excessive waste of energy involved in raising livestock.
5. Improving water supplies in arid regions, using wells and irrigation systems.
Regards
132) Francescah Munyi, Kenya Organic Finest Aromas Ltd, Kenya
Soil degradation is a major issue in Kenya and attracting little action. We have tried our soil amendment programme in rural Kenya and have proven that repaired soils is a sure gurantee to quality food production.
133) Etienne Tournesol Bama, Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development, Central African Republic
Today, many people lack access to a good training program and they don’t know how to do well in the field of agriculture, livestock, fishery, aquaculture, etc... It's better to repromote agricultural training for youth and gentlemen in Central Africa which will be the world basin for productions according to its natural resources.
134) Corinna Hawkes, World Cancer Research Fund International, UK
Here are some comments from Corinna Hawkes at WCRF International, an organisation concerned with the prevention of cancer through the promotion of improved nutrition:
http://www.wcrf.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/wcrfint
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/wcrfint
Research and Policy Blog: http://www.wcrf.org/blog
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
122
Theme 1: What are some of the key lessons that have been learned during the current MDG Framework, 1990-2015?
Many lessons have been learned during this period. Here are some:
Food and nutrition insecurity encompasses a triple burden of poor nutritional status: underweight; stunting; and overweight/obesity. These three conditions can co-exist within the same individuals, households, and communities. They may also exist independently of each other.
All forms of malnutrition are linked with health, including the development of chronic non-communicable diseases in later life. Evidence indicates that poor nutritional status is linked with the development of noncommunicable diseases.
Intervention in early life is critical to prevent stunting and the health conditions associated with it later in life since malnutrition has a profound effect on child growth and development during the first two years of life.
Good nutritional status should therefore be an objective for development, rather than “hunger” alone.
Moving out of a situation of undernutrition does not necessary lead to good nutritional status if replaced by overweight and obesity. Healthy development needs to take a different path to Western nations in this regard!
Good nutritional status is achieved by a range of actions, including on food, health and care.
With regard to food, improvement to the total diet is essential. Focusing on one or two specific foods or nutrients can have perverse effects.
A strong civil society can galvanise and promote action to address malnutrition.
Good governance, including multi-sectoral mechanisms, is essential for the effective development and implementation of actions to address malnutrition in all its forms.
Having clear goals can motivate action.
Theme 2: What actions are needed?
Taking into account the triple burden of poor nutritional status, the following actions are needed for the post-2015 development agenda:
Actions that address all forms of poor nutritional status. Some actions are needed to address two of three aspects of malnutrition at the same time; others are needed that target the specific form of malnutrition alone.
Maintaining and promoting breastfeeding – evidence states that breastfeeding leads to positive nutritional outcomes in all its forms. UN recommendations on breastfeeding should be followed, implemented and monitored by all relevant actors.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
123
Social safety nets are needed to reduce poverty and malnutrition among poor families, including systems of ensuring adequate food intake, such as school meal provision and cash. However, it is essential that these systems include nutrition standards and/or provisions to promote healthy eating (evidence suggests these otherwise valuable programmes can be associated with excessive energy intake or unbalanced diets).
Malnutrition should be viewed as a food systems problem, as well as one of poverty and unbalanced development. This is particularly the case now that more attention and investment is being placed into agriculture. There currently exists a considerable opportunity to promote “nutrition sensitive agri-food systems”. Actions are needed to improve the nutrition-sensitivity of “short value chains” between farmers and consumers, focused on specific, and often rural, populations e.g. initiatives to promote the production of plant-based foods and their movement into the market throughout the value chain. Given the presence of huge urban populations who purchase food that has moved through long and complex value chains, action is also needed to make “long value chains” more nutrition sensitive. This is needed to bring the triple burden and vulnerable urban populations into the frame of nutrition-sensitive agri-food systems.
As part of this, policy actions are needed that target entire populations. For example, national governments and UN bodies should build the protection and maintenance of good nutritional status into relevant policies and agreements; the food and drink industries should make nutrition an explicit priority in all stages of food systems including product research, development, formulation and reformulation, and promotion. disincentives to the food and drink industries to mobilise and create demand for poor quality diets, such as policies to significantly reduce the marketing of high calorie, nutrient-poor foods to infants, young children, adolescents, and their caregivers.
Overall, policies and actions will only be effective if they change the 3As – the availability, affordability and acceptability of healthy diets. Policies should thus promote a combination of supports changes in the food environment to address all 3As, plus educational strategies designed to facilitate the acceptability of healthy food choices and other food- and nutrition-related behaviours conducive to health.
Evidence suggests that school-based approaches can be effective, but that a “whole school approach” is needed (that is, the integration of nutrition in several different forms throughout the whole school, including education on the curriculum, food served in schools, gardening etc). School gardening interventions are becoming more popular all over the world as a way of integrating many different aspects of nutrition education into one.
Multi-sectoral (health, agriculture etc) and multi-stakeholder (civil society, government etc) action is needed to ensure good governance of the triple burden of malnutrition. For multi-sectoral and mulit-stakeholder action to happen, it is necessary to create the spaces to do so. This requires a policy spaces and governance spaces, such as national multi-sectoral councils. There is evidence that these multi-sectoral governance mechanisms have more power and positive influence when they report directly to the executive branches of government, preferably at the prime ministerial or presidential level.
Current civil society mobilisation around nutrition has largely (and understandably) focused on undernutrition. A stronger “social movement” around all forms of malnutrition is needed
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
124
to bridge gaps and cut across into the health and development agenda. Further focus is needed from civil society on overweight/obesity and nutrition-related non-communicable diseases.
Theme 3: Objectives, targets and indicators
The post-2015 development framework should include goals and indicators.
With regard to nutrition, nutrition indicators should be mainstreamed throughout the entire post-2015 framework given its interlinkages with other areas, such as health and sustainability.
The Zero Hunger Challenge and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition are to be welcomed and have many strengths, but are limited in how they bring the triple burden of malnutrition together into one framework. The post 2015-agenda should be more explicit in how it addresses this triple burden in its actions, goals and indicators for food and nutrition security.
There should be time-bound targets that take into account the triple burden of malnutrition.
Reduction of stunting should be a key target, as should zero growth of obesity , particularly among infants and young children.
There should also be an “indicator” on the development of food systems relevant to the triple burden of malnutrition.
135) Kamila Mukhamedkhanova, Center for Economic Research, Uzbekistan
Exactly in the middle of the 15 year MDG period the World suffered from the food crisis. Due to the crisis, achievements of MDGs on hunger, food and nutrition security witnessed during the 1990-s and 2000-s were reversed significantly in many countries.
The crisis has become an indication that it is time to reconsider radically the model and approach to food policies, implemented in many countries so far and revise the framework of development goals in the terms of food and nutrition security.
The main question is what the new model should be based on and what is the set of revised MDGs on food and nutrition for the post-2015 agenda?
Sustainable Food Policies: A Striking Case of Uzbekistan
To find out an answer we can look at the experience of countries which were successful in the terms of implementing sustainable food and nutrition policy and managed to provide effective results even during the crises.
A striking example of such an economy is Uzbekistan. The main feature of the food policy framework in Uzbekistan was the holistic approach to the issue. In fact, in Uzbekistan since the early years of independence the problem of food and nutrition security has been a part of an enormously complex policy agenda of socio-economic development. Hence, Uzbekistan had to strike a delicate balance between several, at times conflicting objectives – steeply increasing its own food production; finding a new place in the global economy; generating investment resources for industry and infrastructure
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
125
development; maintaining safety nets for the growing population, and gradually implementing market reforms and supporting the nascent private sector.
Food security has always been considered as a complex problem including a triad of the requirements: a) adequate aggregate supply; b) proper access to food across the population (especially across the vulnerable groups of the population); c) safety and quality of food.
As a result, Uzbekistan was better prepared than many other countries to the recent surge of new threats to food security. In particular, self-sufficiency in wheat and some other key food products provided a cushion against adverse global trends and mitigated their destabilizing effect for the national economy and households’ welfare.
The important difference of Uzbekistan’s approach to food security from that of other countries was the combination of market and non-market instruments and components. Although this often drew the international criticism, at present elements of such an approach are replicated by other countries searching for more reliable and effective means to ensure food security at a time of global economic instability.
In a Search of an Effective Balance: Focus on the Systemic Approach
The facts above provide the evidence that in order to be sustainable and effective, the system of food policy goals for the future needs to be oriented at seeking the effective balance to put in better use the national resources of each country, prepare adequate and timely responses to possible adverse shocks, taking into account internal processes, related to economic, social and other transformations within the economies.
It is also important, that the system adjusts to the changes occurring, copes with the negative impact of multiple crises in various areas being pro-cyclical during growth and counter-cyclical while the downturn.
To find an effective balance, the new post MDG framework should implement the holistic approach. The main difference of post-MDG agenda from the current one should be that the goals are not oriented at one area (like hunger or malnutrition), but are cross-sectional and related to a number of areas simultaneously, thus ensuring the achievement of the overall development objectives. In other words, the goals and indicators within the new system will not be considered separately but only as the elements of the whole system.
The new post-2015 framework also needs to take into account the future development trends for the medium and long term. For instance, it is important to bear in mind that the growing population will increasingly put stress on the current food systems. Transformation of the demographic and social structure of the society, urbanization trends and growing income of the population will change the behavioral stereotypes and pattern of the nutrition, thus transforming the demand for food products and changing the pattern of agricultural production. It is also clear that the increasing pressure on water and land resources will require to improve agricultural productivity and provide the effective land and water management; the aggravating problem of increasing food losses will put further strain on food availability.
Based on these ideas, below is our vision on the set of goals, that could be developed to ensure food and nutrition security within the post-2015 development framework:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
126
New Goals on Food and Nutrition for the Post-MDG Agenda: Our Vision
1. Ensure adequate aggregate supply of food by improving agricultural productivity.
More ambitious food security targets and tightening resource constraints leave no alternatives to increasing agricultural productivity as the basis for future food security. Institutions, technologies, infrastructure and government policies should be integrated within a holistic food security strategy to increase returns to all key agricultural inputs – land, water, labor and capital.
This goal should be strongly linked to the goals on technological development and structural transformations as well as the environmental goals in the terms of effective land and water management.
2. Ensure proper access to food across the population (especially across the vulnerable groups of the population)
This goal should be strongly linked to the strategies on poverty reduction, reformation of model of social protection, gender mainstream, labor market strategies, policies to cope with the income differentiation.
3. Provide the effective distribution of food.
In fact, in most of the cases food and nutrition security is not a problem of availability, but a problem of effective distribution. The effective distribution of food is in turn, strongly related to the governance reformation. As a result, this goal is strongly linked with the reformation of governance and institutions at all levels.
4. Ensure safe and healthy nutrition (this indicator is not included into the set of objectives under Zero Hunger Challenge in any form )
Safe and nutritious food is both a valuable outcome and important factor of economic development. As an outcome, it is an integral factor of the food security triad. As a factor, it constitutes a major investment in human capital accumulation, contributing to a healthy and productive workforce. Food quality prevents economic losses caused by diseases, and saves health care expenditures.
Therefore, this goal is strongly linked to social policies (healthcare) and social protection, governance reformation, etc.
5. Ensure food security policies contribute much to the environmental sustainability. The following aspects of the linkage of food security goals with the environmental ones are of particular importance:
Effective land and water management (this point is linked to the first goal, as the effective land and water management is an important factor of improving agricultural productivity while implementing the resource efficient development pattern;
Zero loss or waste of food (this point is very much linked to the new resource efficient pattern of development which also needs to be considered within the post-MDG development framework);
Energy sustainability (in fact, there is a strong positive relationship between the prices for gas and oil and prices for food. If the energy sustainability is provided and prices for the conventional energy sources are not soaring up, the food prices are also likely to remain stable);
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
127
Climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies also contribute much to ensure food security policies;
As it could be seen each goal to be suggested for the post-MDG agenda is strongly linked with the other goals of the system. We suggest the overall goals to be the same for all countries. However, taking into account that there is no one size fits all, the indicators and target parameters should be specific for each country depending on its national development strategy and objectives.
Kamila Mukhamedkhanova, Research Coordinator, Center for Economic Research, Uzbekistan
Relevant researches:
Conceptual approach to Green Economy in Uzbekistan;
Food security in Uzbekistan after 2010: News challenges and policy responses
136) PA Lakshmi Prasanna, India
The three important components of food security are (1) food availability (2) accessibility and (3) absorption and/or utilization. Recently added fourth component is food system stability. Further these components in-turn influence each other. Like higher availability will lead to affordable price of food commodity and hence improved accessibility. Similarly higher food system stability will lead to price stability and stability in affordability. But asset/income distribution determines not only food accessibility to different classes but also aggregate food production/availability in an economy (as different category of farmers will have preference for production of different commodities). To harness the synergy of these components in improving food security, multi-pronged interventions are needed both at national level and global level.
For elaborating these linkages between these different components of food security and highlight some suggested intervention measures the references cited in the attachment file were used.
In addition to the targets mentioned in the attachment file, per capita available cultivatable land can also be a monitorable target for ensuring food security.
P.A.Lakshmi Prasanna
Please access link here
137) Subhash Mehta, NGO Association for Agriculture Research in Asia-Pacific (NAARAP), India
Dear all,
Thank you for the excellent contributions made covering this very important subject. I would like to add my bit to the three themes, as my focus for the last ten years and continues even now, to bring on the table the AR4D needs of the smallholder producers, specifically, following the low cost successful integrated sustainable agriculture, as applicable to the local soil and agro climatic conditions of each
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
128
area, if we are to achieve the MDGs, reduce hunger, rural poverty, malnutrition, suicides and the effect on climate change, whilst improving livelihoods, increasing net incomes and purchasing power:
Theme 1: For achieving the MDGs in the short term, we need to put the 50% of the Global population of rural smallholder producers and their communities to work, thereby ensuring they have access to their nutritious food needs available at farm gate price, being half to one tenth of the retail price. This ensures their nutritious food security, ensuring economic growth, rural employment, investments to meet infrastructure needs for primary and secondary value addition to increase the shelf of the perishable produce to eradicate post harvest losses. This means creating human and institutional capacity building among the rural educated unemployed youth to take over the problems and responsibilities and manage risks, other than on farm activities of the members, having been trained to become general practitioners (GPs)/ MBAs in agriculture, to staff the producer orgs/ company (PC) set up by the producers, if we are to change the face of rural areas around the world, turning each area into inclusive and sustainable growth, with opportunities for all, especially women, most of them being linked to agriculture and or allied rural vocations, and where today’s rural youth will want to live, rather than being forced to migrate to urban slums for their livelihoods.
Theme 2: ‘Integrated Producer Oriented Development (IPOD) is the way forward as against ‘Market Oriented Development’, which has and continues to be the cause of the agrarian crisis in the developing countries, calling for a shift to policies and focus on and supporting:
a) Communities in rural areas to set up their producer orgs/ company (PC) from the start, staffed by educated rural youth, trained to become general practitioner (GPs)/ MBAs in agriculture, to manage the risks and take over all problems and responsibilities other than on farm activities from their members(rural poor producers)
b) Human and institutional capacity building of rural areas especially unemployed women and rural youth
c) Develop plans and budgets for nutrition through smallholder producers following integrated agriculture to meet rural communities own needs
d) Create a mechanism for rural communities to access nutritious food at farm gate price
e) Assistance and support of public sector investment to meet the needs of the smallholder producers
f) Ensure that the local species, varieties and breeds and successful farmers’ low cost integrated agriculture in each area are adapted, supported and widely replicated
g) Primary and secondary value addition to optimize shelf life to minimize post harvest losses
Theme 3: The Zero Hunger Challenge is an ambitious time-bound objective, which can be achieved, say over ten years, provided:
• investments are made in setting up of rural smallholder producer orgs, staffed by professionals, to manage all risks, take over problems and responsibilities, other than on farm activities of their members: www.navajyoti.org,
• follow the low cost, successful, sustainable integrated agriculture of each area,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
129
• primary and secondary value addition to increase the shelf life of the produce and minimize post harvest losses, to meet their communities’ annual nutritious food needs at farm gate price, thus increasing net farm production, purchasing power and net incomes, considering that the world produces twice the food needed but is not accessible to about half the resource poor population, as they do not have the money.
The following case studies support this contribution: One village. 60 rupee millionaires. The miracle of Hiware Bazar, Maharashtra, the suicide State of India, link:
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main54.asp?filename=Ne201012VILLAGE.asp
I am also providing the link to a case study on nutrition through agriculture, ‘Increasing Cropping System Diversity Balances Productivity, Profitability and Environmental Health, a USDA and Univ of IOWA case study’:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0047149
Regards
Subhash
138) Ashok Pillai, Online Volunteer, India
Hi, I just wanted to add two more points here which may be universal in nature particularly in the developed world:
1. Sustainable livelihood available for the landless farmers/labor.2. Reclaim farm lands and bring arid areas under agriculture
136) Beyond 2015 Campaign, United Kingdom
The Beyond 2015 campaign submits the paper regarding our priorities for the post 2015 framework from a Food and Nutrition Security perspective.
This paper is submitted by Liam Crosby at Save the Children UK, on behalf of the Beyond 2015 campaign. Beyond 2015 is a civil society campaign pushing for a strong and legitimate successor framework to the Millennium Development Goals, building on the lessons and achievements of the MDGs. The campaign is built on a diverse, global base and brings together 577 orgs from 95 countries, which range from small community-based organizations to international NGOs, academics and trade unions. Food and nutrition security (FNS) are among the most basic of human needs and must be central to the post-2015 development agenda. In particular, the Right to Food is enshrined in international law and as such there is not only a moral obligation but also a legal obligation for states to ensure that all people have adequate food. While the period since 2000 has seen progress on these issues, over 800 million people globally remain undernourished and an increasing number are overweight or obese.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
130
Dramatic inequalities in food and nutrition security remain and in many countries have increased; indeed in some countries and contexts the poorest groups suffer from alarming rates of undernutrition, while richer groups simultaneously experience high prevalences of overweight and obesity. These facts, along with the impacts of our food consumption and production patterns on environmental degradation and climate change, highlight that our global food system is unsustainable, unfair and inadequate. The post-2015 framework offers an important chance to deliver the ambitious, novel and wide-ranging approach needed to change that. Whilst the civil society organizations participating in Beyond 2015 hold a wide range of views regarding how FNS should be addressed in the post-2015 framework, we are united that it is essential that the framework should encourage actions on four pillars, outlined below, which contribute to the overall aim of achieving Food and Nutrition Security For All. In order to achieve this aim, it is essential that inequalities in all aspects of food and nutrition security are addressed, including addressing the systemic imbalances that result in available food not being accessible where it is most needed. This paper addresses the crucial issues which face food and nutrition security today, and identifies some key problems with the global food system which must be addressed in order for universal FNS to be achieved. It establishes key principles that should be adhered to when addressing them, and makes proposals for actions to deliver Food and Nutrition Security for All.
Liam Crosby Beyond 2015 Campaign
139) Iris Krebber, DFID, UK
Theme 1:
The MDG nutrition target has been necessary but not sufficient to accelerate progress on undernutrition. Until 2008 nutrition was relatively neglected and until then the MDG target did not help to galvanise international commitment on undernutrition. However, when the political landscape changed with the first food price crisis, and with a new body of evidence on what works in nutrition, the MDG helped legitimise a growth in interest in nutrition. Now a substantial global commitment to tackle undernutrition – 28 countries have in the last 2 years, signed up to the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) movement. This effort is being strongly supported by a number of development partners and the UN system. This may not have been possible if there was no nutrition MDG target.
The nutrition indicator is quite invisible within MDG 1 – it is frequently not reported in progress reports on MDG1. It also provides a story which is not consistent with progress against the number of undernourished (the other hunger indicator). This lack of clarity has arguably hindered progress. Having said this, it is probably better overall that the nutrition indicator was with MDG1, rather than MDG4 as it has helped to keep nutrition out of the exclusive domain of health.
On the inconsistency between the under-five nutrition and the general population undernourishment targets, there is need to improve understanding to better fight hunger sustainably. Currently there is a largely unnoticed phenomenon that morbidity and mortality among young children has effectively decreased, but the level of undernourishment in the general population has remained unchanged, with hunger-related morbidity actually increasing. There are indications that the undernourishment figure across age groups may even be increasing. This requires urgent attention, not just because of the risk
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
131
to individual people’s life-cycle trajectories. but also because this undermines growth and poses a threat to the economic development of countries.
Overall, MDG1c has led to significant attention and motivation to act on hunger.
1) It is unlikely that the MDG 1c will be met, in spite of the fact that it is the MDG with the “multiplier effect” because it is also essential to MDGs 2-7 being met. About one billion people (1 out of 7 globally) are still estimated to lack access to adequate food and nutrition, and another billion suffer from micro nutrient deficiencies, the majority women and girls. While there are proportionately fewer malnourished people in the world than there used to be, the absolute number may even be rising. Stunting rates are sticky.
Most of the countries which are not on track to meet the hunger MDG are in SSA, followed by South Asia. Absolute numbers of hungry people are higher in South Asia, but hunger is more acute in SSA. This may also be the trend for the future: All countries not on track are vulnerable to climate change and other shocks. Many of them, in particular in SSA, are in protracted crisis, where the proportion of undernourished people is three times as high as in other developing countries.
(2) Climate change, changing land use practices, commodity price stresses and shocks, population increase, the continued volatility of food prices at high level, and disasters are likely to increase the already high base load of chronically malnourished (stunted) and frequently acutely food insecure people.
The number of people who are vulnerable to increasing and repeated shocks or who are in crisis (including protracted crises) is rising, and resilience-strengthening efforts do not (yet?) have sufficient coverage to counter this trend fast enough to keep the downward livelihoods spiral from accelerating.
(3) Even in countries that are making good progress, a significant baseload remains sticky. These are primarily the extremely poor which are already bypassed by a lot of the progress. Given also their increased vulnerability to stresses and shocks and the fact that some programmes may harm them, this gap is likely to widen (growing inequality within countries).
Theme 2:to what MDG1c has already covered well:
(i) Prevention: Building food security resilience to prevent large increases in acute food insecurity during crises and shocks – define resilient food security as a target indicator
(ii) Do more to reduce sticky stunting rates – eg through better agric for nutrition outcomes programming, social protection for the poorest and most vulnerable
(iii) More balanced reduction of hunger and malnutrition across regions – more focus on high burden regions and countries
(iv) More balanced reduction of hunger and malnutrition in-country – make sure that programmes and resulting progress do not bypass or even harm the very and extremely poor
Theme 3:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
132
Our current best internal discussion proposal is based on the UNSG’s zero hunger challenge and comprises the following:
Post 2015 Candidate goal: Getting to zero poverty and hunger
Targets:
Target a: By 2030, all people have long term access to adequate, affordable nutritious food.
Target b: By 2030, 50% reduction in the number of children whose growth is stunted by malnutrition
Target c: By 2030, 20% increase agricultural productivity, driving greater efficiency and sustainability.
Target a Indicators: [Institution holding/developing relevant data set]
% of children aged 6-24 months with a Minimum Acceptable Diet [UNICEF/ WHO Demographic Health Surveys]
Household food insecurity experience [FAO/Gallup Global Survey] Number of food insecure people [Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, IPC]
Target b Indicators:
% under 5s stunted (low height for age) [WHO/UNICEF] % under 5s wasted (low weight for height) [WHO/UNICEF] % of babies born with low birth weight (< 2.5 kg) [WHO/UNICEF] % babies under six months who are exclusively breastfed [WHO/UNICEF]
Target c Indicators:
% increase in agricultural production per unit of land, energy, water, inorganic fertiliser and pesticide.
% land use change due to agricultural production % reduction in post-harvest losses % rate of global forest cover loss (0% by 2030). Rate of tropical deforestation (reduced by
50% by 2020) All sea fisheries managed sustainably.
And possibly an additional
Target d: By 2030, all countries have built food systems resilient enough to stresses and shocks, to avoid these resulting in increased poverty.
Target d Indicators:
Inter-seasonal domestic food price changes relative to income [FAO/ILO] % of paved roads over total roads + road density [International Road Federation + WB] % of irrigable land under irrigation [FAO]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
133
140) Mariela Contreras, UNICEF, Honduras
Theme 1:
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) gave the world tangible and visible goals that can be monitored and evaluated by governments and the world community. The challenges we are still facing are many, specifically with regards to the MDGs related to food security and nutrition. The world economic crisis has slowed down this process. Low-income countries still have high poverty and unemployment rates, with a low proportion of people who have secondary school or above. However, the scientific community has more understanding of what needs to be done to better food security and nutrition, especially among children below 2 years of age. The Lancet Series of Nutrition and Child Survival are good examples of opportunities and how evidence needs to be translated into practice. For instance, we know that the promotion of breastfeeding is a cost-effective intervention which protects children´s nutrition and health during the first years of life. We also know that appropriate complementary feeding interventions are key in sustaining adequate nutritional levels among children. A great opportunity is that we are more aware what nutrition during the first years of life means for economic productivity and health later on in life. It is crucial, hence, to have well executed cost-effective nutrition interventions with results at the local level to improve children´s nutrition. We know what to do.
Theme 2:
We need to secure the nutrition of infants and children during the first two years of life. For this, governments and the world community should focus on executing nutrition interventions targeting this age group. As previously mentioned, the promotion of breastfeeding is the most cost-effective intervention that can save lives. In addition, complementary feeding interventions have the capacity to secure adequate nutrition between 6 and 24 months. Governments need to prioritize in bettering food security, so households can have access and availability to food all year round. For example, conditional cash transfers can enable access to food of the poorer families. This intervention, however, is a clear example of how governments need to be hold accountable of their administration and finances when considering the implementation of social programs like the mentioned above. I think it is highly important to strengthen mechanisms that ensure the effectiveness and transparency of country programs. This can be done by ensuring governments to work against tangible results.
Theme 3:
The objectives mentioned above cover crucial areas of food security and nutrition. I suggest adding other indicators. The new WHO infant and young child feeding indicators could be used as potential measurements of some of the objectives. For example, the proportion of children who meet dietary diversity and meal frequency could be used to measure the objective 100% access to adequate food all year round. As well, the indicator minimum acceptable diet could be used to measure the overall quality of children´s diet. These indicators are part of the document Indicators for assessing infant and young child feeding practices Part 1 Definitions (http://www.who.int/en/). With regards to nutrition, stunting should be the indicator that measures growth and nutrition. Thus, governments should work in favor of measuring stunting, especially among the under 2 and 5 children.
The objectives should be global because they are a reflection of the problems that most of low-income countries face with regards to food security and nutrition. They should be time-bound and evaluated every 5 years to examine the progress countries make and when necessary re-direct the efforts in pro of meeting these goals. I believe governments are more accountable when time frames exist.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
134
141) Lisa Kitinoja, The Postharvest Education Foundation, USA
The objectives, targets and indicators as stated can be achieved via concerted efforts toward reducing postharvest losses and food waste.
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
All 5 of these objectives can be met when food is treated as a precious resource, protected from damage, heat, pests and other environmental stresses, and as the focus of rural development. I believe that if governments and international donors realized the potential for new rural jobs and improved incomes for producers, handlers, processors and marketers that are tied to more appropriate postharvest handling systems, they would be more interested in promoting postharvest development. For example, to use improved handling practices and reduce food losses and waste, we need people who make and sell postharvest tools, goods, supplies, and provide services, repairs, advice, training, etc, and work in production planning, packing, cooling, quality control, storage, transport, processing, marketing, food safety, sales and more. The incredible untapped potential for agriculture development if food is treated as an important product for nutrition, income and health, and actively protected from waste and abuse is enormous, but this aspect has been neglected for as long as I can remember.
142) Emily Levitt Ruppert, FAO/WFP Facilitation Team, USA
Dear All,
On the issue of nutrition security, I raise two questions to the group.
1) This past week we've received contributions in support of the use of stunting as a key indicator for nutrition security in the post-2015 agenda: measuring stunting among U5 children, with data also measured for the subset of children U2, and by sex. Patrick Webb (Tufts University, USA) highlighted that the stunting indicator would need to be complemented by other measures that would support the achievement of stunting reduction. What do others think about the use of stunting as an overarching measure of nutrition security in the post-2015 agenda?
2) (Question at end in italics) There has been much discussion globally in civil society organizations on the importance of emphasizing dietary diversity and not solely the measurement of adequate caloric consumption in the post-2015 development agenda. Experts are reviewing the adequacy of available indicators and the capability of national information systems to collect this type of data.
Linked to the attainment of balanced diets for all, this week one contributor (Colin Sage, U. Cork, Ireland) noted the fundamental importance of creating 'sustainable food systems for all' supporting this component of the UNSG's Zero Hunger Challenge. The paper (IJAS Commentary) Sage shared states:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
135
"A sustainable food system will not be achieved only through technology-centred changes in the realm of agriculture: it will require massive strides towards securing sustainable consumption too...Unfortunately, there appears to be rather greater appetite to support bio-science solutions that seek to re-engineer the bodies of farmed animals (rumen function in cattle, low-methane sheep, the EnviropigTM) in order to reduce emissions and waste streams, than to embark upon the challenge of formulating a global strategy to lower the levels of consumption in the interests of climate stability, global justice and human health."
What experience do participants in this e-consultation have with improving and/or measuring dietary diversity at scale? Do you agree with the suggestion to move away from reliance on biotechnology approaches in favor of large scale modifications to current consumption habits? Is a global strategy (that would need to be implemented/adapted at national level) to change dietary patterns possible?
Emily Levitt Ruppert, M.S., Ph.D.Member of FAO-WFP Facilitation teamCoordinator, Agriculture-Nutrition Community of Practice
143) Australian Government
Australian Government response to the E-Consultation on Hunger and Nutrition from the FAO
Theme 1
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
There are many lessons learned that need to be considered in the lead up to the post-2015 framework:
A future indicator needs to better capture the depth of poverty and vulnerability to changes in poverty status. This may include readily measurable and understood targets, such as the proportion of the population living below the minimum dietary energy consumption and prevalence of underweight children under 5 years. There is also a need for indicators which better capture other dimensions of under nutrition. For instance, the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) encourages programs to monitor and evaluate the results of Australia’s social protection assistance in reducing the stunting of girls and boys1. This or a similar indicator may be a powerful tool for improved food security and malnutrition.
Providing quality food to meet the nutritional and health needs of farmers and consumers is an under-researched area. Current interventions are largely focused on the quantitative, calorific dimension of food security. Qualitative, nutritional dimensions of food security are seriously under addressed and require rigorous primary research. The links between agriculture, nutrition, health, water and sanitation hold potential to not only accelerate positive health outcomes but impact on longer term sustainable economic development.
1 AusAID (2012), AusAID Social Protection Framework, p.6.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
136
Innovations that could help smallholder farmers increase productivity have not been widely adopted, and policies to relieve hunger and malnutrition have often failed. More research on adoption and scaling up of useful agricultural innovations is needed.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
The Australian Government’s approach to food security is to increase the availability of food (by increasing production and improving trade), while also increasing the poor’s ability to access food (by increasing incomes). The Australian Government also promotes adequate nutrition, through the strengthening of health systems and the delivery of quality maternal and child health interventions.
In line with this approach, we consider the main challenges to achieving food and nutrition security to be:
Ensuring appropriate economic and trade policies, and open and efficient markets which should boost global food flows, smooth supply and reduce excessive price volatility and risk;
Poor infrastructure, limited technology transfer and lack of market access; Supply side restrictions caused by land and water shortages, climate change, environmental
degradation and diversion of food crops to biofuel production; Access to maternal and child health services, including neonatal and postnatal care, for rural
and marginalized populations; Policy frameworks and legislation which do not support women as landowners, farmers and
food producers; and Growing populations and changing diets which increase the demand for safe and nutritious
food as well as access to adequate food. To address these challenges, the Australian Government is:
Lifting agricultural productivity by increasing our investment in agricultural research and development, through Australian and international organisations working on food policy and agricultural innovation;
Advocating reforms to global agriculture and food markets to increase opportunities and incentives for developing countries, to increase their food supplies and improve their incomes and ability to buy food;
Improving rural livelihoods by strengthening markets in developing countries and improving market access;
Strengthening health systems and promoting healthy behaviors to prevent under-nutrition and associated morbidity; and
Building community resilience by supporting the establishment and improvement of social protection programs that reduce the vulnerability of the poor to shocks and stresses.
Australia considers the greatest opportunities towards achieving improvements in food and nutrition security lie in:
Improving agricultural productivity yields, developing climate resilient products and practices and micronutrient content through international agricultural research innovation and extension. This involves focusing on: agricultural productivity growth in smallholder systems developing market integration and supply chain access building human and institutional capacity building to enhance sustainable follow-up
research and adoption capabilities;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
137
Improving distribution, crop losses and incomes of poor households through access to finance, infrastructure, input markets, logistic and storage systems;
Ensuring open and well-functioning domestic and international markets; Building social protection programs and systems to build the resilience of vulnerable
communities; and Improving water and sanitation to reduce nutrition loss post consumption.
Theme 2
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
The Australian Government would support a unified approach, which integrates the best elements of the MDGs and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into the new post-2015 development framework. We would discourage language seeking to enshrine a rights based approach and support interventions that are consistent with international obligations.
Improvements to the existing targets and indicators to address hunger, food security and malnutrition, might be explored in the following areas:
With such rapid progress being made in the proportion living below $1 per day, there is a case for adding a new target based on those living on less than $2 per day. This is a much larger group and will become an increasingly important focus for poverty reduction efforts over the next 20 years.
- However, there would be advantages in also retaining the existing <$1 per day target, so that progress against extreme poverty can continue to be monitored.
There may be good arguments for introducing a new target or indicators for under-nutrition (particularly micronutrient deficiency, stunting and the impact of temporary food crises and other macroeconomic shocks). Any new under-nutrition indicators that are introduced should be consistent, stable and where possible, include baselines to enable performance tracking over time.
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org) and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
It is important to consider how the current process to develop SDGs will influence the development of the post-2015 goals, targets and indicators, particularly as the post-2015 framework should contain a single set of goals with the MDGs and SDGs merging as one process with one outcome. The Australian Government believes poverty reduction should remain at the core of the post-2015 development agenda. It will also be important for hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition to be a key priority in reducing poverty. As there are numerous food security initiatives including frameworks and reports around the world, caution must be exercised in drawing from those initiatives that do not have broad international support or have failed to deliver outcomes.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
138
Theme 3
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under the Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainable d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives by country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
At this stage it is too early to start narrowing down to a specific set of goals, targets and indicators that might comprise the post-2015 framework. What we need to do is make sure that whatever goals and targets we create are realistic, attainable and achievable. This requires them to be measurable at the global, regional and national level similar to the current MDGs. For example, it is unclear how we would measure 100% access to adequate food all year round and the sustainability of all food systems.
We will also need to consider the time frame for the new post-2015 framework. The above objectives do not seem achievable in a 20–25 year timeframe.
144) International Diabetes Federation, Belgium
The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) is the unique global voice of the diabetes community. IDF’s strength lies in the capacity of our Member Associations – over 220 national diabetes associations in 170 countries – who connect global advocacy to local reality and deliver vital diabetes prevention, treatment and care services worldwide. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this FAO/WFP consultation on Food and Nutrition Security in the Post-2015 Development Agenda.
The global diabetes epidemic is an urgent and overwhelming challenge which no country has under control. In 2012, IDF estimates there were 371 million people with diabetes, and this number is expected to rise to 552 million people by 2030 with the greatest acceleration in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Up to half of all people with diabetes are still undiagnosed. While the challenge remains immense, the global diabetes community has made significant progress in elevating diabetes onto the global agenda, with the 2006 UN Resolution on Diabetes and the 2011 UN High-Level Summit on Non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Now, IDF’s Global Diabetes Plan 2011-2021 sets out a ten year framework for action with three priority objectives – to improve health outcomes, prevent type 2 diabetes and prevent discrimination against people with diabetes – which we call on FAO/WFP to reflect within the post-2015 development agenda.
Within the context of post-2015, IDF aims to ensure the centrality of health and diabetes/NCDs is reflected across all dimensions of development – social, economic and environmental. In this proposal, IDF presents the connections between diabetes and food security in order to strengthen the place of
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
139
health within food security, and advance a future development agenda that is people-centred, inclusive and sustainable.
Key Messages
Traditionally malnutrition has been understood to describe undernutrition, underweight, stunting and hunger. However, today we face a triple burden of malnutrition: undernutrition, micronutrient deficiency and overnutrition/overconsumption, often times in the same country, community or household.
The triple burden of malnutrition is symptomatic of underlying problems: poverty, inequalities and a dysfunctional food system that is unable to meet the health and nutrition needs of its population.
Combating the triple burden of malnutrition will require guaranteeing the right to adequate diets for all, reforming agricultural and food policies, including through taxation, and reshaping food systems for the promotion of sustainable diets.
Current initiatives have not adequately balanced the need for interventions which work now and in the short-term, with the need for long-term thinking and prevention of health and nutrition problems in the future.
A single focus on undernutrition, the approach most common to date, is insufficient to address the range of nutritional problems affecting every country in the world, and the oncoming tsunami of overweight/obesity, diabetes and other NCDs.
The emphasis in the post-2015 development framework should not be only on increasing food, but ensuring that all populations have sufficient access to affordable healthy foods which are environmentally sustainable. To obtain this holistic, nutrition-focused approach, we recommend the following goals and objectives:
Goal: To ensure adequate and healthy food for all
Objectives:o To halt the rise in overweight and obesity for children and adults by 2025o Reduction in the global number of children under five who are stunted by 2025o Increase exclusive breastfeeding rates in the first six months by 2025
We also recommend that a global food systems objective/indicator be developed, which can assess the healthfulness of the food system, a critical piece to achieving a healthy and secure food supply for the world.
For our full submission, please see the attached document.
145) Belén Verdugo, CERES-COAG, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]La SOBERANÍA ALIMENTARIA con MUJERES CON IGUALDAD DE DERECHOS.
Contar con LA VÍA CAMPESINA como organización en la elaboración de la agenda FAO 2015
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
140
Recoger las conclusiones de la próxima VI CONFERENCIA INTERNACIONAL DE LA VIA CAMPESINA 2013 y de la próxima IV ASAMBLEA INTERNACIONAL DE MUJERES 2013.
[English translation]
Food sovereignty with women with equal rights.
Count with Via Campesina as an organization in developing the agenda FAO 2015.
Collect the conclusions of the forthcoming Sixth International Conference of Via Campesina and the upcoming 2013 International Assembly of Women IV 2013.
146) Gino Brunswijck, Africa Europe Faith and Justice Network (AEFJN), Belgium
Theme 1:
Question:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years? Key Lessons:
It has been recognized that progress on the MDG 1.C (halving the proportion of people suffering from hunger between 1990-2015) is hampered in several countries. The MDG’s are centred on results; however, to achieve a long term improvement on the indicators, it is imperative that the objectives are enshrined in sound policies that aim at and support food sovereignty and food security. There is need for a change in agriculture, trade and social policies because the current national and regional policies and international agreements produce contradictory effects on the progress towards food sovereignty and food security. Policies, especially in the fields of agriculture and trade, need to be tuned to the attainment of food security and food sovereignty. Industrialised countries have to ensure coherence in their policies affecting developing countries so that these policies are not impeding the achievement of food security and food sovereignty. A change of policies is thus essential to achieve improvements on food sovereignty.
Challenges:
1. The main challenge is to change policies in such a way that they aim at and support Food Sovereignty and Food Security in all countries.
Future approaches should focus on a change in policies, so that policies in different sectors do not have a negative impact on food security and food sovereignty. Improving food sovereignty implies improving the global trade and finance system. Food prices have been driven up by numerous factors in recent years such as food speculation, increased demand for food and biofuels and lack of food
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
141
reserves. This has a devastating impact on poor consumers, which use a significant part of their income for food. The current WTO-system leaves very little policy space for developing countries to devise and implement policies related to food security and food sovereignty. A future challenge is the elimination of such constraints that affect food security and food sovereignty.
2. Not to consider “food” as a commodity like any other, as it is vital for the life and the survival of humanity. Food should not be considered as a “tradable commodity” and should be kept out of the WTO Agreements.
The progressive deregulation of the financial commodity market has given rise to speculation on food, which contributes to the rise of the world food prices. High world food prices prevent the access of the poor to their Right to adequate food. Therefore financial markets should be regulated to prevent speculation on food.
The elimination of export subsidies and other kinds of subsidies that affect food sovereignty and food security in developing countries should be a priority within the WTO, because they have a devastating effect on the food security and food sovereignty of family farmers.
3. To increase the production of family farmers while assisting them to keep their traditional modes of production.
In developing countries, family farmers occupy a central role in ensuring access to food for them, their families and the local community. In developing countries agriculture is the most important source of employment and of livelihoods for rural populations. Increasing the production levels of family farming, by improving family farmers’ access to land and credit, improves the livelihoods of rural households, which is vital in ensuring food security and food sovereignty in developing countries.
Opportunities:
1. To support the commitment of African countries towards greater budget allocations for agriculture
African countries committed themselves to dedicate 10% of their national budgets to agriculture. The FAO could be instrumental in helping countries to overcome their budgetary constraints in order to fulfil this commitment. The challenge lies in ensuring that family farmers are the first beneficiaries of such policies.
2. To promote an ecological and sustainable food production
An ecological sustainable food production system will require an elimination of unsuitable modes of production, like for example the industrial agriculture and large scale land grabbing investments, which affect negatively the food sovereignty and the right to food of local communities in developing nations and provoke displacements of local communities. Policies that promote such investments should be changed in the light of the negative effects they produce for developing nations and their communities.3. The FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security are an opportunity if they are transformed into a legally binding framework.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
142
The underlying purpose the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security is to achieve food security and food sovereignty for all. However, to ensure a change in policy aimed at the purpose of food security and food sovereignty, these guidelines should become legally binding for companies and governments. The principle of extra-territorial jurisdiction should also be developed and enforced by national judicial systems.
In many developing countries, however, the effective implementation of these guidelines, in particular concerning the access to land for family farmers, is being hindered by large-scale land grabs. A 5-year moratorium on land grabbing would allow developing countries to achieve a simplified land reform ensuring family farmers of the rights on the land they cultivate and to transpose the FAO Guidelines into their national laws. Such an option could be discussed at the Committee on World Food Security.
Theme 2: Question:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on.
Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS? Answer: Governance and accountability mechanisms for responsible investment in agriculture should be in place. The FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security should become legally binding for companies and governments. The principle of extra-territorial jurisdiction should be developed and enforced by national judicial systems. Theme 3:
Question:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old.c. All food systems are sustainable
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
143
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound? Answer:
The objectives are clear but what is needed is that they are backed by policies that fully support Food Sovereignty and Food Security and that would allow the achievement of these objectives.Objectives:
a. Access to credit and to inputs, and improved storage conditions for family farmers are vital to reach this objective. The lack of credit obliges family farmers to sell most of their production at the moment of harvest, because they need the money to repay the inputs and to cover family needs. When they run out of food, they have to buy it at a higher price during the dry season what often obliges them to contract a debt. Access to credit will prevent them from losing money in this process of selling food and then buying it. Improved storage conditions would prevent the spoilage of food and this would reduce family farmers’ need of buying food at a high price during the dry season. Mechanisms should be devised to allow financially strained family farmers in developing countries to buy inputs and to access credit. A minimum price policy should be in place in order to ensure decent living conditions for family farmers. This objective should be country-specific as climate factors differ from country to country, e.g. a lower than average rainy season has significant impact on the harvest.
c. Family farmers are essential in the pathway towards sustainable food production that leads to food sovereignty. They are the ones ensuring livelihoods for themselves and their families. A sustainable food production system would allow the rural poor to enjoy the Right to adequate food. Additionally, a sustainable food production system would allow family farmers to use and to conserve their natural resources and to gain a sufficient income from their production. Food production systems should also be environmentally sustainable, drawing on sustainable techniques and methods, e.g. traditional agricultural methods.
Existing local traditional agricultural systems provide a balanced method for local communities to deal with challenges such as feeding people, pressures on livelihoods and biodiversity, sustainable use of natural resources, regeneration of the soils and climate change. Such agricultural systems are appropriate to local economies and societies drawing on indigenous knowledge of the eco-system. d. Improving rural infrastructure for family farmers is essential to reach this objective. Adequate irrigation systems, mechanisms providing access to inputs, adequate food storage conditions, and transport and distribution systems need to be put in place. The proposals from the report “Agriculture at a crossroads” of the International Assessment of Agriculture Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development go in this direction and they recognize the vital importance of traditional and local agricultural knowledge. While the proposals of the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa are tuned to the needs of the agro-food industry and not the those of family farmers.
e. Adequate food storage and transport mechanisms should be put in place to prevent great loss of food. Especially, in rural areas storage conditions should be improved. Food is often lost due to bad storage quality. Furthermore, sustainable transport and distribution chains should equally be established to prevent the loss of food and food spoilage.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
144
147) Mwadhini Myanza, IRTECO, United Republic of Tanzania
Theme 1:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The key success of Fair Food is cooperation that maximizes sharing knowledge and expertise in research on the food industry that comprises of production and trade along with agricultural supply chains.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
There are new emerging needs as MDGs projects take roots including activities engage with media based products that require heavy investments (soft ware equipments and partnership among CSO networks.
Theme 2:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
Customized and coaching programs aimed at sharing of information and experiences of good sustainable development practices
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
Strengthening transparency and anticorruption measures including consolidated funding budgets for each MDGs chapter and encouraging skill-share events.
Theme 3:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round (CR)b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old (G)c. All food systems are sustainable (CR)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
145
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income (CR)e. Zero loss or waste of food (CR)f. Periodically assess and document MDG-1 community beneficiary experiences, capacity, knowledge and level of adoption of sustainable global development framework
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific (CR), or regional (R), rather than global (G)? Should the objectives be time-bound (T)?
148) Werner Schultink, UNICEF, United States of America
The current MDGs tried to connect hunger and poverty reduction in one goal, using a set of indicators which were not optimal. Undernutrition (underweight in pre-school children) was one of the indicators linked linked to hunger reduction. We know now that this indicator is far from optimal and that efforts to reduce underweight may even lead to negative outcomes such as obesity increase.
We do also know now that inadequate nutrient absorption during the period of pregnancy and the first 2 years of a child's life leads to stunted growth, compromised brain development, reduced school performance and income earning capacity. Stunting is further associated with increased risk of non-communicable disease in adult life. Prevention of stunting should therefore be at the core of a new goal on food and nutrition security. The ultimate goal of food security should be to achieve a well-nourished, healthy, optimally developed population. With our knowledge that stunting is a sensitive, measurable, and objective indicator that can predict development outcomes and the fact that its prevention contributes to the reduction of poverty and inequity makes stunting a very strong indicator.
Stunting prevention offers a very good opportunity to improve welfare of populations in a very cost effective manner. Proof exists that reduction of stunting prevalence at scale is do-able through a mix of interventions which include the improvement of household food security, but also include measures such as improvement of caring capacity.
149) Angela Estevez Peralta, Saluvid Nutricocina, Dominican Republic
[Original contribution in Spanish]
TEMA I.
Mi pais, Republica Dominicana; no ha cumplido con los Objetivos del Milenio en el tema del Hambre en razon de que debe iniciarse un proceso de:
1) Conocimiento de las maneras de alimentarse los antiguos habitantes de nuestro pais, 2) Educando a la poblacion acerca de las maneras mas saludables de aprovechar los alimentos que proporciona nuestra tierra3) Accionar de las autoridades sanitarias en el sentido de eliminar del mercado una gran cantidad de productos y publicidad enganosa sobre alimentos nocivos a la salud.4) Motivando a la poblacion a investigar y comprobar la certeza de los nutrientes que contienen los alimentos.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
146
TEMA II.
En razon de las diferencias en cuanto a la cultura alimenticia y culinaria de las naciones y en conocimiento de que en principio, cada tierra produce los alimentos que sus habitantes requieren para su normal desenvolvimiento, se requiere con urgencia sembrar plantas frutales autoctonas en las areas verdes de las ciudades y concientizar a los habitantes de su responsabilidad en el cuidado de las mismas, asi como el aprovechamiento cuando las frutas esten listas, suministrando asi, nutrientes elementales.
En cuanto a las proteinas, volver al pasado, que cada familia tenga, cuide y reproduzca animales domesticos, para su consumo y pequenos suministros a vecinos, los que puedan.
De igual manera, hacer de conocimiento general cuales son las acciones que debe realizar el ciudadano comun para aportar al tema. Nunca manejarse secretamente como se esta haciendo en Rep. Dom. Aqui se esta trabajando en una Ley sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y los congresistas se niegan a que sea conocida. Es como un gran secreto. Se ha denunciado que hay intereses que perjudican el pais.
TEMA III.
a. En Republica Dominicana existen optimas condiciones para que la poblacion nacional, incluso vecinos, recibamos una alimentacion adecuada durante todo el ano a precios ascequibles.
b. Divulgar adecuadamente (sin lucha de intereses economicos), la necesidad y como se obtienen nutrientes elementales para toda la familia.
c. Crear conciencia colectiva de seguimiento a los procesos. Educando desde la escuela inicial hasta la universitaria, ademas de empleo sin costo para la promocion de todas los medios de comunicacion existentes.
d) Si se realiza lo anteriormente expuesto con seriedad y transparencia, y sin secretos ni enganos ni intereses particulares de politicos y sectores empresariales perversos y se mejoran las condiciones de vida y de negocios de los pequenos agricultores; ellos se pueden motivar a esforzarse por incrementar el aumento de la productividad de los alimentos. La razon principal por la cual los pequenos productores se desmotivan es porque no reciben apoyo real del Estado, porque sus condiciones de vida no mejoran y porque quienes reciben los beneficios jugosos de sus esfuerzos, son los intermediarios comercializadores.
e. En Republica Dominicana es muy dificil que exista perdida o desperdicio de alimentos, por razones de que es facil que la gente pobre conozca donde pueden recoger desperdicios o porque gran mayoria de los que pueden producir esos desperdicios conocen quien puede aprovecharlos.
[English translation]
TOPIC I
My country, the Dominican Republic, has failed to meet the Millennium Development Goals related to Hunger. Therefore, a process with the following guidelines should be started:
1) Gaining knowledge into the food habits of the ancient inhabitants of my country;2) Educating the population about the healthiest ways of making the most of our food
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
147
3) Urging Health authorities to withdraw from the market a great amount of unhealthy food and misleading advertising campaigns4) Encouraging the population to look into and verify the accuracy of the nutrients in food.
TOPIC II
Due to the differences in national food and culinary cultures and, based on the assumption that each land produces the food required for the standard nutritional development of its inhabitants, planting native fruit trees in the cities’ green areas and making the inhabitants responsible of taking good care of them is urgently required. As well as taking advantage of the mature fruits and, thus, obtaining basic nutrients.
Regarding proteins, we should go back to past. Every family shall breed and take care of its smallholder livestock, for self-sufficiency and for supplying their neighbors, when possible.
Similarly, making public those measures to be adopted by every citizen to contribute to this topic would also be recommendable. And not acting with secrecy; as in the Dominican Republic. Currently, our congressmen are working in a Food Security Law and it is being secretly handled. It is like a huge classified file. It has been reported that there are interests from some groups that are harmful for the country.
TOPIC III
a. In the Dominican Republic, the conditions for adequately feeding the national population -and even in the neighbor countries- at an affordable price and all year long, are optimal.
b. Adequately making public (avoiding the economic interests disputes) the need of essential nutrients for the whole family and the ways of obtaining these.
c. Raising public awareness about monitoring the processes. Educating the population from elementary school to university, and using -at no cost- all the available media.
d. If all the above mentioned measures are adopted in a professional and transparent way, avoiding any kind of secret, fraud or particular interests of politicians and perverse business sectors, and the living and business conditions of small farmers are improved, they can be motivated to put all their efforts in increasing food productivity. The main reasons behind the small farmers’ discouragement are the lack of real governmental support, the stagnation of their living conditions, and the appropriation of the lucrative benefits of their efforts by market intermediaries.
e. In the Dominican Republic food loss or waste is very rare, as poor people know where they can collect leftovers or because most of the people producing this waste know who can take advantage of it.
150) Nourishing Ontario Research Group, Canada
THEME 2
Nourishing Ontario Research Group in Canada has been exploring and documenting food system sustainability with over 100 community food projects across the province. Our research points to
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
148
common problems that stem from globalization pressures while the solutions need to be place-based. Each region has its own assets and challenges and as a result will confront food and nutrition security in its own ways. We find that three key approaches tend to emerge as potentially promising:
1. Avenues to scale up community food and nutrition initiatives – founded on sustainable diets – by improving urban and rural linkages;
2. Building food system resilience as a form of community development including the identification of complementary urban, peri-urban and rural food production, processing and distribution opportunities; and
3. Improved land access/tenure.
Our international conversations confirm these key issues to be similar regardless of the extent to which a country or region is industrialized. Transforming the current food system into multiple, place-based, people-centered regions that are sustainable, locally-reliant and resilient has to go hand-in-hand with improving access to nutritious, socially and culturally acceptable food. Moreover, given that most of the world's population now lives in cities, city-regions require more attention as the connections of cities and rural spaces become increasingly important for ensuring both access to food and viable farm income. (See also our general comments below).
THEME 3
For the proposed indicators a, b, and e: 100% access to adequate food all year round; zero stunted children less than 2 years old; and zero loss or waste of food; these indicators are excellent; zero waste may be an impossible target, but is nevertheless and important directionFor the proposed indicator c (all food systems are sustainable): defining food system sustainability is very difficult so developing metrics would be very challenging. If this is attempted, it would be important to ensure that indicators capture small-scale ecologically resilient food production, processing, distribution and sales in rural, peri-urban and urban areas. And, could this include measuring: human health related to food system access; social and community well-being; democratic community engagement/participation? For the proposed indicator d, 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income. What baseline data would be used to measure 100%? It would be important to measure this for rural, peri-urban and urban areas.
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Our research points to common problems that stem from globalization pressures while the solutions need to be place-based. Each region has its own assets and challenges and as a result will confront food and nutrition security in its own ways. With this in mind, our approach to supporting communities has been to document innovative case studies and best practices and provide information about the processes that can help move communities towards increased food system sustainability. As much of our work is focused on understanding what makes some food initiatives successful and finding ways to replicate, adapt, and scale up those successes, we have produced an online toolkit and expect to continue adding resources as our work expands. The models and practices needed to transform the food system already exist, and we need to find ways to make them central, rather than marginal, to how we produce and access food.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
149
Earlier this year Olivier De Schutter, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, was in Canada and observed that: “Canada has long been seen as a land of plenty. Yet... What I've seen in Canada is a system that presents barriers for the poor to access nutritious diets and that tolerates increased inequalities between rich and poor, and Aboriginal non-Aboriginal peoples” (SR FOOD). At the same time farm income and the number of farms (and thus farmers) in Canada is decreasing, while farm debt and the average age of farmers are increasing (National Farmers Union). Accessibility and farming are not separate issues, rather, they are distinct but intertwined consequences of a problematic food system. Governments are often identified as obstacles to transforming that system due to policy designed for an industrial and trade-based food system. There is now a pressing need for governments at all levels to act as facilitators for local sustainable food systems and improved, more equitable food access.
We want to highlight Graziano da Silva's recent comments (at the release of FAO's The State of Food and Agriculture 2012): “We need to assure that the investments meet a certain set of conditions that assure that they contribute to food security and sustainable local development.” We add that sustainable local development includes the collaborative development of regional urban markets for agricultural production, as a means of stabilizing and providing a secure source of both income at the farm level, and food and nutrition security for vulnerable populations in city-regions.
(On behalf of Nourishing Ontario)
Alison Blay-Palmer, Phil Mount, and Irena Knezevic
151) Save the Children International, United Kingdom
To motivate further progress the goals that feature in the post 2015 framework must be embedded in global systems that will expedite their achievement. There will need to be stronger accountability mechanisms next time around, at local, national and global levels. Save the Children proposes that three accompanying mechanisms could support a framework that successfully operates at these levels: national financing strategies; a robust international accountability mechanism and a data investment fund.
It is essential that the goals are time-bound to ensure accountability for progress. The goals and targets that we propose below are achievable “within our lifetime”, i.e. by 2030.
In many countries with high levels of food insecurity and malnutrition, progress is predicated by a range of international factors such as food price volatility, international trade rules, and other countries’ subsidies and mandates, meaning that to be credible, some policy indicators will also need to be international. As such, the post-2015 framework will need to be broad enough to ensure action at international level as well as the national level.
Save the Children proposes that the post 2015 framework should include a goal to eradicate hunger, halve stunting, and ensure universal access to sustainable food, water and sanitation.
In particular, this goal should be underpinned by the following global targets: Eradicate hunger; halve stunting and malnutrition rates among children. Directly link sustainable food production and distribution systems to nutrition targets. Ensure everybody in the world has access to adequate, safe and environmentally sustainable
water facilities within 1 km of their home, and in all schools and health facilities.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
150
Ensure everybody in the world has access to basic sanitation within 1km of their home, along with sanitation in all schools and hospitals.
Liam CrosbySave the Children InternationalUnited Kingdom
Save the Children’s submission to the e-Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security.
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?The MDGs have been successful, lifting 600 million people out of poverty and reducing the number of daily child deaths by 14,000, to give just two examples. We have come a very long way - but there is also far to go. We should build on the strengths of the MDGs: the new framework should remain firmly focussed on human development, it should highlight areas where an international agreement can make a difference, and it should retain a limited number of measureable goals. But to finish the job that was started - to fulfil a promise to eradicate poverty – we need to address some of the challenges we can now perceive from the MDG period.
In particular, Save the Children believes that the post 2015 framework needs to better confront inequality; include a robust, effective accountability mechanism; be structured in a way that better addresses synergies and systems; be reactive to emerging issues; and focus on improving the long-term sustainability of the natural resource base, upon which human health and prosperity is dependent.
The MDGs—in particular the target of halving the prevalence of underweight children as well as MDG 4 on reducing child mortality—have focused efforts and accelerated action towards improving food and nutrition security (FNS). They have, furthermore, improved our understanding of the scale, location and impacts of food insecurity and malnutrition. Many developing countries now monitor food security and nutrition with increased frequency.
Yet, while the MDGs have supported progress on food and nutrition security, progress towards meeting MDGs 1, 4, and 5 (those most related to FNS) remains insufficient. We highlight five shortcomings which should provide valuable lessons for the future framework:
1. MDGs relating to food security and malnutrition failed to address the importance of equity within countries.Aggregate targets and indicators mask often huge disparities within countries, meaning progress can be made among the easy to reach, while leaving the most poor, marginalized and vulnerable behind. For example, rates of stunting can be up to six times higher in rural than in urban areas in countries with high spatial inequalities.2
2. Reducing malnutrition was not adequately addressedThe poverty reduction goal focused on increasing food security but failed to ensure action was taken also on malnutrition. The only nutrition-related MDG indicator related to underweight: a
2 In China, rates of stunting in cities are on average six times lower than in rural settings. Save the Children – forthcoming. Ending poverty in our generation: Save the Children’s vision for the post 2015 framework.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
151
composite indicator that is affected by both chronic and acute undernutrition. A more accurate indicator of the combination of factors that impact on child wellbeing during the 1000 day window from pregnancy until age 2 is stunting, or measuring height for age. Stunting is a strong determinant of future earning potential and therefore links strongly to poverty reduction.3
3. A failure to encourage actions on some of the international determinants of food and nutrition security.The MDGs encouraged country-level actions, but did not address crucial international factors affect FNS. A complete blueprint for addressing hunger and malnutrition should examine pathways in which international market forces impact local food security. For example, high and volatile food prices, which Save the Children estimates put 400,000 children’s lives at risk in 2011 alone, require coordinated international action. Most of the countries with the highest burdens of malnutrition, including conflict-affected and fragile states, are also those that are most susceptible to this food volatility.
4. A failure to integrate environmental sustainability in measures to challenge hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. The production of adequate nutritious food is dependent, in the long-term, on sustainable resource use and climate stability. The separation out of environmental objectives from the poverty reduction goal and hunger target has perpetuated the misperception that food security can be achieved without addressing issues such as soil quality, freshwater availability, fisheries over-exploitation, climate change and biodiversity loss. This artificial separation has resulted in actions on food security and nutrition neglecting to address critical environmental sustainability aspects.
5. Limited accountabilityThe MDGs lacked a robust and effective accountability mechanism making it difficult to ensure the fulfillment (or otherwise) of commitments in a transparent way. Genuine and representative country ownership of the goals has been lacking from the outset, and processes have typically been top-down, with resources following donor interests rather than aligning with locally-identified needs. A lack of sufficient data further undermines country and donor accountability.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?Several key opportunities mean that eradicating food insecurity and malnutrition is an achievable aspiration for the post 2015 framework. We know what works, including strengthening social protection systems, investing in direct nutrition interventions, and a focus on the first 1,000 days. Additionally, the key opportunity to enhance agriculture’s nutrition and food security benefits is too often wasted. We must capitalize on this opportunity by focusing agricultural interventions on those that are most beneficial for food security and combine interventions with activities that are shown to
3 It should be recognized that protocols for measuring stunting will be a challenge initially. Most countries do not collect height information on a regular basis and annual measurements are not appropriate given the time needed for change in height
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
152
improve nutrition. As political momentum increases around the issues of hunger and malnutrition, now is the key moment for making substantial progress in these areas.However, while many opportunities to improve FNS do exist, progress on reducing malnutrition has been pitifully slow, with the average prevalence of stunting falling at an average rate of just 0.65 percentage points per year since 1990. A combination of global trends threatens to undermine future progress on FNS.
We highlight six primary challenges:
1. A lack of coherence between different sectors that affect food and nutrition security. Nutrition requires a comprehensive cross government approach. Yet because it does not sit neatly in any one ministry, it falls through the gaps. Agricultural strategies too often fail to integrate nutrition into their approach, for example. This lack of coherence hampers attempts to improve food security and malnutrition.
2. Increasingly high and volatile international food pricesSave the Children estimates that the food price rise of February 2011 put the lives of 400,000 children at risk.4 Our recent report, A High Price to Pay found that the countries with the highest burden of malnutrition are the most exposed to international food prices as net food importers. When prices go up, families prioritise staples over more nutritious foods. This also has a significant effect on a country’s import bills, undermining their fiscal space to tackle malnutrition. Bio-fuel policies are playing and important role in this price volatility by introducing price competition for certain crops and strengthening the links between food and energy prices.
3. Climate Change Climate Change seriously threatens food production and distribution systems, as well as poverty reduction efforts. Rising sea-levels, increasing temperatures, changing rainfall patterns and ocean acidification pose a major threat to global efforts to reduce hunger and malnutrition. The World Bank has recently identified global climate change as one of the key drivers of high and volatile food prices,5 and has issued a warning that the world is on track for a four degree rise in global average temperature by 2100, even if current mitigation commitments are implemented.6 Even with increases of 2-2.5 degrees (by the 2050s) substantial increases in stunting due to malnutrition are projected to occur – especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia, and this will be worse under four degrees.
4. Population GrowthBy 2030 the UN predicts there will be 9bn people living on the planet; more mouths to feed than ever before. 60% of the global population will be living in urban areas, with a growing middle class; by 2030, while demand for ‘water hungry’ diets and those that are often high in fat, sugar and salt, is increasing. This adds pressure on increasingly scarce natural resources and the availability of adequate food globally.
4 Save the Children (2011) Costing Lives5 World Bank 2012 Global monitoring report.6 World Bank, November 2012. Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4oC Warmer World Must be Avoided. Report for the World Bank by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research and Climate Analytics. Washington: IBRD / The World Bank.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
153
5. Natural Resource Scarcity.Demand for energy, water and land resources has increased dramatically over recent decades and is projected to continue increasing over the next century as consumption patterns change and grow with an increasing and more urban global population. In particular inequalities in the distribution of existing water resources are increasingly salient issues affecting nutrition around the world. Furthermore a third of the world’s population does not have access to adequate sanitation which is essential for nutrition.
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights.
Save the Children’s suggested post-2015 development framework champions universal and equitable development, with human rights as its guiding principle and evidence as a foundation for its approaches. Human rights principles such as universality, equality and inalienability must underpin everything that is agreed. And, unlike with the MDGs, these principles must be visible in the targets established. With respect to FNS, Save the Children believes that the following focuses are the most important for the post 2015 framework:
1. Enhance political will for tackling malnutrition. It is essential that the post-2015 framework acts to motivate political actors at all levels to work on improving FNS for children. This is especially important as food and nutrition security during childhood is one key factor contributing to chronic malnutrition which in turn leads to lower educational outcomes and a lifelong reduction in earnings – which, in addition to the direct human impact, also reduces GDP by as much as 3%. 7 It should ensure support for existing frameworks and programmes, including the Scaling up Nutrition (SUN) programme which is currently being promoted in a large number of countries and needs to be expanded and deepened.
2. Focus on improving equality of food security and nutrition outcomes.Inequality in food security and nutrition outcomes has if anything gotten worse over the period of the MDGs. Data from Save the Children’s Cost of Diet tool shows that in many rural livelihood zones, the poorest quintile of families regularly does not have sufficient income to afford a nutritious diet, even before food price rises occur.8 The post 2015 framework should ensure that actions aiming to improve people’s access to and utilisation of nutritious foods should focus on the poorest groups and aim to reduce these inequalities. An approach that is in line with key Human Rights principles of universality requires that improvements must be made on reducing inequities in food and nutrition outcomes. Access to food should be ensured for all. In particular, inequalities in wealth and access to services are a fundamental obstacle to sustainable growth and to ensuring FNS for all. It is estimated that the top 5% of world population has 37% of global income, in contrast to 0.2% for the bottom 5% of the world’s
7 Save the Children, 2012. A Life Free From Hunger: Tackling Child Malnutrition.8 Save the Children, 2012. A High Price To Pay, page 7.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
154
population. Such unequal wealth distribution is a key factor detracting from many people’s ability to access a nutritious diet.
3. Integrate the concept of sustainability.The MDGs did not address long-term sustainability in a serious way, but it must underpin the new development consensus. Economic, financial, social and environmental sustainability must be integrated across all activities and should be an integral component of policy development. In particular, issues of environmental degradation and climate change should be addressed. All initiatives and government policies must be assessed for sustainability and how the different initiatives and government policies use resources.
4. Ensure accountability.Accountability is underpinned by public disclosure of timely and robust information about progress. Accountability of all actors for their responsibility towards food and nutrition security improvements is crucial; including donors, multilateral institutions and businesses, but the first line of accountability must lie between citizens and governments. A robust public financial management system is a pre-requisite.
Save the Children advocates for the following specific actions, which we know work to improve food security and tackle malnutrition:
Direct Nutrition Interventions. Scaling up coverage of a package of 13 direct nutrition interventions (DNIs), identified by the Lancet medical journal in 2008, could prevent a quarter of child deaths, lower the prevalence of stunting by a third and As such, development practitioners, national governments, civil society and donors are focussing efforts towards scaling up coverage of such interventions. This approach works and should be encouraged by the post 2015 framework.9
Social Protection. There is an emerging body of evidence of the impact of social protection systems on food security and nutrition outcomes. In particular, social transfers are particularly relevant to tackling malnutrition, enabling families to increase food expenditure and dietary diversity, strengthen investments in productive assets, as well as stimulating demand in local markets.
1,000 Days Focus. Much of a child’s future – and in fact much of a nation’s future – is determined by the quality of nutrition in the first 1,000 days. The period from the start of a mother’s pregnancy through her child’s second birthday is a critical window when a child’s brain and body are developing rapidly and good nutrition is essential to lay the foundation for a healthy and productive future. Much remains to be done in ensuring this 1,000 Days focus. In our State of the World’s Mothers Report, Save the Children found only four of 73 developing countries score “very good” on measures of young child nutrition.
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development, and the
9 The Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) movement, for example, currently involves 30 countries and aims to increase the effectiveness of existing programs by supporting national priorities, aligning resources and fostering broad ownership and commitment to nutrition SUN website: http://scalingupnutrition.org/about. Accessed 4/12/12
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
155
Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
At the policy level, there is a growing consensus on the nature of the problem. While initiatives helpfully raise political attention to the issue, there is a risk that a proliferation of initiatives dilutes this focus. Ultimately the focus needs to be on implementation. The Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC) serves as an important way to encourage political positioning for food security, calling for called for progress and unified action towards ending hunger and malnutrition around the world. It is important that this level of ambition and breadth of focus of the ZHC are maintained and reflected in the post 2015 framework. The post 2015 framework should build on the ZHC, in particular aiming to develop a timeframe and set out a clear strategy for the achievement of these goals. In doing so it should encourage actors beyond the UN system, encouraging national governments, businesses, foundations and civil society, to coordinate efforts towards these goals. The post 2015 framework should not, however, aim to develop a new authority for the governance of these ambitions: good governance mechanisms for food security already exist and should be strengthened (particularly the Committee on World Food Security) in order to support concerted efforts in this direction. The Global Strategic Framework (GSF) as a “tool for charting a new course for the international community by prioritizing key principles, policies and actions” relating to food security and nutrition.10 In particular, the GSF goes a long way towards integrating various approaches to improving FNS, for example making reference to recently-approved WHA MIYCN Implementation Plan. It could be strengthened by linking up with the Scaling Up Nutrition movement, and encouraging the implementation of country level costed plans for investments in nutrition.The GSF makes a solid attempt to ensure its practical regional and country-level relevance, by separating recommendations by county and global levels as well as by outlining critical roles, responsibilities and methods for support at national, regional and global levels. The post-2015 framework offers a chance to ensure these recommendations are developed, through consultative and inclusive process, so that a wider range of institutions can be included in to the aims of the GSF.Save the Children believes that the following courses of action should be taken by the post 2015 framework in order to build on existing frameworks.
1. Leadership and supportThe post 2015 framework should ensure political leadership from the beneficiaries of these initiatives. It must ensure the equitable access to resources required to achieve ambitions of the ZHC, GSF, SUN and other existing initiatives.
2. Coordination between all partners in order to achieve food and nutrition security for allThe post 2015 framework should ensure coordination and coherence between various existing initiatives. One key platform for coordination and long term food security planning is the Committee on World Food Security (CFS). The CFS has made important strides to be inclusive of national governments, civil society, the private sector, academia and other key stakeholders, enabling inclusive debate the most pressing issues in food and nutrition security, the ‘food system’, and development. The post 2015 framework provides an opportunity to improve coordination, governance and coherence of food security actors, and in doing so should recognise the role of existing bodies and mechanisms, including the CFS.
10 GSF document
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
156
3. Aid effectiveness Further pursuit of the Paris and Busan agendas is needed. All partners need to ensure that their programmes are geographically coherent and the technical expertise targeted is strongly linked. Collateral effect is strongly sought after. The UNDAF tried to achieve greater coordination within the UN family; it resulted after a 3 year period, with much talk but little forward movement. Governments need to consider a sector-wide approach, guiding and giving direction to different initiatives.
4. Environmental sustainabilityRecognizing that the long-term sustainability of food security is dependent on sustainable resource use, mitigating climate change and ocean acidification and adaptation to climate impacts, it is essential that the post 2015 framework develops efforts towards ending hunger and malnutrition in a way that simultaneously addresses issues of environmental sustainability. In particular, the post-MDG and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) processes should be integrated to form a coherent post 2015 that recognises the interdependencies between human development and environmental sustainability. The ZHC’s pillar of “ensuring all food systems are sustainable” offers a useful starting point which should be developed further.
A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC). Please provide us with your feedback on those pillars – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
Save the Children supports the Zero Hunger Challenge as a comprehensive challenge to develop political action on ending hunger and food insecurity. As stands, however, the pillars of the Zero Hunger Challenge should be treated as a useful basis from which goals and targets of the post-2015 framework can be developed, rather than as a set of goals themselves. The ZHC pillars should be adapted through a participatory process in order for them to inform the goals of the post 2015 framework. To motivate further progress the goals that feature in the post 2015 framework must be embedded in global systems that will expedite their achievement. There will need to be stronger accountability mechanisms next time around, at local, national and global levels. Save the Children proposes that three accompanying mechanisms could support a framework that successfully operates at these levels: national financing strategies; a robust international accountability mechanism and a data investment fund.
It is essential that the goals are time-bound to ensure accountability for progress. The goals and targets that we propose below are achievable “within our lifetime”, i.e. by 2030.In many countries with high levels of food insecurity and malnutrition, progress is predicated by a range of international factors such as food price volatility, international trade rules, and other countries’ subsidies and mandates, meaning that to be credible, some policy indicators will also need to be international. As such, the post-2015 framework will need to be broad enough to ensure action at international level as well as the national level.
Save the Children proposes that the post 2015 framework should include a goal to eradicate hunger, halve stunting, and ensure universal access to sustainable food, water and sanitation.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
157
In particular, this goal should be underpinned by the following global targets:
1. Eradicate hunger; halve stunting and malnutrition rates among children.
2. Directly link sustainable food production and distribution systems to nutrition targets.
3. Ensure everybody in the world has access to adequate, safe and environmentally sustainable water facilities within 1 km of their home, and in all schools and health facilities.
4. Ensure everybody in the world has access to basic sanitation within 1km of their home, along with sanitation in all schools and hospitals.
Save the Children works in more than 120 countries. We save children’s lives. We fight for their rights. We help them fulfil their potential
Save the ChildrenSt. Vincent House30 Orange StreetLondon WC2H 7HHUK
152) Thiago Jota TJ, Cahermo Pescados, Brazil
TEMA 1: Acredito em aplicar práticas de criação de culturas buscando sempre a sustentabilidade ambiental. Em relação a nutricão acredito em investimentos nos setores da aquicultura principalmente na PISCICULTURA (criaçaõ de peixes em cativeiro). Produção de um alimento com um alto valor protéico e que pode ser de fácil acesso as classes pobres.
Vamos aproveitar nossos recursos hídricos para a produção de alimento PEIXE!! (FISH)...
Fazer um trabalho de concientização em locais onde a prática de comer peixe é minima.
Maximizar o uso da Àgua com tecnologias (bioflocus) que vão ajudar na qualidade da agua evitando assim muitas renovações em fazendas com tanques de terra.
Acredito que para combater a FOME de verdade temos que investir em tecnologias e apoiar com mais vigor o setor da Piscicultura. È uma produção de um alimento com um alto valor proteico e que pode ser produzido em alta densidades em pouco espaço.
Abraço
Thiago Jota de Souza
Engenheiro de Pesca - Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
158
153) Elva Barrios López, Peru
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Tema 2
Considero que en el Perú puede contribuir a combatir el hambre y la inseguridad alimentaria, la “producción orgánica y el consumo nacional”, debido a la situación particular del país, al contar con diversidad de materias primas y con una gran cantidad de conocimientos ancestrales. Creo que es fundamental por parte del Estado y de los ciudadanos, impulsar la “producción orgánica y el consumo nacional”, pues para que exista seguridad alimentaria no basta con que todas las personas, caso de los consumidores, tengan acceso físico y económico a suficientes alimentos, sino también es necesario que estos sean nutritivos, con el fin de disfrutar de una vida sana. La “producción orgánica y el consumo nacional” beneficia no solo a consumidores, sino también a los productores, en su mayoría campesinos e indígenas afectados por la pobreza, a quiénes este tipo de producción les permite desarrollar un comercio justo. Durante las últimas décadas, en el territorio nacional son muchas las empresas transnacionales que han instalado complejos agroindustriales orientados principalmente a la producción de alimentos para exportación. Esta situación ha sido promovida por una concepción según la cual cada territorio debe especializarse en aquellas actividades en las que tenga “ventajas comparativas” en una economía fuertemente globalizada (Klauer 2010: 132). Estas empresas transnacionales recurren al uso intensivo de la tierra, al empleo de productos químicos, semillas híbridas o transgénicas, maquinaria pesada. Asimismo, cabe destacar que muchas de estas empresas no respetan cabalmente las reglas del libre mercado, ya que son muchos los países desarrollados que mantienen fuertes subsidios a su producción. Ello implica que la producción agropecuaria destinada hacia la exportación llevada cabo a través de subvenciones, promueva que se vendan en otros mercados por debajo del costo de producción en el lugar de origen, generando un proceso llamado “dumping”, que perjudica a las economías locales, sobre todo a la producción familiar campesina. Este proceso ocurre precisamente porque el objetivo es generar ganancias y no alimentar a los pueblos, lo que ocurre a pesar que los estados miembros de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación (FAO) hayan ratificado en la Cumbre Mundial de la Alimentación (1996), el derecho a la alimentación incluido en la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, recientemente tanto los movimientos sociales como las organizaciones campesinas e indígenas se han preocupado por los problemas que han generado la producción de alimentos de empresas transnacionales como de la exportación de estos productos. Las condiciones actuales de comercio, de acceso a recursos y de desprotección de la actividad campesina, coinciden en señalar que el problema de alimentación que existe es tanto de producción como de acceso a los alimentos (Klauer 2010: 134).Relacionado al problema de la alimentación, existen muchos foros, organizados por los movimientos sociales, donde ello se discute, sobre la base de lo que implica la “soberanía alimentaria” (Klauer 2010). Poseer soberanía significa el poder decidir sobre lo que se quiere producir, y en qué mercados se desea colocar los productos, por supuesto priorizando la demanda interna de los productos. Sin
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
159
embargo, en el caso de los productores orgánicos de exportación en el Perú, este poder de decisión se desestima en la medida en que las cada vez más fuertes interrelaciones con el mercado global, les exige solo cierto tipo de productos (café, cacao, y banano en su mayoría). Esto se da debido a que los fines de la producción no son asegurar alimentariamente al país, sino es colocar cierto tipo de productos en el mercado internacional para aprovechar los altos precios de los productos orgánicos en algunos países desarrollados; es decir, el fin de la producción orgánica peruana es en general, la exportación, dando priorización a los consumidores y sus demandas de los mercados externos.La producción orgánica aparece como alternativa de desarrollo sostenible, ecológico y económico para pequeños productores; pues los estudiosos del movimiento agroecológico consideran que la agricultura orgánica tiene dimensiones socio-culturales, económicas y políticas. La Federación Internacional de Movimientos de Agricultura Orgánica (IFOAM) presenta 4 principios que debe seguir toda agricultura orgánica (PROMPEXPERÚ. 2007: 8 y 9): a) Principio de Salud: debe sostener y promover la salud de suelo, planta, animal, persona y planeta como una sola e indivisible; b) Principio de Ecología: debe estar basada en sistemas y ciclos ecológicos vivos, trabajar con ellos, emularlos y ayudar a sostenerlos; c) Principio de Equidad: debe estar basada en relaciones que aseguren equidad con respecto al ambiente común y a las oportunidades de vida. d) Principio de Precaución: debe ser gestionada de una manera responsable y con precaución para proteger la salud y el bienestar de las generaciones presentes y futuras y el ambiente. Los pequeños productores a través de un tipo de organización asociativa, logran costear diversas fases necesarias para la exportación de sus productos. Esta asociatividad se vuelve necesaria en la medida que es fundamental contar con acceso a servicios financieros, capacitación técnica, leyes y apoyo estatal para el desarrollo de la exportación orgánica. Asimismo, las interrelaciones que se establecen con el mercado global de productos orgánicos son de dependencia, puesto que los productores solo producen y exportan lo que mercados extranjeros demandan, y al mismo tiempo están supeditados a los flujos de precio internacional. Los productores orgánicos son pequeños propietarios; es decir, su posesión de la tierra es de tamaño pequeño; sin embargo, llegan a exportar a mercados internacionales en cantidades cada vez más grandes. La dinámica organizativa que permite este logro, a pesar de los pocos capitales tanto económicos como tecnológicos que tienen los pequeños propietarios, es el de la asociación o cooperativa. En este sentido, este tipo de organización productiva, le permitiría a los pequeños productores “hacer fuerza” para poder exportar; ya que para hacerlo es necesario costear certificación, invertir en implementación tecnológica, y conseguir préstamos de los bancos y mercados en el exterior. Por otro lado, los productores orgánicos que orientan sus bienes al mercado local, tienen más control del proceso productivo, del proceso de comercialización y de sus beneficios.
BIBLIOGRAFIA
KLEIN, Emilio Condiciones laborales de la pobreza rural en América Latina. En: Políticas de mercado de trabajo y pobreza rural en América Latina. FAO, OIT y CEPAL, Roma. 2010
PROMPEXPERÚ. 2007. “Guía Comercial de Productos Orgánicos”. Pp.47
[English translation]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
160
Topic 2
I believe that in Peru the "organic production and domestic consumption" can help fighting hunger and food insecurity, due to the country particular situation, having a diversity of raw materials and a lot of ancient knowledge.I think it's important for the state and the citizens to promote "organic production and domestic consumption”. Having food security not only means that everybody –the consumers-, do have physical and economic access to sufficient food, but we also need this food to be nutritious, in order to enjoy a healthy life. The "organic production and domestic consumption" benefits not only consumers, but also producers, mostly farmers and indigenous people affected by poverty, to whom this production allows to develop a fair trade.
During the last decades, there are many transnational corporations that have settled in Peru agroindustrial plants oriented primarily to food production for export. This has been promoted by the principle that each country should specialize in those activities in which it has "comparative advantages" in a highly globalized economy (Klauer 2010: 132).
These corporations are turning to intensive land use, the use of chemicals, hybrid or transgenic seeds and heavy machinery. Also, we should highlight that many of these companies do not comply fully with the rules of the free market, as many developed countries have strong production subsidies. This implies that agricultural production destined to export is carried out through grants, promoting selling in other markets below production costs in the place of origin, generating a process called "dumping", which hurts local economies , especially farmers household production.
This process occurs precisely because the goal is to generate profits and not feeding people, despite of member states of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) having ratified in the World Food Summit (1996), the right to food included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
However, both social movements and farmers and indigenous organizations have been recently concerned about the problems created by the food production of the transnational companies and the export of these products. The current trading conditions, the access to resources and the vulnerability of farmers activity, coincide in that the existing problem is generated by both production and access to food (Klauer 2010: 134).
There are many forums related to the problem of food, hosted by social movements, where the meaning of "food sovereignty" is discussed (Klauer 2010). Having sovereignty means the power to decide on what you want to produce, and in which markets you want to put the products, prioritizing of course domestic demand. However, in the case of export organic producers in Peru, this power of decision is dismissed because the increasingly strong relationships with the global market demand only certain types of products (coffee, cocoa, and bananas mostly). This occurs because the goals of production are not to ensure food for the country, but to place certain types of products in the international market taking advantage of high prices for organic products in some developed countries. That is, the goal of Peruvian organic production is generally export, giving priority to consumers -and their demands- from foreign markets.
Organic production appears as an alternative for sustainable, ecological and economic development for small producers, as agroecology movement scholars believe that organic agriculture has socio-cultural, economic and political dimensions The International Federation of Organic Agriculture
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
161
Movements (IFOAM) presents four principles to be followed by all organic agriculture (PROMPEXPERÚ. 2007: 8 and 9): a) Principle of Health: should sustain and enhance the health of soil, plant, animal, human and planet as one and indivisible; b) Principle of Ecology: should be based on living ecological systems and cycles, work with them, emulate them and help sustain them; c) Principle of Fairness: should build on relationships that ensure fairness with regard to the common environment and life opportunities. d) Principle of Care: should be managed in a precautionary and responsible manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the environment.
Smallholders, through a kind of associative organization, manage to finance the various stages necessary for the export of their products. This associativity becomes necessary as it is essential to have access to financial services, technical training, laws and state support for the development of organic exports. Furthermore, the relationships established with the global market for organic products are relations of dependency, since producers only produce and export what foreign markets demand, while being at the same time subject to fluctuating international prices.
Organic producers are smallholders, ie, the land plots they possess are small, however, they manage to export to international markets in ever larger quantities. The organizational dynamics that allows this achievement -despite the few technological and financial capital that smallholders have-, is the association or cooperative. In this sense, this type of productive organization allows small producers to be stronger in order to export, since it is necessary to pay for certification, to invest in technology implementation, and to get loans from banks and foreign markets. In addition, organic producers who gear their goods to the local market, have more control over the production and marketing process and its benefits.
REFERENCES
KLEIN, Emilio Condiciones laborales de la pobreza rural en América Latina. En: Políticas de mercado de trabajo y pobreza
rural en América Latina. FAO, OIT y CEPAL, Rome. 2010PROMPEXPERÚ. 2007. “Guía Comercial de Productos Orgánicos”. Pp.47
154) Caritas Internationalis, Vatican City
Caritas Internationalis is a global Confederation with 164 national members present in 200 countries and territories.
Inspired by the Catholic Social Teaching, the Caritas organisations are dedicated to contributing towards the eradication of poverty and social exclusion, the realisation of human rights and peace, and to challenging the structures of injustice and inequality throughout the world. In thousands of projects and institutions, Caritas organisations are in daily touch and interaction with millions of people experiencing poverty and hunger worldwide.
We call on UN officials and Member States (MS) leaders to make the fight against hunger a priority and ensure the right to food as the foundation for being able to develop peoples capacities and talents and living up to the outcome document of Rio + 20. Hunger today has systemic causes such as the volatility of food prices, land grabbing, unfair trade. We call for coordinated interventions to address both short‐term and recurrent food crises. The only hunger we should undergo is the hunger for justice, equity, ecological sustainability and joint responsibility. We call UN officials and Member States (MS) leaders
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
162
to effectively agree on a ‘Zero Hunger’ goal as a commitment to end the most flagrant violation of human rights.
This paper will address key lessons learned during the current MDG framework, will look at the challenges for achieving Food and Nutrition Security and how Food and Nutrition Security should be best addressed, following the questions of the thematic consultation:
1. What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990 2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to ‐hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
Key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (General):One of the targets of the first Millennium Development Goal (MDG 1) is to reduce the proportion of people who suffer from hunger by half between 1990 and 2015, with hunger measured as the proportion of the population who are undernourished and the prevalence of children under five who are underweight. While having achieved the overall goal in some regions, there are still many countries which remain far from reaching this target. At the same time inequities within countries have grown. Moreover much of the progress made has been eroded by the recent global food price and economic crises.
The MDG framework however has influenced policies positively in several ways. It has made the fight against poverty one of the key elements of development policy and it led, in some developing countries, to more systematic, planned approaches to the fight against poverty and, in some cases, also provided the opportunity for more socially excluded and marginalised groups to make their voices heard. However, Caritas Internationalis calls for a more systematic 1involvement of the poor and most marginalised in the process of identifying the new development framework. 1The MDGs in general facilitated national policy makers in defining priorities, identifying and planning ‐interventions, particularly in the social sectors and improving transparency in some countries through the production of regular reports on progress. MDGs led to the development of some new policy and programming instruments, such as the longer term EU ‘MDG Contracts’ which brought about more planning security for donors and recipients. They also facilitated organisations in conducting development education work and raising awareness within the population on the importance of fighting against poverty and hunger globally.The MDGs led to more focus and priority setting in the debates and, in the actions of the international ‐community, particularly as regards social development and social policy. In a number of countries, some of the goals were made explicit in national development policies and in bilateral development cooperation agreements. It also helped to mobilise public opinion and raise media attention .Key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition:The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), set time bound, broad ranging commitments, allowed for ‐effective monitoring of progress on a number of human development indicators, of which food and nutrition security was a central part. They went a long way towards galvanising the political commitments necessary to improve Food and Nutrition Security (FNS) in many contexts.While progress has been made on FNS since 2000, progress towards meeting MDGs 1, 4, 5 and 7 (those most related to FNS) remains insufficient, especially for the world’s poorest people. Progress on target MDG1c in particular remains limited around the world, and under nutrition remains a large problem. With a billion people going to bed hungry every day and with the knowledge that hunger can be eradicated there remains a major challenge to be addressed.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
163
Accelerating progress toward the MDG1 targets is less about the development of innovations and new technologies and more about putting what is already known into practice.Some limitations of the MDG framework with regard to FNS, include:
a) Focus of the targets at the national level, and as such failing to encourage actions on the international determinants of food and nutrition security, in particular around international trade, agricultural subsidies and global food markets.
b) Most strategies being implemented to tackle FSN have been focusing on treatment of malnutrition and rooted within the health sector. While critical, these programs generally address disease related ‐effects and emphasize the immediate determinants of under nutrition. Strategies that adopt multisectoral programming are crucial to address longer term determinants of under nutrition, such ‐as poverty, inequality, and functioning food and health systems, remain under developed and under‐ ‐researched.
c) A failure to address sufficiently the ways in which policies related to FNS have impacts on other areas, and vice versa. In particular, a failure to identify the environmental sustainability aspects of agricultural production.1 http://www.cafod.org.uk/Media/Files/Resources/Policy/100-Voices 2
d) The MDG framework entirely omitted to incorporate a focus on policy coherence , and, in focusing predominantly on the social sectors, overlooked the need to take a comprehensive approach to development, that is, to include other policy areas which impact significantly on the achievement of development objectives.
e) Appropriate and rigorous accountability mechanisms pertaining to all actors are crucial for the success of achieving goals and turning aspirations or ‘commitments’ into obligations. Accountability is also central to democratic governance and the respect for human rights, both of which, as has been noted, were lacking from the MDG framework.
f) The MDG framework failed to measure progress in terms of equity between men and women and the realisation of human rights. Due to the concentration of income, power and access to resources in the wealthiest part of the population in many countries, the national average on a range of development indicators can differ greatly.Other significant gaps, which must be addressed in the post 2015 framework, include the lack of a ‐strong link with the principles and particularly with the rights based approach of the Millennium ‐Declaration.
2. What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
The main challenges:
Food and nutrition security are complex issues which must be addressed by collaborative action across multiple sectors. Achieving FNS for all is not only an issue of the production and availability of adequate, nutritious food. It is paramount that food is accessible and affordable at the household level. Indeed, the four pillars of food security, as well as the additional factors that affect nutrition, namely living conditions, environmental quality, health and care practices, must all be successfully addressed by the post 2015 framework.‐
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
164
Widespread food and nutrition insecurity, highlight the dramatic failure of the global food system to meet the needs of all people, support their Right to Food and to live healthy, productive lives. To address this, the post 2015 framework must galvanize action in both the immediate and longer term. ‐In the short term, proven immediate actions, such as the recognition of the right to food as a core element of any food security and agricultural policy must be taken into account to ensure progression towards the realisation of the Right to Food . For longer term progress, structural issues, such as ‐control of food prices within the global food system which underpin food and nutrition insecurity must be addressed.
On a global scale, there are multiple challenges facing the global food system and the achievement of food and nutrition security for all. The post 2015 framework must account for, and address, these ‐challenges:
a) In developing countries, the root causes of food insecurity include: poverty, corruption, national policies that do not promote equal access to food for all, incoherence of certain policies with development objectives, environmental degradation, lack of access to markets, infrastructure insufficient agricultural development, low levels of education, lack of rights and access to resources for women, poor social protection systems, and natural disasters. Drought and conflict are the main factors that have exacerbated the problem of food production, distribution and access in the most food insecure regions, in Africa.
b) While the world currently produces enough food for everyone, population growth means there are more mouths to feed than ever before. The UN estimates that by 2030 the global population is likely to be between 8 and 9 billion. The profile of the global population is also rapidly changing: 60% of the global population will be living in urban areas (landless problem) by 2030. Increasing numbers of the poorest people live in cities.
c)Changing diets, including growing demand for animal products, add pressure on increasingly scarce natural resources and the availability of adequate food globally.
d)Demand for energy, water and land resources have increased dramatically over recent decades and are likely to continue increasing. Energy prices have significantly increased over the past 15 years, and the agricultural sector’s dependence on fossil fuels has increased, creating a stronger linkage between fuel and food prices. Along with poor land and resource governance these trends have increased the phenomenon of ‘land grabbing’, and threaten to remove the ownership and control of productive ‐resources from those who rely most heavily upon them. Furthermore they have led to the displacement of millions of people who are most affected by food and nutrition insecurity.
e)More than ever, those suffering from hunger, namely smallholder food producers, pastoralists, landless population, women and poor consumers are today more vulnerable to slip into hunger than previously. Food price levels have increased again according to recently published World Bank figures— a 10 per cent rise in July 2012 from the previous month. Moreover prices of food (rice, maize, wheat) have risen since 2006 due among other reasons to excessive speculations on agricultural commodities and raw materials. According to the UN ‘Food Price Watch’2 report, prices are expected to remain high and volatile in the long run as a result of supply uncertainties largely related to climate change, higher demand and low responsiveness from the agricultural system.
f)Currently, the global food system is unfit to meet these challenges, in several ways. The increasingly dominant industrial agricultural production model consumes increasingly costly fossil fuels, water, and soil resources at unsustainable rates. It tends to be characterised by large scale monoculture ‐
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
165
which compromises biodiversity, depletes soil health, leads to land degradation and is inherently vulnerable to climate change.
g) Meanwhile, increases in productivity frequently fail to lead to increased equitable access to food, as exemplified by the development of export driven industrial agriculture in several developing ‐countries. Directly or indirectly subsidised exports of agricultural products often undermine market ‐ ‐access for farmers in developing countries and put pressure on world market prices. Trade policies which have been negotiated in an era of overproduction now need to be revisited to ensure that equitable distribution of food can be achieved at the global level.
h)A further problem with the current global food system is that it lacks a strong governance system, with numerous actors in the system operating with limited coordination, accountability and power. In particular, international food markets have limited regulation, with the result that large amounts of speculative capital are being intertwined with productive capital; a stronger speculation system of agricultural markets which many fear is contributing to increased and volatile prices. As noted below, the Committee on World Food Security provides a mechanism which can greatly improve governance of the international food system.http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTPOVERTY/Resources/336991-1311966520397/FoodPriceWatchJanuary2012.htm
The opportunities will be developed further in the next point.
3. What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving ‐food and nutrition security?
Caritas Internationalis expects first and foremost that the international community effectively contributes to the realisation of the first Millennium Development Goal and the right to food. This implies secure access to adequate and safe food as a universal Human Right, which all states of the international community are mutually obliged to respect, protect and fulfill. This includes an extraterritorial obligation not to violate the Right to Food of the people of other countries, that is, to avoid that any policy that may have an impact on food security in developing countries such as trade or agriculture policies will be detrimental to the local food system. Caritas Internationalis reaffirms, food is not just a commodity and agriculture is not just about producing more food. Despite historical overall boosts in production in the last 50 years, hunger is increasing in some regions. Today we produce 17 percent more calories per day per person than we did 30 years ago in spite of a 70 percent population increase, however increases in yields have not automatically translated into food security, due for instance to food/crop for energy production and monopolized production of livestock`s feed ‐ ‐ ‐instead of food for people. Hunger is not a matter of insufficient production, but a matter of equal access to food.
The future development framework should present a number of characteristics:
a) The framework should aim at an integral human development. This integral approach should take into consideration the well being of all people, women and men, in their different dimensions: ‐economic, social, political, cultural, ecological and the spiritual dimension including equality and non‐discrimination requirement, ensuring that we focus our attention on the most marginalised and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
166
vulnerable groups. The framework needs to articulate a set of clear, concrete, legally binding objectives and indicators, which have been agreed upon through a participatory process.
b) It should be designed through a transparent participatory process. Decision makers must make ‐every effort to consult with people directly affected by hunger, poverty and injustice, including marginalized groups namely women, small scale producers, pastoralists and landless population and ‐involve civil society. It should clearly define who, within which timeframe and with what resources, should take what actions. The CFS’s inclusive structure could serve as a model for such a process. An innovative and transparent monitoring system should also be agreed upon.
c) It should be ambitious and framed in terms of a ‘zero goal’ approach in this case ‘ZERO HUNGER’, by which the aim is to eradicate food and nutrition insecurity, rather than simply to reduce it. A high level of ambition should capture and maintain appropriate and adequate support at public and political levels to ensure that food and nutrition security is met for all, while also robustly measuring progress, supporting the establishment of funding mechanisms, and ensuring accountability from duty bearers.
d) A right based approach must be used in the design of policies and country cooperation strategies ‐and programmes of governments. The FAO voluntary guidelines on the right to food are appropriate tools for the use of governments to improve their policy and programmes from a right based ‐perspective. 5
e) It should ensure that progress is achieved equitably across social groupings namely the most vulnerable including wealth , sex, age, ethnicity and geographic region based inequalities, so as to ‐ ‐equality and universal FNS; ensure FNS improvements are socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable;
f) It should encompass an approach of common but differentiated responsibility for the realisation of FNS, which acknowledges that some important solutions to global problems of FNS will be found internationally, and will require actions which transcend national boundaries and the development and improvement of strong international governance structures, such as subsidies and trade.
g) It should be adaptable to the specific FNS challenges that face different countries. The framework must recognise that the specific issues and challenges within these goals are distinct for countries at different stages of development and their geographic and climate realities. The framework must first deliver action for the poorest and most marginalised, in whichever country they are situated and whatever FNS challenges they face. All countries should commit to national deliberative processes, to apply the goals to their national context. The framework should also be universally applicable reflecting the global challenges the world faces today, but should recognize common but‐ ‐differentiated responsibility. In line with the subsidiarity principle, goals should be set bottom up, ‐nationally owned processes and priority setting, specific to context.‐ ‐
h) The framework should follow an evidence based approach, relying on precise data as a basis for ‐decision making and designing interventions;‐
i) Accountability mechanisms should be established, allowing victims and organisations representing them to hold Governments responsible for their failure to take action. It is through the human rights framework that duty bearers can be held accountable, since the principles of transparency and ‐accountability are at the core of this framework. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter, put it:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
167
‘The right to food requires that accountability mechanisms be put in place so that victims of violations of the right to food have access to independent bodies empowered to monitor the choice made by decision makers. The right to food implies that victims must have a right to recourse mechanisms, that governments must be held accountable if they adopt policies which violate that right, and that courts are empowered to protect that right.’The post 2015 framework must put an emphasis on building and strengthening effective mechanisms ‐at local level in the first instance, at national level, and at international level, including for instance enforcement through binding legislation or rulings.
j) Lessons learned from our work and projects on the ground with those communities most affected by food insecurity have convinced us that the fight against hunger requires giving priority support to an agro ecological model which enhances resilience by mimicking natural processes such as by recycling organic matter, diversifying cropping systems, and enhancing biodiversity. The Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food report on Agro ecology demonstrates that agro ecology, if sufficiently supported, can double food production in entire regions within 10 years while mitigating climate change and alleviating rural poverty. Stronger emphasis on connecting the agro ecological economy with local markets should be explored.
k) Support for small scale food producers including pastoralists and landless population‐The eradication of hunger cannot be achieved unless those most affected are at the centre of initiatives and policies. For this there must be a commitment to attack the issue at its root 6by supporting small scale holders and pastoralists as well as landless population to reach their full ‐potential as producers for their families and communities.
l) The Domestic FocusThe responsibility of developing countries to uphold the right to food should be recognized when negotiating trade agreements and respecting their need to regulate and protect their agricultural markets. Their national food security strategy should be based on their own assessment of their local needs, in a transparent way, with the participation of all stakeholders and the involvement of the most vulnerable, namely women, small scale producers as well as landless population.‐Donors should align their support on the local needs and national strategies, in compliance with the ownership and alignment principles of the Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness.High level leadership will be necessary to achieve the necessary political and financial commitments to succeed in these ambitious FNS goals at the country level, and inclusion of FNS as a central pillar of the post 2015 framework will help to catalyse the required commitments. The post 2015 framework has ‐ ‐the potential to bring the issue of FNS to the forefront of governments’ development policies.
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF) should be the overarching framework to inform global food security policy, improve coordination and guide synchronized action by a wide range of stakeholders. Its adoption including a global peer review mechanism will articulate the different activities of the Committee on Food Security (CFS) and the monitoring and implementation of the Right to Food.
Caritas Internationalis considers the CFS must be recognized as the authoritative global policy forum based on the principle of “one member, one voice”. Part and parcel of this recognition is the support
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
168
for CFS initiatives like the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests. Companies should be accountable for the impacts of their global investments on the right to food. To avoid duplication and to ensure relevance of the framework to key stakeholders, the approach to FNS in the post 2015 framework must be grounded in, and further strengthen, ‐existing political structures and mechanisms. It is fundamental that the goals be in line with the work of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS). The Global Strategic Framework (GSF) adopted by the CFS in 2012 represents an important step towards harmonising FNS policies and achieving a new paradigm on global food, agriculture and nutrition governance, enshrined in more democratic and coherent policies. Importantly, this new paradigm holds human rights, dignity and participation at its foundation. It is imperative that the post MDG framework builds on these good practices.‐The current over arching development framework of the MDGs expires in 2015. It is vitally important ‐that the future framework integrates the “acquis” of the current framework. The MDGs remain vital development objectives and having measurable targets has helped to focus global attention on progress towards the eradication of poverty, improvement of health and universal education, among others.
Rome, December 2012
This document was prepared by Caritas Europa in close cooperation with Caritas Internationalis.
155) IFSN and Action Aid
IFSN- ACTIONAID SUBMISSION FOR THE ONLINE CONSULTATION ON HUNGER, FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY
Theme 1:What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The Millennium Development Goals agreed by world leaders provided a pathway with clear objectives and indicators to track and monitor progress on poverty reduction. This has helped accountability, as world leaders have been constantly requested to account for their efforts to meet the MDGs targets., However, MDG 1 and its sub-targets have not been able to address the increased inequality, the lack of coordination at international and national level, and the failure in the governance of the food system. As a result there are still unacceptable amount of undernourished people concentrated in developing countries along with an unsustainable food system. Thousands of hectares of land are under biofuel and animal feed production to meet the food and energy demand of developed countries. Although the poverty reduction target is likely to be reached 11, increased inequality
11MDGs Development Report 2012, UNDP. With regard to the hunger target in relation to the overall MDG1, preliminary estimates indicate that the global poverty rate at $1.25 a day fell in 2010 to less than half the 1990 rate. If these results are confirmed, the first target of the MDGs— cutting the extreme poverty rate to half its 1990 level—will have been achieved at the global level well ahead of 2015. However, hunger remains a global challenge with the FAO estimates of undernourishment setting at 870 million the people living in hunger in the world. This continuing high level reflects the lack of progress on hunger in several regions, even as income poverty has decreased. Progress has also been slow in reducing child under nutrition. Close to one third of children in Southern Asia were underweight in 2010. Another alarming date is that while gender equality and women’s empowerment are key, gender inequality persists and women continue to face discrimination in access to education, work and economic assets, and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
169
continues in the global trend. This is, among others, due to the prevalence of only quantitative methods, which cannot capture the difference between the entitlement to rights, and the full enjoyment of those rights, as well as the accountability of states as duty bearers.
ActionAid believes that entrenched poverty, growing inequality and inadequate access to food and resources are the major barriers to achieving the right to food for all. Most people are not hungry due to lack of food availability instead they are too poor to access the available food12. Ensuring greater access to food – the ability to produce or purchase food – highlights the central role of poverty reduction in the fight against hunger and depravation.
An holistic approach is needed to address the root causes of food insecurity. Reducing hunger and malnutrition starts with much fairer access to resources, employment and incomes in rural areas. Agriculture, especially smallholder and family farms, can play a key and catalytic role in the improvement of rural livelihoods. Many of these smallholders are women, who face additional constraints compared with men due to discrimination, cultural factors and unequal access to productive resources. Only bold actions and sustained efforts to democratize and rebuild food systems will ensure increased access to food and feed the future generations, fairly, sustainably and equitably along with preserved natural resources, forests, and enhanced biodiversity.
Reducing chronic food waste, tackling over-consumption and the diversion of enormous quantities of grains for animal feed and biofuels away from human consumption is absolutely essential. Nevertheless this must be coupled with support for women and men smallholder farmers and producers to a paradigm shift towards climate-resilient ecological agriculture to confront the challenges of poverty, hunger and climate change.
Any new framework beyond 2015 - to address food insecurity and malnutrition - should be based clearly on the following factors, which were largely missing in the MDG 1 on food security and hunger:
Right to food. The Right to Food approach empowers the rights holders – food insecure and malnourished people - and holds the duty bearers accountable on food security and malnutrition. The post 2015 framework should stipulate governments to enact and implement the Right to Food legislative framework in the countries.
Women’s access and control over natural resources is key to achieve food security. Many studies show that women control over land result in increased food production and food security. An ActionAid forthcoming research is collating evidence to showcase how women’s secure access to land contribute to their empowerment and the enjoyment of other rights.13
Importance of investments in agriculture: greater and responsible investment in agriculture is essential for food security and poverty reduction in poor countries. In achieving
participation in government. Violence against women continues to undermine efforts to reach all goals. Further progress to 2015 and beyond will largely depend on success on these interrelated challenges12 De Schutter 200913 (...In fighting for their rights to claim land, some women are de facto empowering themselves, sometimes quite dramatically, and once they feel secure about their land access some feel empowered to do more – not just for themselves, but for their children first and then their communities...) From Marginalization to Empowerment: The Potential of Land Rights in Contributing to Gender Equality - Empirical evidence from Guatemala, India and Sierra Leone. ActionAid-to be published.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
170
food security for all, the level of public spending into agriculture should be monitored within the overall ODA commitment and other regional agreed targets. National policies should promote greater investment for smallholder sustainable agriculture. Besides, the investments made by smallholder farmers deserve respect and recognition as private investment.
Increased local production and access to natural resources. ActionAid field surveys14 revealed that that communities with sufficient food production were better placed to face the food crisis while the households with land entitlement were better off during the food crisis. The post 2015 framework should include the country’s implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on land tenure to provide secure access to land, fisheries and forests as a mean towards the full realization of the right to adequate food.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Challenges
The following issues, which will continue to exert a major impact on food security and nutrition, should be factored in the post 2015:
Food price rise due to the declines in stocks to use ratios of some of most heavily consumed grains, long-term decline in investment in agriculture, diminishing productivity growth from green revolution technologies such as hybrid seeds, climate-induced supply shortfalls, specifically the increased incidence of droughts and floods, depleted soils and water tables resulting from unsustainable production, explosive growth in demand triggered by the expansion of biofuels, increased oil and fertilizer prices, speculation in oil and food commodity futures markets and unabated trade liberalisation. Volatile food prices destabilize food producers and consumers, and make impossible for farmers to make well-informed investment choices.
Increased impact of climate change - in the form of drought, floods, hurricanes, erratic rains, biofuel, land grabs, and food waste etc - is a growing challenge for food security. Post 2015 strategies should include climate related concerns and building resilience of communities against climate shocks, investment in sustainable models of production, including climate resilient sustainable agriculture.
Opportunities
The food crisis has driven the attention back to the importance of investing in more sustainable agriculture. It has also made clear the failure of the food system governance and the huge bill that developing countries had to pay for lack of coordination. The reformed Committee on World Food Security (CFS) has attempted to respond to the crisis by building a new food governance system with the right to food at the centre of any food security strategy. Putting together UN Agencies, Donors, Governments, private sector, civil society, IFI, and all the relevant stakeholders working on food
14 37. Aftab Alam, 2011. How to Remedy the Food Crisis: Exploring Causes and Effects at the National Level Food Files. http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/food_files_4_web_issn.pdf
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
171
security, the CFS provides the foremost food security platform to provide guidance and space for coordination, cooperation, consensus building, and continue learning process.
The result of this effort has been the development and the endorsement of the Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests, and the adoption of the Global Strategic Framework. Both the documents provide political and technical guidance on the way to manage national land tenure systems and national human rights-based strategy, with the overarching goal of supporting the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security.
All Governments should refer to these instruments when developing their national food security policies, and develop and/or strengthen mapping and monitoring mechanisms in order to better coordinate actions by different stakeholders and promote accountability.
The reformed CFS has committed to support countries in developing an innovative mechanism, including the definition of common indicators, to monitor progress towards food security. As stated by the GSF, objectives to be monitored should include nutritional outcomes, right to food indicators, agricultural sector performance, progress towards achievement of particularly MDG1, and regionally agreed targets. The CFS also committed to develop an innovative mechanism to monitor the state of implementation of the Committee’s own decisions and recommendations, so as to allow for the reinforcement of the coordination and policy convergence roles of the CFS. This is to be considered the foremost opportunity to advance on the accountability agenda, and to provide “international voluntary agreements” with teeth to enable their effective implementation.
Another important opportunity is offered by the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. (PGRFA), adopted by the Thirty-First Session of the Conference of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations on 3 November 2001. The Treaty recognizes the enormous contribution of farmers to the diversity of crops that feed the world, establishes a global system to provide farmers, plant breeders and scientists with access to plant genetic materials, and ensures that recipients share benefits they derive from the use of these genetic materials with the countries where they have been originated. Farmers’ rights are formally recognized and the Contracting Parties should take measures to protect and promote these rights.The current attempt on further regulating seeds by using (and abusing) Intellectual Property Rights represents a threat for the rights of farmers to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed, as well as to access and participate in benefit sharing. The Treaty calls for protecting the traditional knowledge of these farmers, increasing their participation in national decision-making processes and ensuring that they share the benefits from the use of these resources, and helps maximize the use and breeding of all crops (also the local-used not commercial crops) and promotes development and maintenance of diverse farming systems.ActionAid and IFSN support local seed banks in order to help preserve local and traditional knowledge, seed diversity, and economic accessibility to good quality seeds for farmers15.
15 Seed Banks for neglected and under-utilized species – Nepal. Climate Resilient Sustainable Agriculture, experiences from ActionAid and its partners- http://www.actionaid.org/publications/climate-resilient-sustainable-agriculture-experiences-actionaid-and-its-partners
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
172
Theme 2:What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
The Human rights based approach and the importance of the political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security
ActionAid and IFSN strongly support the human rights based approach to poverty. Human rights approach as applied to food implies that food insecure and malnourished people are put at the centre of national food security strategies, and empowered by Governments in assessing their vulnerabilities and how to respond to them. States as duty bearers, should be accountable on food security and nutrition. States have been provided with tools such as the Voluntary Guidelines for the progressive realization of the right to adequate food, and most recently the Global Strategic Framework, that provide guidance for developing effective institutional and adequate legal frameworks, establishing independent monitoring mechanisms, and implementing these frameworks to achieve the progressive realization of adequate food. Countries who have followed the prescriptions of the Guidelines have been able to progress on hunger reduction, but no indicator or target in the MDGs framework has been developed to monitor the implementation of these international instruments. The successes in Brazil, India and Malawi provide guidance and inspiration16. In these countries the role of Government in developing participatory food security strategies based on the right to food and with the active participation of several stakeholders in designing interventions proved to be a success in reducing the hunger in each country. States should commit to develop legal frameworks, rehash and development of appropriate institutions and policies with the participation of stakeholders. Analyzing successes in Brazil, India and Malawi highlight the following major lessons that can be replicated by other countries:
1. Government commitment and promotion of the Right to Food2. Pressure from civil society to introduce and improve the programmes3. Decentralized implementation and participation4. Cost-effective programmes
Increased local production and access to natural resources as precondition for the realization of the right to food
Lessons learnt from the 2007/2008 food crisis includes that people resilience draw from increased production and greater access to natural resources. Communities with sufficient food production were better placed to face the food crisis while the households with land entitlement were better off during
16 Success in reducing hunger, lessons from India, Malawi and Brazil, IFSN 2011, http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/successes_in_reducing_hunger_-_lessons_from_india_malawi_and_brazil.pdf
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
173
the food crisis. To contrast, the latest wave of FDI are having devastating impacts on rural communities and their access to land. Rural people who gain their livelihoods from land are dispossessed by foreign and national investors who take advantage of weak governance and legal loopholes in the national systems. OECD estimated that 83% of farmland acquired is dedicated to the production of export crops.. Current investments are also looking for access to natural resources (land and water) and acquisition of land for biofuels production with little benefits for local people.
Public investment have declined over the past 20 years: the share of public spending on agriculture in developing countries has fallen to 7%, even less in Africa. Donors ODA going to agriculture has fallen from around 10% to 5%. Only recently major attention is given to the fact that small food producers undertake the bulk of investments and that 500 million small scale producers feed the world population. This encourages a shift from how to regulate international investments towards how to create the appropriate conditions to facilitate and support farmers own investments. In this regard, public policies are crucial to mobilize national spending in supporting of farmers investments. The following measures should be given adequate attention within the post 2015 framework:
- Full implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in order to ensure and strengthen people’s secure access to land, fisheries and forests so as to progress on food security.
- increase the level of public spending in the agricultural sector by setting an ambitious target for investments in agriculture. Efforts to build national systems to collect timely and disaggregated data by sex and age,.
- leverage investments in agriculture that deliver on food security while respecting human rights, protecting the environment and promoting women’s empowerment. Public policies should create the enabling conditions for farmers own investments and promote public investments for public goods, including research and development.
The role of women and the need of food policies targeting specifically women
Women play a critical role in agricultural production in developing countries, where they comprise , on an average, 43 percent of the agricultural labour force.17.
ActionAid’s work in empowering women farmers and helping them gain control over resources and incomes has had significant positive impacts on raising agricultural productivity and improving household food security and nutrition.18 Hence keeping women at the centre of policy discussions regarding food security can deliver remarkable economic and social benefits.Governments and other duty bearers should ensure policies and practices that facilitate women farmers for a better life and greater contribution in the fight against hunger and malnutrition. ActionAid experience 19 underscores the following measures be given adequate attention within the post 2015 framework :
Women farmers’ participation in gender specific policies on food, hunger and agriculture
17 FAO (2011),The State of Food and Agriculture: Women in Agriculture: Closing the gender gap for development, p. 318 The Long Road from Household Food Security to Women’s Empowerment: Signposts from Bangladesh and The Gambia, 19 http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/policy_briefing-_investing_in_women_smallholder_farmers.pdf
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
174
Access to and control over land Access to financial services including social transfers Gender appropriate farming inputs Access to clean water Appropriate extension services and trainings Appropriate research and technological development Appropriate marketing facilities
In practice, targets and indicators should empower women to participate equally, whilst ensuring specific needs of women are also met, eg in terms of land rights. Targets and indicators need to be supported by sex disagreggated data and data use. Progress here would be supported/complemented/driven by a standalone gender equality goal, ensuring specific focus on tackling broader causes of inequality, such as violence against women and girls.
The promotion of climate resilient sustainable agriculture and agro-ecology
The fact that still 870 million people suffer from hunger, and the majority of them live in rural areas and are women, confirmed that a complete shift is needed towards a model of agriculture that deliver on food security while protecting the environment and promoting women’s empowerment.
After the 2007/2008 food crisis, World Bank20 affirmed that agricultural investment was the most appropriate and effective strategy for poverty reduction in rural area, where the majority of poorest people live. Unfortunately, the World Bank proposed solutions were drawn from the Green Revolution prescriptions without taking into any account the lessons learnt. The social and ecological costs of the Asian Green Revolution are visible to everyone, with loss of biodiversity, soil depletion and land degradation, water pollution, concentration of land and rising social inequality, and the replacement of locally-used crops with cash crops for export.
The other dominating assumption that free trade would have provided food for all ensuring global supply also failed, as the 2007/2008 food crisis showed how unequal market power has benefited traders while developing countries have seen their food bill hugely go up.21
IAASTD report stated that business as usual is no longer a solution and we need to promote a more sustainable model of production, hence the need to invest in agro-ecology.
ActionAid believe that states should commit to change their policies, investment and practices in favor of agro-ecology. ActionAid experiences and reports underscore the potential of agro-ecology to improve food production, improved income, and climate change adaptation22. The important lesson we draw from the 2007 and most recent food crisis is that developing countries cannot rely on a few number of commodity traders for their food security, but should build their food security on localized diverse food security systems, with the use of buffer stocks and food reserves to stabilize prices and
20 WB 200821 Four big commodity traders known as “ABCD” (ADM, Bunge, Cargill and Dreyfus) controlled an estimated 73% of international grain trade . Cobwebbed Report, ActionAid/IFSN22 Climate Resilient Sustainable Agriculture, experiences from ActionAid and its partners-
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
175
guarantee food supply in case of shocks or climate related events.
The “productivity” narrative focusing only on increasing productivity to feed 9 billion people in 2050 should be challenged by the fact that world produce enough food to feed everyone. Solution lays in the reform of the food system which should provide everyone with the means to access food. Agroecology proved effective not only to increase productivity, but also in its capacity to meet the multiple challenges of climate change, hunger reduction, building resilience, empowerment of women small holder farmers23 24 25.
The post 2015 framework should look at:
support for small scale farmers and peasants and producer groups in their ecological approaches
support for diversified food systems that build on local and traditional knowledge support for participatory research and plant breeding that combines indigenous and
traditional knowledge with science and modern technology programmes to phase out input subsidies schemes for agro-chemicals in favor of subsidies to
promote ecological agriculture. Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?The Zero Hunger Challenge initiative launched by the UN Secretary General announced very ambitious objectives including the 100% access to adequate food at all times, strong reference to the enjoyment of the right to food and the diversified food systems. This is an excellent contribution to the post 2015 framework, which should be complemented with adequate policies as highlighted by the Global Strategic Framework.
The GSF should be considered as the most comprehensive basis to build the new framework for the post 2015. The new framework should also build on the reformed CFS as the foremost food security platform for coordination and coherence, as well as the model of governance to promote at regional and national level. All the stakeholders should be involved in the formulation of human-rights based food security strategies, with the active and full participation of those most affected by food insecurity. Ultimately, increasing efforts are needed to develop monitoring mechanisms in order to better coordinate actions by different stakeholders and promote accountability.
Theme 3:For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or
23 http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/policy_briefing-_smallholder-led_sustainable_agriculture.pdf24 FED UP – Now’s the time to invest in agroecology – http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/ifsn_fed_up.pdf25 Seeds And Sisterhood, By Joanna Kerr, Aa Ceo, Hosted By Oxfam Online Discussion Essay November 2012 Making The Food System Work For Women Www.Oxfam.Org
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
176
national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals.
For the post 2015 framework, ActionAid and IFSN support a food and nutrition security goal which point at zero hunger .The development of specific targets can start from here, and ActionAid and IFSN recommend the following to be included. All the actions needed to create or further improve systems that enable the data collection to measure the progress. A specific target on the right to food, monitoring progress in incorporating the right to food into national constitutions. Specific ad hoc indicators, used by the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, should be included in the set of targets related to measuring the progress on the right to food. A specific target on women’s secure access to land (measuring access and control over land by women), built on the findings of the SOFA 2011 and the recently adopted VGs on land tenure. Women’s access and control over land should be differentiated as a separate target. Women’s access to land should be constantly measured as target towards the full realization of the right to food. A specific target on investment in agro-ecology. An ambitious target for investments in agriculture within the ODA 7% commitment and other regionally agreed targets - such as Maputo declaration of 10% of national budget - should be introduced. A minimum percentage of local sourced food production (based on local production capacity) should be introduced by country. This would boost agricultural local production, ensure country self-sufficiency, prevent dependency on international market for food provision.
A specific target on accountability, tracking countries which fully endorse, domesticate, implement the relevant agreements on food security and nutrition, namely the VGs for the progressive realization of the right to adequate food, the VGs on responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests, the recently adopted Global Strategic Framework, and the FAO Rome Principles.
156) IBON International, Philippines
IBON International welcomes this opportunity to provide its position on hunger, food and nutrition security towards a post 2015 development framework. In October this year we launched the Campaign for People’s Goal for Sustainable Development (CPGSD), a campaign platform of southern civil society organizations (CSOs), grassroots organizations, labour unions, social movements, non-governmental
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
177
organizations and other institutions committed to forging a transformative development agenda hinged on the common good of all over the interests of a few elite; human rights; and food sovereignty. It calls for the establishment of open, participatory, and inclusive multi-stakeholder processes for setting a post-2015 development agenda at national and international levels.The CPGSD now has 136 national, regional and international organizations as well as individuals from Asia, Africa and Latin America.
The current development pathway urgently needs to be changed. The dominant neoliberal policy regime reduces development to growth in production and consumption of material goods, and grants rights and liberties to capital over the rights and freedoms of people and the protection of the environment. This has led to greater hunger, inequality, landlessness, unemployment, precarious employment conditions, indebtedness, loss of incomes and social protections, deprivation of basic services, dispossession of communities, forced migration, resource depletion, environmental degradation, and the climate crisis.
Theme 1 Key Lessons from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
The MDGs have been useful in sparking public awareness on poverty and other key development concerns. They are, however, focused on short-term and short-sighted development goals that do not address the structural roots of the current global economic, social and ecological crises. For instance, MDG 1 to reduce extreme poverty into half has supposedly been met, and yet 43% of the global population still live on less than US$ 1.25 per day. The richest 1% of the world’s adult population continue to own 39.9% of world’s household wealth. This is more than the combined wealth of the poorest 95% who are in the global south.
The MDGs are embedded within the broader context of the neoliberal restructuring of the global economy (trade and investment liberalization, privatization and deregulation) which have worsened many human development indicators in the region. The continuing food crises dramatically underscored in 2008 and 2011 show that any so-called gain in meeting the targets are easily lost and eroded due to failure to address the roots of poverty and underdevelopment.
Process-wise, the MDGs were not defined by its supposed beneficiaries. The MDGs were set by the UN with strong participation from northern countries and donors but without involvement from the people. Countries of the south have become mere implementors of said goals. Democratic ownership is fundamental in formulating policies and programs owned by the people. Finally, accountability mechanisms have been confined to state executives reporting to donors and donor governments. Mechanisms for the people to hold their governments to account for failing to meet the targets are absent.
Theme 2What works best? Future key issues?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
178
Governments and the international community must adopt concrete commitments and targets, consistent with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capacities, on the following peoples’ priorities: human rights; poverty and inequality; food sovereignty; full employment and decent work; universal social protection; gender justice; climate justice and environmental sustainability; new trade, financial and monetary architecture; democracy and good governance; and peace and security based on justice.
Specific to hunger, food and nutrition security, food sovereignty must be adopted as a policy framework towards adequate, safe, nutritious food for all, including policies and investments to support small-scale farmers, women producers, workers and secure access to (and protection of) the water, land, soils, biodiversity, and other resources upon which food security depends. Agrarian reform is integral to this in order to secure workers’, farmers’ and rural people’s democratic access to land, water resources and seeds. There must be support in the form of finance and infrastructure in line with, but not limited to, the recommendations of the 2006 International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development.
Theme 3Objectives, Targets and Indicators for a Post 2015 Development Framework
A transformative development agenda requires a radical redistribution of ownership, access and control over productive resources. It involves the democratization of state and social institutions so that communities and citizens, rather than markets can democratically set social goals and priorities. It requires a reorientation of production and consumption to meet people’s needs and human potentials within environmental limits rather than maximizing short-term profits.
Specific objectives set in the zero hunger challenge -- 100% access to adequate food all year round; zero stunted children less than two (2) years old; sustainability of all food systems; 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income; and zero loss or waste of food – while significant are again, short-term development goals that do not address structural causes of poverty, hunger and malnutrition.
Sustainable development goals in a post 2015 development framework to be effective must be transformational, operationable and monitorable. Important indicators could be: poverty reduction; women participation; equality (building on Gini coefficient); decent work; social protection especially for youth and children; self-reliant economic development, among others.
Claiming Right to ParticipateThe ongoing process of establishing a new set of sustainable development goals and a post-2015 development framework should recognize and provide full mechanisms and opportunities for full participation of civil society in deliberations and decision-making at all levels.
At the national level, multistakeholder bodies should be formed with representatives from the government (including parliament and local authorities), civil society and other stakeholders to decide
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
179
on national development strategy and priority targets based on local consultations with experts’ inputs. At the international level, multistakeholder processes led by Task Teams under the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals can be set up where member governments and representatives of civil society and other stakeholders can formally meet and work side-by-side to draft proposals for the General Assembly. These modalities should include providing adequate support for the participation of those directly affected and most vulnerable to poverty, inequality, injustice, ecological destruction and human rights violations, especially from the Global South. #
Sources:1. “SDGs: Can they promote sustainable development?”, IBON International Policy Brief, June 20122. “Reforming Global Sustainable Development Governance: A Rights-Based Agenda”, IBON
International Policy Brief, March 20123. “Monopoly Capitalism and the Ecological Crisis”, IBON International Primer, 2012
157) Benjamin Graeub, Biovision Foundation / Millennium Institute, Switzerland
Theme 1:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
MDGs have proven very successful in bridging a political divide and channeling money to a select number of goals. Part of this is due to the fact that the MDGs were not formally negotiated but rather proposed by UN agencies
A sole focus on hunger and malnutrition is not enough! To achieve sustainable development, a more holistic approach that promotes a sustainable agriculture and food systems that have positive economic, environmental, and social impacts is necessary.
While there has been some advancement, it seems that the strong focus on production increases that resulted from the MDGs is not enough to effectively fight hunger and poverty – at least that is what hunger and poverty numbers currently show. A stronger focus needs to be placed on topics such as environmentally friendly improvements of local, smallholder production in developing countries and inefficiencies in the food system (waste and food losses) and sustainable consumption, which in turn reinforces positive synergies in the system. There was far too much emphasis on short term solution, quick fixes while the system changes that are needed remain the exception.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
A major challenge will be the political divide around the future of agriculture and what measures are necessary to realize the agriculture-hunger-poverty nexus already acknowledged in the MDGs[1]
This divide can also be the source of major opportunities. Just as the MDGs brought together actors with diverse backgrounds and opinions, so also will any effective post-2015 arrangement bring together opposing forces.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
180
Another challenge may be that any effective post-2015 agreement on goals and targets will have to be more specific than the MDGs were to address the multi-dimensionality of the issues. It will thus be a major challenge to agree on specific measurements. The experience from the MDGs would suggest that these measurements not to be negotiated, but rather prepared by the relevant UN bodies (FAO, IFAD; WFP) or multi-stakeholder expert groups in a transparent process with input from all relevant stakeholders – especially small-scale farmers.
To build a system that allows for effective monitoring of current initiatives and their achievements will be a further major challenge that has to be tackled in order to make the post-2015 framework an effective tool.
Theme 2:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on.Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
We believe that no matter what goals, targets and indicators are agreed upon it is important that resources are available for stakeholders to develop their own strategies on the national and sub-national level to tackle these issues. A one-size fits all approach in the implementation of the post-2015 framework is to be avoided. Instead, participatory and inclusive national assessments on food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture should be facilitated (as called for by the Rio+20 declaration and currently discussed within the CFS) and should establish the basis of international action to achieve the post-2015 goals. Only with such an approach can there be local ownership and a truly bottom-up pressure for the right measures and governance structures to be put in place. We are currently piloting this approach in three countries in sub-Saharan Africa (Kenya, Senegal and Ethiopia) and by the end of 2013 will be able to present preliminary results.
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
The GSF of the CFS should be used as a basis of discussions to avoid duplication of work in NYC that has already been done in Rome. Therefore it is important to have several events with both Rome- and NYC-based delegates discussing the negotiated and agreed work in Rome on the topic.
The Zero Hunger Challenge should be the basis of any discussion in the area of poverty, hunger and sustainable agriculture. While it is not perfect, it is a good starting point because it incorporates the main issues that need to be addressed and is very ambitious in its goals.
Theme 3:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
181
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
We strongly support the goals and the general direction of the Zero Hunger Challenge. As the Secretary-General pointed out, these goals should be achieved within his lifetime. We do therefore think that any post-2015 goals need to be time-bound and propose 2030 as the target year. This also allows countries to effectively plan for 2030 and allows for effective monitoring of progress and achievements as well as failures.
The one issue that is not emphasized strongly enough in the context of an increasingly risky and uncertain future is resilience. It is indispensable that resilience – and not just climate-resilience – will be at the core of any sustainable food system. We therefore would like to see under point c. “All food systems are sustainable and resilient”.
We believe that to the goals proposed by the Zero Hunger Challenge the targets can be negotiated within the relevant intergovernmental bodies while it is crucial that indicators are not negotiated but proposed by the entities with the necessary technical knowledge. This shall be done in an open and transparent process, taking into account the inputs of all relevant stakeholders.
We believe that the goals should be global but that the process allocates resources to allow for region- and country-specific adoption and implementation plans to be carried out.
We would also point to the fact that agriculture and food systems are part of the climate change problem, and also very much affected by it. Looking forward, there is a need to emphasizes that agriculture and food systems alone cannot deliver on all the sustainability dimension without the other sectors strong commitment to transformation towards sustainability (greenness too. The task of meeting food and nutrition security is the responsibility of all sectors, should we be successful.
[1] http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/a0056e/A0056E03.htm
158) Noemie Gerbault, ORU-FOGAR Core group sécurité alimentaire, France
Pour information, l’Organisation des Régions Unies FOGAR (ORU-FOGAR) et son Core group « sécurité alimentaire » se sont engagés, dans la Déclaration finale du 2e Sommet des Régions du monde pour la sécurité alimentaire, à développer, d'un point de vue politique et opérationnel, une approche territoriale des systèmes alimentaires. Cela se matérialise par la mise en œuvre de Systèmes Alimentaires Territoriaux (S.A.T.) dans les Régions et leurs territoires d’influence pour faire la démonstration par la preuve de l’impact et de l’efficacité de tels systèmes pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle des populations et anticiper les crises et favoriser la résilience.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
182
Le prochain Sommet des Régions du monde pour la sécurité alimentaire, prévu en 2014, présentera l’impact de la mise en œuvre d’une approche territoriale de la sécurité alimentaire dans 10 Régions du monde.
159) Benjamin David Patterson, International Development Law Organization, Italy
Theme 2:
One of the greatest challenges in the current food and nutrition security debate is government accountability.
A key element is the ability of citizens to hold their governments accountable to national Constitutions, the national laws to address food security, and international legal obligations and commitments made through various international instruments and at forums such as the UDHR, ICESCR, WFS, WFS: five Years Later and the annual CFS. The last decade saw a paradigm shift in the rights-based approach to food and nutrition security, and also to development programming by various implementing agencies.
Particularly, the 2002 WFS: five years later brought to fore a fundamental human right – the right to adequate food.
Currently, over 20 countries have constitutional protections for the right to food. There is visible growth in domestic legal frameworks that give explicit legal recognition to the right to food, and a corresponding growth in jurisprudence of right to food cases at the domestic, regional and international levels.
More work is needed to build capacity of key actors such as activists, legal professionals, government policy makers, legislators and judges at national levels, and also subnational levels in Federal systems. This includes in research, education and awareness, training, assessment and monitoring, to institutionalize the right to food and strengthen access to justice for violations of national laws, national Constitutional protections, and international law. IDLO and partners will publish a research report on the justiciability of the right to food in March 2013. Further information:
http://www.idlo.int/english/Media/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?IdNews=382 Link attached: IDLO Draft concept note on the right to food justiciability study
160) International Dairy Federation, Belgium
The International Dairy Federation (IDF) appreciates the opportunity to contribute to this FAO/WFP consultation on Food and Nutrition Security in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. The International Dairy Federation is the pre-eminent source of scientific and technical expertise for all stakeholders of the dairy chain.
Food is the primary source of the nutrients needed to sustain life, promote health and normal growth, and it is the essential component that links nutrition, agriculture and ecology within the ecosystems framework to assure human productivity. The inter-relationships among food security, agricultural and food systems, ecosystems and the environment call for an interdisciplinary approach for implementation of successful interventions.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
183
To improve the nutritional status of individuals and populations, cultural, agricultural, economic, and social conditions requires better integration. Many nutrient deficiencies are concurrent and interrelated, and solutions also must be integrated. Careful consideration of the inter-relationships between nutrition and human health, agriculture and food production, environmental health, and economic development is needed to adequately address hunger, food security and malnutrition challenges particularly as the global population continues to expand.
Please consult the IDF full submission to see how dairy and the dairy chain contributes to work on these challenges, by providing a naturally nutrient rich food, and by improving its industry’s environmental performance.
Please check link here
161) Noemie Gerbault, ORU-FOGAR Core group sécurité alimentaire, France
[Original contribution in French]
Pour information, l’Organisation des Régions Unies FOGAR (ORU-FOGAR) et son Core group « sécurité alimentaire » se sont engagés, dans la Déclaration finale du 2e Sommet des Régions du monde pour la sécurité alimentaire, à développer, d'un point de vue politique et opérationnel, une approche territoriale des systèmes alimentaires. Cela se matérialise par la mise en œuvre de Systèmes Alimentaires Territoriaux (S.A.T.) dans les Régions et leurs territoires d’influence pour faire la démonstration par la preuve de l’impact et de l’efficacité de tels systèmes pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle des populations et anticiper les crises et favoriser la résilience.
Le prochain Sommet des Régions du monde pour la sécurité alimentaire, prévu en 2014, présentera l’impact de la mise en œuvre d’une approche territoriale de la sécurité alimentaire dans 10 Régions du monde.
162) Coalición Clima, Congde, Campaña Derecho a la Alimentación Urgente, Spain
Please find attached the document compiled by various Spanish civil society organizations belonging to various alliances:
Group of development organizations belonging to Coalición Clima http://www.coalicionclima.es/
Working Group on Food and Agriculture within the National Spanish Platform of NGOs http://www.congde.org/
Campaña Derecho a la Alimentación Urgente http://www.derechoalimentacion.org/webkwderecho/index.asp
Please see link here
163) Urgency,France
Theme 2 Food for Cities Consultation: what works best?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
184
Some very quick thoughts to contribute to this consultation on behalf of Urgenci, the global Community Supported Agriculture network:
The issue of eliminating food insecurity is intricately linked to the issue of who controls access to food production and distribution, which in turn are linked to climate change. This can be either a vicious circle, as is currently the case, with increased industrial monoculture and global food distribution, commodification and speculation on food, and greenhouse gas emissions.
The alternative is to build a virtuous circle; it is a community-empowered paradigm shift that involves genuine food sovereignty: local small-scale food production and short/direct distribution chains combined with decommodification, control over and access to land for growing food. This leads to positive knock-on effects, whereby Local Authorities preserve existing green belt from speculation, support access to land through schemes ranging from Community gardens to urban planning of rezoning (decontaminating) land from brown-field sites for urban agriculture, encouraging the use of public space for free horticultural spaces, legislation that facilitates community supported agriculture and solidarity purchasing groups where risks/benefits are shared. Grow-it-yourself trends are also an important part of the puzzle, and can involve roof-top, balcony and indoor gardening (sprouting seeds, an excellent source of protein etc). Community Supported Agriculture is one of the most relevant ways to establish these virtuous circles, irrespective of whether we are talking about rural or urban areas.
Local Authority involvement is the relevant level of decision-making in food growing, spatial planning and actions to both fight climate change and preserve/reclaim land for local agriculture in all areas, particularly in preserving it from speculation in urban and peri-urban districts. To this end, the Voluntary Guidelines on land tenure and governance adopted by the CFS constitute a powerful tool.
These latter alternatives are all low-impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions (agro-ecology, organic, local..)
It is very important to take cultural differences into account. (For example in Africa Urgenci has been developing a different model from the common CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) as known in Europe, N. America and Japan…). No one size fits all. What is important is the community empowerment, awareness-raising, capacity building as to the benefits of fresh local organic food, which is not necessarily an expensive alternative. It can also involve community food banks and local cooperative-owned processing units.
The key to much of this is trust. Many people go to supermarkets because they trust them. This is a recent sociological phenomenon, and is built around a lifestyle of convenience food/shopping rather than an understanding of nutritional values or seasonality. Historically we have trusted the farmer/family who grew our food. We knew where it came from (back garden, local suppliers etc). It is not necessary to elaborate here on these issues. What is important is to rebuild the knowledge of what food is, how it is grown, and for children to develop this awareness through (urban) school gardens. This sort of programme is generally very successful, irrespective of the continent or country.
164) Samir Chaudhuri, Child in Need Institute (CINI), India
Theme 2: What works best?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
185
1. Targeting nutrition inputs during the most critical period of the life cycle i. e the first 1,000 days of life.
Child in Need Institute (CINI) has adopted this crucial strategy to get poor women and their family members provide support and care during pregnancy and the first two years of life. Working with trained women who have good communication skills, selected from the locality, help to bring about crucial behavior change to ensure exclusive breast feeding and addition of locally available supplements during 6 months to two years. Accessing health care during this period for commonly treatable childhood ailments from local health facilities is vital to cut the interaction between infection and malnutrition - the biggest cause of malnutrition and ill health during this period.
2. Working with women self help groups.
Many of these groups now have access to microcredits and bank loans in India, but what they do not have is the wisdom to invest their earnings in child care, good food, safe water and sewage disposal. Frequent interaction with trained workers make this possible.
3. Through a rights based approach, ensure access and utilisation of existing services provided by the government. Even the poor when empowered with knowledge are able to make the best use of existing services.
4. Ensure convergence of locally available services so that a well nourished and healthy child is sent to school, provided protection so that s/he do not end up as a child labour or is trafficked.
5. CINI in India works very closely with state and national government to add value to existing government programmes to benefit children in the areas of nutrition, health, education and protection in an integrated manner.
These are the insights gained by CINI since it was founded by me in 1974 in Kolkata, India. Visit www.cini-india.org to know more about our integrated approach through establishing "Child and Woman Friendly Communities" (CWFC).
165) Rahul Goswami, Centre for Communications and Development Studies, India
Dear FSN moderators and friends,
Thank you for opening up this matter, which in short is the removal of hunger. You have provided three themes for guidance, and the views we provide will find listeners (or an audience) on two occasions during 2013, in March and in September. In the provision of views, it may be advisable to observe a few personal preferences and here, before fulfilling the themes, are mine: that action to end hunger is not a "post-2015" target or goal and is a generation overdue; that, as you have stated, "many food security and nutrition policies, strategies and action plans have been written over the past number of years" and we see more, and not less, hunger and malnutrition stalk our communities which substantially dilutes my belief that such strategies and action plans work for the grater common good; that, as you have also stated, "close to 870 million people around the world remain undernourished and do not have access to a healthy diet" and indeed as long as the transformation of 'raw' - or primary - agricultural produce continues as the main activity of food processing and packaging industries, this total number will rise at an appreciably faster clip than the growth rate of population does.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
186
Theme 1:The most important lesson that has been there to learn, freely and independent of political or economic pressure, about the MDGs is how invisible they have been to those whose work has contributed to their limited success, and by the same token, their invisibility to many of those whose 'development', millennially related or otherwise. Why has this been so? In part I see this as a result of the MDGs (individual goals and the group of goals) having remained a subject of negotiation between inter-governmental agencies and relevant ministries and departments in countries. The MDGs did not, indeed they remained distant from, the sub-national scoreboards and locuses of learning they could quite easily have become. That is but one aspect. A second, more powerful on the ground, is that eradication of hunger is almost always in developing countries held up as an example of the ability of a certain regional form of politics to deliver these most basic of welfare measures - hence the commonality of countries together striving to achieve MDGs was treated as and remained a 'foreign' idea useful only insofar as it could be included as a subject for a seminar, and otherwise mostly irrelevant in the field.
As for the second question in theme 1, concerning a remaining challenge (I will omit the 'opportunity' part, because the 'for whom' question which is an accompaniment is a topic by itself), there is a lesson to be learnt from the sector of climate change, wherein several strategies on climate change and agriculture have been designed generally independently of agriculture sector policies (which in turn are designed independent of what small cultivating households, or smallholder farmers, require), as if the task of managing the two-way stream of communication between cultivator and climate researcher is left to the state and therefore tends more often than not to be incomplete.
Climate change is now and upon us, but these are recurrent questions the member states of the FAO (and of the UN) have faced since 1945, with the end of World War Two. If you read the passage below, it helps illustrate how little has changed from one point of view, and how much has, from another, far more destabilising point of view:
"...some of the basic problems that have afflicted humanity since the beginning of society remain unsolved. Large parts of the world still suffer from hunger, and the threat of famine is ever present. Today we are confronted by a new challenge in human history which, if not faced, could sweep away the little progress we have so far achieved - this is the upward surge of world population at a rate never experienced before."
That was the fourth director-general of the FAO, B. R. Sen (of India), and he said these words during his inaugural address at the First African Regional Conference held in Lagos, Nigeria, on 3 November 1960. Sen appealed "… to our Member Governments not only to discuss their problems, but also to avail themselves of the knowledge and skills FAO has acquired over many years in the fields of agricultural development and food production and distribution." He said: "While the increase of agricultural productivity must remain the sine qua non of economic development of the less developed regions, the importance of education, public health and institutional factors must be recognised in any plan of balanced economic development."
As you see, it has been over 50 years and few of the deficits recorded then have been banished. How could they have been? In the years - the decades - since 1960, many a development theory has been advanced only to be discarded, but not before the worst of them were thrust upon poor folk and choiceless urban dwellers, as they are now.
Theme 2:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
187
The economic and political landscapes in which we attempt to address hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition are not ours to command. Were they, I dare say we would not to include food and hunger in a post-2015 line-up of urgent needs. No matter what the moth-eaten rhetoric claims, there is little or no democratic control we have (we as practitioners or researchers or facilitators; farmers as farmers) over economic decision making. There are very few such genuinely socialist societies left. Is it possible to wrest control of our societies out of the tight and noisome grasp of the political-industrial combine and its scientist-servants? At country level it is extraordinarily difficult, and it is not for nothing that the 99% versus the 1% agitations have foundered in many parts of the world, for the machinery of the state is usually more aligned to the political and business elite than it is to the proletariat (and the cultivating proletariat).
Hence it has become a relatively far more simple matter now than it was a generation earlier to influence especially the youth and the new adults (let us say the 15-30 age group) and this is why so many working people continue, despite the evidence they encounter in their lives every day in the form of rising food prices and a shrinking democratic space, to be influenced by pro-capitalist ideas. Can the promise of organic agriculture practices using native or indigenous systems of knowledge help usher in a new democratic systems that represents the majority, a society based on human need and sustainability? That ought to be the sort of question and studied responses we in the FSN feed into the FAO for (at least) the remainder of the troubled life of the MDGs.
If there is an encouraging trend it is this: that there appears to be growing recognition that farmers need to be recognised as co-creators of knowledge in agriculture, encouraged and respected for the innovations they develop. We do know that promoting agriculture for development presents a serious challenge of managing multiple agendas and collective interests of formal and informal institutions (the state, the private sector, and civil society). Their inter-relationships, their obligations, processes, mechanisms, and differences are just as important, as pointed out to us so succinctly in "The Top 100 Questions of Importance to the Future of Global Agriculture" (International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 2010) which emphasised that "it is precisely at this interface that governance, economic investment, power and policy making converge and play their respective critical roles."
Theme 3:Through this network and allied networks, we do know that a number of pilot actions are under way concerning the points raised in this theme. At the level of global discussion (inter-agency, inter-government, inter-disciplinary) there is ample strategising, but at the level of the local will we still know little about what this rapid surge in attention to climate change and agriculture will mean in practice? Who defines the agenda - is it cultivating communities or is it administrators who come under repeated political and business pressure? On what basis and on whose terms are particular approaches and technologies favoured as a result? Are interventions driven by particular donors or commercial interests? What happens to the needs of those cultivating households most vulnerable to the effects of climate change?
Studying the official documents of the FAO Council (it sat for its 145th session in early December 2012), it is difficult to reconcile the FAO's stated intention as an organisation with the burgeoning number of new partnerships and alliances that the FAO is striking every week. However, there is a different clarity concerning political commitment.
"Political commitment is a prerequisite to appropriate policies being put in place, and investments made to enable people to realize their right to adequate food, both in the short term through various social protection instruments, and in the medium and long term, through measures that empower poor and vulnerable people to be self-reliant, resilient, food secure and well-nourished. Political
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
188
commitment not only refers to the responsibility of government, but also of civil society, the private sector and the wider development community." So said a relevant paragraph from the Council's "Reviewed Strategic Framework and Outline of the Medium Term Plan 2014-17" document. Thus we see there are three kinds of actors other than the private sector. Why then is such importance being accorded to one kind?
Some of the answer, a small part, can be found in a qualifying statement of the same document: "Agricultural and food systems are becoming more complex. More than 80 percent of the total value of food production corresponds to the industrial and commerce sectors. These food systems are also more concentrated and integrated into global value chains which provide new opportunities for small farmers and new challenges from the point of view of maintaining fair and transparent markets."
Thank you and regards, Rahul Goswami
166) Jennie Bever Babendure, Arizona State University and Friends of the WHO Code, United States of America
Lack of adequate breastfeeding is a significant contributor to malnutrition, disease and death all over the world, but especially in developing countries. Unfortunately, lack of regulatory enforcement of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes has allowed infant food manufacturers to prey on mothers and babies, convincing mothers that artificial baby milk is equivalent or better than their own breastmilk. When mothers are convinced by formula company marketing to forgo breastfeeding, they not only put their own health and that of their children at significant risk, they also accrue the significant economic burden of paying for a commercial product that is far beyond the means of a large portion of the world. Parents are soon unable to afford to feed their children the expensive artificial baby milk products touted by glossy ads, but have missed the important window to establish breastfeeding. As a result, artificial baby milk is watered down with unclean water, or infants are fed the cheapest substitute available such as powdered coffee creamer. These infants, who could have thrived on their mothers’ free breastmilk, instead suffer from disease, malnutrition and death due to the aggressive and predatory marketing of artificial baby milk. The best way to go about addressing this would be to support the creation of laws and enforcement of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. Created by the World Health Organization in 1982, this Code was developed to protect infants and children from malnutrition at death at the hands of aggressive infant formula marketing. However, even the WHO itself has turned a blind eye to the Code in recent months as its Pan American Health Office accepted donations from Nestle, one of the worst violators of the Code. Increased breastfeeding needs to be a major focus of the Millenium Development Goals as it has been shown to greatly impact child and adult health for decades. It is a sustainable, portable, affordable solution to infant nutrition that nearly all mothers have access to. Supporting legislation and enforcement of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes would be a significant step that the UN could make to reduce malnutrition all over the world. I sincerely hope that the Millenium Development Goals will include supporting breastfeeding mothers by reducing the influence of infant formula marketing around the world. For more information, please watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PBtb-UDhEc
167) World Vision International United States of America
On behalf of the nutrition, food security, livelihoods, agriculture and advocacy teams at World Vision International, I would like to share a finalized position paper that covers the present theme on hunger,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
189
food and nutrition security. It addresses topics pertaining to all three questions raised by this e-consultation (lessons learned from the MDGs, recommendations for a way forward, and suggested targets and indicators).
Emily Levitt Ruppert, M.S., Ph.D.Senior Policy Advisor, Maternal & Child NutritionNutrition Centre of ExpertiseWorld Vision International
168) D. Hien Tran Landesa, United States of America
Secure rights to land, particularly for women, are a critical but often overlooked factor in achieving household food and nutrition security. Data analyzed by the OECD Development Centre show that countries where women lack rights or opportunities to own land have on average 60% more malnourished children than countries where women have some or equal access to land.
Secure land rights can lead to increased household agricultural productivity and production by 1) providing the ability and incentive to invest in improvements to the land; 2) increasing opportunities to access financial services and government programs; and 3) creating the space needed – one without constant risk of losing land – for more optimal land use. This enhances household food and nutrition security through two avenues: increased food production for consumption and increased incomes permitting the purchase of more and better quality food. In both ways, secure land rights can help moderate the impact of food price volatility on poor rural households. Indeed, the Zero Hunger Challenge already recognizes the need to improve tenure security and empower women to achieve its objective of a 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income.
The link between secure rights to land and household food and nutrition security is more pronounced when women have secure land and property rights. With secure rights, women gain improved status and have greater influence over household decisions. Studies show that this can translate into improved nutrition for women and their children. In Nepal, research (Allendorf 2007) demonstrates that the likelihood that a child is severely underweight is reduced by half if the child’s mother owns land.
Secure rights to “microplots” of land, plots as small as one-tenth of an acre, can protect against household food insecurity and improve nutrition. A study (Prosterman 2009) in the Indian state of Kerala revealed that the value of microplot production was the most “consistent positive predictor of child nutrition.” Landesa has seen this in our own work (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie8jBEWdNLQ). Land tenure security, particularly for women, can thus also help achieve the Zero Hunger Challenge objective of zero stunted children less than 2 years old.
Improved land governance and political commitment to policies and programs that support land tenure security are critical. This is particularly true with respect to women’s land rights, which can be disadvantaged by formal legal or customary laws, or are not enforced due to structural, cultural, or other factors. As the world weighs options for improving food security, we must include one of the most promising elements for addressing the needs of the world’s hungry: secure land rights.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
190
169) Simon Vilakazi Economic JusticeNetwork of the Fellowship of Christian Councils in Southern Africa, South Africa
The above objectives are good. However, they do not say anything about making land available to landless people to enable them to produce food which in turn should result in the achievement of the objectives themselves.
Secondly, the objectives do not touch on the important issue of governments. I would like to suggest that there is a need for an objective that point to the governments.
170) Action pour le Développement Durable au Sahel Niger
[French version]
Nous vous remercions pour nous faire fait participer à cette consultation d’importance capitale pour notre organisation, Action pour le Développement Durable au Sahel (ADDS- BONKANEY), pour notre pays et enfin pour la sous région sahélienne.
Comme vous le savez à mesure que nous nous rapprochons de 2015 fixée, pour la réalisation des objectifs du millénaire pour le développement (OMD), nous sommes réellement pessimistes, car comme vous le savez certains indicateurs ne font que se dégrader en région sahélienne en général et au Niger en particulier.
Les fréquences des crises alimentaires et nutritionnelles sont devenues plus rapprochées car les causes sont multiples, au niveau de l’exploit agricole la terre à elle seule n’arrive plus à nourrir le paysan qui la cultive et cela pour plusieurs raisons dont entre autre la sécurité foncière, le manque d’intrants, ou même des calamitées naturelles dont particulièrement la sécheresse.
S’agissant des mesures, les objectifs, les buts et les indicateurs requis pour parvenir à la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle et éradiquer la faim après 2015, il nous semble que tous acteurs doivent participer aux débats afin de parvenir des politiques, stratégies et plans d'action consensuels pour enfin arriver à éradiquer la faim dans le monde .
Enfin pour ce qui est de nos expériences sur les 03 thématiques nous vous le ferions parvenir avant la clôture de la consultation.
Veuillez agréer cher Monsieur nos salutations les plus distinguées
SEYDOU OUSSEINI Agronome
Secrétaire General de L'ONG - ADDS
Action pour le Développement Durable au Sahel
[English version]
Thank you for us to participate in this consultation is critical to our organization, Action for Sustainable Development in the Sahel (ADDS-BONKANEY), for our country and finally under the Sahelian region.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
191
As you know as we get closer to 2015 set for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), we really pessimistic, because as you know some indicators are only worsen in the Sahel region in general and Niger in particular.
The frequencies of food and nutritional crises have become closer because the causes are multiple-level exploit agricultural land alone can no longer feed the farmer who cultivates and this for several reasons, among other security land, lack of inputs, or even natural calamitées which particularly drought.
With regard to measures, objectives, goals and indicators required to achieve food and nutrition security and eradicate hunger after 2015, it seems that all players must participate in debates to achieve policies, strategies and plans action to finally reach consensus to eradicate hunger in the world.
Finally, regarding our experiments on the 03 themes we would arrive before the end of the consultation.
Dear sir please accept our best regards
SEYDOU OUSSEINI Agronome Secrétaire General de L'ONG - ADDSAction pour le Développement Durable au Sahel
171) Claudio Schuftan PHM, Viet Nam [second contribution]
Is the Gap in Policy Processes towards better Food Security and Nutrition Interventions Mainly a Gap Between Knowledge and Action?Food and nutrition issues get little policy attention from decision-makers. The lack of action is not due to a lack of knowledge by the latter. Other gaps are at the root - gaps that denote a deliberate choice of not attending to food and nutrition matters. It is ultimately power relations that affect policy choices. It is here contended that policy processes can only be fully understood if analyzed politically. Consciousness raising and social mobilization are indispensable to influence policy processes. Research organizations have hardly engaged in this consciousness raising; most of them are rather conservative. They think that if decision-makers have more and better knowledge they will indeed take urgently needed decisions; but they never go against their own interests. What is missing, and is argued in favor-of here, is the need for structural changes that address the basic causes of preventable hunger and malnutrition by organizing pressure from below; thus the importance of empowering beneficiaries.The issues at stake are here analized in a point-counter-point format.
Point 1:As most nutrition colleagues would agree, the right food and nutrition policy decisions are not being made in a world where malnutrition is still a serious public nutrition problem and where a host of options for action exist. It is fitting to ask for the reasons for this and for perhaps, the overall lack of policy attention that food and nutrition issues get from decision-makers.
Counter-point 1:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
192
Some researchers in the food and nutrition community are indeed looking for ways to reduce the gap between knowledge-and-action. It is here counter-argued that it is not a lack of policy attention to the knowledge/action gap that is at the root of the problem. Instead, it is a deliberate ignoring of the food and nutrition problem as long as it is not the direct cause of social unrest. (To state the obvious, those who have the power are not those who have the problems). The real gap therefore is not between knowledge-and-action. It is not either a lack of political will. It is a deliberate choice of not attending to these matters if they are not jeopardizing the stability of the system controlled by those who hold the power. The current gap, if looked at as a knowledge gap, most decidedly exists, but is of little significance, because policy is only minimally affected by knowledge alone.It is political factors that define what the policies to be attended to, actually are - and it is ultimately power relations that affect policy choices. In short, policy processes can only be fully understood if analyzed politically.As regards beneficiaries genuine participation in decision-making, communities do not engage at all in the policy making process, because they do not have a voice; communities can thus not influence policy. They need to be empowered to do so in order to claim their rights.How interactions between active civil society and various levels of government affect policy development and implementation is a chapter in the writing. The more militant civil society organizations have indeed achieved some real changes and there is much to be learned from those organizations. We have to help budding civil society organizations to achieve the clout (power) to demand needed changes and to monitor their implementation.Consciousness raising and social mobilization are indispensable in influencing policy processes; this is best done using the human rights-based approach that organizes claim holders to demand policy changes from duty bearers. (Note that ‘stakeholders’ is a terrible neutral term!)
Point 2:Existing food and nutrition research organizations often engage in attempts to influence policy makers by communicating their findings to them and by contributing new information to policy fora.
Counter-point 2:Historically, however, most of these research organizations have hardly engaged in the consciousness raising and social mobilization of the ‘needed type’ at least not very proactively. In all honesty, most of them are rather conservative organizations, as for example those in the Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research institutions (CGIAR). Just communicating and contributing new information to decision-makers will not achieve the changes needed unless this information is more on the political side of changing things.
Point 3:These organizations claim there is a disconnection between the spheres of policymaking and of science-and-knowledge; that one needs to break ground methodologically to engage policy makers as decisions are made.
Counter-point 3:Actually, this has been one of the problems of these food and nutrition research organizations for years: they try to connect policy with science-and-knowledge and not with politics. Do they really think that if decision-makers have more and better knowledge they will make decisions against their power interests? In their guts, politicians already know what scientists want to tell them...they may not have quantified information, but they know. The need is not to break ground methodologically, but to break ground politically.
Point 4:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
193
These organizations still often call for more interdisciplinary research.
Counter-point 4:It is definitely not a dearth of interdisciplinary work that has hampered progress. Almost all the hurdles are political and ideological. If one puts together multidisciplinary teams of conservative researchers, the results and recommendations will be conservative and will just tinker with the immediate causes (and will do so strictly within the system). What is being argued here is the need for structural changes that address the basic causes of preventable hunger and malnutrition. (See www.humaninfo.org/aviva)
Point 5:Moreover, many of these organizations call for setting up social protection and safety nets.
Counter-point 5:The time is overdue to stop talking about safety nets! This is precisely what leads to tinkering with changes within the system. The ongoing neo-liberal global restructuring creates a mess and food and nutrition professionals are supposed to pick up the pieces? Just in order that the poor and marginalized do not revolt? Who is cheating here? We need to stop victimizing the poor and throwing them bread crumbs. What about, to begin with, changing the system that makes safety nets for the poor required?
Point 6:The CGIAR organizations claim they have proven their ability to communicate effectively to bring certain actors together to promote "action".
Counter-point 6:Yes, but what are they communicating? Rice with iron or with vitamin A? Doom forecasts for 2020? The horrible impact of AIDS on agriculture and on the economy? The need for improved agro-forestry? Super staple food species? Is that enough? Does this imply that those who will listen and do some of it will then go on to make structural changes? If one brings actors together to promote action, what meaningful and sustainable action will they promote, will this be the political action needed?People overlook the fact that some governments do place a high priority on reducing hunger and malnutrition. Take Vietnam, China, Costa Rica, Cuba, and Kerala State in India. What is the common denominator among them? Political determination. Period. This is not just an often used ‘cliché’. So, the bottom line that affects policy-makers’ choices is the politics of it all, i.e., political processes reign.Epilogue:
To sum up, food and nutrition issues appear on the public agenda only when it is in the interest of the decision-makers or when international pressures become unbearable. Only occasionally does one see this happening when leaders have a clear mind and determination about the importance of food and nutrition in the development process. The only factor that ultimately works is organized pressure from below; thus the importance of empowering and mobilizing beneficiaries.Even current legislation and legal systems do not affect action to reduce hunger and malnutrition to any great degree. This includes the promotion of the right to adequate food and nutrition. Laws may be passed, but are not enforced. National leaderships often feel content with having passed the legislation, and do not care much about its enforcement. Legislation is also frequently in response to international pressures and not to a felt need. Only mobilizing civil society and providing them with the necessary teeth to monitor the laws’ enforcement will make things work.What can these research organizations then do to create the conditions for actions that will effectively reduce hunger and malnutrition in developing countries? They need to go through a profound process
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
194
of revising and redefining their vision and their mission so that they can genuinely adopt the right to adequate food and a nutrition-based approach in all that they do. They are simply not looking at food and nutrition as a human right even as they may have made oral and written pronouncements to that effect.
They need, for instance, to engage more on operations research that tries out different approaches to maximize the social mobilization of claim holders to negotiate and demand their rights from duty bearers at different levels. In fact, research related to all areas of implementing the right to adequate food and nutrition-based approach is of high priority.As a general rule, if research findings have high social mobilization potential, they should be popularized directly to the beneficiaries to empower them to claim their rights. 'Selling' research findings to decision-makers may continue bringing us more of the same disappointments. Policy makers do not always really (want to) listen...unless beneficiaries put pressure on them.
So, where is the gap? …and don’t you think this is a key issue for us to ponder in the post-2015 era?
Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh [email protected]
172) Roy Anunciacion, People's Coalition on Food Sovereignty, Philippines
People’s Coalition on Food Sovereignty:
Submission to consultation on hunger, food and nutrition security
The World Bank claims it has achieved Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 1 - to halve extreme poverty and hunger (measured as living on less than US$1.25 per day) - yet 43% of the world continue to live on less than US$2 per day.[1] This amount is insufficient to meet basic needs – food, shelter, health care and education – and it is clear a large proportion of the world continues to live in poverty. However, they are not considered sufficiently poor and are left outside of the work of the MDGs.
The MDGs were unambitious, and hugely flawed. The limitations in the MDGs in the exclusionary process of its development, the Northern-led, box-ticking manner of implementation and the total failure to address the root causes of development issues has meant that little substantial progress has been achieved. The post-2015 development agenda needs to commit to real action to tackling the root causes of poverty and hunger in the Global South. Rhetoric and surface-level targets must be abandoned in favour of more ambitious targets based on human rights. The new development framework should tackle and eliminate the structural causes of inequality that drive hunger and poverty. In the face of ongoing multiple crises, the post-2015 agenda presents an opportunity to introduce substantive structural reforms which will address the root causes of these crises,
Theme 1
Key lessons from MDGs
Challenges and opportunities in the coming years
There is a need to recognize the inherent limitations of the MDGs to ensure that the same problems are not repeated in a Post-2015 agenda.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
195
· Goal setting: MDGs were unambitious even on targets that could be achieved by 100%. Some targets such as halving hunger glosses over the fact that the right to food is a basic inalienable right for all people and not only half the population. Basic human rights could be achieved for all if the MDG framework took into account the issues related to good governance and the need for sustained and comprehensive support from developed countries. The Post 2015 framework needs to be more ambitious in its targets, set concrete goals on good governance and set an accountability framework for developed countries,
· Process: the MDGs were developed through an undemocratic process without consultation with the target people. This is reflected in the goals failure to call for the eradication of poverty and hunger, but rather it’s halving in accordance with standards which are manipulated to produce favorable results. The Post-2015 agenda must be developed through a truly democratic, consultative multi-stakeholder processes led by Southern governments and Southern CSOs.
· Limited vision: the MDGs were short-sighted. They proposed grand objectives without connecting problems to root causes. As a result the MDGs have not had meaningful, sustainable impacts on their intended beneficiaries. The post-2015 agenda must address the systemic causes of inequality that mean many live in wealth, yet nearly two-thirds of the global population face poverty and hunger everyday – despite the World Bank’s claim that MDG 1 (to halve extreme poverty and hunger) has been met.
· Donor-led: The MDGs were developed and led by donor institutions and governments. Developing countries were seen as implementers through their executives only which resulted in little awareness and participation in MDG processes by other stakeholders. As a result the MDGs have become a scorecard through which donor countries and institutions evaluate the ‘improvements’ made by Southern countries. The post-2015 agenda must be Southern-led and be characterized by a true multi-stakeholder process.
· Accountability mechanisms: The MDGs held state executives accountable to donors. The executive bodies of national governments were expected to report on MDG progress to international institutions and major donor countries, ignoring the people supposed to benefit from the work of the MDGs. There was not accountability mechanism which centered on the people themselves holding their own governments to account. As such the MDGs became a box-ticking exercise, a development agenda disconnected from Southern people.
Theme 2
What works best?
Future key issues?
PCFS member organizations are comprised of grassroots farmer and fisherfolk organisations, and their representative civil society organisations. They have everyday practical experience of the struggles facing farmers. They have identified the following critical issues affecting domestic food security, and driving hunger and poverty especially in the rural areas where the majority of global poor and hungry are located.
1. Land: without land a farmer cannot produce food, fisherfolk have no access to fisheries resources and a base to keep their home and equipment, and pastoralists cannot feed their livestock. Two (2)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
196
increasingly critical and interconnected issues are land loss and landlessness perpetuated by inequitable distribution of land and land grabbing. Concentration of land in a few hands leads to many people being unable to grow enough food to sell on the market or support their families. Laborers on large-scale farms commonly experience terrible labor conditions and have no food security. At the same time, urban populations are dependent on local food production for affordable, nutritious and culturally appropriate food - their access to food is threatened by land grabs. Land grabbing is taking place in Africa, Asia and Latin America due to the demand for biofuels and agricultural production for export to meet the food security demands of other countries.
2. Climate Change: food producers need to adapt to climate change. Rural, Southern communities are the most vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change, including reduced favorable conditions for crop growth. These impacts have been brought about by historic pollution by Northern governments and businesses. Despite the urgency of genuinely addressing climate change in agriculture, international institutions and governments continue to debate mitigation strategies in agriculture hinged on markets for profits. Northern countries should provide finance and support to Southern Countries to adapt to the effects of climate change especially in agriculture.
3. Fisheries: the fisheries sector has critical economic and social importance - it is the highest value traded food, and more than half the global population depend on fish products for 15% of their protein intake, while 10 – 12% of the global population are dependent on the sector for their livelihood. But fisheries resources are in a state of crises. Wild fish stocks are close to total collapse. Millions of people face being thrown into poverty and hunger. Yet the fisheries sector continues to be forgotten in plans to combat hunger and poverty.
The common experience across these three critical issues is that industrial agri-businesses and industrial fisheries are leading unsustainable environmental and social exploitation of resources, and driving poverty. These businesses are grabbing resources to meet demand for export products while displacing local small-scale food producers and exploiting local labor forces. Their actions are driving climate change, environmental degradation, and hunger and poverty. PCFS member organizations have seen that small-scale food producers can produce enough food to meet global needs while using environmentally and socially sustainable methods.
Theme 3
Objectives targets and indicators
The UN Secretary-General has put forward several proposed objectives for the Post-2015 agenda under the Zero Hunger challenge. PCFS remains concerned about the proposed objectives as they reflect the same structure and objectives used in the MDGs. They thus pose inherent limitations in addressing the structural causes of poverty and hunger.
Limitations of Zero Hunger challenge objectives:
a) 100% access to adequate food all year round: This objective does not guarantee that people will have access to nutritious or culturally appropriate food. Urban poor communities increasingly consume cheap, unhealthy food products, which do not meet nutritional requirements. Furthermore, guaranteeing ‘access’ to food does not mean that it will be affordable.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
197
b) Zero stunted children less than 2 years old: malnutrition in children affects growth into adulthood and must be tackled at an early stage. This target should be increased to zero stunted children less than 5 years old.
c) All food systems are sustainable: What is sustainable? This should be qualified: food systems need to be ecologically, environmentally and socially sustainable. We need to abandon industrial, mono-cropping farming practices which exhaust the soil and pollute the environment with heavy dependence on chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The most important component in food production systems – farm laborers and farmers – must be prioritized.
d) 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income: the barriers to smallholder productivity are not the farmers themselves but the external factors limiting their production. Promoting and supporting the interests of small-scale farmers and fisherfolk must be coupled with the rejection of destructive large-scale industrialized agriculture and fisheries. The objective fails to recognize how land grabbing and measures favouring industrial agri-business are pushing out small-scale farmers, alongside factors limiting smallholder farmers, such as climate change, dependence on chemical fertilizers and pesticides brought by their international promotion, and the appropriation of land.
e) Zero loss or waste of food: the bulk of loss and waste of food takes place upon reaching markets in Northern countries in industrial agriculture. Rejection of unattractive but edible food and waste of food is common. This objective must recognize this distinction to ensure that this objective is adequately addressed.
In the Post-2015 agenda on hunger and poverty, PCFS strongly recommends that:
· Food sovereignty should be objective number one. Food sovereignty should be the key policy framework to inform the post-2015 agenda on hunger and poverty. It promotes a framework of food production systems based on:
o Adequate, safe, nutritious and culturally appropriate food for all,
o Food production that is environmentally and socially sustainable
o Agro-ecology as a means to increase food production in environmentally and socially sustainable methods
o Ensures local ownership and control of food production systems guaranteeing domestic food security
o Support small-scale farmers and fisherfolk, women producers, workers and secure access to (and protection of) the water, land, soils, biodiversity, and other resources upon which food security depends.
o Agrarian reform in order to secure worker’s, farmer’s and rural people’s democratic access to land, water resources and seeds, as well as to finance and infrastructure
· Process and Accountability Mechanisms: The post-2015 agenda must be based on substantive and true consultation with the people and it should be led by Southern governments and southern CSOs. It should include a participatory multi-stakeholder approach emphasizing support for Southern movements, and their inclusion as leaders of the in post-2015 processes. While there are initial steps
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
198
towards this direction in the form of this open consultation, there are still substantial barriers to southern participation in the processes. As stages of the consultation process are commonly slated to be held in the Global North, they are rendered inaccessible for many Southern organizations. For example, the second stage of this consultation process to be held in late January or early February 2013 open to all stakeholders will be held in Rome, Italy is only accessible for organizations located nearby or with substantial resources. Grassroots organisations from the South do not have the resources to self-finance to ensure their participation in these processes. Ensuring their participation is a challenge in this regard.
The Post-2015 agenda should feature accountability mechanisms that people can use to hold their governments to account. The structure for accountability mechanisms should move away from donors to ensure that the people themselves have primary control over the formation and implementation of these goals. As representatives of the people, CSOs should feature prominently in accountability mechanisms, using their sectoral and thematic expertise to hold governments and institutions to account on behalf of the people. Southern Governments need to put in place permanent consultative processes which include all stakeholders and ensures their regular input and feedback on the framing of policy and its implementation.
Policy coherence: There is a proliferation of policy documents aimed at addressing poverty and hunger. The post-2015 agenda on hunger and poverty should complement pre-existing policies on hunger and poverty to ensure there is effective, coordinated action. This should not be another action plan which will divert resources away from existing actions and policies. The Post-2015 agenda should also recognize the inter-relations between different issues, for example between poverty and hunger, agriculture and environmental sustainability.
[1] World Bank, An Update to the World bank’s estimates of consumption poverty in the developing world, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPOVCALNET/Resources/Global_Poverty
173) Richard Grant, United Kingdom
Theme 1 What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Realising that we must accept that we MUST REVERSE the ever rising world POPULATION. If we fail it will be our children who will suffer - is that what we want? We must gain general acceptance to have no more children that will replace ourselves. In that way we show our love for ours and everyones children.
174) Marta Andrich, Argentina
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Los principales desafíos y oportunidades para lograr la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en los próximos años
Afirmamos que existe un nuevo paradigma que se expresa en la agenda post 2015 y que ya se perfila en el documento de Río+20, El futuro que deseamos y en el concepto de “economía verde” (PNUMA, 2011). Nos trasmite el mensaje: “es posible”, es posible un desarrollo sostenible.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
199
Se agrega, además, la frase con inclusión social, que la podemos rastrear cuando en los indicadores del primer objetivo del desarrollo del milenio, “erradicar la pobreza extrema y el hambre”, se incluye, a partir de 2008, “el trabajo decente”. De esa manera se unen pobreza y hambre con la necesidad de superar el hambre con dignidad y de hacerlo dentro del carácter interrelacionado que tiene el enfoque de derechos humanos.
En el título se presenta el tema de los desafíos. También podemos describir las realidades que se proyectan cambiando el matiz y tal vez, con una mirada menos optimista, hablar de limitaciones1 o condicionamientos para lograr la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional.
Seguramente para mensurar la realidad se pueden volcar una cantidad de variables en modelos matemáticos. Sin embargo, este artículo corresponde a una mirada enmarcada en las interpretaciones propias de las ciencias sociales.
Para recortar la amplitud de la propuesta del título se puede pensar en algunos desafíos que provienen el entorno físico y otros que tienen su origen en las relaciones sociales. Pero es imposible una separación neta: lo ambiental está impregnado de influencias antropogénicas y de similar modo los fenómenos sociales también admiten la cuantificación en la medición por indicadores y estadísticas.
En lo físico habría que analizar cada uno de los recursos necesarios para la producción de alimentos a lo largo de todo su ciclo vital. Sin duda el suelo, el agua y sus componentes, son condicionantes fundamentales. Las oportunidades, en este caso, probablemente vengan de la ciencia, la tecnología y especialmente de la genética.
En lo humano, se destaca el problema de la distribución y de las asimetrías en las relaciones entre las personas y grupos. Sería necesario indagar además, qué ocurre en cada una de las etapas de toda la cadena alimentaria. Pero habrá que enfrentar, también, lo que nos plantean hechos como el aumento de la población, las migraciones, la seguridad, la gobernanza global y hasta las nuevas maneras de comunicarse.
Hablo desde mi región, América Latina, que es la mayor exportadora de alimentos del planeta y se calcula que puede producir lo suficiente como para alimentar a una población tres veces mayor de la que tiene (CEPAL/FAO/IICA2, 2012). Es lícito deducir, entonces, que la causa principal de la subnutrición, en este caso, radica en la mala distribución de los alimentos y en la falta de acceso de los más pobres, de las poblaciones vulnerables a estos bienes y a otros como salud, capacitación, educación, vivienda, empleo. Recordamos la necesidad de ubicar el alivio de la pobreza como objetivo central. Lo que nos ocurre es un ejemplo evidente de que, desde el enfoque de los derechos humanos, todos los derechos están interrelacionados y es una muestra clara de los compromisos que genera la palabra inclusión, que para el caso del derecho al alimento se traduce en: el alimento, pero con inclusión3.
Por lo tanto la pobreza es un limitante.
En multitud de documentos internacionales se percibe una preocupación generalizada ante la perspectiva de tener que alimentar a 9.000 millones como pronostica la demografía, por ser esta la población que se calcula va a haber para 2050. Es preciso producir más alimentos y hay que hacerlo de un modo sostenible.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
200
Si tuviera que elegir otras seis limitaciones diría que, tal vez, las más importantes provengan del suelo, del agua, de la energía, de la tecnología, la infraestructura y de la inversión y el capital financiero. Solo me propongo hacer algunos comentarios sobre las dos primeras. Todos estos elementos también son objeto del obrar humano, de políticas y relaciones normativas, de ahí la complejidad del análisis. Por otra parte, si nos colocamos en el plano global, políticas y normativas se despliegan dentro de un sistema actual de producción, de consumo y de disposición final, que es insostenible y está movido por el lucro y la avaricia.
“La estrategia es producir más bienes con menos tierras, más cosechas por gota de agua, más rendimiento por unidad de insumos de fertilizantes y pesticidas, más alimentos por unidad de energía, y más biomasa por unidad de Carbono y de huella medioambiental” como se dijera en la COP 10 de la UNCCD, (Rattan Lal, 2011) a esto podríamos llamar nuestro desafío.
Según (Pigretti et al.2012 p 2). “Los científicos que estudian los cambios climáticos, la degradación de los recursos naturales y la desertificación aún se preguntan cuál es el límite de explotación que podrá soportar este planeta”. Estos son los límites físicos que señalan la posibilidad material y social del goce del derecho al alimento.
Comenzaremos por algunos limitantes que condicionan el uso del suelo:
La tenencia de la tierra
Las declaraciones finales y planes de acción de las reuniones internacionales, aunque no sean vinculantes, tienen la riqueza y la virtualidad de mostrar hacia dónde se dirige la agenda internacional. Al analizar esos documentos es notable observar cómo se ha impuesto la expresión tenencia de la tierra que destaca la relación de la persona con la tierra prescindiendo del tipo jurídico de relación y englobando una amplia gama de situaciones. Se afirma al mismo tiempo y de forma unánime que es necesario que haya seguridad en la tenencia.
Por “tenencia de la tierra” se entiende un conjunto de reglas (formales o de tipo consuetudinario) que definen la relación entre los individuos y la tierra misma.
A través de ella se definen los derechos de acceso que tienen las personas a determinados recursos naturales y la forma de respaldo que estas relaciones presentan a nivel social.
Los sistemas de la tenencia y administración de tierras determinan quiénes y bajo qué condiciones van a ejercer los derechos de propiedad, de uso y de control sobre este recurso. Es preciso analizar estas relaciones y que no haya duda sobre quiénes son los titulares legítimos. Esto es fundamental para el derecho a la alimentación, como también proteger a esos titulares frente a las acciones y las infracciones que puedan amenazarlos y que les impidan disfrutar de estabilidad en la tenencia.
En la actualidad, la tenencia sola no es suficiente para acceder a la seguridad alimentaria, sino que, debe ir acompañada del acceso al agua, a la electricidad, al transporte y a algún tipo de infraestructura.
La noción de seguridad en la tenencia varía según las diferentes culturas. No siempre se trata de la seguridad jurídica. Los derechos sobre la tenencia de la tierra pueden originarse en el reconocimiento de una comunidad a que alguien posea determinada tierra. Lo que importa es que alguien tenga acceso a la tierra y al efectivo goce del derecho y no tema ser despojado, o si lo fuera, que pueda contar con los recursos para recuperarla. Esto es fundamental para la seguridad alimentaria.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
201
La FAO ha elaborado las Directrices voluntarias sobre la gobernanza4 responsable de la tenencia de la tierra, la pesca y los bosques en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria nacional (FAO, 2012). Estas Directrices tienen como objetivo, según el Director de General de la FAO, Graziano Da Silva: “fomentar la seguridad de los derechos de tenencia, garantizar el acceso equitativo a la tierra, la pesca y los bosques como medio para erradicar el hambre y la pobreza, respaldar un desarrollo sostenible y mejorar el medio ambiente”.
Las Directrices fueron ratificadas oficialmente por el Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial el 11 de mayo de 2012.
Apropiación La expansión de la frontera agrícola y la preocupación por la seguridad alimentaria han promovido el surgimiento de otro problema. No se puede ignorar que existe una competencia por la apropiación de recursos naturales. Lo que no sólo compromete a los recursos sino también la situación de los más débiles.
Se puede producir la apropiación por medio de una inversión, en ese caso, es crítico tener en cuenta que las inversiones no desplacen arbitrariamente a las poblaciones locales de sus propias tierras, ni destruyan su hábitat.
Importa también, tener presente que se generaliza el fenómeno de la adquisición de tierras en gran escala por parte de algunos Estados que buscan colmar un vacío en la disponibilidad de alimentos en sus propios países. Estas dinámicas han incrementado ampliamente los niveles de adquisición y arrendamiento de grandes cantidades de tierras en ciertos países (Luisa Cruz, 2010)
Un estudio conjunto realizado por la FAO, el IFAD5 y el IIED6 reveló la magnitud de dichos contratos de inversión. También hay informes del CFS y del Banco Mundial que estiman que la transferencia de tierras a manos de inversores privados oscila entre 50 y 80 millones de hectáreas. (CFS7, 2011), (World Bank, 2011). Hay, incluso, estimaciones mayores.
Ahora consideraremos la tierra bajo limitantes de carácter físico y antropogénico
Desertificación. Tierras degradadas y suelo bajo presión
Seguramente el convenio internacional en el que el núcleo es la preocupación por el suelo es el Convenio de las Naciones Unidas para combatir la desertificación (UNCCD). En su página web se presenta diciendo que “La desertificación junto con el cambio climático y la pérdida de la biodiversidad fueron identificados como los grandes desafíos para el desarrollo sustentable durante la Cumbre de la Tierra en Río, 1992. Este convenio se estableció en 1994 pero es el único acuerdo internacional legalmente vinculante que relaciona el ambiente y el desarrollo al manejo sustentable de la tierra”, Son 195 los Estados parte de este acuerdo. Como todos los convenios de Río se prolonga en las Conferencia de las partes (COPs).
“Nuestro principal recurso geológico no renovable es la tierra productiva/el suelo fértil”. (UNCCD, COP 10, nov. 2011).
Degradación
• El UNCCD entiende por degradación de tierras la reducción o la pérdida de la productividad biológica o económica y la complejidad de las tierras agrícolas de secano, las tierras de cultivo de regadío o las dehesas, los pastizales, los bosques y las tierras arboladas, ocasionada, en zonas áridas,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
202
semiáridas y subhúmedas secas, debido a los sistemas de utilización de la tierra o por un proceso o una combinación de procesos, incluidos los resultantes de actividades humanas y pautas de poblamiento, tales como:• i) la erosión del suelo causada por el viento o el agua,• (ii) el deterioro de las propiedades físicas, químicas y biológicas o de las propiedades económicas del suelo, y• (iii) la pérdida duradera de vegetación natural;
Según informe del IFPRI (International Food Policy Research) (IFPRI, 2011) El Global food policy report de 2011, mil quinientos millones de personas y el 42% de los muy pobres viven en tierras degradadas. También nos informa que alrededor de un 24% del área agrícola global ha sido afectada por la degradación, lo que hace que disminuyan los rindes en 20 millones de toneladas de grano por año.
Por otra parte y como consecuencia del aumento de la población, la proporción de tierra cultivable per cápita disminuye año tras año.
Todo esto ocurre en un contexto en el que el aumento de la producción de alimentos es imprescindible. Por eso se dice que el suelo está bajo presión. En septiembre de 2011, la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas llamó a construir un mundo sin tierras degradadas y el órgano de la UNCCD pidió cero degradación y la adopción del manejo sostenible del suelo, para lo que se precisan instituciones robustas y participativas.
La preocupación por el suelo no es ajena ni a los convenios ni a los órganos derivados de Cambio Climático (UNFCCC) la preocupación se explica, en este caso, porque el suelo puede actuar tanto como sumidero o a la inversa como emisor de gases de efecto invernadero como claramente se especifica en el Protocolo de Kyoto (art. 3) en el que se comprometen las partes a brindar información verificable sobre el uso de la tierra y los cambios en el uso de la tierra y sobre los bosques (UTCUTS). Este es otro aspecto de la importancia del suelo para que la producción agrícola se realice de un modo sustentable y de este modo asegurar su contribución fundamental para que haya alimentos y continúe habiéndolos.
Ya que hablamos de dos de los convenios de Río 92, parece conveniente prestar atención sobre el tercero, el Convenio sobre Diversidad Biológica en algo que funciona como estimulo y como límite, me refiero a una frase del segundo párrafo del artículo 16 que dice que: En el caso de tecnología sujeta a patentes y otros derechos de propiedad intelectual el acceso a esa tecnología y su transferencia se asegurarán en condiciones que tengan en cuenta la protección adecuada y eficaz de los derechos de propiedad intelectual y sean compatibles con ella.
El estímulo es la retribución y el incentivo a la investigación, el límite es que toda innovación patentada está atada a un beneficio y orienta la investigación a la obtención de una ganancia.
El 4to informe del IPCC, no se trata de un compromiso internacional. Habla desde el conocimiento científico señalando como altamente preocupantes respecto de los suelos, el anegamiento, la erosión, el estrés térmico, estrés hídrico, mayor probabilidad de incendios y el empobrecimiento de las cosechas, problemas que se agravan en los sucesivos escenarios que corresponden a un mayor aumento de la temperatura. Por lo tanto también actúa como limitante la probabilidad de un cambio en los patrones de precipitaciones, de eventos climáticos extremos, sequías, insectos, acidificación de los océanos, derretimiento de glaciares, polución, sobreexplotación de los recursos, desplazamiento y
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
203
extinción de especies y un aumento global de la temperatura. No está en el lenguaje del informe hablar sobre oportunidades. Habla, en cambio de adaptación y de mitigación.
Por ejemplo respecto de la agricultura propone estas medidas de adaptación:
Modificación de las fechas de siembra y plantación y de las variedades de cultivo;
reubicación de cultivos; mejora de la gestión de las tierras (por ejemplo, control de la erosión y protección del suelo mediante la plantación de árboles).
Cambio de pautas de comportamiento, almacenamiento de agua, mejoras tecnológicas.
Algunas mejoras pueden obtenerse mezclando los fertilizantes químicos con los orgánicos, alternando con leguminosas, incrementando la reserva de humedad del suelo.
Las principales causas de la degradación son: la deforestación, el pastoreo excesivo, el consumo de leña, la gestión agrícola deficiente, la urbanización, la industrialización, la erosión hídrica y eólica.
Es necesario mencionar también, entre las causas de la degradación de las tierras y la desertificación, a las presiones del comercio internacional con precios bajos para las materias primas, las coacciones políticas y algunos productos químicos y ciertas tecnologías que obligan a abandonar las buenas prácticas agrícolas
La compactación, es decir la falta de porosidad del suelo es la forma más seria de degradación de la tierra causada por las prácticas de labranza convencional. Inhibe el crecimiento de las raíces. El uso permanente de implementos de labranza, el peso de las ruedas, causan compactación. Para evitarla, se recomiendan neumáticos flotantes. No se manifiesta en la superficie como ocurre con la erosión o la salinización. La labranza cero, que es uno de los componentes básicos de la Agricultura de Conservación, o nuestra siembra directa, es comúnmente recomendada y practicada para el control de la erosión.
Desertificación La Convención de las Naciones Unidas para la Lucha contra la Desertificación (UNCCD) enuncia que «por desertificación se entiende la degradación de las tierras de las zonas áridas, semiáridas y subhúmedas secas resultante de diversos factores, tales como las variaciones climáticas y las actividades humanas».
Las actividades para luchar contra la desertificación incluyen la gestión de cuencas hidrográficas, la conservación del suelo y el agua, la fijación de dunas, programas de repoblación forestal, recuperación de terrenos sobresaturados y salinos, rotación de cultivos, ordenación forestal y de pastizales, y la recuperación de la fertilidad del suelo y de la biodiversidad.
Es muy probable que se concrete una amenaza creciente de sequía grave. Según (UNCCD, 2011). El mundo se enfrenta a la posibilidad de una sequia general en los decenios próximos. Aunque la comunidad internacional no reconoce completamente la posibilidad de este hecho. Se sigue sin ver la importancia que el suelo tiene para la humanidad y que es imperioso prevenir y aprender a adaptarse y a mitigar los cambios. Tanto como conocer cuáles son las políticas y las normas adecuadas para la conservación de los suelos ante los cambios que ya están ocurriendo.
El agua
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
204
Limitantes de carácter social: la demanda
El agua es la llave de la seguridad alimentaria
Tal vez resulte imposible hacer una clasificación como la que intentamos porque los factores humanos se entrecruzan con los que provienen de la naturaleza.
Es netamente social el previsible aumento de la población, la urbanización y probablemente, una mayor prosperidad y sus consecuencias, el mayor uso de energía: y que estos incrementos provocarán, a la vez, un aumento de la demanda de agua. Pero este problema no puede aislarse de las proyecciones que se realizan previendo un aumento de la temperatura y cambios en los regímenes hídricos. Hay que situarlo, teniendo en cuenta conjuntamente las consecuencias que sufrirán la agricultura y la producción de alimentos. Es necesario agregar el factor de la incertidumbre, como nos lo advierte el informe de la UNESCO, 2012 que lleva como título: Manejando el agua bajo la incertidumbre y el riesgo que aconseja, además, pensar todos estos problemas que se presentan con un enfoque global. Es posible que globalmente haya suficiente agua para las futuras necesidades pero esta afirmación esconde el hecho de que existen enormes zonas con escasez de agua.
La demanda de agua se puede desglosar en seis sectores:
Alimentación y agricultura. Este sector es el responsable del mayor consumo de agua. El porcentaje de agua que utiliza este sector oscila entre el 70% y para algunos llegaría a más del 80%.
La energía (Utiliza agua para enfriamiento y en el caso de biocombustibles para la producción).
La industria
Los asentamientos humanos. Para beber, cocinar, limpiar, aseo personal, sanitarios.
La que consumen los ecosistemas.
La que consume la megaminería a cielo abierto. En un proceso en el que el agua se extrae en grandes volúmenes, se utiliza, se contamina muy probablemente por el agregado de sustancias químicas y se desecha. Hay un impacto en el balance total del agua y en la calidad del agua.
Se suele clasificar el agua en:
Según UNEP, CEPAL, Hoekstra et al., 2011
Agua verde: El volumen de agua de lluvia acumulada en el suelo. Agua azul volumen de agua dulce superficial o subterránea Agua gris: volumen de agua contaminada.
El aumento de la demanda se calcula entre el 50% al 70% para el año 2050.
Cada vez preocupa más la huella hídrica y se toma conciencia de la denominada “agua virtual”. El agua virtual es la cantidad de agua utilizada de modo directo para la realización de un bien, producto o servicio
Pongamos un ejemplo de agua virtual. (Según revista ADN agua y medio ambiente, 2012 pp. 2 y 3)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
205
Nos preguntamos cuánta agua se necesita para producir un litro de leche.
Una vaca produce aproximadamente 6000 litros de leche por año. En ese tiempo consume más de 3000 kilos de alimento, que, a su vez necesitan casi 4.000.000 de litros de agua para ser producidos, además de 8000 litros de agua para beber y 2500 más para su cuidado e higiene. Conclusión, para obtener un litro de leche se usan en total 1000 litros de agua virtual.
Una regulación debe tener en cuenta todos estos aspectos Pero además importa decidir la condición del agua, si es un bien público, si es privado. Si hay que internalizar los costos, si es necesario poner un precio al agua (recordamos la tragedia de los comunes de Garrett Hardin, en Science 1968) o sólo a su distribución, si convienen los mercados de derechos de agua.
Ante la perspectiva de la escasez de agua, según Pigretti et al., 2012. p.10
“Existe un auténtico interés por reasignar el uso de los recursos del agua, a fin de obtener su mejor aprovechamiento. Nadie puede manifestarse en oposición a una reasignación de caudales”.
El dilema está en una “reutilización mediante un procedimiento que no afectara derechos adquiridos pero que permitiera una reutilización adecuada”.
En el plano internacional El 28 de julio de 2010, a través de la Resolución 64/292, la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas reconoció explícitamente el derecho humano al agua y al saneamiento, reafirmando que un agua potable limpia y el saneamiento son esenciales para la realización de todos los derechos humanos.
Septiembre 2010 el Consejo de Derechos Humanos, Resolución A/HRC/RES/15/9.
Siguiendo la resolución de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, esta resolución del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de la ONU afirma que el derecho al agua y al saneamiento es parte de la actual ley internacional y confirma que este derecho es legalmente vinculante para los Estados
Contaminación
Las ciencias naturales nos explican lo que le ocurre a los seres vivos de un río cuando curso de agua recibe residuos peligrosos. Pero sólo las ciencias sociales pueden ayudarnos a comprender por qué nuestra sociedad tolera que alguien contamine nuestros ríos. (Antonio Elio Brailovsky, 2012).
Existe una amenaza creciente para la sostenibilidad de fuentes de aguas superficiales y subterráneas por la alteración antrópica de uso del suelo en cuencas de aporte.
Las causas: Prácticas agrícolas no conservacionistas, deforestación, uso de agroquímicos y cambios en uso del suelo, perturban balance hídrico y condiciones de calidad de las fuentes.
La Industria, asimismo es causa de contaminación de las fuentes.
La contaminación del agua está en aumento como resultado del crecimiento económico, por la práctica de la agricultura intensiva, por la relocación de las empresas que buscan los países con normativas o controles menos exigentes. Lamentablemente mucha información no se trasmite o se subvalúa, por eso es difícil de mensurar su impacto.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
206
La contaminación se refiere generalmente a los productos químicos (arsénico, cadmio, zinc, cianuro, cobre, manganeso, níquel, plomo, ácidos). Pero también hay que incluir entre los mayores contaminantes a los microbios, nutrientes, fertilizantes, metales pesados, químicos orgánicos, petróleo, sustancias cloradas e incluso la temperatura que al aumentar la del agua actúa como un contaminante. Los agentes patógenos y los nutrientes (nitrogenados) que consumen el oxígeno del agua. Las aguas servidas, efluentes industriales, la minería, los diques de cola.
Estos son algunos de los problemas asociados con el agua y que pueden hacer peligrar la seguridad alimentaria. En muchos casos han mejorado las regulaciones. Pero deben ir acompañadas de una toma de conciencia sobre la gravedad del problema que produzca un cambio cultural y que existan instituciones sólidas.
La OMS publicó en 2009 guías de la calidad del agua potable (OMS, 2009).
Economía verde
En este documento, (Río + 20, El futuro que queremos) cada vez que se mencione “economía verde” deberá entenderse que se habla del concepto completo “economía verde en el contexto del desarrollo sostenible y la erradicación de la pobreza”
La economía verde es la que mejora el bienestar del ser humano y la equidad social, a la vez que reduce significativamente los riesgos ambientales y las escaseces ecológicas. En su forma más básica, una economía verde es aquella que tiene bajas emisiones de carbono, utiliza los recursos de forma eficiente y es socialmente incluyente UNEP/LAC-IG.XVIII/3.
La OECD define así la economía verde
• “Economía verde significa promover el crecimiento económico en tanto se pueda asegurar que los activos naturales continúan proporcionando los recursos y los servicios ambientales en los que se fundamenta el bienestar”.
Definición de la UNEP (PNUMA) de economía verde
• “Es aquella que resulta en una mejora del bienestar y de la equidad social y al mismo tiempo reduce significativamente los riesgos ambientales y la escasez ecológica. En su expresión más simple es una que emite poco carbono que usa eficientemente los recursos y es socialmente inclusiva”.
Es una postura optimista, nos dice que es posible. (Deseo recordar que la posición oficial del gobierno argentino fue no a la economía verde).
Veamos qué dice una postura crítica:
La encontramos en el artículo sobre “Dos grandes desafíos contemporáneos: el control corporativo sobre la alimentación y la nutrición y la falta de un enfoque en los determinantes sociales de la nutrición” (Claudio Schuftan y Radha Holla, 2012). Finalmente, debemos comprender que los dos principales desafíos presentados en este artículo – el control corporativo sobre la nutrición, y la falta de un enfoque en los determinantes sociales de la nutrición- no cambiarán sólo con paliativos. Llaman determinantes sociales a las causas estructurales del hambre, como la distribución inadecuada de
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
207
ingresos, el desempleo, la falta de acceso a la educación, servicios sanitarios, saneamiento y recursos productivos, y la discriminación racial.
Tal vez las ideas nucleares sean:
• Adoptar un enfoque basado en los determinantes sociales de la nutrición y el concepto de la soberanía alimentaria en lugar de la seguridad alimentaria,• Rechazar el modelo de participación del sector privado por ser una parte interesada en los procesos de debate y diálogo que tienen por objeto el bien público, así como en la toma de decisiones. Explican que: “La principal parte interesada es el público general, que posee ciertos derechos, mientras que el papel del sector privado es el de titular de obligaciones”.
Si se desenvuelve esta afirmación se encuentra un sí a la participación de los titulares de derechos en el diseño, la implementación y el monitoreo de todos los proyectos y programas. Han quedado distinguidos claramente los verdaderos titulares de los derechos, por un lado y por otro los responsables de obligaciones.
Destacan que aunque es fácil fijar objetivos, los procesos de importancia vital para alcanzar tales objetivos fueron relegados.
Comentario: Reconociendo que existen determinantes sociales a las causas estructurales del hambre, entiendo que eso no significa que haya que llevar a cabo una política de igualación, sino, que es necesario reconocer que los actores sociales tienen distinto peso y diferentes obligaciones y para usar una expresión habitual en los tratados internacionales que tienen obligaciones “comunes pero diferenciadas”.
Significa también que debe haber una correcta asignación de recursos.
Y que, en palabras del papa Benedicto XVI en el Angelus del Domingo Gaudete, ,2012 “La justicia pide superar el desequilibrio entre quien tiene lo superfluo y quien carece de lo necesario”.
Bibliografía
• ADN, agua y medioambiente.”Pensar el agua de otra forma”. Año 3 – Número 12. Pp. 2 y 3. Independencia Gráfica & Editora Buenos Aires. Argentina. ISSN 1853-1989.• Brailovsky Antonio Elio, 2012 Comentario al libro Ésta, nuestra única Tierra. Consultado en correo electrónico, [email protected] 20/11/12.• Cepal, 2010. Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio. Informe 2010. Antonio Prado. Secretario ejecutivo adjunto. “El progreso de América Latina y el Caribe hacia los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio – Desafíos para lograrlos con igualdad”.• Cepal, 2012 Estudio económico de América Latina y el Caribe. Publicación de las Naciones Unidas. ISBN: 978-92-1-221071-1 • ISSN impreso: 0257-2176
E-ISBN: 978-92-1-055366-7 LC/G.2546-P • Número de venta: S.12.II.G.3Copyright © Naciones Unidas, octubre de 2012. Todos los derechos están reservados. Impreso en Santiago de Chile • 2012-825.
• CEPAL/FAO/IICA, 2012. Respuestas de los países de América Latina y el Caribe al alza y volatilidad de precios de los alimentos y opciones de colaboración. Boletín Número 1/2012. Boletin_12.pdf
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
208
• Cruz, Luisa, 2010. Derecho a la Alimentación (ESA) Documento elaborado por el Equipo del Derecho a la Alimentación, Dirección de Economía del Desarrollo Agrícola (ESA) perteneciente al Departamento de Desarrollo Económico y Social, en estrecha colaboración con la División de Medio Ambiente, Cambio Climático y Bioenergía (NRC) perteneciente al Departamento de Gestión de Recursos Naturales y Medio Ambiente de la FAO, con motivo de la creación de las Directrices voluntarias para la gobernanza responsable de la tenencia de la tierra y los recursos naturales. Hoekstra, Arjen Y, Ashok K. Chapagain, Maite M. Aldaya, Mesfin M. Mekonnen, 2011. The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard ISBN: 978-1-84971-279-8.• IFPRI, 2011. El Global food policy report. 2011 global food policy report / International Food Policy Research Institute. title: Global food policy report Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-89629-547-6 (alk. paper)
1. Nutrition policy. I. International Food Policy Research Institute. II. Title: Global food policy report. TX359.A12 2012 363.8’62—dc23. Washington. DC.• OMS, 2009. Manual para el desarrollo de planes de seguridad del agua: metodología pormenorizada de gestión de riesgos para proveedores de agua de consumo. ISBN: 978 92 4 356263 6.• Pigretti, Eduardo A., Dino Luis Bellorio Clabot y Luis A. Cavalli, 2012 Derecho Ambiental de Aguas. Lajouane. ISBN 978-987-1286-55-3.• PNUMA, 2011. Hacia una economía verde: Guía para el desarrollo sostenible y la erradicación de la pobreza - Síntesis para los encargados de la formulación de políticas. www.unep.org/greeneconomy• Rattan Lal, (Director of the Carbon Management and Sequestration Center at Ohio State's Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center) Nobel Peace Prize Certificate from IPCC. Cita Extraída de su conferencia magistral pronunciada en la Reunión de Alto Nivel de la COP-10 de la CNULD; Changwon, 18 de octubre de 2011. • Río+20, 2012 El futuro que queremos (borrador cero). Elaborado por las Naciones Unidas.• Schuftan Claudio y Radha Holla, 2012. En Observatorio del derecho a la alimentación y a la nutrición. ¿Quién decide sobre la alimentación y la nutrición a nivel mundial? Estrategias para recuperar el control. “Dos grandes desafíos contemporáneos: el control corporativo sobre la alimentación y la nutrición y la falta de un enfoque en los determinantes sociales de la nutrición”. p. 24. ISBN: 978-3-943202-11-3.
1 Damos a limitación el sentido de que se trata de eso que impide que algo pueda expandirse indefinidamente.2 IICA Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura.3 Obviamente aludo a “desarrollo sostenible, con inclusión social”. Como tanto se insistiera en el documento final de Río+20, El futuro que queremos.4 Sobre gobernanza todavía no hay uniformidad de criterios. La idea central es que la gobernanza trasciende al gobierno e incluye organizaciones de la sociedad civil y del sector privado. (PNUD) Se vincula con la legitimidad y la calidad del ejercicio del poder y se extiende hacia arriba cediendo competencias a órganos comunitarios y hacia abajo incluyendo actores sociopolíticos públicos y privados. Se asocia con buen gobierno, con mejores prácticas de gobierno. Afirma The rule of law.5 IFAD: International Fund for Agricultural Development.6 IIED: International Institute for Environment and Development. 7 CFS: Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial.
[English translation]
The main challenges and opportunities for achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
209
We affirm that there is a new paradigm stated on the post-2015 agenda, already outlined in the document from Rio +20, The future we want and the concept of "green economy" (UNEP, 2011). It conveys the message"it’s possible", a sustainable development is possible.
We should also add “with social inclusion”, as the indicators of the MDG-1 (eradicating extreme poverty and hunger) include, since 2008, the expression "decent work" . Thus, poverty and hunger are linked with the need to overcome hunger with dignity and to do so within the interrelated nature that has the human rights approach.
The title of the topic introduces the various challenges. We can also describe the realities that are presented changing the nuance, and perhaps –with a less optimistic view-, discuss the constraints (*1) or restrictions to achieving food and nutrition security.
Probably, for measuring reality we can use a lot of variables in mathematical models. However, this article uses an approach within the interpretations of the social sciences.
To reduce the scope of the proposal in the title, we can think in some challenges from the physical environment and others rooted in social relations. But a clear separation is impossible: the environmental aspects are full of anthropogenic influences, and in a similar way, social phenomena admit also quantification in measurement by indicators and statistics.
Regarding the physical aspects, we should analyze each of the resources needed for food production throughout its full life cycle. Definitely, soil, water and its components are fundamental conditions. The opportunities in this case, come probably from science, technology and especially genetics.
On the human side, we highlight the problem of distribution and asymmetries in the relations between people and groups. It would be necessary to investigate further what happens at each stage of the food chain. But we must address, too, facts like population growth, migrations, security, global governance and new ways of communication.
I speak from my region, Latin America, which is the largest food exporter in the world and is estimated to be able to produce enough to feed a population three times larger than the present one (CEPAL/FAO/IICA (*2), 2012). It is permissible to infer, then, that the main cause of undernutrition, lies in the unequal distribution of food and lack of access of the poorest and vulnerable populations to food and other goods like health, training , education, housing and jobs. We remind the need to place poverty alleviation as a central goal. What happens to us is an obvious example that -from a human rights approach- all rights are interrelated, and is a clear demonstration of the commitments generated by the word “inclusion”, which in the case of the right to food means: “food, but with inclusion” (*3).
Hence, poverty is a constraint.
In many international documents we perceive a widespread concern at the prospect of having to feed 9,000 million people, as population projections forecast by 2050. We must produce more food and must do it in a sustainable way.
If I had to choose six other limitations, I would say perhaps that the most important come from soil, water, energy, technology, infrastructure and investment and financial capital. I intend only to comment on the first two. All these elements are also the subject of human action, policies and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
210
regulatory relations, hence the complexity of the analysis. Moreover, if we put ourselves at the global level, policies and regulations are deployed within an existing system of production, consumption and disposal, which is unsustainable and is driven by profit and greed.
"The strategy is to produce more goods with less land, more crops per drop, more output per unit of input of fertilizers and pesticides, more food per unit of energy, and biomass per unit of carbon and environmental footprint" as said in the UNCCD COP 10, (Rattan Lal, 2011). We might call this our challenge.
According to Pigretti et al.2012 p 2:. "Scientists who study climate change, natural resource degradation and desertification, are still wondering what is the limit of the exploitation that can withstand this planet" These are the physical limits that frame the possibility of physical and social enjoyment of the right to food.
Let’s begin with some limitations that affect land use:
Land tenure
The final declarations and action plans of international meetings, although not binding, have the fortune and the virtue of showing to where the international agenda is moving. When analyzing these documents, is noteworthy to observe how the term “land tenure” has gained strenght, highlighting the relationship of the people with the land regardless of its legal nature and encompassing a wide range of situations. The need for the security of tenure is simultaneously and unanimously stressed.
“Land tenure" means a set of rules (formal or customary) that define the relationship between individuals and the land.
It defines the access rights that people have to certain natural resources and how these relationships are supported at social level.
Land tenure and administration systems determine who -and under what conditions- will exercise the rights of ownership, use and control over this resource. It is necessary to analyze these relationships and to make clear who are the legitimate owners. This is key to the right to food, as well as protecting those right holders in front of the actions and violations that can threaten them and prevent them from enjoying stability of tenure.
Currently, tenure alone is not enough to ensure food security, it must be accompanied by access to water, electricity, transport and some kind of infrastructure.
The notion of security of tenure varies according to different cultures. It is not always about legal security. Land tenure rights can originate in the recognition of a community of someone owning a certain piece of land. What matters is that someone has access to land and the effective exercise of the right and hasn’t to fear being robbed. And if this happens, having the resources to regain the land. This is essential for food security.
FAO has developed the Voluntary guidelines on responsible governance (*4) of the tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security (FAO, 2012). These Guidelines are intended -according to FAO Director-General, Graziano Da Silva- to: "promote security of tenure rights, ensuring equitable access to land, fisheries and forests as a mean to eradicate hunger and poverty, support sustainable development and improve the environment".
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
211
The Guidelines were officially ratified by the Committee on World Food Security on May 11, 2012.Land grabbing. The expansion of the agricultural frontier and the food security concerns have promoted the emergence of another problem. You can not ignore that there is competition for the appropriation of natural resources. What jeopardizes not only resources, but also the situation of the weakest.
Appropriation may occur through an investment. In that case, it is critical to note that the investments do not displace local populations arbitrarily from their own land, or destroy their habitat.
It is also important to be aware of the phenomenon of widespread large scale land grabbing in some countries seeking to fill a gap in the availability of food at national level. These dynamics have greatly increased the levels of acquisition and leasing of large tracts of land in certain countries (Luisa Cruz, 2010)
A joint study conducted by FAO, IFAD(*5) and IIED (*6) revealed the extent of such investment contracts. There are also reports by the CFS and the World Bank estimating the transfer of land to private investors between 50 and 80 million hectares. (CFS (*7), 2011), (World Bank, 2011). There are even higher estimates.
We analyze now land under physical and anthropogenic constraints
Desertification. Degraded land and soil under pressure
Probably the international agreement in which the core is the concern for soil is the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). The introduction on its website says: "Desertification along with climate change and loss of biodiversity were identified as the major challenges for sustainable development during the Earth Summit in Rio, 1992. This convention was established in 1994, but is the only legally binding international agreement linking environment and development to the sustainable explotation of the earth ". There are195 state members of this agreement. Like all Rio Conventions, it is extended into the Conference of the Parties (COPs).
"Our greatest non-renewable geological resource is productive land/fertile soil". (UNCCD COP 10, November 2011).
Degradation
• “Land degradation” is defined under the UNCCD as “reduction or loss of the biological or economic productivity and complexity of rain fed cropland, irrigated cropland or range pasture, forest and woodlands resulting, in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas, from land uses or from a process or combination of processes, including processes arising from human activities and habitation patterns”, such as:• i) soil erosion caused by wind or water,• (ii) deterioration of the physical, chemical and biological or economic properties of soil, and• (iii) long-term loss of natural vegetation;
According to a report from IFPRI (International Food Policy Research) -the Global Food Policy Report, IFPRI, 2011), 1 500 million people and 42% of the very poor live on degraded land. IFPRI also informs us that about 24% of global agricultural area has been affected by degradation, which causes decreased yields by 20 million tons of grain per year.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
212
Furthermore, and as a result of population growth, the proportion of arable land per capita decreases year after year.All this occurs in a context in which the increase in food production is essential. That’s why we say that soil is under pressure. In September 2011, the United Nations General Assembly called for building a world free of degraded lands and the UNCCD called for zero degradation and the adoption of sustainable land management. Strong and participatory institutions are needed for this.
The concern for soil is also addressed in the conventions and agencies derived from Climate Change (UNFCCC). In this case is because the soil can act both as a sink or as a source of greenhouse gases, as clearly specified in the Kyoto Protocol (art. 3) in which the parties make a commitement to provide verifiable information on land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF). This is another aspect of the importance of soil for agricultural production to be carried out in a sustainable way and thereby ensure its key contribution to food supply.
Now that we mention two of the Rio 92 Conventions, it seems appropriate to pay attention to the third one, the Convention on Biological Diversity in a detail that works as a stimulus and as a limit. I mean a sentence of the second paragraph of Article 16 which states that: “In the case of technology subject to patents and other intellectual property rights, such access and transfer shall be provided on terms which recognize and are consistent with the adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights”.
The stimulus is the reward and the incentive to research, the limit is that any patented innovation is tied to a benefit and orients research at obtaining a gain.
The 4th IPCC report is not an international commitment. Its source is scientific knowledge, pointing out its concern regarding soils, flooding, erosion, heat stress, water stress, greater likelihood of fires and the impoverishment of the crops, problems that are compounded in successive stages corresponding to a further increase in temperature. So, acts also as limiting the likelihood of a change in rainfall patterns, extreme weather events, droughts, insects, ocean acidification, melting of glaciers, pollution, overfishing, and species extinction and displacement and global temperature increase. The report do not discuss opportunities. Instead, it talks of adaptation and mitigation.
On agriculture, for example, it proposes the following adaptation measures:
Modification of sowing and planting dates and crop varieties;
Relocation of crops, improved land management (eg, erosion control and soil protection by planting trees);
Changing behavior patterns, water storage, technological improvements;
Some improvements can be obtained by mixing organic with chemical fertilizers, alternating with pulses, increasing soil moisture reserve;
The main causes of degradation are: deforestation, overgrazing, fuelwood consumption, poor agricultural management, urbanization, industrialization, water and wind erosion;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
213
Among the causes of land degradation and desertification we should also mention the pressure of international trade with low prices for raw materials, political coercion and certain chemicals and technologies that require abandoning Good Agricultural Practices (GAP);
Compaction, ie the lack of soil porosity, is the most serious form of land degradation caused by conventional tillage practices. Ii inhibits the growth of the roots. Continuous use of tillage tools and the weight of the wheels, cause compaction. To avoid it, floating tires are recommended. It doesn’t appear on the surface as erosion or salinization. Zero tillage, which is one of the basic components of conservation agriculture (or our direct seeding) is commonly recommended and practiced for erosion control.
Desertification.- The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) states that "desertification means land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various factors, including climatic variations and human activities".
Efforts to combat desertification include watershed management, soil and water conservation, dune fixation, reforestation programs, reclamation of waterlogged and saline land, crop rotation, forest and grassland managemente, and of soil fertility and biodiversity recovery
According to UNCCD (2011) a growing threat of severe drought will likely materialize. The world is facing the possibility of widespread drought in the coming decades, though the international community does not fully recognize this possibility. They still do not see the importance of soil for mankind and that it is imperative to prevent and learn to adapt and mitigate changes. As well as knowing which are the appropriate policies and standards for the conservation of soils in front of changes that are already happening.
Water
Social constraints: demand
Water is the key to food security
It may be impossible to classify as we want because human factors intersect with those from nature.
It is clearly foreseeable the increase in population, urbanization and probably greater prosperity and its consequences: increased use of energy: that will lead, in turn, to an increased demand for water. But this problem can not be isolated from the projections made by providing for an increase in temperature and changes in water regimes. We must consider the consequences on agriculture and food production. We must add the factor of uncertainty, as warns the UNESCO report (2012) titled: “Managing water under uncertainty and risk” . The report advices to address all these problems with a comprehensive approach. It is possible that there is enough water globally for future needs, but this statement hides the fact that there are large areas with water shortages.
Water demand can be broken down into six sectors:
Food and agriculture. This sector is responsible for the largest amount of water consumption. The percentage of water used is between 70% and more than 80%.
Energy (Uses water for cooling and for the production of biofuels).
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
214
Industry
Human settlements: drinking, cooking, cleaning, personal hygiene, health.
The ecosystems
Big open-pit mining projects. Is a process in which water is pumped in large amounts, and very likely contaminated by the addition of chemicals, and discarded. There is an impact on the overall water balance and water quality.Water is usually classified in:
According to UNEP, ECLAC, Hoekstra et al., 2011
Green Water: volume of rainwater accumulated in the soil. Blue water: volume of fresh surface water or groundwater Grey water: volume of contaminated water.
The increased demand is estimated between 50% to 70% by 2050.
There is a growing concern about water footprint. We are becoming aware of the so-called "virtual water". Virtual water is the amount of water used directly for the making of a good, product or service.
Let’s use an example of virtual water. (According to ADN magazine Water and Environment, 2012 pp. 2 and 3)
We wonder how much water is needed to produce one liter of milk.
A cow produces about 6 000 liters of milk per year. During this time consumes more than 3,000 kilos of food, which in turn takes almost 4 million liters of water to be produced, along with 8,000 liters of drinking water and 2,500 more for their care and hygiene. Conclusion, to obtain a liter of milk, a total of 1,000 liters of virtual water is used.
A regulation must take into account all these aspects but is also important to decide the condition of the water, if it is a public good or if it is private. If you have to internalize the costs, if it is necessary to put a price on water (remember the tragedy of the commons by Garrett Hardin in Science 1968) or only for distribution. And if water rights markets have advantages.
Faced with the prospect of water shortages, according Pigretti et al., 2012. p.10
"There is a genuine interest to reallocate the use of water resources in order to get the best management. Nobody can oppose a reallocation of flows ".
The dilemma is a "reusing by a process that does not affect vested rights, but enabling proper reuse".
At the international level, on July 28, 2010, through Resolution 64/292, the United Nations General Assembly explicitly recognized the right to water and sanitation, reaffirming that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to the realization of all human rights.
September 2010 the Human Rights Council, Resolution A/HRC/RES/15/9.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
215
Following the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, the UN Council on Human Rights resolution states that the right to water and sanitation is part of modern international law and confirms that this right is legally binding for States
Polution
Natural sciences tell us what happens to living things when a watercourse receives hazardous waste. But only social sciences can help us understanding why our society tolerates someone to pollute our rivers. (Antonio Elio Brailovsky, 2012).
There is a growing threat to the sustainability of surface water and groundwater sources, because of human alteration of land use in basins.
The causes: are: non conservation agricultural practices, deforestation, use of pesticides and changes in land use, that disrupt water balance and quality conditions of the sources.
The industry also causes pollution of sources.
Water pollution is increasing as a result of economic growth, by the practice of intensive agriculture, for the relocation of companies looking to countries with less stringent regulations or controls. Unfortunately a lot of information is not transmitted or is undervaluated, so it is difficult to measure its impact.
Pollution generally refers to chemicals (arsenic, cadmium, zinc, cyanide, copper, manganese, nickel, lead, acids). But you also have to include among the biggest polluters microbes, nutrients, fertilizers, heavy metals, organic chemicals, petroleum, chlorinated substances and even water temperature rise. Pathogens and nutrients (nitrogen) that consume oxygen from the water. Sewage, industrial effluents, mining, tailing dams.
These are some of the problems associated with water that could endanger food security. In many cases regulations have improved. But they must be accompanied by a raising awareness of the seriousness of the problem to produce a cultural shift and the creation of strong institutions.
WHO issued guidelines in 2009 on drinking water quality (WHO, 2009).
Green Economy
In this document, (Rio + 20, the future we want) every time you mention "green economy" we must understand that we are speaking of the whole concept "green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication".
The green economy is the one that improves human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological shortages. In its most basic form, a green economy is the one that has low carbon emissions, use resources in an efficient and socially inclusive UNEP/LAC-IG.XVIII/3.
Definition of green economy by the OECD
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
216
• "Green economy means promoting economic growth as it can ensure that natural assets continue to provide the resources and environmental services on which our well-being relies".
Definition by UNEP
• "It is one that results in improved human well-being and social equity while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. In its simplest expression, a green economy is a low carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive".
It is an optimistic stance, telling us that it is possible. (I recall that the Argentine government's official position was against green economy).
Let's see a critical position:
It is found in the article on "Two big current challenges: corporate control over food and nutrition and lack of a focus on social determinants of nutrition" (Claudio Schuftan and Radha Holla, 2012). Finally, we must understand that the two main challenges presented in this article - corporate control over nutrition, and lack of a focus on social determinants of nutrition- won’t change only with palliatives. The structural causes of hunger are considered social determinants, such as inadequate income distribution, unemployment, lack of access to education, health services, sanitation and productive resources, and racial discrimination.
Perhaps the core ideas are:
• Adopting an approach based on the social determinants of nutrition and the concept of food sovereignty rather than food security,• Rejecting the model of private sector participation for being a stakeholder in the process of discussion and dialogue aimed at the public interest, as well as in decision-making. They explain that: "The main stakeholder is the general public, which has certain rights, while the role of the private sector is being holder of obligations".
If we develop that statement, we find it’s favourable to the participation of rights holders in the design, implementation and monitoring of all projects and programs. On the one hand, the true owners of the rights have been clearly identified, and on the other those responsible for obligations.
They point out that although it is easy to set objectives, the processes vital to achieve these objectives were relegated.
Comment: Recognizing that there are social determinants in the structural causes of hunger, I understand that this does not mean you have to carry out a policy of matching, but we need to recognize that social actors have different weight -and different obligations- and to use a regular expression in international treaties, we can say they have "common but differentiated" obligations.
It also means that there must be an appropriate allocation of resources.
And that, in the words of Pope Benedict XVI at the Angelus on Gaudete Sunday,, 2012 "Justice calls to overcome the imbalance between those who have superfluous things and those who lack the necessary"
References
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
217
• ADN, agua y medioambiente.”Pensar el agua de otra forma”. Año 3 – Número 12. Pp. 2 y 3. Independencia Gráfica & Editora Buenos Aires. Argentina. ISSN 1853-1989.• Brailovsky Antonio Elio, 2012 Comentario al libro Ésta, nuestra única Tierra. Consultado en correo electrónico, [email protected] 20/11/12.• Cepal, 2010. Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio. Informe 2010. Antonio Prado. Secretario ejecutivo adjunto. “El progreso de América Latina y el Caribe hacia los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio – Desafíos para lograrlos con igualdad”.• Cepal, 2012 Estudio económico de América Latina y el Caribe. Publicación de las Naciones Unidas. ISBN: 978-92-1-221071-1 • ISSN impreso: 0257-2176
E-ISBN: 978-92-1-055366-7 LC/G.2546-P • Número de venta: S.12.II.G.3Copyright © Naciones Unidas, octubre de 2012. Todos los derechos están reservados. Impreso en Santiago de Chile • 2012-825.
• CEPAL/FAO/IICA, 2012. Respuestas de los países de América Latina y el Caribe al alza y volatilidad de precios de los alimentos y opciones de colaboración. Boletín Número 1/2012. Boletin_12.pdf• Cruz, Luisa, 2010. Derecho a la Alimentación (ESA) Documento elaborado por el Equipo del Derecho a la Alimentación, Dirección de Economía del Desarrollo Agrícola (ESA) perteneciente al Departamento de Desarrollo Económico y Social, en estrecha colaboración con la División de Medio Ambiente, Cambio Climático y Bioenergía (NRC) perteneciente al Departamento de Gestión de Recursos Naturales y Medio Ambiente de la FAO, con motivo de la creación de las Directrices voluntarias para la gobernanza responsable de la tenencia de la tierra y los recursos naturales. Hoekstra, Arjen Y, Ashok K. Chapagain, Maite M. Aldaya, Mesfin M. Mekonnen, 2011. The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard ISBN: 978-1-84971-279-8.• IFPRI, 2011. El Global food policy report. 2011 global food policy report / International Food Policy Research Institute. title: Global food policy report Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-89629-547-6 (alk. paper)
1. Nutrition policy. I. International Food Policy Research Institute. II. Title: Global food policy report. TX359.A12 2012 363.8’62—dc23. Washington. DC.• OMS, 2009. Manual para el desarrollo de planes de seguridad del agua: metodología pormenorizada de gestión de riesgos para proveedores de agua de consumo. ISBN: 978 92 4 356263 6.• Pigretti, Eduardo A., Dino Luis Bellorio Clabot y Luis A. Cavalli, 2012 Derecho Ambiental de Aguas. Lajouane. ISBN 978-987-1286-55-3.• PNUMA, 2011. Hacia una economía verde: Guía para el desarrollo sostenible y la erradicación de la pobreza - Síntesis para los encargados de la formulación de políticas. www.unep.org/greeneconomy• Rattan Lal, (Director of the Carbon Management and Sequestration Center at Ohio State's Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center) Nobel Peace Prize Certificate from IPCC. Cita Extraída de su conferencia magistral pronunciada en la Reunión de Alto Nivel de la COP-10 de la CNULD; Changwon, 18 de octubre de 2011. • Río+20, 2012 El futuro que queremos (borrador cero). Elaborado por las Naciones Unidas.• Schuftan Claudio y Radha Holla, 2012. En Observatorio del derecho a la alimentación y a la nutrición. ¿Quién decide sobre la alimentación y la nutrición a nivel mundial? Estrategias para recuperar el control. “Dos grandes desafíos contemporáneos: el control corporativo sobre la alimentación y la nutrición y la falta de un enfoque en los determinantes sociales de la nutrición”. p. 24. ISBN: 978-3-943202-11-3.
FOOTNOTES
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
218
1.We give limitation the sense that is a factor that prevents something to expand indefinitely.2 IICA Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture.3 Obviously I refer to "sustainable development with social inclusion". As it was much emphasized on the final document of Rio +20, “The future we want”.4 There is still no uniform criteria about the meaning of governance. The central idea is that governance goes beyond the government and includes civil society organizations and the private sector. (UNDP) It is linked to the legitimacy and quality of exercising power and extends upward ceding powers to community institutions and downward including public and private sociopolitical actors. It is associated with good governance and better governance practices. It reinforces the rule of law.5 IFAD: International Fund for Agricultural Development.6 IIED: International Institute for Environment and Development. 7 CFS: Committee on World Food Security
175) Louise Croot, New Zealand
The MDG 's that have most impact on the topic of this discussion are Education for all, including higher education for women and girls, gender equality and maternal health. These are the core set that I believe will involve more women in decisionmaking about land ownership, water access and infrastructure- no area left dry.
The other key prerequisite for successfully addressing hunger, food and nutrition security is peace. The longer we continue to lack the political will to turn guns and armaments into tools and diplomatic work for peaceful co existence we will not achieve success. Self development and constraint within the environmental resources we have in the area of the globe we reside in is a reality. Sustainable management of our soils and habitats are essential.
176) Sergio Tripi Good News Agency, Italy
It is of paramount importance in the forthcoming year that international institutions make public opinion aware of what they could do with financial resources deriving from a reduction of military expenses. Such a programme of information was pursued steadily by FAO in the Eighties and the parallelism between the cost of a nuclear submarine and the contribution to development it could be converted into was very effective and started to instil a new awareness in people's mind.
This programme could well be orchestrated by all UN Agencies, specific examples could be agreed by all of them, than each of them could put each example in relation to their own specific goals and objectives. The most striking examples would constitute a strong basis for an annual conference that, year after year, would build up a new awareness on part of the public opinion. And each year, the most striking example of "potential conversion" would win the "Best Way to Convert Military Spending" prize.
177) Lesha Witmer BPW International, Netherlands
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
219
Sustainable farms, food, feed, fuel, funds – all are needed to put us on a sustainable path to the future. But the most important ingredients in the recipe are farmers, especially women farmers, and rural communities whose empowerment is the key to poverty eradication and to sustainable development.
Let's not forget the conclusions and recommendations from CSD 17 e.g.
Build social capital and resilience in rural communities. In that context:(i) Empower women and small-scale farmers, and indigenous peoples, including through securing equitable land tenure supported by appropriate legalframeworks;(ii) Promote equitable access to land, water, financial resources and technologies by women, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups;(iii) Support and promote efforts to harmonize modern technologies with traditional and indigenous knowledge for sustainable rural development;
and the
HAGUE CONFERENCE ON AGRICULTURE, FOOD SECURITY aND CLIMATE CHANGE
13. Agriculture and water are closely linked. There are many competing claims on water. Worldwide agriculture consumes seventy percent of all freshwater withdrawals. Agricultural water productivity has to be increased significantly. Integrated land and water resources management, efficient use of water resources and safe reuse of waste water are vital in our approach to climate change adaptation. Adaptation efforts must begin now, because institutions and the infrastructure will bind us to patterns of water use and behavior for years to come.
13. Farmers have adapted to climate variability for centuries. The agricultural sector has the capacity to offer sound solutions to cope with this challenge, provided that farmers are encouraged to do so. Farmers, particularly women, youth and smallholder farmers, indigenous peoples and other relevant natural resources dependent people have an important role in a transition to climate-smart agriculture. Farmers feed the world, yet far too many are living in hunger and hardship. This injustice must cease. Farmers and rural people through their farming practices are custodians of the land and water. They are also custodians of the forests, of biodiversity, indigenous and traditional knowledge, and other services. Farmers’ organizations can play an important role in promoting dialogue between farmers and across sectors. They can support individual farmers, especially smallholders. They can improve access to financial mechanisms, funding and carbon markets.
178) Hugo Bayó, Costa Rica
Theme 1-2 and 3:
My humble experience has been developed in Mozambique, China, Cape Verde, Costa Rica, Panamá, Ecuador, Brazil ans Spain. Nowadays, hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition are linked to poverty, so:
- To understand poverty, one must speak directly with the people living in poverty.
-The MDGs represented the minimum that the global community could agree on.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
220
- MDGs didn’t engage with the poorest people.
- The lives of people living in poverty are highly complex, and these complexities are not well understood. Analyses tend to focus on issues of power and politics but miss many other dimensions.
- We need to build learning processes intod evelopment systems, onest hat involve asking questions, analyzing data and incorporating comprehensive participatory engagement. This kind of engagement is more important than any particular goal.
-Reaching the poorest should be the principal focus of the agenda.
- The Post-2015 development agenda should be inclusive, sustainable and growth oriented.
- We need to cooperate to reach these goals, but even within a collaborative framework, countries need to be given the space to develop their own policies. The UN cannot be prescriptive; it can only provide a framework. Countries need to proceed in their own way.
-Poverty eradication and sustainable development are part of one agenda.
-Challenges: the biggest killers of infants living in poverty are diarrhea and pneumonia, inequalities between small and larger farmers are growing, agricultural production is falling, weather patterns are becoming erratic, and electricity is expensive. Other challenges include multi-dimensionality of poverty, youth bulge,corruption, lack of property rights.
-Successful interventions include electricity, irrigation in rural areas, roads, change to agriculture and availability of water. In addition to basic infrastructure, development has been driven by girls’ education, good governance (especially in terms of service delivery) and the opening up of trade (although this has at times heightened the rural/urban divide and led to inequality.) -Interventions have to be targeted; sustained growth is not enough.
-Human rights have to be central to economic development. Women’s and girls’ rights have not been raised in this discussion. Women represent 70% of those living in poverty.
–We must analyze power relations and the structures by which people are kept in poverty.
-We cannot rush the process of developing a Post-2015 policy framework. We need time to get it right.
-The decision-making process around the PN2015 development agenda has not been inclusive. Major Groups’ level of access to information has decreased since Rio+20.
179) Vedabhyas Kundu, Gandhi Smriti, India
It is a innovative example of how group of children in rural village of North Karnataka, India got together to form Gokak Shishu Panchayath and address issues of nutrition in their school.
Attached is a paper on the experiment by Mr A R Patil from Belgaum, Karnataka at a National Conference on Youth , Volunteerism and Sustainable Development organized by UN Volunteers and RGNIYD.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
221
180)Krishna Kant Jha, L.N.Mithila University, Darbhanga, Bihar, India, India
Thanks for giving opportunity to discuss such a vital issue that world is facing even today.
Individuals of different ethnic and racial backgrounds often work different jobs, earn different incomes, hold different levels of wealth, and live in different neighborhoods. Men and women are clearly concentrated in different kinds of jobs and their earnings, a large number of people have no job to do, and their likelihood of living in poverty differs. More generally, there are large and growing differences in the social circumstances of the rich and poor, the educated and uneducated, and one’s socioeconomic status is clearly affected by one’s race, ethnicity, gender and social class, cultural and religious blind faith. This is the situation; the whole world is facing even today, despite, end of poverty and hunger being the first millennium development goal.
The basic challenge is that a large number of people have no opportunity towards achieving food and nutrition security where as some people are wasting foods, as they possess the same much more than their need.
The remedy lies in foolproof and strong management and organizational framework. Having association with a number of International Organizations and working in a backward area I feel, for example, that countries like India which is one of the four biggest economy of the world in terms of GDP, is facing the problem of population explosion, keeping its substantive population unemployed, hungry, unhealthy, uneducated, victim of religious and cultural blind faith.
The political leaders are note taking strong corrective measures keeping eye on vote bank to continue in power.
So time has come when U.N.O should be vested with top management and policy making status.
The following policy should be centrally decided:
Universalize Primary Education giving moral weight for making honest and conscious citizen across the world. Centralize assessment for the need for different categories of man power. Educate and train them accordingly. Optimize the population according to need at global level
This will make a way for global justice and equity if central authority is given teeth by framing international law for the same and helping and directing the member countries. This will help the regional politician to convince their voters the development agenda globally decided cannot be altered locally. This will help, in long run, to solve problem of food and nutrition. Besides, temporary measures like zero loss or waste of food, technology to grow maximum food production should be adopted.
181) Abdikarim Bashir Ahmed, Dolow Farmers co-operative society, Somalia
It is great topic really to be discussed as per the them 1there was improvement but did not reached to extent that was needed, still 60% of the people have no access to food specially the developing
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
222
countries as estimated and 80% of the infants are zero in terms of nutrition, so as my suggestion we should be in to the shoes of this people who are dying because of inadequate food.
182) Manuel Darío Zanón Sierra, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Señores y señoras de la FAO,
Permítame indicar que las preguntas que plantean apartan al encuestado de un planteamiento más básico pero necesario para satisfacer su pregunta y, por extensión, la consecución de los fines de la FAO. A saber:
La ONU, de la que ustedes dependen, debería hacer su trabajo de forma eficiente y efectiva, evolucionando y madurando como organización para el mejor cumplimiento de su misión.
¿Qué ha pasado con todas aquellas declaraciones, con las voluntades que dieron origen a este organismo?
Superen el bloqueo y limitaciones organizativas impuestas por los grupos de intereses, hagan valer el propósito de su organización y cúmplanlo por encima de cualquier otra consideración.
Si tras años de funcionamiento de la ONU o FAO, miles de millones de dólares consumidos y trillones de los mejores intelectos disponibles en todo el orbe humano no han conseguido cumplir la promesa que realizaron a la Humanidad con la fundación de ambos organismos... quizá vaya siendo hora de que empiecen a tomárselo en serio.
Yo les animo a hacerlo. Tengo la certeza de que la Humanidad les seguirá en su noble e inspirador propósito fundacional.
Hagan su trabajo por encima de la mediocridad o las pasiones humanas y denuncien los obstáculos que encuentren porque les ayudaremos a derribarlos. Muéstrennos el camino a casa.
Muchas gracias.
[English translation]
Ladies and gentlemen from FAO,
Let me suggest that the questions you make drive the survey respondent away from a more basic but necessary proposal to answer your question and, by extension, the achievement of the goals of the FAO. Namely:
The UN, which you depend on, should do its job efficiently and effectively, evolving and maturing as an organization to better fulfill its mission.
What happened with all those statements, with the will that gave birth to this organization?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
223
You must overcome the blockade and organizational limitations imposed by interest groups. You must assert the mission of your organization and fulfill it above any other consideration.
If after years of operation of the UN or FAO, billions of dollars spent, having the best intellects in the whole world, you have failed to fulfill the promise made to mankind with the foundation of the two organizations ... perhaps it is time you begin to take it seriously.
I encourage you to do so. I am certain that humanity will follow you in your noble and inspiring foundational purpose.
Do your job above mediocrity or human passions and denounce the obstacles you may encounter, because we will help you to bring them down. Show us the way home.
Thank you very much.
183) Lourdes Benavides, Intermón Oxfam, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
1. La seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición en el centro de la agenda post-2015A pesar de los progresos realizados en muchos países, según los últimos datos de la FAO, 868 millones de personas, el 12% de la población mundial, sufren desnutrición y no tienen acceso a una dieta saludable. Los problemas de la inseguridad alimentaria y la nutrición son globales y, por tanto, el enfoque del marco post 2015 debe abarcar a todos los actores internacionales, nacionales, inter- o sub-regionales que tienen una influencia en los sistemas alimentarios.
Si bien se ha avanzado en la seguridad alimentaria y nutrición desde el año 2000, el progreso hacia el cumplimiento de los ODM 1, 4, 5 y 7 sigue siendo insuficiente, especialmente para los más pobres. Persisten las razones: la pobreza, la desigualdad y un sistema alimentario disfuncional que no es capaz de responder a las necesidades alimentarias y nutricionales de todas las personas.
La seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición (SAN) son necesidades humanas básicas por lo que deben ser pieza central de la agenda de desarrollo post 2015. El marco post-2015 debe incluir el objetivo de la Seguridad Alimentaria y la Nutrición para todos y todas, teniendo en cuenta los cuatro pilares que la garantizan: disponibilidad, acceso, uso y estabilidad en el suministro de alimentos. El Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria va más allá y añade además la importancia del marco de saneamiento, servicios sanitarios y cuidados adecuados . La SAN debe abordarse desde una perspectiva de derechos, en particular, del derecho a la alimentación para que los estados cumplan con su obligación moral y legal de asegurar la alimentación adecuada de todas las personas.
Varias iniciativas entre las que se encuentra la iniciativa del Secretario General de Naciones Unidas, el Reto del Hambre Cero (Zero Hunger Challenge) , han hecho un llamamiento por el progreso y la acción unificada para la realización universal de la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional y son una base sobre la que construir y desarrollar las propuestas.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
224
Las organizaciones de la sociedad civil compartimos la necesidad de una meta orientada a erradicar el hambre y la desnutrición, con especial hincapié en la sostenibilidad. El Reto del Hambre Cero es un buen punto de partida.
Para superar el riesgo de divergencia entre el proceso post 2015 y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible, es indispensable que se unan en un único marco de Objetivos Globales, que se exprese en términos universales, de solidaridad global y de imperativos en los límites planetarios.
Los sistemas alimentarios son esenciales a la hora de entender la sostenibilidad ambiental, el cambio climático y la construcción de resiliencia en las comunidades. Por ello, es necesario un enfoque holístico, que promueva acciones consistentes y complementarias en todos los sectores. Al mismo tiempo, es esencial acabar con la creciente y extrema desigualdad, de modo que las oportunidades, la riqueza, los bienes y los recursos naturales estén mejor repartidos entre y dentro de los países, con especial atención a los derechos y necesidades de los grupos más marginalizados.
La participación de la sociedad civil en el proceso post 2015, incluyendo la formulación de posicionamientos y las contribuciones específicas al marco de desarrollo, es esencial. Es fundamental ampliar la base de apoyo buscando la implicación, participación y colaboración entre distintos actores (ONG, Gobiernos, sector privado). En particular, se debe considerar la participación de los grupos sociales que sufren la inseguridad alimentaria y representar los puntos de vista de los grupos vulnerables y marginados. Una sociedad civil comprometida puede garantizar la inclusión de estas personas en el proceso.
Asegurar que la SAN esté en el centro del marco post 2015 es por lo tanto una forma esencial de motivar la acción política necesaria a nivel internacional, con el fin de garantizar el derecho a la alimentación, acabar con las desigualdades del sistema alimentario mundial, garantizar su sostenibilidad y contribuir al progreso en otras áreas del desarrollo humano y económico que se derivan de esta acción.
La meta deberá integrar el fin de la extrema pobreza y la privación (es decir, desde una perspectiva de derechos humanos deberá conseguir su desaparición en términos absolutos), una sociedad más justa y menos desigual, la protección de bienes globales y la sostenibilidad ambiental (respetando los límites ecológicos planetarios) y la rendición de cuentas de los poderes públicos (transparencia, participación, gobernanza responsable y coherencia de políticas).
A escala global, algunos de los retos relacionados con el sistema alimentario global y el logro de la SAN son: el crecimiento de la población, los cambios en el perfil poblacional y los cambios en las pautas de consumo, la menor disponibilidad de tierras para la producción de alimentos, los impactos del cambio climático, la degradación de la tierra, el agua y la biodiversidad. La agricultura industrial y el tipo de monocultivos de exportación (en algunos casos no alimentarios) imperantes comprometen la biodiversidad, conducen a la degradación de la tierra y son inherentemente vulnerables al cambio climático. Otros retos son los conflictos y los estados frágiles, combinados con la débil gobernabilidad.
Por último, los mercados y el comercio internacional de alimentos tienen poca regulación, lo que ha resultado en un aumento de la especulación y en la financiarización de los mercados agrícolas, que conlleva un aumento de los precios y la volatilidad. También los precios de la energía se han incrementado considerablemente en los últimos quince años, al igual que la dependencia del sector agrícola de los combustibles fósiles, creando un vínculo más fuerte entre los precios del combustible y el de los alimentos.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
225
Finalmente, los problemas estructurales del sistema alimentario mundial se hacen patentes al observar pérdidas post cosecha y las debidas a los desperdicios, que actualmente representan casi el 30% de la producción mundial de alimentos y tienen importantes costos económicos y ambientales. Al mismo tiempo, los grandes subsidios agrícolas en el Norte global suelen promover la sobreproducción, con importantes efectos negativos en la nutrición humana.
3. Principios que deberían guiar la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición en el nuevo marco de desarrollo post 2015
4.Nota: los principios están alineados con los de la Campaña Beyond2015, una propuesta que ya incluye más de 500 organizaciones de la sociedad civil.
El marco post-2015 debe concebirse desde una perspectiva de derechos y abordar los desafíos globales de la SAN. Este nuevo compromiso debe reflejar la verdadera ambición de la Declaración del Milenio, reconociendo que las cuestiones estructurales y de gobernanza global son parte integrante de la pobreza. Las metas, los objetivos y el enfoque de la SAN en el marco post-2015 deben:
• basarse en un enfoque de derechos humanos que tenga en cuenta los principios fundamentales de participación, rendición de cuentas, no discriminación, transparencia, dignidad humana, empoderamiento y estado de derecho. En particular, el enfoque post-2015 debe basarse en el Derecho a la Alimentación, los derechos de las mujeres y el enfoque de género.
• asegurar la sostenibilidad social, económica y ambiental a largo plazo de la SAN. El marco post-2015 debe considerar su contribución para frenar la desertificación, el cambio climático, la pérdida de biodiversidad y otros fenómenos que inducen la degradación ambiental a la vez que desarrolla la resiliencia de la producción agrícola y los sistemas de distribución a esos cambios.
• ser ambiciosos para conseguir cambios en todos los niveles y abordar los problemas globales. El nuevo marco debe ser auténticamente global y promover acciones que transcienden las fronteras nacionales, enfrentar cuestiones como los subsidios directos e indirectos a las exportaciones agrícolas, los acaparamientos de tierras, los subsidios agrícolas insostenibles que tienen un impacto en la seguridad alimentaria, la especulación financiera.
• integrar enfoque de responsabilidad común pero diferenciada, con soluciones distintas en función del contexto y las capacidades de cada país.
• ser desarrollados de forma inclusiva y participativa, teniendo en cuenta en particular a los más afectados por la inseguridad alimentaria y nutricional, niños, mujeres y agricultores a pequeña escala, para que puedan participar en la definición de políticas. Todos los países deben comprometerse a procesos de deliberación nacionales, para aplicar los objetivos a su contexto nacional.
• orientar la acción hacia los más pobres y vulnerables a la inseguridad alimentaria y nutricional y asegurar que se avance de manera equitativa teniendo en cuenta factores como la riqueza, el género, la edad, la etnia y la región geográfica, con el fin de reducir las desigualdades.
• seguir un enfoque basado en la evidencia y centrado en la persona, es decir, en datos objetivos para la toma de decisiones. Es necesario mostrar resultados que sigan facilitando la toma de decisiones y la priorización de estrategias. Es necesario sumar evidencia económica y política a la evidencia técnica contra la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
226
3. Orientaciones prioritarias para la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición en el nuevo marco de desarrollo post 2015
Nota: la propuesta está alineada con la de la Campaña Beyond2015, una propuesta que ya incluye más de 500 organizaciones de la sociedad civil.
En base a los cuatro pilares de la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición, las propuestas son las siguientes.
3.1 Garantizar la disponibilidad de una alimentación adecuada para todos y todasEn el marco post-2015, urge abordar el tema de la disponibilidad de alimentos adecuados, especialmente para los más pobres. Los incrementos en la producción agrícola deben ser ambiental, económica y socialmente sostenibles -a través de prácticas agroecológicas por ejemplo- y deben garantizar la disponibilidad de alimentos suficientes y nutritivos para aquellos que sufren las consecuencias de la inseguridad alimentaria y nutricional en la actualidad. Las metas deben asegurar la reducción de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero derivadas de la producción mundial de alimentos, y asegurar la resiliencia de las comunidades y de los recursos naturales, incluido el mantenimiento de la diversidad genética.
Los pequeños productores de alimentos son en este caso una prioridad, pueden adoptar enfoques agroecológicos, utilizar el conocimiento local, la innovación, los recursos naturales y un sistema de producción circular que ha mostrado menores pérdidas, la conservación de los recursos naturales y la creación de sistemas más resilientes y sostenibles. La inversión en estos productores a pequeña escala, la mayoría de los cuales son mujeres en Asia y África, y que constituyen la mayor parte de las personas que viven en la pobreza absoluta, tiene el potencial de hacer frente a los problemas ambientales y de distribución en el sistema alimentario mundial actual. Se necesita, para ello, acceso a servicios esenciales, incluidos los servicios financieros, de seguros y de extensión agraria. Además, requieren apoyo para hacer frente a futuros cambios en el ámbito de la energía, del acceso a la tierra y al agua. Los objetivos deberían ir orientados a:
• Implementación de las Directrices Voluntarias sobre la Gobernanza Responsable en materia de Tenencia de la tierra, Pesca y Bosques en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria nacional (aprobadas por el Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial)
• Inversiones públicas para los 500 millones de productores a pequeña escala (con menos de 2 Ha de tierra) y su acceso a servicios financieros, incluidos seguros
• Apoyos para la agricultura y regulaciones (que privilegien la producción de alimentos) y políticas coherentes con la necesidad de asegurar la SAN (frente a la producción de agrocombustibles)• Reducción de las pérdidas de alimentos, limitación en la demanda de alimentos en ciertos contextos (promoción de estilo de vida moderadas y sostenibles, reducción del consumo, mejoras en los sistemas de almacenamiento y distribución…)
• Fomento del uso sostenible del agua, la energía y los bienes naturales globales y priorización del uso alimentario de estos insumos
• Reducción en las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
227
• Mantenimiento de la biodiversidad de las plantas cultivadas y los animales domesticados y desarrollo de estrategia para la minimización de la erosión genética y la salvaguarda de la diversidad genética.
3.2 Garantizar el acceso a una alimentación adecuada
Será necesario un amplio rango de avances políticos para alcanzar el 100% del acceso a una alimentación adecuada. Las políticas van desde asegurar la cobertura de transferencias sociales condicionales e incondicionales adecuadas, a largo plazo, y basadas en derechos, el desarrollo de cadenas de valor pro-pobre, hasta enfrentar los desequilibrios comerciales y la volatilidad de los precios de los alimentos en los mercados internacionales. En algunos casos, serán necesarias acciones para enfrentar la creciente integración de la producción de alimentos y el sistema de distribución, que aumenta la propagación de alimentos de mala calidad en mercados emergentes.
La mayoría de las personas dependen de los mercados para abastecerse en alimentos, por lo que el acceso a una dieta adecuada depende de sus recursos financieros. La volatilidad de los precios de los alimentos es un factor clave que afecta al acceso a alimentos nutritivos. Las prioridades deben incluir:
• Implementación nacional e integración legislativa de las Directrices Voluntarias sobre la Gobernanza Responsable en materia de Tenencia de la tierra, Pesca y Bosques en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria nacional
• Acciones para enfrentar la volatilidad de los precios alimentarios en mercados internacionales (transparencia, límites de posición, límites en la especulación pasiva…)
• Estrategias para fomentar el crecimiento económico inclusivo y la cobertura de protección social para erradicar la pobreza extrema (por debajo de 2 dólares al día): esto contribuirá al acceso universal a una alimentación adecuada
• Establecimiento de sistemas de alerta y acciones tempranas en todas las zonas con riesgos de crisis alimentarias
• Fortalecimiento, ampliación y adaptación de los sistemas de protección social a los contextos nacionales para que reflejen suficientemente y de forma sostenible el coste de una dieta adecuada para todos y todas. Implementación de los más amplios suelos de protección social para asegurar beneficios adicionales en salud y educación
3.3 Asegurar progresos en la calidad y la utilización de los alimentos
La calidad de los alimentos y su utilización son el tercer pilar de la seguridad alimentaria. La desnutrición materna e infantil tiende a estar concentrada en los más vulnerables y los más pobres. La mayor parte de las intervenciones directas requeridas para enfrentar el retraso en el crecimiento y la deficiencia en micronutrientes se conocen y han mostrado resultados: se debe asegurar financiación para estas intervenciones. Pero las causas de la desnutrición son más amplias y por ello, las políticas y programas de nutrición deben ser más amplios para responder a los factores múltiples de las diversas formas de desnutrición. Los objetivos deben orientarse hacia:
• Implementación universal y alcance de los objetivos del Plan Integral de Implementación de la Nutrición Materno-Infantil, Infantil y Juvenil adoptado por la Organización Mundial de la Salud en 2012
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
228
• Cobertura universal con intervenciones que han demostrado ser eficaces en la reducción de la desnutrición, como las 13 intervenciones de alto impacto promovidas por la serie Lancet en 2008• Acceso a agua adecuada, saneamiento e higiene
• Apoyo adecuado a las prácticas saludables de lactancia materna
• Acciones legislativas para prevenir los alimentos y las bebidas insanos para niños y niñas y regulación del etiquetado e información al consumidor.
3.4 Asegurar la rendición de cuentas y el cumplimiento del objetivoEs probable que la volatilidad de los precios, los eventos climáticos adversos y otros desafíos globales permanezcan después de 2015, por lo que la alimentación y la nutrición seguirán en lo más alto de la agenda internacional, como ya ocurre desde 2008. Es necesario un liderazgo político al más alto nivel, así como acciones ambiciosas por los gobiernos nacionales y las instituciones regionales e internacionales. Hay un gran consenso sobre la importancia de la acción y apoyo a nivel nacional pero también sobre la necesidad de un compromiso político amplio y alineado para conseguir un cambio real en las generaciones futuras. La gobernanza de la SAN implica transparencia, rendición de cuentas, honradez y políticas y procedimientos participativos
Para evitar duplicaciones, es importante que el marco post-2015 esté alineado y apoye al Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria, por ser la plataforma inclusiva, intergubernamental e internacional con mayor legitimidad sobre cuestiones alimentarias. El Marco Estratégico Global, recién adoptado por dicho Comité, representa un paso importante en la armonización de políticas de SAN y en la consecución de un nuevo paradigma en la gobernanza de la alimentación global, la agricultura y la nutrición, anclado en políticas más democráticas y coherentes. El marco post-2015 debe construirse sobre estas buenas prácticas y su visión desde los derechos humanos, la dignidad y la participación.
Madrid, a 21 de diciembre de 2012
Este documento ha sido aprobado por un grupo amplio de organizaciones de la sociedad civil: el Grupo de Agricultura y Alimentación de la Coordinadora de ONGD-E, la Campaña “Derecho a la Alimentación. URGENTE” y las organizaciones de desarrollo de Coalición Clima.
[English translation]
1. Food security and nutrition at the core of the post-2015 agenda
Despite the progress in many countries, according to the latest available FAO data, 868 million people (12% of the world population) suffer from malnutrition and do not have access to a healthy diet. The problems of food insecurity and nutrition are global and, therefore, the focus of the post-2015 framework should cover all the international, national, inter-regional or sub-regional stakeholders that influence food systems.
Although there have been improvements in food security and nutrition since 2000, progress towards the fulfilment of MDGs 1, 4, 5 and 7 is still not enough, especially for the poorest. The reasons leading to this situation have not varied: poverty, inequality and a dysfunctional food system incapable of meeting the food and nutritional needs of all people.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
229
Food security and nutrition (FSN) are basic human needs that should constitute the keystone of the post 2015 development agenda. The post-2015 framework should include the target of Food Security and Nutrition for everyone, taking into account the four pillars in which they are built on: food availability, food access, food utilization and stability of supply. The Committee on World Food Security goes further and also highlights the importance of adequate sanitation and healthcare services. FSN must be addressed from a rights perspective (in particular from the right to food) enabling the fulfilment of the legal and moral obligation of the countries of ensuring adequate food for all people.
Several initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge by the United Nations Secretary General, have called for progress and unified action for the global achievement of food and nutrition security, laying the foundations for the development of proposals.
The civil society organizations do share the need of having a target focused in the eradication of hunger and malnutrition, with particular emphasis on sustainability. The Zero Hunger Challenge is a good starting point.
To overcome the divergence risk between the post-2015 process and the Sustainable Development Objectives, unifying them in a single framework of Global Objectives, expressed in universal terms of global solidarity and imperatives, is essential.
Food systems are essential to understand environmental sustainability, climate change and resilience building in communities. Therefore, a holistic approach promoting consistent and complementary actions in every sector is required. At the same time, eradicating the growing and extreme inequality is essential, so that opportunities, wealth, assets and natural resources are better distributed between and within the countries, paying special attention to the rights and needs of the more marginalized groups.
The civil society participation in the post-2015 process, including the drafting of positions and specific contributions to the development framework, is essential. Broadening the support base by seeking involvement, participation and collaboration between the different stakeholders (NGOs, governments, private sector) is also very important. In particular, the participation of social groups that suffer from food insecurity and the representation of the vulnerable and marginalized groups should be considered. A committed civil society can guarantee the inclusion of these people in the process.
Ensuring that the FSN is at the center of the post-2015 framework is therefore an essential way to motivate the political action needed at international level, in order to secure the right to food, eliminate inequalities of the global food system, ensure its sustainability and contribute to progress in other areas of human and economic development resulting from this action.The goal shall integrate the erradication of extreme poverty and deprivation (i.e. it should achieve its complete eradication from a human rights perspective), a fairer and better balanced society, the protection of global assets, the environmental sustainability (respecting global ecological limits) and the accountability of public authorities (transparency, participation, responsible governance and policy coherence).
Globally, some of the challenges related to the global food system and the achievement of the FSN are: population growth, changes in the population profile and variations in consumption patterns, reduced availability of land for food production, impacts of climate change and land, water and biodiversity degradation. Industrial agriculture and the prevailing type of export monocultures (non-food in some
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
230
cases) jeopardize the biodiversity, lead to land degradation and are inherently vulnerable to climate change. Other challenges are conflicts and fragile states, combined with weak governance.
Lastly, food markets and international trade are under-regulated, therefore motivating an increase in the speculation and financialization of agricultural markets, and leading to an increase in prices and volatility. Additionally, energy prices have increased considerably in the past fifteen years, the same as dependence of the agricultural sector on fossil fuels, creating a stronger link between fuel and food prices.
Finally, the structural problems of the global food system are evident when observing the post-harvest and waste losses, currently accounting for almost 30% of global food production and leading to significant economic and environmental costs. At the same time, large agricultural subsidies in the Northern countries often promote overproduction, with important negative impacts on human nutrition.
2. Principles that should guide food security and nutrition in the new post-2015 development framework
Note: the principles are aligned with those of the Beyond2015 Campaign, a proposal that already features more than 500 civil society organizations.
The post-2015 framework should be conceived from a human rights perspective and address the global challenges of the FSN. This new commitment should reflect the real ambition of the Millennium Declaration, acknowledging that the structural and global governance issues are part of poverty. The FSN targets and approach in the post-2015 framework should:
• be based on a human rights approach that takes into account the fundamental principles of participation, accountability, non-discrimination, transparency, human dignity, empowerment and rule of law. In particular, the post-2015 approach should be based on the Right to Food, women rights and a gender approach.
• ensure the FSN long-term social, economic and environmental sustainability. The post-2015 framework should consider its contribution to curb desertification, climate change, biodiversity loss and other phenomena that lead to environmental degradation whilst developing the resilience of agricultural production and distribution systems to these changes.
• be ambitious to achieve changes at all levels and address global issues. The new framework must be really global and promote actions beyond national boundaries, addressing issues like direct and indirect subsidies to agricultural exports, land grabbing, unsustainable agricultural subsidies that impact on food security and financial speculation.
• integrate a common - but differentiated - responsibility approach, with different solutions depending on the context and abilities of each country.
• be developed in an inclusive and participatory way, especially considering those who are most affected by nutritional and food insecurity, children, women and smallholders, facilitating their participation in policy-making. All countries should be committed to national deliberative processes for the application of the objectives in their national context.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
231
• guide the action towards the poorest and most vulnerable to food and nutritional insecurity, and ensure a fair progress which takes into account factors like wealth, gender, age, ethnicity and geographical region in order to reduce inequalities.
• follow an evidence-based and person-centred approach, i.e. based in objective data for decision making. Showing results that continue facilitating decision making and strategies prioritization is necessary. Besides technical evidence, economic and political evidence need to be provided against food insecurity and malnutrition.
3. Priority guidelines for food security and nutrition in the new post-2015 development framework
Note: the principles are aligned with those of the Beyond2015 Campaign, a proposal that already features more than 500 civil society organizations.
Based on the four pillars of food security and nutrition, these are the proposals.
3.1 Ensuring the availability of adequate food for allIn the post-2015 framework, the issue of adequate food availability should be urgently addressed, especially for the poorest. The increases in agricultural production must be environmentally, economically and socially sustainable – eg. through ecological practices - and should ensure the availability of sufficient and nutritious food for those currently suffering from food and nutritional insecurity. The goals must ensure the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions generated by global food production, and ensure the resilience of communities and natural resources, including the conservation of genetic diversity.
Small food producers are a priority in this case. They can adopt agro-ecological approaches, using local knowledge, innovation, natural resources and a circular production system that reduces losses, conservation of natural resources and the creation of more resilient and sustainable systems. Investment in these small-scale producers, most of who are women in Asia and Africa and constitute the majority of the population living in absolute poverty, has the potential of addressing environmental and distribution issues in the current global food system. For this purpose, access to essential services is required, including financial, insurance and agricultural extension services. Support to address future changes in energy, access to land and water is also needed. Targets should aim at:
• Implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (adopted by the Committee on World Food Security)
• Public investments for 500 million smallholders (with less than 2 hectares of land) and their access to financial services, including insurance
• Agricultural and regulatory support (favouring food production) and consistent policies ensuring FSN (against bio-fuels production)
• Reduction of food losses, restriction of food demand under certain conditions (promoting moderate and sustainable lifestyles, consumption reduction, improved storage and distribution systems ...)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
232
• Promotion of the sustainable use of water, energy and global natural resources, and prioritization of the food use of these inputs
• Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
• Maintenance of crops and livestock biodiversity, and development of a strategy for minimizing genetic erosion and safeguarding genetic diversity.
3.2 Ensuring access to adequate food
Wide political progress will be required to achieve a full access to adequate food. Policies range from ensuring coverage of adequate, long-term, and rights-based conditional and unconditional social transfers, developing pro-poor value chains, to addressing trade imbalances and food price volatility in international markets. In some cases, actions will be required to address the growing integration of food production with the distribution system, which increases the delivery of poor quality food in emerging markets.
Most people rely on markets to stock up on food. Therefore, access to an adequate diet depends on their financial resources. The food price volatility is a key factor affecting the access to nutritious food. Priorities should include:
• National implementation and legislative integration of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security
• Actions to address food price volatility in international markets (transparency, position limits, passive speculation limits ...)
• Strategies to promote inclusive economic growth and social protection coverage to eradicate extreme poverty (below $ 2 a day): this will contribute to the universal access to adequate food
• Creating early warning and action systems in every area at risk of food crisis
• Strengthening, expansion and adaptation of the social protection systems to the national contexts for an adequate and sustainable projection of the cost of an adequate diet for all. Implementation of the broadest social protection threshold to secure additional health and education benefits.
3.3 Ensuring progress in food quality and utilization
Food quality and utilization are the third pillar of food security. Maternal and child malnutrition tend to be focused in the most vulnerable and in the poorest. Most direct interventions required to address stunting and micronutrient deficiencies are known and have shown to be effective. Funding must be ensured for these interventions. However, there are more causes of malnutrition and, therefore, nutrition policies and programs should be broader to address the multiple factors of the diverse forms of malnutrition. The targets should be focused in:
• Universal implementation and scope of the objectives of the Integral Plan of Implementation of the Mother and Child, Child and Youth Nutrition adopted by the World Health Organization in 2012
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
233
• Universal coverage with interventions that have proven to be effective in reducing malnutrition, like the 13 high-impact interventions promoted by the Lancet series in 2008
• Access to adequate water, sanitation and hygiene
• Appropriate support to healthy breastfeeding practices
• Legislative actions to limit unhealthy foods and beverages for children, and regulation of labeling and consumer information
3.4 Ensuring accountability and the fulfilment of the objective
It seems likely that price volatility, adverse weather events and other global challenges persist after 2015. Therefore, food and nutrition will continue being a priority in the international agenda, as it has been the case since 2008. Political leadership at the highest level and ambitious actions of national governments and regional and international institutions are required. There is a broad consensus on the importance that action and support have at national level, but also on the need for a broad and aligned political commitment to make real changes for future generations. The FSN governance implies transparency, accountability, honesty and participatory policies and procedures
To avoid duplication, the post-2015 framework should support and be aligned with the Committee on World Food Security, as it is the inclusive, intergovernmental and international platform with greater legitimacy regarding food issues. The Global Strategic Framework, recently adopted by this Committee, constitutes an important step towards the harmonization of FSN policies and the achievement of a new paradigm in the governance of global food, agriculture and nutrition, based on more democratic and consistent policies. The post-2015 framework should be built on these good practices whilst including human rights, dignity and participation.
Madrid, 21 December 2012
This document has been approved by a broad group of civil society organizations: the Food and Agriculture Group of the Spanish “Coordinadora de ONGD-E”,, the campaign "Right to Food. URGENT "and development organizations of the Climate Coalition (“Coalición Clima”).
184) Cristina Grandi, IFOAM, Italy
Theme 1, Second question: What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Ensuring food security in a future which will have constrained resources, and which will be feeling the effects of climate change, is one of the thorniest issues facing policy makers today. The natural resource base upon which agriculture depends, soils, water and biodiversity (including seeds), is being degraded and lost. Supplies of fossil fuels used to make inputs, and minerals such as phosphate, will become increasingly scarce and expensive. This means that we urgently need to improve the resource use efficiency of farming systems and enhance resilience through adaptation. Agriculture will come under increasing pressure to contribute to mitigating global warming through reducing emissions and increasing sequestration especially in soils.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
234
FAO Director-General José Graziano da Silva writes in FAO’s new (2012) State of Food and Agriculture report that the world will not end hunger if we do not shift towards more sustainable patterns of production and consumption. “We cannot separate agriculture from the management and preservation of our natural resources, from food security and from sustainable development itself…. In agriculture, as soon as you pull on something, you find it is connected to everything else.’’
The key opportunity for achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years is the combined social and ecological intensification of agriculture, farming and gardening. Food and farming systems that enable social inclusion by reducing barriers to entry, such as the affordability of organic farming, and gardening, are critical to bringing rapidly growing rural populations into food production in an effective manner, which can increase access to food to both rural and urban communities. Diverse organic production, distribution and consumption economies operate successfully throughout the world and offer endless models that can be replicated and adapted. These models empower people, farmers and consumers to enter into food production and marketing and therefore enhance livelihoods and food and nutrition security. Productivity is enhanced by increasing ecological functions such as soil nutrient cycling, photosynthesis, soil water holding capacity, soil formation, pest and disease equilibrium and carbon sequestration etc through organic practices such as rotations; crop diversity; nitrogen fixing intercropping and catch crops and trees, plant and livestock diversity, composting, use of perennials, companion planting (e.g. push and pull), innovative systems such as those based on SRI / ‘Planting with Space’ and many others.
- Theme 2, First question: What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
There is a growing body of evidence that organic farming systems can be more energy, nutrient and water efficient than their non-organic counterparts. Research published in the journal Science found that nutrient inputs of nitrogen, phosphate and potassium in the organic systems to be 34-51% lower than in non-organic systems, whereas average crop yields were only 20% lower over a period of 21 years (Mader et al. 2002).
The majority of farming worldwide is rain fed and even if financial resources were available the world does not have the water resources to irrigate all of the agricultural lands. Water use efficiency is therefore a critical issue. Improving the efficiency of rain fed agricultural systems through organic practices is the most efficient, cost effective, environmentally sustainable and practical solution to ensure reliable food production in the increasing weather extremes being caused by climate change.
Research shows that organic systems use water more efficiently due to better soil structure and higher levels of humus and other organic matter compounds (Lotter et al., 2003; Pimentel et al., 2008). The more porous structure of organically treated soil allows rainwater to quickly penetrate the soil, resulting in less water loss from run-off and higher levels of water capture. This was particularly evident during the two days of torrential downpours from hurricane Floyd in September 1999, when the organic systems captured around double the water than the conventional systems captured (Lotter et al., 2008). A recent article in Nature (Seufert et al., 2012) showed that soils managed with organic methods have better water-holding capacity and water infiltration rates and have produced higher yields than conventional systems under drought conditions and excessive rainfall.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
235
Other published studies also show that organic farming systems are more resilient to the predicted weather extremes and can produce higher yields than conventional farming systems in such conditions (Drinkwater et al., 1998; Welsh et al., 1999; Pimentel et al. 2005). The Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trials found that organic yields were higher in drought years and the same as conventional in normal weather years (Posner et al., 2008). Similarly, the Rodale Farming Systems Trials (FST) showed that the organic systems produced more corn than the conventional system in drought years. Water efficiency and resilience of organic agriculture to extreme weather events is very relevant in the context of global climate change and dependence on rain-fed agriculture and therefore should attract much greater international attention.
Organic is a solution that meets smallholders conditions
A report by the United Nations on organic agriculture in Africa found that organic and near-organic methods and technologies are ideally suited for many poor, marginalized smallholder farmers in Africa because they require minimal external inputs and make use of locally and naturally available materials. They studied 114 projects in Africa and they found that organic farming increased the availability of food over time. Access to food improved through increased quantity of food production ensuring household food security, but also selling food surpluses at local markets led to farmers benefiting from higher incomes. Fresh organic produce was found to become more available to more people in the wider community. The study also found that organic farming enabled new and different groups in a community to get involved in agricultural production and trade (UNEP-UNCTAD, 2008).
New support for smallholder agriculture, especially in Africa, is urgently needed to increase productivity and provide economic opportunities for small-scale farmers. They need more than subsistence diet. They need an income so that they can send their children to school, pay for medical bills, have adequate housing, clothing, transport and all the needs that we all aspire too. This investment needs to be focused on agro-ecological systems, such as organic, rather than on intensive farming methods that require expensive inputs made from fossil fuels, that will become increasingly scarce in the future and which further degrade the environment. Organic methods are the most suitable as the necessary methods and inputs that are needed can be sourced locally at no or very little cost to the farmers.
The FAO director general Graziano da Silva, has stated that small scale farming is essential for fruit and vegetable production and many other local products and that local markets are based on small-scale agriculture. He stated at the opening of the Committee on Commodity Problems in June this year “Smallholders cannot continue to be seen as part of the hunger problem. They are an important part of the solution and are crucial to promote sustainable agriculture and management of our natural resources.”
The United Nation’s Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier De Schutter, has argued for the scaling up of such models of agriculture and ensuring that they work for the benefit of the poorest farmers. However, in most African countries organic agriculture is not specifically supported by agricultural policy, and is sometimes actively hindered by policies advocating the use of high-input farming (UNEP-UNCTAD, 2008). Agroecology is a science and a set of farming practices that seek to improve agricultural systems by mimicking natural processes, creating beneficial biological interactions among the different components of the agro-ecosystem (De Schutter, 2010)1 Organic systems put into practice the core principles of agroecology such as recycling nutrients on the farm, integrating livestock and crops, diversifying species and genetic resources, and considering the productivity of an entire agricultural system rather than a single crop. Agro-ecological farming is
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
236
based on knowledge-intensive techniques that are developed through farmers’ knowledge and experimentation.
The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (‘the IAA STD report’) is supported by FAO, 400 scientists and 60 countries, recommends support for agro-ecological sciences that would contribute to addressing environmental issues whilst maintaining and increasing productivity. It also recommended that community-based innovation and local knowledge combined with science-based approaches as the best way to addressing the problems, needs and opportunities of the rural poor.
There are many existing examples of innovation in agroecology. In Cameroon, training for local people in tree propagation and the setting up of nurseries has led to the widespread planting of trees that can fix their own nitrogen and can rehabilitate degraded land. Yields of wheat, maize, beans and potatoes have doubled. It has also led to the cultivation of indigenous fruit and nut trees for planting and for sale to neighbouring communities (Ebenezar et al., 2011).
In East Africa, fodder shrub species have been researched and introduced as a reliable source of less expensive and easily available protein feeds for dairy cattle that can improve milk production and reduce soil erosion and increase soil fertility. It is estimated that 25,000 smallholder farmers have planted fodder shrubs, contributing about 3.8 million US dollars to farmer incomes across East Africa (Wambugu et al. 2011). The largest ever study of agroecology approaches in the developing countries analyzed 286 projects covering 37 million hectares in 57 countries. The study found that on average crop yields increased by 79% (Pretty et al., 2005).
In Tigray, Ethiopia, from 1996, the Institute for Sustainable Development worked in cooperation with the farmers to revegetate their landscape to restore the local ecology and hydrology. The biomass from this revegetation was then harvested to make compost and to feed biogas digesters. The result was more than 100% increases in yields, better water use efficiency and greater pest and disease resistance in the crops. The farmers used the seeds of their own landraces, which had been developed over millennia, which proved to be very responsive to producing high yields under organic conditions, whereas under conventional input practices they were susceptible to diseases such as rust. The major advantage of this system was that seeds and compost were sourced locally at no or little cost to the farmers. The organic system had both higher yields and a much better net return for the farmers (Edwards et al., 2011).
IFAD's Office of Evaluation conducted two thematic evaluations of organic agriculture and poverty reduction: one covering Latin America and the Caribbean (2001-2002), and the other covering Asia (primarily China and India, 2004). The evaluations looked at the practice of organic methods and their relation to poverty reduction, food security and trade. They also analyzed small-farmer groups that have been successful in adopting organic technologies and in marketing their organic products. The results of the evaluations were very encouraging. IFAD included organic agriculture in some of its successful projects as for example the IFAD's Sustainable Development Project for Agrarian Reform Settlements in the Semi-Arid North-East of Brazil ( Dom Helder Camara project ) and the Organic and fair trade production revitalize cocoa industry in São Tome and Principe.
Argentinean government has been developing from more than 20 years the national program Prohuerta with the aim of improving food security and sovereignty. At the moment the program has 589,000 organic gardens, 160,000 small farms (with animals). The population involved is 3.3 million people Economic performance is extraordinary, for every dollar invested by the government obtained organic vegetables and farm products worth $ 40. Prohuerta has also been included in the programs
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
237
of international cooperation of Argentina, obtaining the support of other international donors. For more than four years later in Haiti takes place "Project Fresh Food Self Production – Prohuerta Haiti" aimed at small food producers. In the last period Prohuerta cooperation is being extended to Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico and Mozambique.
Brazil government implements a number of public policies that are intended to support organic production and agroecology. These are: i) financial measures, such as specific credit for organic farmers; ii) educational programmes, from the school to specific university courses in organic farming and agroecology, iii) creation of the resources necessary to produce organically, such as community seed banks, an official register for phytosanitary products, publication of technical information for farmers, etc, iv) incentives to organise and strengthen the organic production network; v) promotion of organic farming and consumer information: such as the Government’s measures to help purchases and support direct sales, plus specific campaigns to promote organic food and to inform consumers.
Cristina Grandi - IFOAM Food Security Campaigner
185) Subhash Mehta, Devarao Shivaram Trust, India
Smallholder System of Crop Intensification can meet world's nutritious food needs:
Smallholder producers, around the world, are meeting their communities' nutritious food needs at farm gate price thus having access to food, increasing their farm production and net incomes by adopting, ''system of cop intensification (SCI)', based on the SRI principal of following the local integrated low cost successful sustainable agriculture and as applicable to the soil and agro climatic conditions of each area.
Jonathan Latham's paper and other links to papers, all trailed below, provides evidence from farmers’ fields coverring a range of crops – wheat, maize, finger millet, sugarcane, mustard (rapeseed/canola), legumes such as pigeon peas, lentils, soya beans and horticulture crops, showing increase in farm production after converting from conventional to following SCI agriculture principles.
http://independentsciencenews.org/un-sustainable-farming/how-millions-of-farmers-are-advancing-agriculture-for-themselves/How Millions of Farmers are Advancing Agriculture For ThemselvesBy Jonathan Latham
Synopsis: An unheralded and unprecedented farmer-led revolution is underway in agriculture. Small farmers around the world are dramatically boosting their productivity and yields by adopting a growing system called SCI (System of Crop Intensification). SCI is based on the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) which is characterised by simple modifications to agricultural practices that synergise to promote healthy plant growth. These modifications include improving soil conditions and greatly lowering plant density (crowding).
Since SRI and SCI methods use fewer seeds, require no fertilisers or pesticides, use less water, and work well regardless of crop variety, they radically boost the income of farmers while also reducing their costs. Unsurprisingly, SRI and SCI are being rapidly adopted, so far in over 50 countries. An important aspect of this story is that SRI and SCI are advancing almost entirely outside the purview of the scientific agricultural research community. Since modern agricultural research mostly ignores farming as a system, and focusses instead on manipulating external inputs and crop genetics, this lack of interest
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
238
should be no surprise; but the two and three-fold yield improvements typical of SRI and SCI suggest that this narrow scientific focus may prove to have been an error of historic proportions.
The world record yield for paddy rice production is not held by an agricultural research station or by a large-scale farmer from the United States, but by Sumant Kumar who has a farm of just two hectares in Darveshpura village in the state of Bihar in Northern India. His record yieldof 22.4 tons per hectare, from a one-acre plot, was achieved with what is known as theSystem of Rice Intensification(SRI). To put his achievement in perspective, the average paddy yield worldwide is about 4 tons per hectare. Even with the use of fertilizer, average yields are usually not more than 8 tons.
Sumant Kumar’s success was not a fluke. Four of his neighbors, using SRI methods, and all for the first time, matched or exceeded the previous world record from China, 19 tons per hectare. Moreover, they used only modest amounts of inorganic fertilizer and did not need chemical crop protection.
Using SRI methods, smallholding farmers in many countries are starting to get higher yields and greater productivity from their land, labor, seeds, water and capital, with their crops showing more resilience to the hazards of climate change (Thakur et al 2009; Zhao et al 2009).
These productivity gains have been achieved simply by changing the ways that farmers manage their plants, soil, water and nutrients.
The effect is to get crop plants to grow larger, healthier, longer-lived root systems, accompanied by increases in the abundance, diversity and activity of soil organisms. These organisms constitute a beneficial microbiome for plants that enhances their growth and health in ways similar to how the human microbiome benefits Homo sapiens.
That altered management practices can induce more productive, resilient phenotypes from existing rice plant genotypes has been seen in over 50 countries. The reasons for this improvement are not all known, but there is a growing literaturethat helps account for the improvements observed in yield and health for rice crops using SRI.
The ideas and practices that constitute SRI were developed inductively in Madagascar some 30 years ago for rice. They are now being adapted to improve the productivity of a wide variety of other crops, starting with wheat, finger millet and sugarcane. Producing more output with fewer external inputs may sound improbable, but it derives from a shift in emphasis from improving plant genetic potential via plant breeding, to providing optimal environments for crop growth.
The adaptation of SRI experience and principles to other crops is being referred to generically as the System of Crop Intensification (SCI), encompassing variants for wheat (SWI), maize (SMI), finger millet (SFMI), sugarcane (SSI), mustard (rapeseed/canola)(another SMI), teff (STI), legumes such as pigeon peas, lentils and soya beans, and vegetables such as tomatoes, chillies and eggplant.
That similar results are seen across such a range of plants suggests some generic processes may be involved, and these practices are not only good for growing rice. This suggests to Prof. Norman Uphoff and colleagues within the SRI network that more attention should be given to the contributions that are made to agricultural production by the soil biota, both in the plants’ rhizospheres but also as symbiotic endophytes within the plants themselves (Uphoff et al. 2012).
The evidence reported below has drawn heavily, with permission, from a report that Dr. Uphoff prepared on the extension of SRI to other crops (Uphoff 2012). Much more research and evaluation
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
239
needs to be done on this progression to satisfy both scientists and practitioners. But this gives an idea of what kinds of advances in agricultural knowledge and practice appear to be emerging.
Origins and Principles
Deriving from empirical work started in the 1960s in Madagascar by a French priest, Fr. Henri de Laulani ้, S.J., the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) has shown remarkable capacity to raise smallholders’ rice productivity under a wide variety of conditions around the world: from tropical rainforest regions of Indonesia, to mountainous regions in northeastern Afghanistan, to fertile river basins in India and Pakistan, to arid conditions of Timbuktu on the edge of the Sahara Desert in Mali. SRI methods have proved adaptable to a wide range of agroecological settings.
With SRI management, paddy yields are usually increased by 50-100%, but sometimes by even more, even up to the super-yields of Sumant Kumar and his neighbors. Requirements for seed are greatly reduced (by 80-90%), as are those for irrigation water (by 25-50%). Little or no inorganic fertilizer is required if sufficient organic matter can be provided to the soil, and there is little if any need for agrochemical crop protection against pests and diseases. SRI plants are also generally healthier and better able to resist such stresses as well as drought, extremes of temperature, flooding, and storm damage.
SRI methodology is based on four main principles that interact in synergistic ways:
• Establish healthy plants early and carefully, nurturing their root potential.
• Reduce plant populations, giving each plant more room to grow above and below ground and room to capture sunlight and obtain nutrients.
• Enrich the soil with organic matter, keeping it well-aerated to support better growth of roots and more aerobic soil biota.
• Apply water purposefully in ways that favor plant-root and soil-microbial growth, avoiding flooded (anaerobic) soil conditions.
These principles are translated into a number of irrigated rice cultivation practices which under most smallholder farmers’ conditions are the following:
• Plant young seedlings carefully and singly, giving them wider spacing usually in a square pattern, so that both roots and canopy have ample room to spread.
• Keep the soil moist but not inundated. Provide sufficient water for plant roots and beneficial soil organisms to grow, but not so much as to suffocate or suppress either, e.g., through alternate wetting and drying, or through small but regular applications.
• Add as much compost, mulch or other organic matter to the soil as possible, ‘feeding the soil’ so that the soil can, in turn, ‘feed the plant.’
• Control weeds with mechanical methods that can incorporate weeds while breaking up the soil’s surface. This actively aerates the root zone as a beneficial by-product of weed control. This practice can promote root growth and the abundance of beneficial soil organisms, adding to yield.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
240
The cumulative result of these practices is to induce the growth of more productive and healthier plants (phenotypes) from any given variety (genotype).
Variants of SRI practices suitable for upland regions have been developed by farmers where there are no irrigation facilities, so SRI is not just for irrigated rice production any more. In both settings, crops can be productive with less irrigation water or rainfall because taking up SRI recommendations enhances the capacity of soil systems to absorb and provide water (‘green water’). SRI practices initially developed to benefit small-scale rice growers are being adapted now for larger-scale production, with methods such as direct-seeding instead of transplanting, and with the mechanization of some labor-intensive operations such as weeding (Sharif 2011).
From the System of Rice Intensification to the System of Crop Intensification
Once the principles of SRI became understood by farmers and they had mastered its practices for rice, farmers began extending SRI ideas and methods to other crops. NGOs and some scientists have also become interested in and supportive of this extrapolation, so a novel process of innovation has ensued. Some results of this process are summarized here.
The following information is not a research report. The comparisons below are not experiment station data but rather results that have come from farmers’ fields in Asia and Africa. The measurements of yields reported here probably have some margin of error. But the differences seen are so large and are so often repeated that they are certainly significant agronomically. The results in the following sections are comparisons with farmers’ current practices, showing how much more production farmers in developing countries could be achieving from their presently available resources.
This innovative management of many crops, referred to under the broad heading of System of Crop Intensification (SCI), is also sometimes aptly referred to in India as the ‘System of Root Intensification,’ another meaning for the acronym SRI.
The changes introduced with SCI practice are driven by the four SRI principles noted above. The first three principles are usually followed fairly closely. The fourth principle (reduced water application) is relevant for irrigated production such as for wheat, sugarcane and some other crops. It has less relevance under rainfed conditions where farmers have less control over water applications to their crops. Maintaining sufficient but never excessive soil moisture such as with water-harvesting methods and applications corresponds to the fourth SRI principle.
Agriculture in the 21st century must be practiced differently from the previous century; land and water resources are becoming relatively scarcer, of poorer quality, or less reliable. Climatic conditions are in many places becoming more adverse, especially for smallholding farmers. More than ever, they need cropping practices that are more ‘climate-proof.’ By promoting better root growth and more abundant life in the soil, SCI offers millions of insecure, disadvantaged households better opportunities.
Wheat (Triticum)
The extension of SRI practices to wheat, the next most important cereal crop after rice, was fairly quickly seized upon by farmers and researchers in India, Ethiopia, Mali and Nepal. SWI was first tested in 2008 by the People’s Science Institute(PSI) which works with farmers in Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand states. Yield estimates showed a 91% increase for unirrigated SWI plots over usual
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
241
methods in rainfed areas, and a 82% increase for irrigated SWI. This has encouraged an expansion of SWI in these two states.
The most rapid growth and most dramatic results have been in Bihar state of India, where 415 farmers, mostly women, tried SWI methods in 2008/09, with yields averaging 3.6 tons/ha, compared with 1.6 tons/ha using usual practices. The next year, 15,808 farmers used SWI with average yields of 4.6 tons/ha. In the past year, 2011/12, the SWI area in Bihar was reported to be 183,063 hectares, with average yields of 5.1 tons/ha. With SWI management, net income per acre from wheat has been calculated by the NGO PRADANto rise from Rs. 6,984 to Rs. 17,581, with costs reduced while yields increased. This expansion has been done under the auspices of the Bihar Rural Livelihood Promotion Society, supported by the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank.
About the same time, farmers in northern Ethiopia started on-farm trials of SWI, assisted by the Institute for Sustainable Development(ISD), supported by a grant from Oxfam America. Seven farmers in 2009 averaged 5.45 tons/ha with SWI methods, the highest reaching 10 tons/ha. There was a larger set of on-farm trials in South Wollo in 2010. SWI yields averaged 4.7 tons/ha with compost and 4.9 tons/ha with inorganic nitrogen (urea) and phosphorus (DAP). The 4% increase in yield was not enough to justify the cost of purchasing and applying fertilizer. The control plots averaged wheat yields of 1.8 tons/ha.
In 2008-09, farmer trials with SWI methods were started in the Timbuktu region of Mali, where it was learned that transplanting young seedlings was not as effective as direct seeding, while SRI spacing of 25cm x 25cm proved to be too great. Still, obtaining a 10% higher yield with a 94% reduction in seed (10 kg/ha vs. 170 kg/ha), a 40% reduction in labor, and a 30% reduction in water requirements encouraged farmers to continue with their experiments.
In 2009/10, the NGO Africareundertook systematic replicated trials in Timbuktu, evaluating a number of different methods of crop establishment, including direct seeding in spacing combinations from 10 to 20 cm, line sowing, transplanting of seedlings, and control plots, all on farmers’ fields. Compared to the control average (2.25 tons/ha), the SWI transplanting method and 15 ื15 cm direct seeding gave the greatest yield response, 5.4 tons/ha, an increase of 140%.
SWI evaluations were also done in 2010 in the Far Western region of Nepal by the NGO Mercy Corps, under the EU-FAO Food Facility Programme. The control level of yield was 3.4 tons/ ha using local practices with a local variety. Growing a modern variety with local practices added 10% to yield (3.74 tons/ha); however, using SWI practices the same modern variety raised yield by 91%, reaching a yield of 6.5 tons/ha.
Mustard (Rapeseed/Canola)
Farmers in Bihar state of India have recently begun adapting SRI methods for growing mustard (aka rapeseed or canola). In 2009-10, 7 women farmers in Gaya district working with PRADAN and the government’s ATMA agency started applying SRI practices to their mustard crop. This gave them an average grain yield of 3 tons/ha, three times their usual 1 t/ha.
The following year, 283 women farmers who used SMI methods averaged 3.25 tons/ha. In 2011-12, 1,636 farmers practiced SMI with an average yield of 3.5 tons/ha. Those who used all of the practices as recommended averaged 4 tons/ha, and one reached a yield of 4.92 tons/ha as measured by government technicians. With SMI, farmers’ costs of production were reduced by half, from Rs. 50 per kg of grain to just Rs. 25 per kilogram.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
242
Sugarcane (Saccarum officinarum)
Shortly after they began using SRI methods in 2004, farmers in Andhra Pradesh state of India began also adapting these ideas and practices to their sugarcane production. Some farmers got as much as three times more yield, cutting their planting materials by 80-90%, and introducing much wider spacing of plants, using more compost and mulch to enhance soil organic matter (and control weeds), with sparing use of irrigation water and much reduced use of chemical fertilizers and agrochemical sprays.
By 2009, there had been enough testing, demonstration and modification of these initial practices, e.g., cutting out the buds from cane stalks and planting them in soil or other rooting material to produce health seedlings that could be transplanted with very wide spacing, that the joint Dialogue Project on Food, Water and Environment of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) in Hyderabad launched a ‘sustainable sugarcane initiative’ (SSI). The project published a manual that described and explained the suite of methods derived from SRI experience that could raise cane yields by 30% or more, with reduced requirements for both water and chemical fertilizer.
The director of the Dialogue Project, Dr. Biksham Gujja together with other SRI and SSI colleagues established a pro bono company AgSRI in 2010 to disseminate knowledge and practice of these ecologically-friendly innovations among farmers in India and beyond.
The first international activity of AgSRI has been to share information on SSI with sugar growers on the Camilo Cienfuegos production cooperative in Bahia Honda, Cuba. A senior sugar agronomist, Lauro Fanj ๙ l from the Ministry of Sugar, when visiting the cooperative to inspect its SSI crop, was amazed at the size, vigor and color of the canes, noting that they were ‘still growing.’
Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana)
Some of the first examples of SCI came from farmers in several states of India who had either applied SRI ideas to finger millet (ragi in local languages), or by their own observations and experimentation devised a more productive cropping system for finger millet that utilized SRI principles.
The NGO Green Foundationin Bangalore in the early ’00s learned that farmers in Haveri district of Karnataka State had devised a system for growing ragi that they call Guli Vidhana (square planting). Young seedlings are planted in a square grid, 2 per hill, spaced 18 inches (45 cm) apart, with organic fertilization. One implement they use stimulates greater tillering and root growth when it is pulled across the field in different directions; and another breaks up the topsoil while weeding between and across rows. In contrast with conventional methods, which yield around 1.25 to 2 tons/ha, with up to 3.25 tons using fertilizer inputs, Guli Vidhana methods yield 4.5 to 5 tons/ha, with a maximum yield so far of 6.25 tons.
In Jharkhand state of India in 2005, farmers working with the NGO PRADAN began experimenting with SRI methods for their rainfed finger millet. Usual yields there were 750 kg to 1 ton/ha with traditional broadcasting practices. Yields with transplanted SFMI have averaged 3-4 tons/ha. Costs of production per kg of grain are reduced by 60% with SFMI management, from Rs. 34.00 to Rs. 13.50. In Ethiopia, one farmer using her own version of SRI practices for finger millet is reported by the Institute for Sustainable Development to have obtained a yield of 7.6 tons/ha.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
243
Maize (Zea mays)
Growing maize using SRI concepts and methods has not been experimented with very much yet; but in northern India the People’s Science Institute in Dehradun has worked with smallholders in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh states to improve their maize production with adapted SRI practices.
No transplanting is involved, and no irrigation. Farmers are planting 1-2 seeds per hill with square spacing of 30 ื30 cm, having added compost and other organic matter to the soil, and then doing three
soil-aerating weedings. Some varieties they have found performing best at 30 ื50 cm spacing. The number of farmers practicing this kind of SCI went from 183 in 2009 on 10.34 hectares of land, to 582 farmers on 63.61 ha in 2010. With these alternative methods, the average yields have been 3.5 tons/hectare. This is 75% more than their yields with conventional management, which have averaged 2 tons/hectare.
Because maize is such an important food crop for many millions of food-insecure households, getting more production from their limited land resources, with their present varieties or with improved ones, should be a priority.
Turmeric (Curcuma longa)
Farmers in Thambal village, Salem district in Tamil Nadu state of India were the first to establish an SRI Farmers Association in their country, as far as is known. Their appreciation for SRI methods led them to begin experimentation with the extension of these ideas to their off-season production of turmeric, a rhizome crop that gives farmers a good income when sold for use as a spice in Indian cooking.
With this methodology, planting material is reduced by more than 80%, by using much smaller rhizome portions to start seedlings. These are transplanted with wider spacing (30 ื40 cm instead of
30 ื30 cm), and organic means of fertilization are used (green manure plus vermicompost, Trichoderma, Pseudomonas, and a biofertilizer mixture known as EM, Effective Microorganisms, developed in Japan by T. Higa). Water requirements are cut by two-thirds. With yields 25% higher and with lower costs of production, farmer’s net income from their turmeric crop can be effectively doubled.
Tef (Eragrostis tef)
Adaptations of SRI ideas for the increased production of tef, the most important cereal grain for Ethiopians, started in 2008-09 under the direction of Dr. Tareke Berhe, at the time director of the Sasakawa Africa Association’sregional rice program, based in Addis Ababa. Having grown up in a household which raised tef, and then written theses on tef for his M.Sc. (Washington State University) and Ph.D. (University of Nebraska), Berhe was thoroughly knowledgeable, both practically and theoretically, with this crop.
Typical yields for tef grown with traditional practices, based on broadcasting, are about 1 ton/ha. The seed of tef is tiny — even smaller than mustard seed, about 2500 seeds making only 1 gram — so growing and transplanting tef seedlings seemed far-fetched. But Berhe found that transplanting young seedlings at 20 ื20 cm spacing with organic and inorganic fertilization gave yields of 3 to 5 tons/ha.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
244
With small amendments of micronutrients (Zn, Cu, Mg, Mn), these yields could be almost doubled again. Such potential within the tef genome, responding to good soil conditions and wider spacing, had not been seen before. Berhe is calling these alternative production methods the System of Tef Intensification (STI).
In 2010, with a grant from Oxfam America, Dr. Berhe conducted STI trials and demonstrations at Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Center and Mekelle University, major centers for agricultural research in Ethiopia. Their good results gained acceptance for the new practices. He is now serving as an advisor for tef to the Ethiopian government’s Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA), with support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
This year, 7,000 farmers are using STI methods in an expanded trial, and another 100,000 farmers are using less ‘intensified’ methods based on the same SRI principles, not transplanting but having wider spacing of plants with row seeding. As with other crops, tef is quite responsive to management practices that do not crowd the plants together and that improve the soil conditions for abundant root growth.
Legumes: Pigeonpeas (Red Gram – Cajanus cajan), Lentils (Black Gram – Vigna mungo), Mung Beans (Green Gram – Vigna radiata), Soya Beans (Glycine max), Kidney Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris), Peas (Pisum sativum)
That SRI principles and methods could be extended from rice to wheat, finger millet, sugarcane, maize, and even tef was not so surprising, since these are all monocotyledons, the grasses and grass-like plants whose stalks and leaves grow from their base. That mustard would respond very well to SRI management practices was unexpected, because it is a dicotyledon, i.e., a flowering plant with its leaves growing from stems rather than from the base of the plant. It is now being found that a number of leguminous crops, also dicotyledons, can benefit from practices inspired by SRI experience.
The Bihar Rural Livelihoods Support Program, Patna, has reported tripled yield from mung bean (green gram) with SCI methods, raising production on farmers’ fields from 625 kg/ha to 1.875 tons/ha. With adapted SRI practices, the People’s Science Institute in Dehradun reports that small farmers in Uttarakhand state of India are getting:
• 65% increase for lentils (black gram), up from 850 kg/ha to 1.4 tons/ha;
• 50% increase for soya bean, going from 2.2 to 3.3 tons/ha;
• 67% increase for kidney beans, going from 1.8 to 3.0 tons/ha;
• 42% increase for peas, going from 2.13 to 3.02 tons/ha.
No transplanting is involved, but the seeds are sown, 1-2 per hill, with wide spacing – 20x30cm, 25x30cm, or 30 ื30 cm for most of these crops, and as much as 15/20 ื30/45cm for peas. Two or more weedings are done, preferably with soil aeration to enhance root growth.
Fertilization is organic, applying compost augmented by a trio of indigenous organic fertilizers known locally as PAM (panchagavya, amritghol and matkakhad). Panchagavya is a mixture of five products from cattle: ghee (clarified butter), milk, curd (yoghurt), dung and urine, which particular appears to stimulate the growth of beneficial soil organisms. Seeds are treated before planting with cow urine to make them more resistant to pests and disease.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
245
This production strategy can be considered ‘labour intensive’ but households seeking to get maximum yield from the small areas of land available to them find that the additional effort and care give net returns as well as more security. The resulting crops are more robust, resistant both to pest and disease damage and to adverse climatic conditions.
Vegetables
The extension of SRI concepts and practices to vegetables has been a farmer-led innovation, and has progressed farthest in Bihar State of India. The Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (BRLPS), working under the state government, with NGOs such as PRADAN leading the field operations and having financial support from the IDA of the World Bank, has been promoting and evaluating SCI efforts among women’s self-help groups to raise their vegetable production.
Women farmers in Bihar have experimented with planting young seedlings widely and carefully, placing them into dug pits that are back-filled with loose soil and organic soil amendments such as vermicompost. Water is used very precisely and carefully. While this system is labor-intensive, it increases yields greatly and benefits particularly the very poorest households. They have access to very little land and water, and they need to use these resources with maximum productivity and little cash expenditure.
A recent article on using SRI methods with vegetables concluded: “It is found that in SRI, SWI & SCI, the disease & pest infestations are less, use of agro chemicals are lesser, requires less water, can sustain water-stressed condition; with more application of organic matter, yields in terms of grain, fodder & firewood are higher.” (from a background paper prepared for the National Colloquium on System of Crop Intensification (SCI), Patna, India, March 2, 2011).
Trials in Ethiopia conducted by the NGO ISD have also shown good results. Readers can learn more about how these ideas are being adapted for very poor, water-stressed Ethiopian households in Tigray province here (Brochure at: http://www.isd.org.et/Publications/Planting%20with%20space%20brochure.pdf).
Conclusion
Philosophically, SRI can be understood as an integrated system of plant-centered agriculture. Fr. Laulani ้, who developed SRI thinking and practice during his 34 years in Madagascar, in one of his last papers commented that he did this by learning from the rice plant; the rice plant is my teacher (mon ma ๎tre) he wrote. Each of the component activities of SRI has the goal of maximally providing whatever a plant is likely to need in terms of space, light, air, water, and nutrients. It also creates favorable conditions for the growth and prospering of beneficial soil organisms in, on and around the plant. SRI thus presents us with the question: if one can provide, in every way, the best possible environment for plants to grow, what benefits and synergisms will we see?
Already, approximately 4-5 million farmers around the world are using SRI methods with rice. The success of SRI methods can be attributed to many factors. They are low risk, they don’t require farmers to have access to any unfamiliar technologies, they save money on multiple inputs, while higher yields earn them more. Most important is that farmers can readily see the benefits for themselves.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
246
Consequently, many farmers are gaining confidence in their ability to get ‘more from less’ by modifying their crop management practices. They can provide for their families’ food security, obtain surpluses, and avoid indebtedness. In the process, they are enhancing the quality of their soil resources and are buffering their crops against the temperature and precipitation stresses of climate change.
Where this process will end, nobody knows. Almost invariably SRI results in far greater yields, but some farmers go beyond others’ results to achieve super-yields for reasons that are not fully clear. Although experience increasingly points to the contributions of the plants’ microbiome, it also suggests that the optimization process is still at the beginning.
SCI Yield Increases Reported:
Crop Yield Increase
Finger millet 200-300%
Legumes 50-200%
Maize 75%
Mustard 200-300%
Sugarcane 20-100%
Tef 200-400%
Tumeric 25%
Vegetables 100-270%Wheat 10-140%
References
Uphoff N (2012). Raising smallholder food crop yields with climate-smart agricultural practices. Report accompanying presentation on ‘The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) and Beyond: Coping with Climate Change,’ made at World Bank, Washington, DC, October 10.
Uphoff N, Chi F, Dazzo FB , Rodriguez RJ (2012) Soil fertility as a contingent rather than inherent characteristic: Considering the contributions of crop-symbiotic soil biota. In Principles of Sustainable Soil Systems in Agroecosystems,, eds. R. Lal and B. Stewart. Boca Raton FL: Taylor & Francis, in press.
Sharif A (2011). Technical adaptations for mechanized SRI production to achieve water saving and increased profitability in Punjab, Pakistan. Paddy and Water Environment 9: 111-119.
Thakur AK, Uphoff N and Antony E (2009) an assessment of physiological effects of system of rice intensification (SRI) practices compared with recommended rice cultivation practices in India. Experimental Agric. 46: 77-98.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
247
Zhao LM, Wu LH, Li Y, Lu X, Zhu DF and Uphoff, N (2009) Influence of the system of rice intensification on rice yield and nitrogen and water use efficiency with different N application rates. Experimental Agric. 45: 275–286.
Further Reading: What lies beyond ‘Modern Agriculture’the Bunting lecture of 2007 given by Norman Uphoff at Reading University, UK
186) Isabel De Felipe, Universidad Politecnica Madrid, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
En el tema 1º deberíamos tener en cuenta no solamente la seguridad alimentaria de abastecimiento (food security) sino también la higiénico-sanitaria (food safety) que tantos problemas viene causando especialmente en los países en desarrollo.
En relación al tema 3º, entiendo que hay unos objetivos básicos, identificados en los apartados a y b, en tanto que los otros son instrumentos para lograr los primeros. En cualquier caso, los apartados c,d y e deben de tener como mínimo un ámbito regional.
También debe hacerse hincapié en la necesidad de una colaboración y responsabilidad compartida entre todos los agentes que participan en el sistema alimentario.
[English translation]
Regarding the first issue, we should take into account not only the food security of the supply, but also the hygiene and health aspects (food safety) that are causing so many problems, especially in developing countries.
On the third issue, I understand that there are some basic objectives -identified in paragraphs a and b-, while the others are instruments to achieve the former. In any case, paragraphs c, d and e must have at least a regional scope.
We should also stress the need for cooperation and shared responsibility among all stakeholders involved in the food system.
187) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [third contribution] I. Qs on lessons learned and context: 1. What have the MDGs achieved? What lessons can be learned about designing goals to have maximum impact?
The mix of MDGs achievements/shortcomings is by now well known. The question here is: Do we really want to set goals --in terms of outcomes? Or do we rather want to set (annual) benchmarks --much more related to processes (a central critique of the MDGs). Goals, in the past and in the present, aim at achieving national averages. By design, this leaves half of those affected below the average. To be consistent with the UN-sanctioned Human Rights Framework, setting goals will only make sense if
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
248
these are applied at the sub-national level, i.e., district or municipality since only this allows focusing national efforts on those territorial units so far most neglected and discriminated. With this being accepted, the concept of maximum impact will have to be redefined in the new framework. 2. How has the world changed since the MDGs were drafted? Which global trends and uncertainties will influence the international development agenda over the next 10-30 years?
The world has changed plenty; but how much due to or despite the MDGs? Let us keep in mind that the selection of MDGs was arbitrary and top-down with many of us having complained about issues left out and about the lack of consultations when they were set. The global trends that will influence development are, for sure, peace, the progressive realization of human rights, and our success in making democracy more a local direct democracy (as opposed to the flawed representative democracy we, at best, have now). But keep in mind that the global trends will be made up of myriad local and regional trends --certainly not forgetting those due to both economic and climate-related migration-- which the new framework will have to influence in a positive direction. The human rights framework is the most effective tool we have to achieve this. In the next development phase, let the human rights perspective, then, guide the deployment of human, financial and other resources. 3. Which issues do poor and vulnerable people themselves prioritize?
First of all, ‘vulnerable people’ I think is a euphemism. [It is the same as speaking of ‘people at risk’; we tend to think that people take risks but, beware, risks are also imposed!]. To avoid any sort of victimization, we must talk of marginalized people. Vulnerable has a connotation of ‘poor them…’; marginalized tells us our social arrangements have put them in that situation. Now to the question of which issues claim holders prioritize: The question has not been answered! Why? Mainly because we have not systematically asked them. Let us do that…and then heed their advice! I have great hope that this time we put this question at the very center of what we do in the massive consultation that has now been launched. Should I be optimistic? For people to influence priorities, development work cannot only continue focusing on service delivery, on capacity building and on (depoliticized) advocacy; what is needed is a focus on empowerment and social mobilization (the latter also called practical politics). It is not easy to say what is really empowering in community development work. Any attempted operational definition will (always) carry a certain bias depending on the conceptual glasses one is wearing. What is clear is that --in a mostly zero-sum game-- the empowerment of some, most of the time, entails the disempowerment of others --usually the current holders of power. Empowerment is not an outcome of a single event; it is a continuous process that enables people to understand, upgrade and use their capacity to better control and gain power over their own lives. It provides people with choices and the ability to choose, as well as to gain more control over resources they need to improve their condition. It expands the 'political space' within which iterative Assessment-Analysis-Action processes operate in any community. That is what we need to pursue.
4. What does a business-as-usual scenario look like?
The business as usual scenario paints quite a grim picture, I’d say. Take, for example, the poverty alleviation discourse in the MDGs: it displaced the poverty debate worldwide: from a political discussion about its causes to a technical, risk management scheme. (N. Dentico) Bottom line, I am not sure MDG achievements will all be sustainable. We have raced for the outcomes neglecting the participatory processes to get there, and what we see does not bode well.
An equally important question is: What does a business-as-usual mode foretell? As another example, take the following: if current trends continue, by 2015, 3.7 million more children in Africa will suffer
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
249
from malnutrition than are today. My crystal ball tells me we will see more fundamentalism more ‘…springs’, growing frustration, more (understandable) explosive conflicts; perhaps some empowerment in the process, but empowerment in an unpredictable direction; some good, I’d expect. What this tells us is the urgency for the post-2015 agenda to address the real deep structural causes of widespread disempowerment of those that live in poverty/happen to be poor.
Perhaps the most crucial element missing in the MDGs was a conceptual framework of the causes of underdevelopment (or maldevelopment). In the 1990s, UNICEF pioneered the now widely accepted conceptual framework of the causes of malnutrition identifying its immediate, underlying and basic or structural causes importantly showing that addressing each level of causality is necessary but not sufficient. This omission of the MDGs cannot be repeated by the new framework we are all trying to come up with. An adaptation of the already well accepted UNICEF framework is perhaps the best way to address this omission. Are we up to the challenge?
188) Action Against Hunger, France
Dear all,
Here is Action Against Hunger - ACF's contribution to the consultation on hunger, food and nutrition security within the post-2015 development agenda.
We hope you will find it interesting.
With our best wishes for 2013,Etienne du VachatFood Security Advocacy OfficerACF-France (Paris)
--
Theme 1: lessons learnt from the current MDG framework
While we recognize the importance of having a framework that is both clearly defined and workable like the MDGs were, we think the next framework for development should be more comprehensive and call for more accountability. Clearly, the political and financial commitments have not been strong enough to translate the goals into full success. Indeed, despite the fact that the MDGs were built upon concrete goals, with quantifiable targets that were relatively simple to understand and monitor, some goals will not be achieved in the given timeframe. Furthermore, the chosen indicators and targets tend to give a truncated – and thus bias – picture of complex problems.
Comments regarding the indicators on hunger in the current MDG framework and suggestions for improvement:
There is currently one target (1.C) focusing on hunger – ‘Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger’ – that comes together with two indicators:
1.8 – Prevalence of underweight children under-five years of age
1. 1.9 – Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
250
These indicators could be improved:
Regarding the indicators:
Underweight (weight/age) is a composite indicator whose interpretation is difficult as age is often not precisely estimated. In the next framework for development, two other indicators should be systematically added to this one:
o The height/age that describes stuntingo The weight/height that describes wasting
Computing these three indicators is the only way of reflecting the various aspects of child malnutrition.
The indicator 1.9, in analyzing only the level of dietary energy consumption (= calories), does not take into account “hidden-hunger”, which refers to micronutrient deficiencies (= chronic lack of vitamins and minerals) and is most of the time not visible. To better assess that issue, it is urgent to come to a consensus on what would be the best indicator (or suite of indicators) to reflect access to and consumption of nutritionally adequate diet at macro level. The dietary diversity scores[1] used by FANTA and FAO could be a basis to draw upon.
Indicators should be disaggregated as much as possible to highlight inequalities/discriminations between groups of population according to their location (rural/urban areas), age and gender. Ideally, indicators should also be time-disaggregated to show the cyclical character of hunger. Underlying disparities in data must enable governments to accurately target policies (i.e. safety nets, food assistance) on the most vulnerable and nutritionally at-risk groups.
Regarding the reference population:
The indicators of the next framework for development must be exclusively based on the WHO Child Growth Standards of 2006 if they are to accurately reflect undernutrition prevalence[2].
Current challenges and opportunities:
The current MDG framework reflects a sectorial approach that must be renewed, so as to better take on the new global challenges. Among those, food price volatility, climate change and demographic growth are key issues to food and nutrition security. Recurrent challenges such as vulnerability to socioeconomic and climate related shocks have intensified, further enforcing the need for a post 2015 agenda to promote resilience by addressing vulnerability. Donors, governments and NGOs alike have traditionally placed too little focus on building resilience within communities before crises occur, choosing instead to focus on tackling hunger and disease during or after the crisis. Furthermore, recurring crises are typically perceived as “humanitarian” issues in need of an immediate, short-term response when in fact a twin track approach with adequate resources is needed, ensuring that the immediate needs of vulnerable populations are met while simultaneously building the longer-term resilience of communities at risk from recurring food crises.
It is very likely that the objective on hunger in the current MDGs framework will not be achieved by 2015. It is thus crucial to make a larger room to undernutrition in the post-2015 development agenda, ideally through both a nutrition-specific goal and nutritional indicators within the other goals. New initiatives such as the SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition) movement show that awareness on the importance
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
251
of nutrition for long term human development is raising. They also convey the message that cost-effective, high impact interventions now exist to address the problem of undernutrition, and that those interventions – that are both direct (or nutrition-specific) and indirect – should be implemented following a twin track approach. A momentum has thus been created, but it must be enhanced by a clear objective on nutrition in the next agenda for development.
Theme 2: what works best to address hunger and under-nutrition?
ACF’s Zero Hunger series produced in 2011[3], found that in the countries that have had most success in bringing down rates of undernutrition, six key success factors – 1) strong political will; 2) civil society participation and ownership; 3) a multi-sectorial approach; 4) institutional coordination; 5) a multi-phase approach and; 6) continued, predictable financial investment - make up an ideal ‘enabling environment’, which if in place should facilitate a reduction in rates of childhood undernutrition. In contexts with the most demonstrable success, all six factors are present in varying degrees.
Agriculture contributes to nutrition through 3 main pathways: direct production for farming households; increased incomes for rural societies and pushing down food prices.
However, hunger and food insecurity are not only a matter of agriculture, although it is a very important contributing factor. If a strong focus has to be placed on smallholder agriculture, it is important to address other food security related aspects as well, such as income generation, urban livelihoods, food assistance and social protection.
Moreover, even though undernutrition is strongly linked to food security, the latter does not necessarily guarantee a satisfactory nutritional situation. Indeed, nutrition is determined by a large variety of factors that goes far beyond food security, among which are women’s education and income, child care practices, access to quality health services, family planning, coverage of vaccination, availability and access to clean/protected water sources and to adequate sanitation facilities, etc.
Furthermore, it is acknowledged that female empowerment, enabling women to have control over household resources, brings significant gains in nutrition. As such, it must be put at the heart of programmes.
Hence, ACF advocates for the development of a nutrition-sensitive agriculture[4], so that agricultural interventions translate to significant improvements in nutrition outcomes. ACF’s field experience has demonstrated the importance of nutrition-sensitive agriculture at the household level. For example, the development of kitchen gardens has the potential to improve dietary diversity, particularly if in conjunction with small scale livestock rearing. Nutrition-sensitive policies can pave the way not only to long term agricultural investments to raise smallholder farmers’ productivity but also to developing a cross-disciplinary approach linking nutrition with agriculture, gender, health, social protection, and dietary education.
Theme 3: the Zero Hunger Challenge
The ZHC admittedly sets an interesting frame for objectives on the global food system. However, although it provides a more holistic way of looking at hunger and points out that adopting a long term vision is necessary to reach food and nutrition security, it appears more like wishful thinking than a seriously defined, realistic, time-bound set of objectives.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
252
Those should be modified so as to be achievable on the medium-term timeframe that is likely to be settled for the post-2015 framework, i.e. to 2030-5. Country or regional level roadmaps which break down the goals into discrete time-bound targets and actions should be drawn up. It is necessary to specify targeted levels of improvement according to the different contexts. For instance concerning the objective (d), the appropriate percentage of increase in smallholders’ productivity should be based on national negotiations with all stakeholders – particularly farmers’ representatives – and be accompanied by financial commitments.
Targets may also differ from one country to another according to the specific actions each country must undertake to reach the objective. For example, whereas the sustainability of agriculture practices is a stake in both developed and developing, unsustainable agriculture practices do not have the same roots and consequences in the North and in the South, and policies must be designed accordingly. In developing countries an important lever would be to facilitate access to credit, develop adequate financing mechanisms and safety nets for farmers so that they don’t adopt short term behaviors that are detrimental to them and the environment.
It is very important to link this objective of sustainability with the one on increased farmers’ productivity, so that increasing food and nutrition security at household level does not lead to fostering highly productive and cash crop agriculture systems. Traditional systems are often the most resilient and can be highly productive as well, even though they are not always oriented towards income generation. The key is that the transition must be farmer-owned and controlled, and oriented towards local and regional markets rather than export markets, as has been the case until now through two decades of perverse international and national policies and incentives. Improvements to local irrigation, road, storage, processing, market and credit infrastructure are also critical to making that happen. Furthermore, emphasis must be put on women farmers and the necessity to close the gap between men and women in access to inputs, as it is stressed in the ‘Global Strategy Framework for Food Security and Nutrition’. Improving living conditions in the country should also be regarded as an important issue. Rural areas must be revitalized to become more attractive to young people and businesses.
The objective (e.) on food waste and losses is also very relevant to smallholders’ livelihoods and food and nutrition security, considering the 30% of pre- and postharvest loss every year. To avoid these losses, smallholder farmers use to sell their production right after harvesting, hence exposing themselves to early food shortage while often selling their production cheaply. Harvest losses are thus quite strongly linked with the seasonality of hunger, itself due to the seasonality of harvest, income and prices, which leads to shorter or longer hunger gaps periods and recurrent crises. Hence, achieving the objective (a) will greatly depends on the reduction of food losses. This can be done notably through investments in storage and post-harvest processing equipment, and also through environment-friendly pest and disease control.
Finally, indicators should be both measurable at country level and at global level. They should be disaggregated when possible so as to enable the design of effective policies, and be as comprehensive as possible. This is particularly important for the objective (b) on child’s undernutrition. By focusing on stunting, it takes only one aspect of undernutrition into account. Yet, adopting a holistic approach of undernutrition allows tackling it more effectively. Hence, the objective should embrace the several aspects of malnutrition, i.e. stunting, wasting and underweight. It should be also be stressed that children with wasting are at higher risk for linear growth retardation, hence, addressing wasting is a way of preventing stunting. Furthermore, the wording of the objective should be changed, so as to encompass the idea of ‘window of opportunity’, to highlight the importance of mothers’ good health during the antenatal period and to encompass other underlying factors leading to under-nutrition.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
253
[1] http://www.foodsec.org/fileadmin/user_upload/eufao-fsi4dm/docs/Dietary_Diversity_paper.pdf[2] According to WHO and UNICEF, “Using the new WHO standards in developing country situation results in a 2-4 times increase in the number of infants and children falling below -3 SD compared to using the former NCHS reference”. Joint statement available here:http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/severemalnutrition/9789241598163_eng.pdf[3] http://www.actionagainsthunger.org.uk/fileadmin/contribution/0_accueil/pdf/Zero%20Hunger %20Overview.pdf[4] FAO’s definition of nutrition-sensitive agriculture: “Agriculture that effectively and explicitly incorporates nutrition objectives, concerns, and considerations to achieve food and nutrition security.”
189) Paul Larsen, WFP, Norway
1. Hunger reduction needs to be targeted as a distinct political and policy goal of the highest priority, and separate from poverty: we have seen that the poverty MDG1 was reached, while the hunger part of MDG1 was thrown off track by the food crisis since 2008. Hunger thus requires particular attention and efforts.
2. Hunger targets must capture individual access to food and nutrition, in particular for children under five, and include the broadest possible data on stunting as well as underweight, calorie as well as micronutrient deficiencies, and individual, household, and community as well as national level statistics.
3. Given the crucial importance of child nutrition during the first 1000 days after conception, hunger indicators should capture the impact of emergency and acute under-nutrition, including of pregnant and lactating mothers, as well as of chronic hunger, to guide high-impact investments and interventions.
190) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [fourth contribution]
II. Qs on the shape of a post-2015 development framework: 5. How should a new framework address the causes of poverty?
Based on the new conceptual framework on the causes of maldevelopment I plead be arrived at by consensus, the post 2015 framework will importantly have to work on deconstructing neoliberal globalization --the latest incarnation of raw capitalism. Why? Because it is not about the alleviation of poverty (much less about the chance of eradicating it); it is about a quantum reduction of disparity the world over --among and within countries. It is about working out new mechanisms of redistribution of wealth and power. And such a redistribution will only come through empowerment and social mobilization from below; with people going from having voice to exerting influence. I worry that all the good intentions of the UN to address the structural causes of poverty in the conceptual framework will lead to another 10 years of failure if it does not politicize this issue. The rich have no intentions to give up their power and privileges; non-violent counter-power has to be organized and applied. Dialogue has to become a dialogue of equals. 6. How should a new framework address resilience to crises?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
254
Ultimately, the common denominator of most of the man-made crises can be attributed to the excesses of capitalism. Decisive steps must be taken by the new framework to foster the social mobilization needed to make sure effective disparity reduction measures are launched nationally and internationally. [ Internationally, this means giving accredited NGOs a seat, voice and vote in UN and in government deliberations. Environmental crises have both natural and man-made causes. As Rio and Rio+20 have shown us, we can effectively address the latter. The new framework must depart from this premise and thus, as a minimum, incorporate Rio+20 recommendations. 7. How should a new framework address the dimensions of economic growth, equity, social equality and environmental sustainability? Is an overall focus on poverty eradication sufficiently broad to capture the range of sustainable development issues?
The economic growth model has been shown to be unsustainable, mostly (but not only) on environmental grounds. Does the new framework have an option not to deemphasize economic growth as the main development goal? It actually needs to denounce it in no uncertain terms.Reaching equity and social equality inevitably points to the fact that both need the processes of empowerment and social mobilization I insisted-upon earlier.
For environmental sustainability, the roadmap has already been worked-on by the experts in Rio and Rio+20 so that the new framework has to adopt its recommendations.
As said, the focus ought not to be on poverty eradication, but on disparity reduction which has connotations for urgently needed actions both in rich and in poor countries including changes in many, if not most, aspects of ODA.
The disparity reduction approach is necessary, but not sufficient to capture the range of sustainable development issues. Rio+20 is clear about this. 8. What should be the architecture of the next framework? What is the role of the SDGs in a broader post-2015 framework? How to account for qualitative progress?
The broader architecture of the next framework must absolutely be based on the human rights framework. Enough of lip service. It is time for deeds (related, nothing less, than to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to the UN Charter). From now on, we have to look at the development process from the perspective of claim holders and duty bearers in their dialectic relationship. This language must be adopted and both groups have to be made more confident and assertive in their respective roles, i.e., claim holders placing concrete demands/staking claims and duty bearers abiding by UN Covenants, Conventions and General Comments. The concept of progressive realization is another one to be given center stage.
The role of the Sustainable Development Goals is also key. We only have one planet! Heed the recommendations from Rio!
Also related to the architecture, there will have to be a global UN body with executive powers following up on the implementation of the new framework. (The MDGs did not really have this; it was left to countries to apply them; there was no global accountability). This body must be endowed with funding. It must have some kind of an executive ombudsperson role on issues of implementation and must work towards influencing international financing mechanisms being made available.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
255
To account for qualitative progress, yearly benchmarks have to be set by each country (especially for the poorest districts/municipalities) based on processes that must be implemented en route to the progressive realization of the different human rights. Civil society organizations are to be appointed as watch dogs for the achievement of these benchmarks; they need to receive funds specially earmarked for this. 9. Should (social, economic, and environmental) drivers and enablers of poverty reduction and sustainable development, such as components of inclusive growth, also be included as goals?
The word enablers is a rather vague one. So is inclusive growth. I had already suggested a) that we need to deemphasize economic growth as the main development goal, b) that the selection of outcome goals is likely to be less useful than the use, inclusion and of yearly processes-achievement benchmarks, and c) that disparity reduction, and not poverty reduction, is the term to be used from now on.
Indeed, the three drivers mentioned in the question need to be tackled --but absolutely not forgetting a fourth one, namely the political driver. Each is necessary, but not sufficient. [The UN being non-political is to be understood in terms of non-political-partisan, but, by God, it needs to act more decisively on issues political in nature it strongly stands for; therefore, when needed, calling a spade a spade. Some agencies do it more that others]. 10. What time horizon should we set for the next phase in the global development agenda (e.g., 10, 15, 25 years, or a combination)?
I am more inclined for five years with yearly-interval benchmarks as yardsticks of progressive realization. Yearly achievements/shortcomings can thus be assessed and adjustments made accordingly, as needed, in a participatory manner. With the world changing as fast as it does, I am sure that major adjustments are justified every five years --at least at the country level. 11. What principles and criteria should guide the choice of a new set of goals? The human rights principles of non-retrogression, universality and inalienability, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness, equality and non-discrimination, participation and inclusion, and accountability and rule of law are, once and for all, to guide the new framework. The assessment of these principles being respected is to be built-in into assessing annual benchmarks.
The main criterion that must go with this is for countries to be mandated to participatorily draw-up long-term and annual plans for the progressive realization of human rights Human rights are all closely related to the development process. (Such plans could be a requirement for ODA as well). The new framework must demand these progressive realization plans be drawn up.
191) Emily Levitt Ruppert, FAO - WFP Facilitation Team
Dear Colleagues,
A series of comments have come in during this e-consultation about the importance of maintaining a multisectoral approach to addressing hunger, food and nutrition security. However, in the new post-2015 framework, many have recommended a more integrated approach (integrated framework) rather than a list of the respective thematic goals without clear links between them. This is a noted weakness of the MDGs.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
256
ACF's contribution noted: "the countries that have had most success in bringing down rates of undernutrition, six key success factors – 1) strong political will; 2) civil society participation and ownership; 3) a multi-sectorial approach; 4) institutional coordination; 5) a multi- phase approach and; 6) continued, predictable financial investment - make up an ideal ‘enablingenvironment’, which if in place should facilitate a reduction in rates of childhood undernutrition. In contexts with the most demonstrable success, all six factors are present in varying degrees." (link to ACF's full contribution)
Claudio Schuftan in Vietnam added: "An adaptation of the already well accepted UNICEF framework is perhaps the best way to address this omission." (link to Claudio's full contribution)
What thoughts do participants in this e-consultation have about how to have a more integrated set of multisectoral goals (contributing to the hunger, food and nutrition security goal/outcomes) in the overall post-2015 framework? Are there effective country examples that exist in national development frameworks that could be used as models/templates?
Emily Levitt RuppertMember of the FAO/WFP Facilitation Team
192) Mohammad Monirul Hasan, Institute of Microfinance (InM), University of Bonn, Germany
Though there are flaws in the objective function of MGDs, the achievement in terms of goal is praiseworthy. Much works has been done for the challenges of MDG implementation. But there are lot of challenges and pitfalls in the process of implementation and sustainability of the process. It looks nice that the goals have been achieved, but the sustainability of the goals is really a big question today. I would like to highlight my ideas on the thematic topics in the Bangladeshi perspective.
Theme1:
In Bangladesh, it is reported that by the government and also by UNDP that most of the MDGs are almost achieved and some are very close to the targets. It is very impressive and government can make it a political success and brag about their achievement. But there are some real issues that need to be address that I will highlight.
In goal Poverty and Hunger, Bangladesh has reduced poverty to 31.5% in 2010 according to National data. It is also proved by other dataset also that the rate of extreme poverty has declined to almost 30%. This is a good achievement for Bangladesh. But another question is very crucial now, is it enough to measure poverty by 2122 kilocalorie per day? Where only two plate of rice can generate this energy, the other requirement of the human body is ignored. People are having rice everyday but the nutrition that they need is not sufficient. As a result lot of diseases are attacking them and they are becoming vulnerable. So only 2122kilocaloire a day or $2.00 a day should not be the measurement of poverty. I think poverty has lot of dimension. According to the Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, poverty has more dimensions that are now being measured. So I think the measuring poverty in terms of kilocalorie is misleading and not accurate.
Bangladesh also has improved universal primary education and gender equality to a great extent. It is also is on track in reducing child mortality, improving maternal health and combating HIV/AIDS.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
257
Bangladesh has also improved the safe drinking water and sanitary latrines to the poorest people. But still a lot of works need to be done.
Challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years
Objective function: It is very important in the next agenda to set the objective function that really faces the challenges of 21st century. It is shame to the mankind that some people are starving for days without food and some are wasting foods. Even the measurement of poverty is wrong. Of course, 2122 kilocalorie is important but this should have at least some variety of sources, like carbohydrate, protein, fat, minerals etc. nutrition issue should be more emphasized in the next agenda. In the education level, people should have able to read, write and ability to read the newspaper in their own language. Proper health care should be ensured to the mother and children and also the seniors those who are out of income category. Now days those who have money can avail good medical care in Bangladesh, because most of the people don’t have any medical insurance and savings to bear the medical expenses. They somehow got primary treatment, but they never goes to the professional doctors. This is very important to have either health insurance or provide sufficient medial doctors to the local areas.
Governance and sustainability: The process of implementing of MDGs is having lot of corruption and misuse of resources. Most of the targeted households are illiterate and they can’t protest this corruption by their own and they believe that the program is like an aid. But the problem should be address from the government. So in the next agenda, corruption and governance issue should be incorporated. Sustainability of the program should also be ensured, because some household today seems to be graduated from poverty but anytime they can also fall into the poverty again, because the sustainable income generating activity is required to make them get out of poverty and nutrition issues. Otherwise, the program will not be successful.
Theme 2:
It is very important to establish good governance, accountability and also political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security. Because in a country like Bangladesh, corruption is the main hurdle for eradicating poverty. Corruption is everywhere. The victims are the poor people those who need help and those who seek service. From healthcare to job sector, you have to bribe the authority. It becomes an open secret matter. Everyone knows but no one can do anything. Civil society is shouting but the government itself is corrupted. The security, law and order, police everyone is corrupted. So whenever, a goal like MDGs comes the fifty percentage of money goes to the pocket of the authority. So Political will, accountability and governance should be improved in the country. There should be a goal in the next agenda that corruption level should be declined by more than 50% by next five years.
Theme 3:
I think the set of objectives that has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC) is alright.
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
258
f. Zero corruption in development projects like MDG goals.g. Sustainability of the food and nutrition programh. Climate change affected people should be most priority and full support with zero corruption.i. Increase the social security for all, especially for the vulnerable people.j. Access to communication technology to all.
These goals may be in some cases country specific and regional also. The climate, culture and geography are different from country to country. So region specific goals should also be addressed in the next agenda.
Mohammad Monirul Hasan Senior Research Associate, InM
http://www.monir1021.blogspot.com/
193) Maria Eugenia Rinaudo Mannucci, Environmental Analyst, Venezuela
First I would like to thank the whole team that made this public consultation on the major challenges we face in the world.
By the way, I would like to share with you, this famous phrase of Vandana Shiva: "Humans have forgotten that water comes from rain and the food comes from the earth. We came to believe that food and water are the products of a company".
Theme 1
Initially, I think that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are major challenges for today's global society. They are facing in cooperation and governmental and institutional partnerships to improve the quality of life of millions of people at the present time, suffer from poverty, hunger and lack of development in their communities.
We learned a lot about the evolution of the MDGs over the years, which, in my opinion, all have been successful, however, I revealed several challenges still remain to be fulfilled in relation to objectives 1, 3, 4, 6 and 8. Global efforts undertaken by the United Nations with governments and communities has been really important and satisfying. I think we are on the right way to combat the major global challenges such as poverty, hunger and climate change (economic and environmental issue that directly affects the aforementioned issues).
I think these are the profound challenges we face:
Effective international cooperation to combat hunger and poverty. Continue to encourage the training of persons to offices of local interest, which may contribute to endogenous development and at the same time to the local economy.
Undertake eco-social studies to determine the influence of climatic changes in high-risk areas, as well as generate and develop action plans to deal with natural disasters caused by climate change (mitigation and adaptation).
Advancing international alliances to promote a "climate-smart agriculture", thus we will be contributing to the creation of carbon sinks, creating green jobs and promoting sustainability and food security.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
259
Another important point that I want to share with you, is the importance of adaptation plans to climate change in agriculture to promote food security and curb poverty and hunger. In Venezuela, I had the opportunity to participate in the final discussion of an Adpatation Program for Climate Change in Venezuelan Agriculture, project that was funded by UNDP to promote development and enhance food security in the country. Studies conducted during this project, unveiled agricultural crops which are more resistant to climate impacts and at the same time, favorable to human health.At the present time, has not yet been made effective this plan, however, we are in the process of generating new local discussions to that end. Theme 2 I think that the strategies that have been developing some countries like: strengthening the capacity of communities through local development, education and application of green technologies for sustainable agriculture, are the main ways we must to take to tackle poverty and hunger. The establishment of green energy technologies and climatically vulnerable areas should be a priority for improving socio-ecological conditions. For example, the construction of solar cookers, is an important and easy to promote local development and ensure as far as possible, adequate food intake. As for my opinion on the current initiatives on the promotion of food security and the eradication of poverty, I think both campaigns mentioned in the question are viable and are doing their best to inform, educate and build partnerships to promote development and prevent hunger. Are represented by ethical and professional technicians, which, I'm sure will continue doing good work in cooperation with local and international campaigns. Theme 3 I agree with all these objectives outlined above, however, I think the main challenge ahead is to encourage all governments (with different development models and political views) to work towards these goals. For example, the case of Latin America is important to evaluate these objectives mentioned above. This continete, is one of the most biodiverse regions on the planet, which helps to strengthen agricultural production for the welfare of citizens (provided, either through a sustainable production). Despite this, the vast majority of people in this space, suffer from hunger. According to the latest report from the FAO (2012), more than 33 million people suffer from hunger (only in South America). We must recognize that Latin America has a massive program to eradicate hunger and poverty called "Latin America and the Caribbean without Hunger" and that according to previous figures, has fallen quite the number of citizens who suffer from this. However, there are countries in this region that have not taken proper measures to control poverty and hunger. I can properly say that Venezuela is one of them, which unfortunately, in recent years has increased the number of poor in the country, which do not have sufficient financial support for food unfit for consumption. Our food production capacity has fallen dramatically over the years, while imports have increased despite having large number of nature reserves, agricultural and livestock, as well as, qualified for these tasks.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
260
So I think that our current challenge in relation to these objectives is to promote the governments, the interest required to be agents of change with international organizations committed to these challenges. Thank you so much!
194) Sébastien Paque, WFP, Ecuador
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Buenos días,
Son interesantes los aportes de todos. Me permito dar mi contribución al debate:
Pienso que la lección principal es que el sistema agroalimentario actual no permite lograr los ODM relevantes para el hambre, la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y además va en contra del ODM 7 (sostenibilidad del medio ambiente).
El principal reto a futuro es construir sistemas alimentarios que puedan de verdad alimentar a todos de forma correcta, sin perjudicar al medio ambiente y a las generaciones futuras. Estos sistemas deberían estar centrados en el campesino, valorando su rol en la sociedad y dándole las oportunidades de mantener una vida digna, considerando que actualmente muchas personas que padecen del hambre son campesinos o viven en zona rural.
La principal oportunidad es la presencia aún de pequeños campesinos y de saberes campesinos que nos ofrecen construir sistemas alimentarios diferentes, adaptados a cada contexto local. Además, en muchas partes del mundo, han nacido iniciativas de campesinos/consumidores que demuestran que otros sistemas son posibles (ferias solidarias, canastas, cooperativa, huertos urbanos, granjas de formación, fincas agroecológicas, etc.). Estas experiencias deben ser replicadas.
El sistema alimentario debería basarse en la agricultura campesina familiar para asegurar la soberanía alimentaria de los países o regiones. El principal objetivo del sistema alimentario debe ser alimentar a las poblaciones y no el negocio. Es necesario garantizar el acceso a los campesinos a los medios de producción (tierra, agua, capital, etc.) a través de reformas agrarias adaptadas.
La producción agrícola debería basarse en la agroecológica para lograr la sostenibilidad energética y ambiental y así independizarla del petróleo y de las multinacionales. Para eso, es importante repensar la formación e investigación. La formación de los agricultores y agrónomos debe ser repensada y basada sobre la práctica. Los presupuestos de investigación se deberían redirigir a las técnicas agroecológicas y a la agricultura campesina de pequeña escala, con un enfoque particular a la agricultura de los países del Sur.
Hay que tomar medidas, para que las tierras cultivables sean cultivadas para alimentar a las poblaciones y no para producir biocombustibles.
Habría que repensar la producción, la transformación y la comercialización a un nivel local. Los circuitos cortos deben ser priorizados acabando con los alimentos kilométricos.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
261
Por otro lado habría que cambiar los patrones de consumo ya que sabemos que el consumo alto de proteínas animales, que se está imponiendo actualmente, no es sostenible a un nivel ambiental y energético. Por otro lado, las poblaciones menos favorecidas necesitan ser capacitadas para poder aprovechar de la mejor forma los alimentos al nivel nutricional.
Un saludo desde Quito.
Sébastien
[English translation]
Good morning,
All your contributions are interesting. I would like to share my impressions on the topic under discussion:
I believe that the main lesson to be drawn is that the current agri-food sector does not allow meeting the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition MDGs, and is also against MDG number 7 (environmental sustainability).
The main challenge for the future is developing food systems that are really capable of adequately feeding the whole population, environmentally friendly and non detrimental for future generations. Bearing in mind that many people suffering from hunger nowadays are farmers or live in rural areas, these systems should be focused on farmers, recognizing their role in society and giving them the necessary opportunities to sustain a decent life.
The major opportunity is the current presence of smallholders and their knowledge that offer the possibility of developing alternative food systems, adapted to each local context. Furthermore, in many parts of the world, several farmers/consumers initiatives have been launched showing that other systems are possible (solidarity fairs, baskets, cooperatives, urban gardens, training farms, agro-ecological farms, etc.). These experiences should be replicated.
The food system should be based on family farming to ensure the national or regional food sovereignty. The main target of the food system must be feeding the population and not making business. Access of the farmers to the means of production (land, water, capital, etc.) should be guaranteed through adapted agricultural reforms.
Agricultural production should be based on agro-ecological farming to ensure its energetic and environmental sustainability and avoid its dependency on oil and multinationals. For this purpose, it is important to reconsider training and research. Training of farmers and agronomists should be mainly practical. Research budgets should be reallocated to the investigation of agro-ecological techniques and small-scale farming, with a special focus on the agriculture of southern countries.
Measures should be adopted to ensure that croplands are exploited to feed the population and not to produce biofuels.
Production, processing and marketing at local level should be reconsidered. Short itineraries for food transportation should be prioritized and long routes dismissed.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
262
On the other hand, consumption patterns should be modified as we know that the currently prevailing high intake of animal protein is not energetically nor environmentally sustainable. Furthermore, less favoured populations need to be trained to get more from food at nutritional level.
Regards from Quito.
195) Simon Ross, Population Matters, UK [third contribution]
We believe that addressing the demand side, population growth and high per capita consumption, is an important part of any strategy for food and nutrition security.
Simon Ross
Population Matters
Food and Nutrition Security in the Post-2015 Development Agenda - Submission by Population MattersThis submission is in response to the call for papers
Theme 1: What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?The world population increased during that period by over one third i.e. two billion people. Until we stabilize population numbers, we are always trying to hit a moving target which is moving away from us. We are also putting ever more pressure on limited resources, particularly land, water, energy and fisheries. The key lesson is that we should seek to limit demand for food as well as increase supply of it.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?One of the main demand side challenges continues to be population growth. During the period 2015-2030, the UNDESA Population Division medium projection is that the population will grow by 14% or over one billion people. This assumes a continued reduction in the global birth rate; the actual growth in population could well be more than that. Another demand side challenge is dietary change with a move in some strata of developing countries to a more meat based, input intensive diet. On the supply side, one of the principal groups of challenges is to key agricultural inputs. These include:
- Loss of productive land through urban development, desertification and overuse.- Loss of productive land to biomass production- Loss of aquifers and river water through overuse due to increased demand, pollution and
saltwater infiltration
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
263
- Increased energy costs, particularly of fuel oil, whose portable nature makes it particularly suitable for agricultural machinery and distribution, due to increased demand and limited supply
- Increased fertilizer costs due to higher energy and mineral costs.
Depletion of marine and freshwater fish stocks by pollution and modern fishing methods is a challenge which should be considered and addressed. Increased impact of plant pests and disease due to monocultural farming practices and growing resistance to pesticides.Climate change has the potential to affect food productivity in major, though uncertain, ways:
- Sea warming, leading to reduction or migration of edible species- Increased scale and quantity of natural disasters- Increased severity and quantity of extreme weather events- Greater uncertainty of rainfall and other weather patterns- Reduction in glacial supplies of water for irrigation.
These are opportunities in the greater use of appropriate technologies. Another opportunity is to accelerate the declining birth rate by promoting rights based family planning, women’s empowerment and the benefits of smaller families.
Theme 2: What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?One important strategy to addressing these challenges should be to reduce and ultimately halt the growth in demand for food. This should be done in two ways:
- Encourage the adoption of healthy diets which have limited calorie intake and are balanced between different food groups
- Seek to limit and then stabilize human population growth.
The latter can be achieved through rights based family planning, women’s empowerment and through promoting the personal and social benefits of smaller families.
Theme 3:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
264
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
These seem to be valid objectives and all of them would be easier to achieve with slower or no population growth. The following additional objectives address this point:
1. It seems important to have maximum population size as a goal.The UN DESA Population Division medium (most likely variant) projection for 2030 is 8.3 billion. Limiting numbers to 8 billion is a modest difference, but would establish the principle of the world population limitation goal. Moreover, it will still require a marked fall in the birth rate (see below).
SDG: Limit the world population to 8 billion by 2030. 2. The birth rate. The UN DESA Population Division projects (medium projection) the Net
Reproduction Rate (daughters per women) to fall from 1.08 in 2005-10 to 1.02 in 2025-30.
SDG: Limit average total fertility rate to 2 children per woman.3. Access to family planning is critical in empowering people to manage their fertility.
SDG: Universal access to a full range of affordable family planning commodities and services.4. Employment of women motivates couples to limit their family size.
SDG: Ensure gender parity in employment rates.5. We support contraction and convergence between the rich and poor, as this would
tend to reduce the birth rate. Under the MDGs, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty i.e. under $1.25 per day fell by half from 1990 to 2010. However, a smaller proportion of a larger number can still be a larger number, as has happened in Africa; and it is numbers of people, not rates or proportions, that need ever-increasing food, water, soil, energy etc.
SDG: Reduce the number of people in extreme poverty by half.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
265
6. Increasing workforce participation would serve to reduce the demand for additional births and is inherently more sustainable. Currently, 200 million people are unemployed (ITUC).
SDG: Reduce the number of unemployed and under-employed by half.7. Secondary education for women increases female workforce participation. Gender
parity of participation in primary education was achieved by the MDGs.
SDG: Achieve gender parity in secondary education.8. Child marriage undermines women’s employment options, and increases birth rates.
SDG: End marriage under the age of eighteen.9. We should not subsidize larger families in general in order to lower the birth rate.
SDG: End payments or other benefits related to the number of children except for reasons of health, education and targeted poverty alleviation.
10. A reduction in the desired family size is essential to reduce the birth rate. Social marketing should be used to encourage smaller families.
SDG: Achieve a majority preference for a family size of two or fewer.11. Sex education is important in birth rate reduction, though hard to measure.
SDG: Provide universal sex and relationships education, including family planning.12. Safe abortion is an essential contingency preventing unwanted pregnancy where
contraception fails. With good family planning services and education, abortion should be legal, safe, and increasingly rare.
SDG: Provide access to legal and safe abortion on demand.
Simon RossPopulation Matters135-137 Station RoadLondon E4 6AGUnited Kingdomwww.populationmatters.org
196) Saba Mebrahtu, Univcef, Nepal
Dear All,
Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
266
Multi-sector partnership is crucial for achieving the goal of zero stunted children less than 2 years old - which in turn requires high level political commitment to bring all the key sectors on board, and to commit to work towards attaining this goal in a coherent and coordinated manner.
(1) Ensuring 100% access to adequate food all year round is essential but it is not sufficient - other causes of chronic under-nutrition need to be addressed simultaneously - such as access to improved sanitation, safe water and hygiene. This will require for instance - the agriculture sector partnering with Ministry responsible for water resource management and promotion of hygiene practices - which is often the domain of two Ministries - Public Health + Water resource management etc..
(2) My concern would be that the poor with very limited or no access to productive resources (e.g poor landless laborers) will be missed from agriculture based interventions which aim to improve productivity of small-scale farm households - such as disadvantaged families or vulnerable population groups. An approach that has been proven effective is social transfers (in kind or cash transfers) to protect the most vulnerable from food insecurity, hunger and chronic under-nutrition. In that case, strengthening partnership between health/nutrition and social protection sectors is crucial to ensure that these schemes have adequate duration - during the narrow window of opportunity (pregnancy to two years of age), adequate value, and are combined with nutrition education for better nutritional outcomes.
(3) I am also concerned that gender is not emphasized enough - there are a number of gender related factors that need to be tackled (e.g. early marriage, heavy workload and poor care during pregnancy which are largely due to traditional beliefs and women's low social status). So, unless maternal care and nutrition is seriously tackled - it will be difficult to achieve the zero stunting goal by the age of two years. Here Civil Society could play an important role - to help bring about social and behavior change. I feel that this is not emphasized enough especially in the above five objectives.
All in all agriculture and food-based approach needs to be well integrated in a coherent manner with WASH/Social Protection/gender to achieve results, and an important pre-requisite is a high level political commitment to coordinate the key relevant Ministries including Civil Society.
197) Climate Emergency Institute, Canada
Please find below the link to the input from the Climate Emergency Institute.
Yours Sincerely
Peter Carter
Theme 1:What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The conclusion that the impacts of global climate change are going to prevent the attainment of the MDGs and even roll back what has been achieved.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
267
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
With respect to populations (billions of people) that the MDGs address, there are two emergency challenges with respect to increasing losses of food. 1. The immediate escalation in world prices and price volatility due to global warming-driven, -increasing and -prolonged regional drought in the US grain belt and the northern hemisphere.2. The well-known fact that the most climate change vulnerable regions and populations will suffer food production losses for even small increases in temperature. "At lower latitudes, especially seasonally dry and tropical regions, crop productivity is projected to decrease for even small local temperature increases 1.0-2.0°C" [0.8-1.5ºC globally from pre-1900], IPCC 2007.These are definite emergencies demanding emergency action now because of already committed future global warming that will be several times higher than today’s.Drought at already committed warming is disastrous to catastrophic for food production (see image 3). The 2013 Maplecroft Global Food Security Risk Index 2012 has found that food security in 75% of African countries is at the stage of extreme risk. Dr. Innocent Matshe, Director of
-2-Training, African Economic Research Consortium, Kenya, says one big element of the problem for agriculture in Africa, which is spreading, is climate change.Due to systemic climate inertias and lags, even if an all-out emergency cut in emissions happened this year, the planet would still warm by 3ºC this century. Robert Watson, at the December 2012 American Geophysical Union Conference, estimated that we are committed to at least a 3ºC warming now and that the 2ºC policy limit is unattainable. For this reason, from now on we live in a world of increasing food and nutrition insecurity – affecting almost all regions. This is certain because we have increasing global warming-driven extreme weather events globally and increasing northern hemisphere regional drought. The challenge extends far beyond the MDGs, to the increasing risk of committing ourselves today to the future collapse of world agriculture. Today's committed unavoidable global warming, together with no plan even to reverse global greenhouse gas emissions, condemns the future to deep declines in world food output with reducing output in all regions. This is a formula for the collapse of world agriculture. The immediate food emergency challenge is the increasing trend in extreme heat and prolonged drought in the northern hemisphere, driving up world prices. The US great grain belt is in a 3-year increasingly severe drought, which the US Drought Monitor forecasts will last into April 2013 (see image 2). The Russian grain belt is still in drought. Southwest China is still in drought after 3 years (see image 1).Clearly 2013 is going to be another bad year for northern hemisphere drought and this is a world food and climate change emergency. This is all happening at today's global warming of 0.8°C. Committed global warming this century is 3ºC (P. Carter, Climate Change Impacts and Responses, in publication; Robert Watson, American Geophysical Union Conference, December 2012). The commitment due to the combined national UN
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
268
emission reduction pledges is 4.4ºC by 2100 (Climate Interactive). The current world economy heading is 6ºC by 2100 (International Energy Agency). A new world food economy is urgently demanded, one that at least does not allow food price speculations and that protects world grain reserves.
Theme 2: What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on.
Nothing is going to help long-term world hunger unless the climate change planetary emergency is acknowledged and emergency climate change mitigation is integrated into hunger, food and nutrition insecurity initiatives.
Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
The Climate Emergency Institute researches and reports on global climate change as the human rights – and now injustice – issue of all time. This is the worst ever global human rights abuse and
-3-extreme injustice to billions of the most climate change vulnerable today and all future generations. Accountability and political commitment stem from and must be linked to this reality.
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
The Zero Hunger Challenge barely recognizes global climate change. Hunger will only increase from now on without global climate change mitigation leading the challenge. Billions of people are now at extreme risk by the combination of climate change vulnerability and food security vulnerability (see Maplecroft, image 4).
Theme 3:For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZH):a. 100% access to adequate food all year round b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. All food systems are sustainable d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income e. Zero loss or waste of food.
All of these are essential and should apply globally.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
269
Escalating food prices to be expected from now on will hurt the poorest regions and the poorest in all regions. None of these are attainable long term unless emergency global climate change mitigation and adaptation leads. A new food security world economy to address the world food climate change crisis is essential first.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
The extent of hunger, food and nutrition insecurity from now on will be determined by the extent to which the planetary climate change emergency is acknowledged and responded to by drastic emergency mitigation interventions. Without this, world agricultural output will collapse, and with it, civilization. Biofuel production must be terminated – it has been found to be a significant net carbon emitter.If those advocating and responsible for addressing hunger, food and nutrition security do not acknowledge today’s committed global climate change world food emergency and urge an all-out world emergency response, these good intentions will remain only good intentions and we will all eventually suffer increasing food costs and deprivations.
http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/6%20Jan%20FAO%20Hunger%20MDGs%20%282%29.pdf
198) Subhash Mehta, Devarao Shivaram Trust, India
My thoughts on a more integrated multi sect oral response to meeting the nutritious food needs through agriculture in addition to my contributions 134 and 182; I am sharing Prof Dr Amar KJR Nayak’s case study (www. navajyoti.org) on how he and his colleagues, over a short term, have transformed one of the poorest communities in South Asia to one of long term sustainability by following the low cost integrated agriculture of the area for meeting their nutritious food needs, by using the producer org/ company (PC) intervention staffed by professionals ( creating human and institutional capacity among rural educated as general practitioners in agriculture) to manage risk, take over problems and responsibilities, other than on farm activities of their members, reduced hunger, mal nutrition, poverty, effect of climate change and suicides while improving livelihood, net income and purchasing power:
Integrated Low Cost Agriculture for Internal Consistency and External Synergy for Sustainability of Smallholder Farmers: Case of Nava Jyoti Agricultural Community
XIMB Sustainability Seminar Series, Working Paper 4.0 , August 2012
Amar KJR Nayak1
Abstract
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
270
Both from a theoretical perspective and empirical evidences from smallholder agricultural community, the paper argues that technology intensive agriculture is unsuitable for smallholder farmers [most believe that ecological agriculture is technology intensive] in rural agricultural settings. It argues that integrated low cost agriculture is internally consistent for sustainable agriculture and externally synergistic to smallholder farmers, local ecology and greater overall performance to different stakeholders. Performance of smallholder farmers and the processes adopted in Nava Jyoti community over the last three years and evidences from a sample of organic farmers in India suggests that integrated low cost agriculture is the only way for sustainability of our food production system at the base of the pyramid; that could ensure food sufficiency, nutritional security and environmental safety for all. Intensive Agricultural Technology with GM Crops at its core may only be an illusion for food security.
Key Words
Food security, agricultural technology paradigm, smallholder farmer, net farmer income, internal consistency, external synergy, integrated low cost agriculture, sustainability
1 ©Amar KJR Nayak, Professor of Strategy and NABARD Chair Professor, Xavier Institute of
Management, Bhubaneswar, Email: [email protected]
Link to complete paper: http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Navajyoti%20case%20study.doc
199) Jean-Christophe S. Djiman Toudonou Ingénieur Agroéconomiste, Benin
[Original contribution in French]
Au crépuscule des OMD,en particulier en ce qui concerne les OMD liés à la faim, à la sécurité alimentaire et à la malnutrition, je peux dire que beaucoup d'efforts ont été effectuer mais l'atteinte de ces objectifs semble être un mirage, cas toute les actions qui concourraient à la réalisation de ces nobles objectifs étaient toutes divergentes et ceci surtout dans les zones dites les plus vulnérable. En effet les indicateurs, les proxys d'évaluation du niveau de vie, l’état nutritionnel, de la sécurité alimentaire dans le monde, ne sont pas encore connus de tous et partagés pas tous ou encore maitrisés pas tous, ce qui rend très relatif le choix des réels cibles, par conséquent le nombre d'individu souffrant de la faim n'est pas souvent bien couvert. L'instabilité politique, et les crises géopolitiques influencent énormément, les rapports d'évaluation. C'est en cela que je trouve que aucun engagement politique en tous cas en Afrique pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle semble être une épée de Damoclès cas la maturité politique n'est pas encore chose évidente,donc c'est donné un outils de plus pour assujettis les populations déjà vulnérables et renforcer plus encore l'anneau infernal de la faim, la pauvreté, et tous ces vices. Comme le dit un adage de chez moi : « pour être chef, assure toi de maitriser la faim des gens ». Une action pluridisciplinaire, intersectorielle ce veux obligatoire et surtout la formation des jeunes pour qu'ils deviennent des spécialistes très avérer. un objectif: rendre les OMD accessibles dans toutes les langues maternelles principales des pays du monde pour favoriser la bonne compréhension des indicateurs dans un délais de 2 ans après l'élaboration des nouveaux OMD.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
271
[English translation]
Now that we are close to the end of the MDGs time frame, in particular with regard to the MDGs related to hunger, food security and malnutrition, I can say that although much has been done, the achievement of these objectives seems to be a mirage, since the actions that could contribute to meeting these noble goals were all divergent, especially in the so-called most vulnerable zones. Indeed the indicators, proxies to assess the living standards, nutritional status, food security in the world, are not yet known to all and not shared nor mastered by all. This is why the choice of real targets is still very uncertain and the number of individuals suffering from hunger is often not well apprehended. Political instability and geopolitical crises greatly influence the evaluation reports. Thus I think that any political commitment to ensure food and nutrition security, at least in Africa, seems to be a sword of Damocles because of problems linked with political maturity, which often contribute to further subjugate already vulnerable populations and strengthen the infernal ring of hunger, poverty, and all these vices. As the saying goes from my country, “to be a chief, be sure to master people's hunger”. An interdisciplinary, intersectoral action is mandatory, especially to give young people a through specialist training, with one goal: to make the MDGs accessible in all major native languages of the world, in order to promote the understanding of the indicators within a period of 2 years after the development of the new MDGs.
200) Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance, Switzerland
Inspired by Christian ethics and human rights principles, members and partners of the Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance (EAA) advocate for justice and dignity for all, and especially for the poorest and most marginalized who are often overlooked in policy-making and implementation. The EAA focuses its collective efforts by campaigning on two key issues per four-year cycle (currently Food, and HIV and AIDS).Thus, through our global alliance representing tens of millions of Christians around the world, our work on food and agriculture especially focuses on support for small-scale farmers, whose production capacity is the foundation of food security in much of the developing world, but whose interests are frequently ignored in relevant policy and practice. Based on our members’ long experience of working with farmers and agricultural communities around the world, and with governments at national and international levels, we welcome the opportunity to submit the following reflections.
Theme 1 – Key lessons, challenges and opportunitiesThe MDG process afforded us many important lessons which should be taken into consideration, including:
The importance of a framework for galvanizing political will: In setting the MDGs, States expressed the political will to reach concrete outcomes. The international declaration coming out of a Summit of World Leaders provided the framework with the visibility and high-level support essential to ensuring at least some level of accountability and monitoring of the
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
272
implementation of the MDGs. A new development framework would require a similarly high level of visibility and political support.
The importance of such a framework for boosting resources and drawing attention to the issues highlighted as priorities: In a number of countries, some of the goals were incorporated in national development policies. The framework’s emphasis on social sectors helped shift political attention somewhat away from an exclusive prioritization of macro-economic growth and towards the human face of development. Having hunger eradication as the first goal also provided an opportunity to leverage stronger attention to the issue. Nevertheless, the root causes of hunger and malnutrition were not thoroughly addressed, and hunger is still used as an excuse to advance discourses on the need to increase production which do not address issues of injustice in access and distribution, which are at the heart of food insecurity.
The importance of time bound commitments: Although there are different opinions on this issue within our constituency, in general we believe that the fact that the MDGs were time-bound commitments made them a valuable instrument for civil society to monitor national and international progress in reaching them and to raise public awareness. In a framework with no linkages to formal accountability mechanisms, the goals along with their targets and indicators – imperfect as they were – and the 2015 deadline were important foundations for efforts to hold governments to account for their MDG commitments.
Failure to address interconnectedness of policies: While the prominent articulation of the goal of halving the proportion of people suffering from hunger in the form of MDG1 Target 1C helped to generate progress in this direction, it remains limited. A general failure to address the interconnectedness of food and agricultural policies and other sectors that impact them, such as trade and fiscal policies related to speculation for instance, persists. And the salience of good nutrition at both the malnutrition and over-consumption ends of the spectrum was inadequately recognized, especially given the new data from the Global Burden of Disease 2012 study showing that obesity-related conditions have now overtaken malnutrition as the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. In addition, the impact of food and agricultural policies on other MDGs such as the health goals (MDGs 4, 5 and 6) were not clearly linked and therefore important synergies were overlooked.
Failure to ensure equal progress. While advances towards achieving the MDGs are to be applauded, it is important to note that they have not all resulted in increased equal progress, and that indeed inequality both within and between countries has increased since 2000. It is therefore vital that the new framework includes specific indicators to measure equity and progress made in reaching vulnerable and marginalized populations. For such purposes, disaggregated data is crucial. In addition, it will also be important to find ways to incorporate qualitative measurements as well as quantitative data.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
273
The main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years include:
Adopting a rights-based approach to food and agricultural policy and practice, integrating the principles and accountability framework of the right to food in relevant policy and practice, and ensuring a focus on the most vulnerable, marginalized and food-insecure people and communities as well as on broader societal needs.
Addressing the interlinkages between agriculture, climate change and food security – both in terms of supporting agricultural adaptation to the effects of climate change (especially among vulnerable food-producing communities in the Global South) and mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the agricultural production sector, especially through scaling up sustainable agroecological food production methods.
Minimizing food waste from the point of production (through investing in improved infrastructure for storage, processing and transportation) to the point of consumption (through addressing wasteful consumer behaviours and procurement and retail policies), so as to reduce radically the proportion of food losses (currently one-third, or 1.3 billion tonnes per annum).
Securing food-producing communities’ land tenure and access to productive resources – especially for women small-scale farmers – including by promoting implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land and other Natural Resources, and preventing land grabbing.
Increasing access to food through the scaling up of cash transfers in the context of rights-based social protection systems.
Regulating financial speculation in food commodities, especially staple crops. Regulating the trade of agricultural commodities so that it does not harm the production of
small-scale farming systems. Ensuring coherence in food and agricultural policies at the international level, through the
instrument of the reformed Committee on World Food Security, and promoting broader recognition and implementation of the recommendations of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).
Focusing on nutritional quality and cultural appropriateness of food, rather than mere quantity.
Highlighting and addressing the emergency and longer-term developmental consequences of infant and child malnutrition.
Addressing the consequences of over-consumption of food globally (including rising consumption of meat), both in terms of distributional equity and – in light of the findings of the GBD 2012 study – the global public health consequences of obesity.
Ensuring that trade policies do not create an environment where small-scale food producers have to compete with subsidized food imports from wealthier countries.
Ensuring that food aid policy and practice avoids negative impacts on the livelihoods and sustainability of food-producing communities at local and national levels, and invests in the productive capacity of those food-producing communities for emergency needs as well as for sustainable longer-term food security.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
274
Bridging the gap between North and South: Development and underdevelopment are still concepts largely drawn in geographic terms – the South vs the North. Yet we are seeing in the context of growing inequalities in all countries that pockets of underdevelopment are increasingly evident even in the world’s richest nations, and vice versa. Of course the magnitude cannot be compared but if the new framework is to be truly visionary it must account for the global trends we are witnessing, such as obesity and other nutritional issues that cut across North and South.
Theme 2 – What works best A rights-based approach: The human right to food, as outlined in the FAO’s 2004 Voluntary
Guidelines, is a necessary foundation for a life of dignity, free from hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition: "The obligation to fulfil (facilitate) means the State must pro-actively engage in activities intended to strengthen people’s access to and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood, including food security. Finally, whenever an individual or group is unable, for reasons beyond their control, to enjoy the right to adequate food by the means at their disposal, States have the obligation to fulfil (provide) that right directly. This obligation also applies for persons who are victims of natural or other disasters." (UN General Comment on the right to food, no 12) International human rights law requires that governments not take actions that result in increasing levels of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. It also requires governments to protect people from the actions of powerful entities or practices that might violate the right to food. States must also, to the maximum of available resources, invest in the eradication of hunger. This should include cash transfers in the context of social protection, as has been prescribed in the ILO Recommendation on Social Protection Floor. Though governments have agreed in principle to respect, protect and fulfil the right to food, their actions do not always put these principles into practice. Thus, people and communities continue to call on their governments to implement the right to food. Ensuring the right to food requires in many contexts access to land. The post-2015 Framework should ensure land rights for small-scale farmers, particularly for women. The Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land and other Natural Resources can play a key role in this.
Coherent, linked-up policy-making on agriculture, food and nutrition at the international level: When the MDGs were drafted, the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) had not yet been reformed. Today it is the most inclusive and comprehensive international platform dealing with food and nutrition security. One of the challenges of eradicating hunger and malnutrition is in fact the fragmentation of policies that can at times contradict each other. For instance the strong focus on increasing production not only has serious ecological and social repercussions but does not account for the problem of access and distribution. As the most legitimate intergovernmental forum on food issues, the CFS aims to provide coherence and coordinate actions at the international level towards the realization of the right to food based on country’s own priorities, and must be central to the future framework for promoting food and nutrition security.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
275
Stronger accountability mechanisms: Related to the above point, one of the deficiencies of the MDGs was the lack of accountability by States to see them through. It is through the human rights framework that States can be held accountable since the principles of transparency and accountability are at the core. The failure of the MDG framework to be centred on human rights meant that accountability was not fully integrated into them. This will remain a challenge for the new framework, but is one that is of vital importance to address. The voluntary nature of the MDGs (specifically the reporting mechanisms) did not offer a strong enough platform to deliver on the goals. Independent mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating reports should be considered with civil society playing an important role.
Focus on smallholder farmers (especially women): Small-scale farmers produce the majority of the world’s food, much of it for local consumption. Given that they are the foundation of food security, key investments must be made to support and empower them – and particularly to liberate the productive potential of women farmers – in order to build a stronger and more sustainable and resilient global food system. An important element of such investments will be support for farmer-to-farmer knowledge exchange networks, and farmers’ collectives for market access purposes. In order for smallholder farmers to further build their adaptive capacity, they must be enabled to practice farming systems that are resilient to climate change, that strengthen the ecosystems of which they are a part and that ensure food security for their families.
Scaling up agroecology: An increasing body of empirical evidence demonstrates the utility of agroecology in food production, sustainability and resilience. Agroecology relies on natural cycling of nutrients, which minimizes the need for external inputs, and reduces waste from the agricultural systems. Through agroecological methods, small-scale farmers combine innovation with traditional knowledge to produce more food, and to boost their resilience to a changing climate. For millions of farmers in dozens of countries, agroecology is delivering economic, environmental and social benefits. This is in contrast to linear systems of production that rely on external inputs for high levels of production. Such systems can have high environmental costs, and increase farmers’ vulnerability to climate change. In order for agroecology to be used on a wider scale, small-scale farmers need to have access to land, seeds, water, relevant extension services, financial tools and local markets, all of which depend on a supportive policy environment. There is also a need for much increased support for the establishment and expansion of farmer-to-farmer networks at local levels throughout the developing world to enable the sharing of information and to support the scaling up of these practices in food insecure areas. For further information on what investments are required to scale up agroecology, we invite you to read the EAA’s report “Nourishing the World Sustainably: Scaling up Agroecology” available at http://tinyurl.com/EAAagroecology2012. This report also presents numerous examples of the successful use of agroecological methods in increasing yields for farmers using locally-available natural resources while lowering or eliminating farmers’ reliance on costly and polluting chemical fertilizers and pesticides around the world.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
276
Social protection and the potential of cash transfers in increasing food security: Many of the most vulnerable and poor people, such as those living with or particularly vulnerable to HIV, are excluded from interventions that seek to enhance their livelihoods. As a rule the “poorest of the poor” have no land and are therefore unable to participate in agriculture projects. Also, children, elderly, caregivers and people suffering from illnesses or physical or mental frailty, are often unable to participate in income generation projects.It is often argued that hunger should be met by a twin track approach, frequently interpreted as immediate relief in kind or as cash, and long-term investments in agricultural productivity. But it has to be recognized that cash transfers, in the context of rights-based social protection systems, is a very important means of decreasing hunger also in the long term. The importance of cash transfers and social protection in promoting health, education and development is increasingly recognized (see for instance the recent World Bank strategy on social protection and labour, and the ILO recommendation on social protection floors). CFS specifically discussed the potential of social protection in the fight against hunger (ref CFS report http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/hlpe/hlpe_documents/HLPE_Reports/HLPE-Report-4-Social_protection_for_food_security-June_2012.pdf).The Post-2015 Development Framework must highlight the importance of increasing access to rights-based social protection, and incentivize the development of nationally-owned and context-sensitive social protection systems, including cash transfers.
The role of civil society organizations in promoting social protection: The State has the main responsibility for providing social protection. This does not, however, mean that civil society is less important. Depending on the local and national context, civil society organizations can play several important roles, examples of which we can witness among EAA members: Help people to claim their rights, for example, by informing disadvantaged people of the
benefits to which they are entitled, helping them to obtain relevant documents, and strengthening people’s capacity to demand their rights through rights-based work.
Advocate in favour of the development of social protection. Monitor the implementation of social protection, draw attention to mistakes and blow the
whistle when representatives of local authorities are corrupt. Participate in the implementation of social protection. In many cases churches and other civil
society organizations have a local presence and capacity that the authorities can make use of in the implementation of social protection.
Complement governmental social protection systems. When governmental social protection is non-existent or poorly developed, there are needs that non-state systems may be able to meet.
Synergies may arise if organizations play several of these different roles simultaneously, but so too conflicts may occur between goals and loyalties, and these are important to address.
The role of the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF): The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) has earned respect as the key multilateral and intergovernmental arena for the governance of agriculture and food policies. The GSF adopted by the CFS in 2012 represents an important step towards harmonizing food and nutrition security policies and achieving a new paradigm on global food, agriculture and nutrition governance, enshrined on more democratic and coherent policies. Importantly, this new paradigm holds human rights, dignity and participation at its foundation. The new framework has the opportunity
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
277
of aligning itself to the CFS’s policy directions, ensuring coherence. It is imperative that the post-MDG framework builds on these good practices.
Ultimately, hunger is caused by poverty (one-third of the world’s population lives on less than $2 a day) and inequality (lack of access to land, seeds, and more), rather than scarcity in food production. The current global structures and systems for producing, buying, selling and sharing food are unjust and must be transformed if we are to achieve food and nutrition security, justice and the right to food for all.
Theme 3 – Objectives, targets and indicators for the Post-2015 Global Development FrameworkThe Zero Hunger Challenge objectives articulate important aspirational goals in the context of global food and nutrition security challenges. However – and depending on whether post-2015 goals are time-bound or not – it is clear that in order to galvanize practical action, and to provide a workable framework for meaningful accountability, the post-2015 goals must be both aspirational AND practical, hopefully more practical than the MDGs. The objectives should be context specific, bearing in mind that governance levels, resource endowments, and the effect of climate-change on agriculture differs from one region to another and political leverage at international forums vary across regions. One-size-fits-all objectives might easily become contentious if not nuanced by regional characteristics and priorities. In particular, it will be vital that middle-income countries are an essential component of the post-2015 framework, in order to ensure that poor and marginalized groups in these countries are reached.The objectives should also set clear priorities: At the global level, a compromise should be sought to firmly privilege the most urgent actions over profit-making-led concerns. An ethically-grounded post-2015 global development agenda should prioritize those actions serving to rehumanize social relations around food, advocate for the fulfillment of the Right to Food, promote critical research and philosophical thinking on sustainable agriculture, include explicit ways to reduce overconsumption, and leverage on-going efforts to fill the gap between the hungry and the overfed. Additional objectives to consider:
a. Objective/s addressing the nutritional and equity challenges associated with over-consumption and increasing global obesity.
b. Objectives concretizing targets for investment (international and domestic) in agricultural infrastructure in the developing world (to reduce post-harvest losses), to reduce food waste by retailers and consumers, and to change consumption patterns among populations at risk of obesity.
c. Objectives related to increases in agroecological extension programs, farmer-to-farmer networks, and farmers’ cooperatives.
d. Objectives related to the access to social protection.e. Objectives related to the purpose of trade in agricultural commodities.f. Integrating recommendations from the IAASTD report as objectives/targets.g. Objectives related to the integration of the right to food in relevant policy frameworks at
national levels, and national ratification of relevant instruments (including the ICESCR and its Optional Protocol).
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
278
h. Objectives related to security of land and resource tenure for smallholder farmers, especially women farmers (based on the Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land and other Natural Resources)
201) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [fifth contribution]
III. Qs on themes and content of a new framework: 12. To what extent can we capitalize on MDGs achievements and failures in developing our post-2015 development agenda? To a great extent and to begin with, the agenda can not again be drawn top-down --a challenge that I still see unresolved. Opening up the consultation to development workers worldwide reading this is only a variance of a top-down model. We not only can, but must capitalize on both the positive and negative lessons learned from the MDGs. Which lessons? Ask the recipients of MDG ‘benefits’! This calls for governments and local civil society the world over to jointly open, in the next year, a wide dialogue on post-2015 options. Seed funding is needed if we are serious about this. 13. What is the legacy agenda of the existing MDGs that will be inherited in the next framework? Which elements should be revised in the light of lessons learned, such as the importance of girls’ education and gender equality? Positive points notwithstanding, the legacy of MDGs shortcomings, as I see them, is that they had donor over-influence; had a technical over-emphasis; paid no attention to acting on the underlying social and economic inequalities; they lacked a systematic long-term financial commitment; had a predominant focus on health and education; and overlooked the entire participation and political economy contexts. Furthermore, they did not quantify the obligations of the rich countries (this assumed that poverty is a problem of poor people only); actions to be taken in the rich countries must simply be part of the next framework.Poverty was defined in the MDGs as a state in which people have to live in the equivalent of less than $US 1 a day (but inflation is likely to make the one dollar in 2000 worth around 60 cents by 2015); and China, Cuba, and Vietnam (where, by the way, I live, so I am in a position to know), have long focused on structural development concerns, but have not labeled them as ‘Millennium Development Goals’, i.e., not wanting to play the MDGs game. These are all shortcomings we do not want to carry over to the next framework. Beware: the elements to be revised, such as the ones insinuated in the question, are not for us reading this questionnaire to decide! Additions and revisions are to come from consultations with claim holders and duty bearers down below in many little places giving this process the flexibility needed in terms of the participative selection of contents and the timing of their participative introduction. 14. Which issues were missing from the MDGs and should now be included? How to address inequality, jobs, infrastructure, financial stability, and planetary boundaries? It is not for us to decide these issues. They must come from dialoguing with claim holders and duty bearers at national and sub-national level importantly including women and youth organizations,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
279
trade unions, social movements, parliamentarians, local civil society organizations, organizations of migrants (who cannot be ostracized as non-citizens!)…Inequalities are a result of power imbalances so, obviously, the organization of a counter-power is the answer for the next period; rights holders have to become de-facto claimants through processes of empowerment and social mobilization.Employment issues must be discussed directly with trade unions for inputs.Nobody knows better the shortcomings in infrastructure than their daily users (and/or those who need it and do not have it); we have to reach out to get their inputs.Financial instability is a trademark of the cycles of boom and bust of capitalism and, as we now know better, is caused by the reckless behavior of greedy megabanks and financial institutions and individuals. Global and national regulation --including people’s audits-- must keep them at bay making sure taxpayers never again bail them out for the disasters they bring about. A Tobin-type tax is an issue whose time has (belatedly) come. People’s audits also must be introduced to look into the issues of odious foreign debt in poor countries.For planetary boundaries, we should fall back on work done by UNEP and in Rio; but what is needed for the new framework is to set aside funding to educate the public at large, all over the world, about these boundaries so as to make this an additional topic of their empowerment and mobilization. All the above notwithstanding, remember the most crucial element missing in the MDGs was a conceptual framework of the causes of underdevelopment (or maldevelopment) alluded-to earlier. 15. How should a new framework incorporate the institutional building blocks of sustained prosperity, such as freedom, justice, peace and effective government? I wish I understand what ‘institutional building blocks’ are. So I am a bit at a loss here. But anyway, first of all, the concept of sustained prosperity must be de-linked from the concept of economic growth with the latter having to be seriously questioned.Freedom, justice and peace are all embedded in the human rights framework which will have to, once and for all, be the guiding framework for post-2015 development agenda. [It is a real pity (or a scandal? ) we are facing having to wait another 24 months for this to become true!]. As for effective government, I have always said that elected officers are as good as the people who elected them; electors deserve those they elect(ed). The problem is that (the often anachronistic and formal) representative democracy is made use of every 4, 6 or 8 years. “You made a bad choice? You are stuck till the next election”. Under these circumstances, nothing short of making the accountability/watch dog function a function of civil society (with commensurate funding) will be good enough in the new framework. Actually, the ultimate purpose of social mobilization is the application of local direct democracy to remedy the serious shortcomings of representative democracy. 16. How should a new framework reflect the particular challenges of the poor living in conflict and post-conflict situations? I assume that by ‘the poor’ actually the question means ‘poor people’ (or people living in poverty). I hope I make my point…
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
280
If we are talking about ‘particular challenges’, can we expect the new framework to have general recommendations here? Is this a contradiction? Would global recommendations have any chance to work?I strongly feel this is, par-excellence, a topic for South-South cooperation (with commensurate funding). Countries living in conflict and/or post-conflict can give better advice to others on what to do/not to do. The international community’s help should come in the implementation of the recommendations coming from such S-S cooperation --the help firmly based on the principles of their extra-territorial human rights obligations now recognized by ECOSOC. 17. How can we universalize goals and targets while being consistent with national priorities and targets? The first question I have here is: Must we again universalize goals and targets? And then: Does the MDGs experience tell us universalization of national level targets was a good thing so as to follow it now? I have said that I personally prefer the setting of benchmarks over the setting of goals and targets (whatever the difference is between these two).National priorities have to be based on a progressive realization of human rights long-term plan with annual benchmarks. The priorities must be disaggregated to the district/municipality level so as to first concentrate actions on the x% of the most marginalized ones. (Vietnam has done so with a hundred thirty some districts). [This applies equally to giving priority to marginalized groups in society; I do not need to name them here since they are well known]. This all is what the human rights based approach calls for! So, nothing new here. In this case, we are talking about a human rights principle that is not subject to progressive realization, but calls for immediate implementation, namely the principle of non-discrimination.The only way another set of universal goals is going to get us further in the next phase is to mandate those goals be achieved in each district/municipality and not as a national average.
18. How will a new framework encourage partnerships and coordination between and within countries at all stages of development, and with non-state actors such as business, civil society and foundations? If the framework should encourage partnerships and which partnerships is the first question to be asked here. We need to know which partnerships the question refers to. Partnerships with whom?‘Partnerships’ between countries have a very sorry historical past in the realm of neo-colonialism. Partnerships in traditional ODA do not have much to show for either in terms of each partner wielding equal weight in decision-making (this includes partnerships with often non-transparent/non-democratic mega philanthropies and foundations). South-South partnerships are an upcoming potentially promising avenue the new framework should definitely refer to, explore and foster.A special worrisome ‘animal’ here are public-private-partnerships that have been plagued by devastating conflicts of interest and by claims of white-washing the conscience of participating TNCs. Quite a bit has been written about this and I will not go into more details. (I call your attention to seminal work done on this by IBFAN and by Judith Richter).[It would be desirable the new framework calls for greater transparency of mega philanthropies with an opening-up of their internal decision making processes].
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
281
The new framework simply has to put in place mechanisms through which governments together with representatives of civil society have a controlling stake in all partnerships. Governments and civil society organizations have learned (and suffered) by now and are now up-to-the-job, from now on, to take this mandated role. At global level, PPPs are also a big worry at the UN in general (Global Compact) and in UN agencies. The People’s Health Movement has been active in denouncing this state of affairs in WHO calling for concrete and definitive measures to be taken. The question also calls for coordination between countries and within countries. The latter, I understand well. But does ‘between countries’ refer to foreign aid? If yes, I have made my point. If not, this coordination will have to be further explained. 19. How specific should the Panel be with recommendations on means of implementation, including development assistance, finance, technology, capacity building, trade and other actions? I would say the Panel should not be specific on such means, but perhaps propose a range of options. It is for the participatory country and sub-country level to work on them and gain full ownership of the ones finally selected. There should be a specific time period and funding set aside for this.As regards development assistance, foreign aid has to be made to abide by the human rights framework and by the principles of extra-territorial obligations. The transfer of technology is a key additional issue. At grassroots level, the technology has to be appropriate, as decided by its direct future users. Otherwise, we have witnessed how TNCs transfer second hand technology to developing countries --technology they have replaced by a more advanced one in rich countries. This perpetuates underdevelopment and must, therefore, be countered.Capacity building: my experience is in health. I have seen the proliferation of aid-funded vertical programs, be they for TB/HIV/malaria or for family planning… They all duplicate in big part the training offered with the same service provider at the point of delivery being called out for yet another training. Add to this that often different donors repeat the very same training due to a total lack of coordination. The service provider attends mostly for the sitting allowance provided and returns home not applying what has been learned. I call this disease ‘workshopitis’. The remedy? In health, we need roving multidisciplinary provincial teams that go facility by facility, stay 2-3 days in each, observe how services are provided, correct deficiencies, add new knowledge, leave a list of to-dos and return in three or six months to check on changes only to make yet a new round of recommendations, and so on.Trade is also a big problem. Rich countries have stayed away from using WTO as a vehicle for their international trade deals and have opted for bilateral free trade agreements where they can better use their muscle to extricate more favorable conditions. The negative human rights consequences of most of these FTAs are nothing short of appalling. The rich in the poor countries may benefit, but not poor people. The new framework cannot possibly ignore this fact at the risk of coming up with a ‘robbing Peter to pay (rich) Paul’ agenda of development. [Not coincidentally, this also applies to poor countries servicing their odious foreign debt].
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
282
20. How can accountability mechanisms be strengthened? What kind of monitoring process should be established? How can transparency and more inclusive global governance be used to facilitate achievement of the development agenda? The answer is: Through civil society organizations specifically funded to act as watch dogs.The monitoring should be based on annual benchmarks so as to check if on processes set in motion to assure the progressive realization of human rights are on course. (This presupposes each country prepares a long-term progressive realization plan of action with a, say, ten years horizon. The new framework must explicit this).If a more inclusive global governance is to be understood as participatory governance, then the issues pertaining to governance transparency are included in the watch dog function.What this question does not touch-upon is the issue of providing accessible redress mechanisms. The obligation of States is to take steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress any abuse through effective policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication. States must ensure that those affected by business-related abuses or other human rights abuses have access to a prompt, accessible and effective remedy including, where necessary, recourse to judicial redress and non-judicial accountability and grievance mechanisms. The new framework must address this issue.It is well known that CSOs are active in many countries in preparing shadow reports for the UN Human Rights Council. The framework must explicitly encourage CSOs to participate. Once the Council engages in the universal periodic review of the human rights issues of each country it issues recommendations which, unfortunately, are not binding. Mentioning this fact, may help the new framework creating greater consciousness about this shortcoming which could result in some corrective action on this in the future. 21. How can a new framework tackle the challenge of coherence among the organizations, processes, and mechanisms that address issues that are global in scope? [I saw the concept of ‘poverty of ambition’ being used in these post 2015 discussions; I think it fits nicely here].Since Paris has, for all practical purposes failed, I think the in-country coordination of donors and local organizations should be made mandatory for multilateral and bilateral agencies and for non-governmental donors both on general aid and aid by sector. Central in the coordination process will be addressing the global issues that the new framework will suggest be prioritized worldwide with the specific mandate to adopt/adapt them to the local realities and priorities. Coordination meetings are to be chaired by two government representatives ideally from the ministries of planning and finance and must have a representative participation of CSOs. More human and financial resources have to be specifically allocated by donors for such a coordination function.Underlying the actual willingness and commitment of all involved agencies to work in a coherent manner will, in many cases, call for a profound exercise of revisioning and remissioning of what they do based on an honest question: Are we part of the problem or of the solution? The new framework can no longer condone silo mentality, vertical programs, each donor for himself in development work. Service delivery work is not enough; technical capacity building work is not enough; advocacy work is barely enough. Remissioning is about these institutions funding and engaging in empowerment an social mobilization work in the countries they work in.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
283
Globally, it would be highly desirable that the new framework proposes ways to be worked out for the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights also to be involved in coherence, in processes and in mechanisms issues. Furthermore, it seems indispensable that in the post-2015 period the UN special rapporteurs be allocated adequate budgets to allow them to have proper small staffing and more travel funds to do their (excellent) work. 22. How can we judge the affordability and feasibility of proposed goals, given current constraints? Affordability is strictly a country by country matter. Being a cautious optimist, I think the current constraints will be overcome. Therefore, to be prominently kept in mind are the provisions of the extraterritorial obligations of rich countries. This means that countries showing well justified shortcomings to embark in the progressive realization of human rights will go to donor agencies for help. Given that the progressive realization is based on yearly progress marked by benchmarks --and countries will have ad-hoc plans-- donors will be able to commit resources long-term, in tranches, based on the budgeted official progressive realization plan of each country. Coupling this with CSOs participation on accountability issues gives us some hope for (cautious) optimism on feasibility. Affordability/feasibility issues can be and have been addressed successfully in several instances through participatory budgeting initiatives. These ought to have an important place in the post-2015 recommendations.
202) Martine Weve STOP AIDS NOW!, Netherlands
Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
This is a reaction to Ugo Gentilini’s request, for responses on the role of social protection in food security.
Social protection is eminent to promote and protect food security. Important to have a social protection measures in place to ensure that vulnerability of poor people can be reduced in a more sustainable way.
For PLHIV and people affected by HIV food security is an important issue. Without adequate nutrition PLHIV cannot adhere well to their needed medication intake. Food security and therefore social protection systems should be in place so that poor people and marginalised people, like people affected by HIV have access to their basic daily needs, e.g. nutritious food intake. Social protection systems and measures should therefore be accessible to all in need, most marginalized and vulnerable (no discrimination).
Governments and partners constraints in Social protection:o Obvious financial constraints are there. Support on tax system strengthening is needed.
Other ways of financing for the system, through community support efforts.o There is a need for national social protection system or policies… At the moment, many
countries do not have a national policy, so different efforts by different stakeholders, duplication of efforts etc., only focus on one area etc.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
284
o Problems with targeting, not really most marginalized reached and fear for dependency.
Opportunities:o Social protection and food security floor initiatives to be combined = should be pro-
poor and pro-growth (preventive, protective, promotive and transformative social protection objectives).
o Rights-based approach and Child and HIV sensitive.o Role of Civil Society in correct targeting, distribution, implementation.o Role of beneficiaries., SHG systems, kitchen gardens, community cooperativeso Social protection measures to reach multiple goals: food security, right to education,
health, sheltero See, enclosed recommendations for social protection by the Stop AIDS Alliance.
Thanks
Martine Weve, HIV and Livelihoods advisor
Link to recommendations for social protection by the Stop AIDS Alliance: http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Social%20protection%20Recommendations%20Final3.docx
203) CIRASTIC "Collectif Inter-Associatif pour la Réalisation des Activités Scientifiques et Techniques Jeunes au Cameroun", Cameroon
[contribution in French] Hunger, food and nutrition security: towards a post-2015 development…
Notre Raisonnement!- Face aux questions orientées sur la problématique de la Faim, la Sécurité Alimentaire et, Nutritionelle dans le monde : « Comment faire pour y remédier à cette espèce d’injustice honteuse et, latente ? – À qui la faute, première ; lorsqu’on sait pertinemment que les vrais affamés et, attiseurs de l’insécurité alimentaire se trouvent en premier lieu au cœur des offices institutionnels susceptibles d’œuvrer pour son éradication? – De qui se moque-t-on éperdument ? À chaque fin d’une décennie, les Seigneurs autoproclamés du temple de Jupiter (l’ONU ou L’ORNU), nous baratinent avec un scoop nouveau ! Mais Le CIRASTIC persiste et signe disant que : c’est du pauvre appauvrit, que provient de la misère…».
À l’attention de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies (la FAO- le PAM – les OMD) :
Le CIRASTIC répond de justesse aux questions posée sur les trois thèmes : 1- 2- 3
Sur le Thème -1 : Voici ce que pense le CIRASTIC des enseignements à tirer du cadre (1990-2015) des objectifs du Millénaire pour le Développement:
[On a noté la ferveur manifeste des uns et des autres; lors des prises de paroles, des allocutions sous la forme des discours qui ont suscité un brin d'espoir. Mais, hélas!!! -Parce que beaucoup de ce tout dit, ne demeure dans les faits, que des résolutions qui suspendent l’espoir, face au désespoir cuisant. - On a
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
285
vu et compris ; on a attendu dans l’espoir d’entendre l’écho positif du réel escompté ! Mais, encore, hélas! Parce que qu’on néglige le réel au profit du virtuel édulcoré du sophisme au relativisme absolu. Les multiples mobilisations des fonds à débloquer, n’ont jusqu’ici, eu que d’effet positif virtuellement! Sur le vrai terrain escompté, c’est la misère honteuse (…). - Beaucoup de résolutions sur le bon sens qui dénotait la prise de conscience. Et après, rien de concret pour éradiquer ce fléau honteux. - Le minimum des fonds débloqués, aurait dû faire beaucoup de bonnes choses en faveur de ces populations dans le monde en détresse, sous cet angle. Mais, malheureusement encore, une bonne partie de ces fonds récoltés a servi comme d'habitude : à « nourrir les effets virtuels, au détriment de l'essentiel nécessiteux ». D'où notre question sans réponse, à savoir: Qu'est-ce qu'on a fait du minimum de ces fonds alloués qui stimulerait l'envi des mêmes donateurs à toujours donner sans compter? À ce propos précis, les tords sont partagés entre les Donateurs aveugles et les Gestionnaires de ces fonds alloués pour aider les vrais pauvres. - Autre enseignement, est que: les uns et des autres, sont priés d'avoir l'obligeance d'arrêter de se moquer d'eux-mêmes ; en croyant se moquer des populations victimes qui souffrent atrocement de cette injustice honteuse (la faim, l’insécurité alimentaire et la malnutrition, qui ne sont qu’un aspect majeur de la pauvreté appauvrit qui en résulte à la misère…].
B- À propos des principaux défis et opportunités, voici ce que nous pensons:
Si la pauvreté est la pire forme de violence, parce que : «elle est inéluctablement la manifestation de l’injustice exacerbée». - Comme la pauvreté n’affecte pas seulement les pays dits défavorisés; il serait indispensable de conjuguer tous nos efforts en donnant du sens aux formes acquises pour une transformation qui a du sens réel et non virtuel.* Considérant qu’une partie des connaissances liée au savoir du sujet connaissant se situe à l’interface de deux ou, de plusieurs influences positives ou négatives: le défi se situe au niveau de l’interdisciplinarité. Parce que nous mouvons dans un monde en pleine mutation incessante; ce qui nous responsabilise tous! Qu’on le veule ou pas. D’où na nécessité impérieuse de faire preuve au moins pour une fois, de probité intellectuelle. Comment cela ? En bien, en conjuguant nos acquis de forme (atouts, efforts), par la transformation productive escomptée par ces populations de plus 1milliard qui souffrent. pour se faire, nous, nous permettons se rappel 1: (Quels sont, à votre avis, les principaux enseignements qui peuvent être tirés du Cadre (1990-2015) des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le développement (OMD), en particulier en ce qui concerne les OMD liés à la faim, à la sécurité alimentaire et à la malnutrition ? - Quels sont, à votre avis, les principaux défis et opportunités pour parvenir à garantir la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle dans les années à venir?).
Sur le Thème -2- Voici en quelque sorte, une prospective des mesures efficaces qui vont au-delà des effets virtuels très disproportionnés de la réalité escomptée. Le CIRASTIC propose :
- 1- Apprendre à ne plus attendre le temps de l’extrême gravité d’une situation, pour proposer l’apport des secours éclairs ou ponctuels! -2- Il faudrait penser à la mise en œuvre des structures qui vise à améliorer sensiblement à moyen et à long terme, les conditions de vies de toutes ces populations qui subissent cette espèce de misère honteuse et injuste. - En rassemblant et intégrant toutes les différentes catégories de forces vives susceptibles de stimuler et de générer à bon escient les différentes ressources surplace. Ce faisant, l'on tiendra le taureau par les cornes. -3- Multiplier toutes les pistes qui quantifient et qualifient l'expertise valorisante à vulgariser par l'éducation des masses populaires ; les différentes méthodes scientifiques et techniques qui responsabiliseraient chacun. "Nous du CIRASTIC, nous avons des plans de mise en œuvre à proposer sous la forme d'un appel à proposition..."
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
286
B- Quand à l’accent mis sur l'importance sur la gouvernance, le CIRASTIC pense que: «le problème vient du fait de l'ignorance alimentée par l'avidité et l'égocentrisme de certains gouvernants qui laissent sciemment ce tout mesquin, prendre le pas d’avance ; au détriment de la nécessité de faire des choses de manière objective. (Ce qui bénéficierait aussi les masses populaires concernées). D’où l’importance des luttes utiles à mener pour sensibiliser et mobiliser dans l’optique inspirée, réaliste et rationaliste. Afin d’obtenir le pragmatisme qui passe par l'éradication tangible des fléaux honteux et injustes. - C'est une situation qui concerne tous les pays du monde ! Au Bien que les influences d’une problématique diffèrent d’une région à une autre, la question de respect de l’éthique, n’est, l’apanage de personne face à une urgence qui nécessite une action vitale
-C- On ne peut tirer le meilleur parti de toutes ces initiatives que lorsque l'action escomptée est réalisée ! Ou est en train d'être réalisée. Les résolutions ne suffisent plus que l’on les garde dans les bunkers dorés! Nous voulons, et implorons les actions par la mise en œuvre qui intègre la prise en compte de toutes les différentes forces vives des domaines concernés et autres...
NB :«Des résolutions du Secrétaire général des Nations Unies- De la Conférence Rio+20 des Nations Unies sur le développement durable et CSA » Tous, doivent comprendre au-delà des mots que :
Sans la preuve d’un minimum de probité intellectuelle qui contribuerait à valoriser l’éthique, aucune initiative louable ne peut espérer trouver d’effets escomptés. Il faut impérativement que les efforts soient faits de Deux côtés majeurs. À savoir: Des Donateurs d'une part et Receveurs chargés de gérer ces fonds d'autre part. Mais, c’est auprès des Receveurs Chargés de Gérer le Fonds, qu'existe le problème ! Parce que c’est au cœur de leur institution qu’il y a de vrais affamés qui affament ! - De vrais pauvres qui appauvrissent en exhibant au virtuel médiatique, la misère des miséreux qu’ils ont eux-mêmes fabriqués(…). NB : «Si les pauvres qui croupissent dans les institutions et ailleurs; cessent d'appauvrir les victimes miséreux, on aura moins du misérabilisme avéré ! Parce que la misère émane de la pauvreté des pauvres qui s’évertuent à se substituer par tous les moyens aux vrais riches…
-On a vu au sein même de l'office des ONG, plusieurs projets dérobés par ceux qui étaient susceptible de les valoriser! On a vu et on continue à le voir que certains ONG financés, ne font pas ce qu'il faudrait faire sur le terrain! D’où la nécessité impérieuse de sensibiliser tous les partis! C’est ce que nous pensons sans ambages. Le CIRASTIC en est victime de ce système mesquin instauré…
-D- Thème -3- Ce que nous pensons : au-delà du scénario à répétition interminable que l’on nous sort à chaque fin d’une décennie au cœur du socle des Nations Unies. Nous n’espérons que ce nouvel scoop soit véritablement porteur d’espoir; face aux multiples défis honteux à relever :
"La faim qui n'est qu'un, aspect fondamental de l’injustice criarde et honteuse,* Nous osons espérer que le tout dit en terme de résolutions, ne soit pas simplement vide et creux"! *Nous espérons que ça ne sombre pas dans les abîmes de l'obscurantisme édulcoré du sophisme au relativisme absolu. *Nous, du CIRASTIC ; Nous, nous permettons d'implorer un minimum de bon sens et de la compassion face à cette urgence qui s'impose après tant de temps. *NOUS, PENSONS QUE TOUT EST POSSIBLE D’UN SEUL TENANT! À CONDITION DE REDEFINR DANS L’OPTIQUE INSPIREE, REALISTE ET RATIONALISTE, LES RÔLE DE CHAQUE ACTEUR Concerné - chaque partie du monde à ses besoins spécifiques liés à ses propres réalités de tous les jours. Le combat commun, mérite aussi la prise en compte des spécificités par secteurs. NB : Nous u CIRASTIC nous avons de manière explicite, un capital imaginatif à partager sous la forme d’un appel à proposition. – Il s’agit «des initiatives pragmatiques de mise en œuvre qui visent à améliorer sensiblement les conditions de vies des
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
287
populations, multiples ». Notre potentiel imaginatif est à l’échelle continentale. Nous du CIRASTIC, nous persistons à penser que : la lutte contre la pauvreté en général, passe par l’implantation des bases de l'éducation scientifiques et techniques appropriées. Il faut un minimum qui stimule et consolide…
En attendant, Merci de votre bonne compréhension ! Et, au plaisir d’une coopération vraiment franche.
Consolider les Bases-Stimuler le créativité et voir se Développer des liens de solidarité ***
[contribution in English]
Hunger, food and nutrition security: towards a post-2015 development ...Our reasoning! - Face to questions directed to the problem of Hunger, Food Security and Nutritional around the world: "How to remedy this kind of injustice and shameful, latent? - Who is to blame, first, knows when the real hunger and food insecurity catalysts are in the first place at the heart of institutional offices could work for its eradication? - Who are we kidding madly? At each end of a decade, the self-proclaimed lords of the temple of Jupiter (the UN or the ORNU), we flannel with a scoop again! The CIRASTIC but persists and signs saying: it is the poor poorer, that comes from misery ...”
To the attention of the General Assembly of the United Nations (FAO-WFP - MDGs): The CIRASTIC responds accurately to questions asked on three themes: 1 - 2 - 3On Theme -1:
Here's think that the lessons of CIRASTIC framework (1990-2015) of the Millennium Development Goals:[There was fervor manifests each other, when taking words, speeches in the form of speech which aroused a glimmer of hope. But, alas! -Because much of what said it all, does not remain in effect, suspend the resolutions to hope against despair cooking. - We have seen and understood we waited in the hope of hearing the positive response of the real expected! But still, alas! Because it neglects the real benefit of virtual watered sophistry to absolute relativism. Multiple mobilizations funds to unlock have so far only had a positive effect virtually! Expected on the true ground, it is shameful misery (...).- Many resolutions on common sense which denoted awareness. And after, nothing concrete to eradicate this scourge shameful. - The minimum funds released, should have a lot of good things for the people around the world in distress, from this angle. But unfortunately, much of the money raised was used as usual to "feed the virtual effects at the expense of the most needy." Hence our unanswered question, namely:
What we did the minimum of these funds would stimulate the environment of the same donors always give without counting? In this precise, twist Donors are shared between blind and managers of these funds to help the real poor.
- Another lesson is that: each other, are requested to kindly stop making fun of themselves, believing mocking the victims who suffer terribly from this shameful injustice (hunger food insecurity and malnutrition, which are a major aspect of poverty resulting in impoverished misery ...].-B- About Challenges and opportunities, here's what we think:If poverty is the worst form of violence, because "it is inevitable the manifestation of ' exacerbated injustice."
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
288
- As poverty n' not only affect the so-called disadvantaged it would need to combine our efforts in giving meaning to acquired forms for a transformation that has real meaning and not virtual. * Considering that part of the knowledge related to knowledge of the knower is located at the interface of two or , several positive or negative influences:
The challenge at the level of interdisciplinary. Because we move in a constant changing world, which empowers all we ! Like it or not spineless. Where did imperative to exercise at least once, intellectual integrity. How so? As well, combining our assets form (strengths, effort), the productive transformation expected by these populations over 1 billion who suffer. to do so, we allow ourselves to recall 1: (What, in your opinion, the main lessons that can be learned Framework (1990-2015) of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), particularly in the MDGs related to hunger, food security and malnutrition - What are, in your opinion, the main challenges and opportunities for achieving food security and nutrition in the years to come?).
On Theme -2 - Here somehow, a prospective effective measures that go beyond the effects of virtual reality very disproportionate expected. The CIRASTIC offers:-1 - Learning not to wait for the time of the extreme gravity of the situation, to provide input or occasional flashes relief! -2 - Consideration should be given to the implementation of structures that aims to significantly improve in the medium and long term, the living conditions of these people who undergo this kind of misery shameful and unjust. - By collecting and integrating all the different types of forces that stimulate and generate various resources wisely treading water. In doing so, we take the bull by the horns. -3 - Multiply all the tracks that quantify and qualify the rewarding expertise to popularize the education of the masses, the different scientific methods and a technique empowers each. "We the CIRASTIC, we have plans to implement to offer in the form of a call for proposals ..."-B- When the emphasis on the importance of governance, CIRASTIC think: "the problem is the ignorance fueled by greed and selfishness of some leaders who knowingly let this all mean , take no advance at the expense of the need to do things objectively. (This would also benefit the masses involved). Hence the importance of the struggles to lead useful to sensitize and mobilize the optical inspired, realistic and rational. To get the pragmatism that passes through the eradication of flails tangible shameful and unjust. - This is a situation that affects all countries of the world! Although the influences of a problem differ from one region to another, the question of ethical, is the prerogative of individual faced with an emergency that requires a vital action
-C- You can make the most of all these initiatives expected that when the action is carried out! * Or is being carried out. Resolutions not enough that they are kept in bunkers gold! We want and crave action by the implementation that integrates the consideration of all the different forces and other relevant fields ...NB: "Resolutions of the United Nations Secretary-General-De Rio +20 United Nations Sustainable Development and CSA" All should understand beyond the words:Without a modicum of intellectual integrity that help promote ethics, no laudable initiative can hope to find the desired effects. It is imperative that efforts be made to two major sides. Namely: The Donors and Recipients on the one hand to manage these funds on the other. But it is with trays Officers manage the Fund, the problem exists! Because it is at the heart of their institution there are real hungry starving! - Real-depleting poor showing in the virtual media, the misery of destitute they themselves have made (...).
NB: "If the poor languishing in institutions and elsewhere continue to impoverish the victims destitute, there will be less of misery proved! Because misery stems from the poverty of the poor who struggle to replace by all means to the real rich ...-We have seen within the NGO office, several projects stolen by those likely to develop! We have seen
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
289
and continue to see that some NGOs funded are not what should be done on the ground! Hence the urgent need to educate all parties! This is what we believe bluntly. CIRASTIC is the victim of this system established mean ...
- D- Theme -3 - What we think: beyond the endless repetition scenario that ' we spell each end of a decade in the heart of the base of the United Nations. We do hope that this new scoop truly hopeful; shameful face the many challenges ahead:"The hunger is a fundamental aspect of blatant injustice and shameful * -We hope that everything said in terms of resolutions is not just empty and hollow!" * We hope it does not sink into the abyss of obscurantism watered sophistry to absolute relativism. * -We, the CIRASTIC, We allow ourselves to implore a modicum of common sense and compassion in the face of this emergency is needed after so long.
* WE BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE ONE PIECE! PROVIDED IN THE CONTEXT OF REDEFINED INSPIRED AND REALISTIC rationalist THE ROLE OF EACH PLAYER Concerned - every part of the world to their specific needs related to their own everyday realities. The common struggle, also deserves consideration by specific sectors.
NB: CIRASTIC we explicitly share capital imaginative as a call for proposals. - It is "pragmatic initiatives implementation aimed at significantly improving the lives of people, many." Our imaginative potential is at the continental scale. We, of CIRASTIC, we continue to believe that: the fight against poverty in general, through the establishment of the foundations of education and scientific techniques. A minimum stimulates and strengthens ... In the meantime, thanks for your understanding!
And the pleasure of a really frank cooperation.
Consolidate Remote stimulate creativity and see the development of solidarity
204) FAO Gouvernance Study Team, FAO, Italy
Hello,
This is a collective contribution from a number of members of the FAO Gouvernance Study Team responding in particular to:
Theme 2. What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment achieving food and nutrition security?”
Many participants in the e-consultation underlined the importance of civil society participation and ownership, accountability of institutions, as well as of the coordination of policies, institutions and actions. These aspects relate to different dimensions of improved governance. Indeed, from the perspective of food and nutrition security, livelihoods and sustainable natural resource management, improved governance is critical for multiple reasons and notably:
First, the increasing complexity of development-related processes.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
290
At the global level, factors beyond national control can affect efforts to reduce hunger and malnutrition; these include energy supply (and price), global commodity markets, and trade policies. Whether a given country is member of WTO or not, and whether it has ratified relevant international instruments – in human rights, agricultural, trade, natural resources or environmental fields – can and often do have implications for a range of food, production and natural resources management policy and legal frameworks. So too will a country’s capacity to negotiate within international fora and to implement relevant international commitments.
At the global as well as at the country level, recent years have seen a growing plurality of actors (with many new, more active and more diverse stakeholders and interests, and more visible divergences in power between interest groups) with an interest in food security. This can make inclusive processes difficult to manage effectively. At the national level, there is also an increasing awareness of the interconnectedness between the environment, social and economic spheres. Development goals can be achieved but it has become apparent that for progress to be sustained requires unprecedented levels of interdisciplinary collaboration across sectors and institutions, and between actors.
Second, increasing uncertainty surrounds the potential impact of climate change (with the likelihood of increased resource competition and risk of conflict), and the level of willingness of key stakeholders with vested interests in current systems to engage in reform. This makes more difficult the design and implementation of efficient and effective interventions in situations where asymmetries in information are the norm.
Third - for the majority of people, their most direct experience of “governance” is at local level through interaction with local extension agents, local agro-dealers, forest guards, fisheries officers, public health services, agricultural, social and education services. Even the best designed natural resource, social and economic policies will be ineffective in the absence of effective systems for service delivery, regulation, control of corruption and protection of rights. Inequalities in access to natural resources (rights to access land or water resources) and/or to inputs and services such as seeds, fertilizers or credit strongly limit agricultural productivity. Lack of transparency and information about Social Protection programmes, lack of awareness among possible beneficiaries, and wide “administrative discretion” lead to the failure of such programmes to reach many of those in greatest need.While there is not a direct correlation between the two issues, it can be observed that many states with low food and nutrition security lack the capacity to create enabling and coherent policy and legal framework, be transparent and accountable to relevant stakeholders, and to enforce the rule of law and encourage gender equality. This is often accompanied by a lack of capacity and of opportunity, for the people, to take an active part in decision-making processes and hold governments to account.
By contrast, when governance structures, both formal and informal, exercise their functions in an accountable, transparent and equitable manner, and give voice to a wide range of diverse interests, including those of the food insecure and hungry who are often excluded and marginalised, the resulting activities should contribute more fully to improving food and nutrition security in a country.
Setting the “building blocks” of the governance of food and nutrition security
Looking at hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition issues from a governance perspective offers insights and information that can improve the design of policies, programmes and projects, and provide tools to make their implementation and enforcement more effective.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
291
While there is not, as yet, a universally agreed definition of governance, it is generally accepted that governance refers to the formal and informal rules and processes through which public and private stakeholders articulate their interests and decisions are made, implemented and sustained in different jurisdictions and levels. Taking a governance perspective requires decision-making processes affecting food and nutrition security, livelihoods and the management and sustainable use of natural resources to be in line with a number of key principles.
They are:
Participation – that people and their institutions are able to participate freely, fully, actively and meaningfully in the planning, design, monitoring and evaluation of decisions affecting them;
Accountability – that leaders are answerable within their organizations and to the people they serve, for their actions;
Transparency – that decision-makers are as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take and that timely and reliable information on these decisions and actions is freely and easily available;
Equality and Fairness – that all groups, particularly the most vulnerable, have equal opportunities to improve or maintain their well being;
Efficiency and Effectiveness – that rules and regulations apply equally to all groups, and that processes and institutions produce results that meet the needs of society, while making the best use of resources at their disposal; and
Rule of Law – that governments are as bound by laws as the citizens and private corporations, and that the laws themselves are consistent with international human rights.
These principles should be used nationally to consider how improved governance can support the achievement of food security goals. One size does very definitely not fit all contexts. Different countries face different development challenges at various stages of their development, and hence require different capacities and approaches to tackle them effectively. What works in one setting may not necessarily work in another. The particular socio-economic, legal and political conditions of each country will facilitate or constrain progress towards better governance.
In other words, the purpose of having a number of key governance principles is not to describe the ideal state of “good food and nutrition security governance”, but to provide practical guidance for prioritizing interventions, designing and assessing development strategies necessary to achieve the post-2015 UN development agenda.
These key principles can also be useful in pointing out mechanisms that allow improving governance in food security and related sectors (e.g. agriculture, land, forests, fisheries) without requiring changes in the state governance system as such. The challenge is finding the right mix and form that fit the specific country context and its specific needs, and that will allow progress to be made.
Collective contribution from the FAO Governance Study Group (Astrid Agostini, Dubravka Bojic, Juan GarciaCebolla, Carol Djeddah, Florence Egal, Nicole Franz, Rebecca Metzner, Jamie Morrison, Jonathan Reeves, Mike Robson, Margret Vidar and Rolf Willmann)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
292
205) Paul Sommers, California State University, USA
Colleagues,
As someone, who is both an agriculturists and nutritionists, and who has worked on agriculture and nutrition linkages for more than 30 years primarily at field implementation level, my approach has been to put nutrition at the center as the driver for agricultural activities. As an agriculturalists, I am ready to use the tools in my resource kit to respond to demand and increase productivity of crops and or livestock. So nutrition has to take the lead and growers will then follow. Nutrition needs to identify the dietary gaps, especially micronutrient malnutrition, when the deficiencies occur, as well as locally grown and consumed crops that are nutrient dense in the micronutrients missing in the diet. Nutrition staff also need to work with communication specialists to design an effective behavioral change strategy so that demand for those foods are created. Once the dietary issues and crops are known and a market demand plan is in place then I can use the tools in my agriculture kit to work with small holder growers to increase on-farm availability for direct consumption as well as local market access of those crops.
The policy implications of this strategy are clear. Countries are quickly adopting the market based value chain approach as a main means of improving small holder food security. By viewing specific dietary deficiencies as drivers for new or expanding markets, the agricultural value chain approach takes on a whole new meaning where it not only grows incomes but addresses a very real and specific dietary issue in a specific location.
206) Stockholm International Water Institute, Sweden
Hunger, Food and Nutrition are prerequisites for people’s livelihoods, sustaining life, and prosperity. A child that goes hungry will not assimilate knowledge, will not thrive as a human or become a contributing member of whichever society it belongs to. However, a child that is thirsty will not even feel hunger because thirst is a more urgent need. A child that feeds will stay hungry if it is plagued by diarrhoea, cholera or other infectious diseases that could be prevented by access to safe water and sanitation. The same way that arable land and seeds are a prerequisite for food production, so is water. The water distribution across the globe in changing due to climate change, irrigation schemes, energy demands and crop choices. In order to feed a growing population we will have to consider water in whichever targets we set. The causes behind food insecurity may be assessed by looking at the three A’s:
- Availability; production of food and its physical availability in various places – mediated by weather & climate, land use / agricultural methods, transport and storage infrastructure
- Access, including how households and individuals are able to get hold of food – mediated by poverty, education, and cultural/social power to command resources
- Absorption, including the ability to absorb food – mediated by health conditions, in turn mediated by water, sanitation and hygiene conditions.
As organisers of the World Water Week, SIWI, Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) and the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR) as key collaborating partners, focused on Water and Food Security as overarching theme for the 2012
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
293
conference. Over 2500 water experts, attended over 200 sessions organized by over 250 convening international organizations to discuss the precarious challenge of feeding a thirsty world. The conclusions from each session and workshop are found on www.worldwaterweek.org. For the format of this discussion, let us here present some of the main overarching conclusions that address the questions in the scope. The full report from the 2012 World Water Week is available here: http://www.worldwaterweek.org/documents/Resources/Synthesis/2012_Overarching_Conclusions_web.pdf
Theme 1What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition? What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Setting new priorities for a water and food secure worldOver the past half-century, dramatic improvements have been made to increase the quantities of food produced. Today, we feed more people than ever before, but we also leave more people hungry and send more food to waste than any time before in our history. Moving forward, focus must be on resource efficiency, effective distribution to the hungry and sustainable stewardship of water, land, and lifesupporting ecosystems. Large scale investments in agricultural research and development, infrastructure, irrigation and supply chain efficiency improvements, coupled with dramatic reductions in losses in the field and consumer waste will yield major returns. Providing farmers with better access to markets, both locally and internationally, is likewise crucial to support smallholders’ livelihoods and ensure the food they grow is beneficially used.This will require a radical shift towards a smarter, healthier, more rational and sustainable global food system. There are many barriers that can delay action, such as a potentially unfavourable political economy, vested interests and bureaucratic inertia, which must be overcome. But the challenges faced to feed an increasingly thirsty world are outmatched by the opportunities they present to stimulate economic growth and provide for a healthier population. With commitment to coordinated action taken on a number of fronts, we can ensure that water will not be a limitation for future well-being on our planet and that everyone has access to clean water and sufficient nutrition to enjoy a sustainable diet.
Water and food security are inseparableLand and water are prerequisites for agriculture and farmers are the main custodians of the world’s freshwater. Roughly 70 per cent of global freshwater withdrawals are used in agriculture. There are several areas where major efficiency gains, in terms of water, energy, human as well as financial resources, can be made, such as producing ‘more crop per drop’, reducing losses and waste in the food supply chain, diversification of agricultural activities and employing a ‘landscape approach’ to development in order to expand food production and maintain ecosystem services. There are a number of other areas for which the convening experts called for increased attention: investment and policy intervention, including the promotion of healthy and sustainable diets, improved early warning
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
294
systems to agricultural emergencies, wiser and fairer trade regulation, and coordinated approaches to assess trade-offs and maximise synergies between water, energy and food.
Producing more with lessSustainable intensification of agriculture is critical to meet present and future food demand and will require effective action across a number of strategic areas such as energy efficiency, improving irrigation productivity and expanding the safe re-use of water and nutrient resources.
Investing big in small-holdersThere is a huge untapped potential for increasing both the productivity and water efficiency of smallholder agriculture. To realise this potential, it is critical to understand the realities faced by many farming communities that lead to sub-optimal use of resources, as well as high rates of losses.
Fixing the leaks in the food supply chainFAO estimates that 1.3 billion tonnes of food goes uneaten each year, with significant variation in the levels of losses and waste between seasons, years and between commodities and regions. Investments in improved harvesting, storage, transport and cooling infrastructure can reduce losses significantly. This, coupled with local producers’ increased access to better food processing, packaging and new markets, means that more food will be sold and less lost, providing economic and social benefits to both producer and consumer. The world is hungry because we are wasting food.
Improving early warning and responding to a more turbulent climateBuilding resilience to drought, floods and shifts in rainfall through adaptive planning is a critical need for the short, medium and long term. New approaches to develop climate smart agriculture and improve the “hydroliteracy” of rural communities can help poor farmers better withstand the shocks of a more variable climate. These systems also need to be accompanied mechanisms to act quickly to take preemptive action based upon available data.
Safeguarding ecosystems while expanding agricultureA bundled view of ecosystem services can help optimise strategies to promote food security and ecosystem health. To work at a landscape level, new mechanisms are needed that can engage a broader range of stakeholders in negotiations around the benefits- and cost-sharing of ecosystem services, starting by increasing land-user knowledge of ecosystem processes.
Promoting fair and effective food tradeFood trade is a rational and necessary mechanism for achieving efficient use and better sharing of global water resources as well as socio-economic progress. Increased trade in agricultural commodities can provide opportunities for smallholder farmers but this requires they gain better access to markets and stronger bargaining power within them. This can be facilitated through modern information technology, effective government regulation and access to know-how and appropriate production technologies.
A call for collaboration
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
295
The challenges that our world is facing cannot be solved by isolated silo thinking and sectoral sub optimisations. Water plays key roles in agriculture, health, economic development, urbanisation, energy production, international affairs and the fulfilment of human rights.
Land acquisitionInvestment in agricultural land by international actors has increased dramatically in recent years, primarily in Africa and Latin America. Investors will need reliable access to water for irrigation of its crops on the purchased or leased land. More attention, besides better safeguarding of local priorities and customary rights to land of indigenous populations, is also needed to ensure the effective and equitable management of both internal and transboundary water resources that will be used on leased lands.
Theme 2 What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
The Sustainable Development Goals must address both process and outcomes by emphasizing equitable, transparent processes (participatory, integrative management) as well as clear goals and measurable targets in terms human and ecological well-being (sustenance of aquatic ecosystems, energy production, and food security). Along with the increased focus on Public Private Partnerships, there is also the recognition of the importance of standard development to guide corporate water stewardship and allow comparison and communication across sectors.
Renewed national and international investmentsAs we move from the Millenium Development Goals to new Sustainable Development Goals there is a need for renewed national and international investment in the water and WASH sectors. The Millenium Development Goals have been enormously successful in uniting donor attention and allowing the development community to join forces in meet major global challenges. This suggests that uniting behind a list of concrete targets can have dramatic impacts. There is a continued need to prioritise water investments.
Recognising the real purpose of water useIn the agricultural context this can be measured a variety of ways from the amount of food produced per unit of water (crop per drop), to the economic value of agricultural production per unit of water, to the nutritional value of agricultural production per unit of water.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
296
Supply chain focusAs much as half of the produced in the field is lost or wasted before and after it reaches the consumer. Increasing productivity means developing governance approaches that decrease both pre- and post-harvest losses and increase water productivity.
Defining good governanceIn terms of next actions, an important point regards developing a common definition of ‘good governance’. To achieve better governance we need two critical components: 1) Better data and knowledge procurement, sharing, and use; and 2) Involvement of major actors like public sector, private sector, and donor communities.
Innovations strengthen monitoringMonitoring the results of water governance interventions can be used to improve accountability and will enhance the projects implementation. More effective methods of stakeholder engagement can be done using recent technology in collecting and sharing data. For example, text messaging and crowd-sourcing offer new ways to democratise data collection and spatially-explicit databases and internet portals.
Create incentives to produce more food on existing agricultural lands, and within existing water use There is potential in improving health, reduce water use and alleviate pressures on the environment by focusing more on nutrition sensitive diets. We are facing dietary challenges in opposing trends in different parts of the world; obesity in some regions and malnutrition in others. Currently 45 per cent of global crop water use goes to animal feed. Inland fisheries and aquaculture are two other vital protein sources for many of the worlds’ poor, particularly when crop fails.
Invest in small-holder agricultural water management to reduce malnutrition/hungerSmall-scale water management technology projects have often been overlooked by investors, although investment costs normally are low while profit margins tend to be relatively high. New business models (e.g. irrigation service providers), investment tools (e.g. the investment visualiser) and specialised insurance products were cited as useful contributions to this trend. Apart from the economic benefits, investments in small-holder agricultural water management also hold substantial benefits for food security. Being able to grow cash crops in the dry season, not only drastically improves the farmers´ economic possibility to buy better food, but it also contributes to a diversified diet. Small-scale agricultural water management thus must be controlled at some level to avoid environmental as well as human health damages. For a future nutrition-sensitive agriculture production to take form it is also essential that wastewater is treated safely and then re-used in the farms.
Intersection between sub-topics and the benefits or synergies that cross-fertilization can bring to the water sector
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
297
The link between WASH and nutrition emerged on several occasions, primarily through a more refined understanding of the connections between WASH, malnutrition and diarrhea; the developing understanding of environmental enteropathy and its growing prevalence amongst the most vulnerable members of a community.
There is a need for a balance of technical, institutional and governance improvements; one without the other will delay progress in meeting development goals and perpetuate business as usual practices. A recommendation is to reach lower levels: to conduct regional dialogues that can lead to improved understanding and deliver more sustainable outcomes.
Feedback on the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and NutritionThe consideration of water in the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition, as part of economic and production issues, demographic and social issues are important. Recognition of the right to water is imperative and consideration taken to indigenous peoples. One aspect that might have to be considered in addition is that water will cross borders when land will not. Safe water and sanitation and its importance for nutrition is addressed. The role of water is considered for a sustainable agricultural production and we encourage the framework to expand on the issue under point VI. c) that “the demand for water for agricultural production and for other uses and ways of improving water management”.
Theme 3For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
Working towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)The aggregation of the dialogue at the World Water Week on this issue centered on the need for higher resolution in the revised goals, targets and indicators with respect to equity and non-discrimination. How can the political objectives of these goals be aligned with our need to promote stronger pro-poor investments by government? The water world is addressing this directly through an increasing focus on wealth quintile analysis of WASH coverage and an explicit emphasis on measuring the impact on the poorest in the proposed SDGs targets.
The world in 2050
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
298
The young generation of water professionals formulated the most pressing challenges and most promising solutions related to water and food security by 2050 during the World Water Week in Stockholm. A Core Team engaged with other young professionals who attended the conference and through video-interviews and social media inputs from those following the conference remotely, in order to formulate the vision which will be followed by an action plan during 2013.
This vision, although ambitious, is one they think should lead development efforts by stakeholders pertaining to water and food. The young vision has a good message for formulating SDG’s in recognizing that the only way to achieve an ‘ideal world’ is by being adaptive. This means that developing solutions, strategies and approaches, needs to be continuously checked and modified to respond to changing conditions. This is because they see that the only certain thing about the future is uncertainty.
207) Faustine Wabwire. Bread for the World Institute, United States of America
Theme 1: Key Lessons From the MDGs
The MDGs have demonstrated that goal-setting matters for development. Since 2000, the MDGs have galvanized support around the world for ending hunger and extreme poverty. When the goals were launched, countries pledged to work together to cut global hunger and poverty in half by 2015. Also, unlike many global initiatives that came before it, the MDGs remain a prominent concern of national governments and the international development community. This is due in no small part to the fact that the goals have concrete targets to measure progress and hold government leaders accountable.
Global poverty is now falling with unprecedented speed, and indeed it is possible to imagine a world by 2040 where chronic hunger and poverty no longer exist. According to the World Bank, the percentage of people living below the international poverty line ($1.25 per person per day) has fallen by more than half since 1990; in other words, the MDG target of cutting income poverty in half by 2015 has been reached.At this point, however, it is not clear whether the hunger target of the MDGs—cutting hunger in half— will be met by the 2015 deadline.The lagging progress on hunger, compared to progress on poverty, illustrates a problem with how the MDGs are being pursued. Too little attention has been paid to the interrelationship between hunger and poverty, particularly in rural areas where most of the world’s hungry and poor people live. In order to sync reductions in hunger with reductions in poverty, greater investments in agriculture are necessary and must be targeted at smallholder farmers.
Theme 2: What works best?
Focus on Marginalized Groups: The goal to end hunger mostly depends on the commitment of political leaders to scale up proven approaches and target the most difficult to reach groups. Leaders will have to address the structural inequalities that deny certain groups of people access to social and economic opportunities. These are predominantly racial, ethnic and religious minority groups. Women and girls
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
299
face additional barriers—including in majority groups. Accelerating progress against hunger therefore requires a more deliberate focus on women and girls.
Strengthen Data Systems: Effective policy responses depend on reliable information about how various groups are faring. Countries where hunger and poverty are stubbornly persistent have a limited capacity to collect and analyze data. Strengthening data systems needs to be a priority of leaders in countries affected by hunger and their development partners.
Increase Investments in agriculture: Improvements in food security and nutrition are linked to a productive agricultural sector. Common sense might suggest that we need to make sure that domestic food supplies match demand for food—but that’s not the core of the problem. The recent increases in hunger were because of the high food prices, not because there wasn’t enough food to go around. Although grain stocks were low, they were not too low to feed everyone if some nations with surpluses hadn’t panicked and banned exports. In the same vein, famines have occurred in countries where some parts actually have food surpluses. The unprecedented rise in hunger recently was a consequence of the high costs. Despite incontrovertible evidence that food security is linked to agricultural productivity, over the past three decades donors slashed agriculture as a share of their development budgets. Agriculture is a key driver of economic growth in poor countries. In very poor countries, agriculture provides more than 70-80 percent of the labor force with the greatest share of their incomes. When the agricultural sector is growing, so are people’s incomes. It’s what determines whether they are eating only a bowl of rice seven days a week or they can occasionally afford to add some meat and vegetables to their diet.
Strengthen social protection programs to reach the most marginalized. Scaling up investments in the nutrition of rural women and girls is central to their economic empowerment. Putting in place safety nets for the most vulnerable rural women and girls, such as activities that promote access to health care and education, lays the groundwork for a healthy society.
Lift the importance of maternal and child nutrition
Remove barriers faced by rural women and girls
Theme 3: Post-2015 Framework
Bread for the World emphasizes that whatever agreement emerges must include a bull’s-eye target: ending hunger and extreme poverty by 2040. Every country should agree to set national development goals, including the high-income nations.
A post-2015 agreement should establish a framework in which each country sets ambitious goals that properly reflect its level of social and economic development. This framework should make it clear that poverty and hunger are morally unacceptable everywhere.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
300
The post-2015 global development framework should be worked out by a broader set of stakeholders than those who developed the MDGs. The MDGs were conceived by rich nations with far too little input from poor and middle-income nations.
The views of poor and hungry people themselves on the fight against hunger and poverty should be strongly considered in any new agreement. This is likely to reshape development goals from their formulation in the MDGs and focus greater attention on the means of achieving the goals. For example, a target of MDG 1 was to “Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people”; and when poor people, particularly young poor people, are asked about the barriers they face to getting out of poverty, they nearly always name lack of jobs as their top concern. But the issue of jobs and job creation has not been given the attention it deserves from policymakers and donor agencies.
208) Sonja Vermeulen,CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, Denmark
Theme 1:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
One of the key lessons is a positive one – the MDGs have demonstrated that it IS possible to achieve large-scale and long-lasting reductions in poverty and gender inequality (as measured by enrolment of girls in schools). What we can learn from this for the post-2015 agenda is that we should again be highly ambitious in our goals for future human and planetary well-being.
Theme 2:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
On behalf of the Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) of the CGIAR (Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers), I wish to draw particular attention to the importance of seriously investing in environmental sustainability and food chain efficiencies if we are to feed ourselves in the long-run. With the Global Donor Platform on Rural Development, CCAFS co-funded the independent Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change during 2011-2012. The Commissioners brought scientific evidence together to argue that we need to bring action on three fronts together if we are to achieve universal food security in future: (1) increasing yields per unit of land and other inputs in ways that deal with increasing climate variability and climatic trends (for example via genetics, careful matching of crops and environments, very precise
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
301
management of nutrients, innovative use of downscaled climatic forecasting), (2) reducing emissions of greenhouse gases from agriculture (many of the strategies are synergistic with the strategies for yield increases and adaptation) and (3) reducing inefficiencies in food supply chains (particularly by shifting towards healthier lower-emissions diets, reducing losses of food due to poor post-harvest storage or wasteful household food management, and improving distribution and affordability for people vulnerable to malnutrition). Readers interested in the Commission’s findings (including many detailed sub-recommendations) can download the report at http://ccafs.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/assets/docs/climate_food_commission-final-mar2012.pdf where there is also a 6-minute video that synthesizes the arguments very clearly.
Sets of aspirational recommendations can sound vague or impossible. But around the world we now have many success stories: examples in which interventions have been brought to scale that increase availability of food to poor consumers while also reducing environmental impacts, particularly greenhouse gas emissions. Substantial learning on successes (and pitfalls) has been shared (and can be found) via international platforms such as Africa Adapt (http://www.africa-adapt.net) and CDKN (http://cdknetwork.net), as well as sector-specific initiatives like the Climate-Smart Agriculture Partnership (http://www.climatesmartagriculture.org/en) – as well as many regional, national and sub-national learning platforms. While there have been some efforts to collate globally promising technologies and institutional arrangements (e.g. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/newsroom/docs/the-hague-conference-fao-paper.pdf), or to draw generalized lessons from large-scale success stories (e.g. http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/24863), the reality is that climate change is experienced locally and must largely be addressed locally (for adaptation; mitigation is more global in scope). What the global level most needs to do is to provide the kinds of governance and learning frameworks that enable local-level resilience and creativity. This means investment both in very general development needs (e.g. free, universal, high-quality, compulsory education, or fair universal tax systems) and in very specific climate-related needs (e.g. scientific research that brings us to the stage that we can make climate forecasts that are downscaled sufficiently in time and space to be directly useful to individual farmers and local policy makers).
Theme 3:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
302
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
These objectives are highly appropriate in terms of (a) simplicity and (b) level of ambition. Additionally the focus on smallholders is appropriate due to their continuing major role in the nutrition and livelihoods of both rural and urban consumers. On the other hand the objectives lack (a) a tangible definition of sustainability (and hence an explicit objective for managing our natural environment) and (b) a clear goal for nutrition security as opposed to food security. The post-2015 Global Development Framework could certainly use the ZHC objectives (and thus contribute to this critically important agenda) but perhaps build in explicit objectives on environment and on nutrition. Given the huge variation around the world in climate change impacts, water scarcity (and soils, biodiversity and other key environmental factors), level of dependence of livelihoods on agriculture, provision of social services and safety nets, and the burden of nutrition-related diseases (e.g. stunting, obesity, diabetes, micro-nutrient deficiencies), perhaps the over-arching objectives should be global but the targets country-specific (or even specific to particular places or social groups within a country). Targets should certainly be time-bound. In doing so, they keep abreast of the rapid pace of change in climate, demographics, economics and geo-politics – and acknowledge that development is never “done”. It is not an admission of failure to accept that the set of objectives and aspirations under design now will be followed by yet another (iterative) set in a couple of decades.
209) A. Nielsen, New Zealand
It was clear from the outset that the goals of the MDG framework are interconnected and each one of them cannot be achieved without also addressing other areas. This is important to keep in mind as we look forward beyond 2015. Addressing food security and nutrition requires addressing areas such as inequalities, population dynamics, conflicts and governance. Vulnerable groups are those most affected by food insecurity, and women in particular tend to bear the burden of sourcing food and ensuring their families are adequately nourished, often forcing them into dangerous situations to do so. Vulnerable groups must be included in strategies and programmes aimed at improving access to food and nutrition to ensure they do not face additional barriers and can enjoy equal access to food and nutrition sources.
It is of utmost importance for their health that children under 5 and pregnant women are well-nourished, yet malnourishment among these groups is widespread throughout the developing world. Targeting these groups to improve their nutritional status should be paramount.
Ensuring investments are made in sexual and reproductive health and rights can have a positive impact on food security and nutrition. When women and couples are able to choose the number, timing and spacing of their children they can plan their families, and will often choose to have smaller families. Smaller families means fewer mouths to feed and a greater chance of children being well-nourished.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
303
210) Claudio Schuftan, PHM, Viet Nam [sixth contribution]
V. Qs on shaping global consensus for the goals: 23. How can we build and sustain global consensus for a new framework, involving member states, the private sector and civil society?
Global consensus has to be built from the bottom up, i.e., starting from the sub-national level up. This is why this consultation period up to 2015 is so crucially in need to go to the level of claim holders and duty bearers at district level. (Keep in mind that duty bearers to claim holders in the community are, in turn, claim holders to duty bearers at the national, often ministerial, level….and those, in turn, claim holders to duty bearers in the international context, i.e., there is a chain of oppressed oppressors). Thinking loud: Can a worldwide 1-2 weeks period of national debate be agreed upon and set sometime in 2014? Can we then imagine a global process of some kind of formal ratification of the new framework by parliaments, social movements, CSOs, private sector without conflicts of interest (?) and governments the world over? Sustaining the consensus will depend on progress being made. Annual benchmarks can give us year-to-year reports of progress as perceived by representatives of the wider society. This national annual taking of stock has the additional advantage of giving the new framework flexibility to change tactics within the same strategy (…or change strategy if needed). 24. How can our work be made coherent with the process to be established by the intergovernmental Open Working Group on the Sustainable Development Goals?
All efforts have to be made to secure such a coherence. Moreover, in all issues pertaining the SDGs and pertaining to this post-2015 framework the principle of one country one vote is non-negotiable in all instances when such consultations are deemed necessary. We all are born to live in this planet as equals. [I see no problem in isolating the rich countries often voting in block against the poor countries and thus formally obstructing this or any coherence. They are already doing so! So what is left for the poor countries is to continue blaming and shaming them, remotely hoping for a future break through. In the meantime, as much as possible, the poor countries ought to act on issues as per their majority vote].
Having come to the end of this reflection, I know I have opened only a small additional window that adds to the equally important contributions of many many others. I am afraid I have often been normative (and even possibly wrong). There are too many shoulds and woulds in my comments. The risk we face is coming up with a more radical new framework than the MDGs framework was only to see it watered down by the powers that be --as has always been the case in end negotiations. I ask you: Why has consensus always to be pulled to the side of those who feel they have something to loose in this pathetically unequal and unfair world?
On some more general issues, I seek advice on six further points:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
304
Is there a way we can get away from the use of the maligned term ‘stakeholder’? Stakeholders stake claims, right? The simple replacement of the word stakeholders by claim-holders or duty bearers, as appropriate (to use the correct HR parlance that we and the UN are finally trying to instill in post-2015), just might provide us with the hint of the sort of framework we are interested in fostering in the new era. Claim holder/duty bearer are in the original UN language. Stakeholders is originally business language. To have or to hold a stake in something is the same as having an interest or holding shares!!! (A. Katz)
The MDGs have shown us that a focus on outcomes does not assure sustainability of the respective goal being kept up. It is not only the quantity and the quality of outcomes that counts; it is the participatory processes to achieve them that will matter in the long run. (Note that here sustainability is used in a different sense than in the environmental connotation of the term).
There are still too many among us that consider HR and equity, gender…as crosscutting issues; they are not. They are core issues (!) and we have to build sectoral or other interventions around them.
I also feel strongly that instead of talking about safety nets, we ought to be talking about social protection mechanisms. Universal social protection is the new political and cultural horizon where health rights must be placed. It includes social security, social assistance, labor rights, the right to public services and environmental rights (F.Mestrum). Social protection is the fundamental measure to pursue redistribution of wealth. Safety nets take the issue of poverty as a fait accompli. So since ‘they’ are poor, we throw them a few crumbles of bread since it is morally reprehensible to us to let them starve. In reality, safety nets somehow come up with measures that avoid social discontent that could flare up into protests and thus a challenge to the status-quo. Or put another way: Safety nets are nothing but a way to manage poverty and ‘ill-being’ (as opposed to well-being) by attenuating social unrest. Am I very wrong?
Moreover, providing accessible and affordable basic needs to the poor closely relates to what I say above. It just, in a way, replaces safety nets by targeting the poor (note the use of ‘the poor’ in High Level Panel papers; should it not be ‘poor people’? We have to be careful with depersonalizing the billions of the affected people). [I want to caution you that the same is true for when programs and projects speak of ‘targeting the poor’].
Finally, is it true that nutrition, health, education, housing, clean water and sanitation will eventually cut the vicious circle of poverty? I thought the inter-generational vicious circle of poverty could only be uprooted for good with structural changes in the political and economic system that rules most of the world and actually perpetuates the problem. Am I very wrong?
211) Vahid Maharramov, Economic Research Center, Azerbaijan
Dear all,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
305
It is great pleasure to contribute at least something to announced topics by FAO. On behalf of Economic Research Center (Azerbaijan) i would like to draw your attention below message: Azerbaijan is the country that possesses fertile soil, humid climate, including sound financial, labor and other resources. The current resources of this country allow Azerbaijan to produce 3 times more agricultural products. Nevertheless, the country failed to show off its potential in last 15 years and given this loses its production strength as well. Thus, in 1997 the grain fields were around 610 - 650 thousand hectare and at that time Azerbaijan was able to import from 167 thousand ton up to420 thousand ton grain. Despite the fact that grain fields grew by 967 thousand hectare in 2011, the volume of imported wheat increased 3,5 times and reaching 1 million 400 thousand tons along imported wheat flour. In a nutshell, Azerbaijan is becoming dependent heavily on import. Azerbaijan currently is obtaining easy flow of funds thanks to revenues emanating from oil and gas export and it can build sound investment policy over its non-oil sector, particularly production of agricultural products. However, it failed to do so and instead it is directing these funds to non-profitable sectors. Azerbaijan which is in potentila of exporting food to world countries is in need of food. Another problem is related to the loss of production. The lack of warehouses and manufacturing facilities triggeres damage of fruit-vegetables in the fields or making as garbages. According to our observations, the degradation process of soil has accelerated in recent years and it arranges 47 % of overall soil fields. Therefore, this rings alarm for future that there might be shortage or similar issues regarding food supply in the country. Recommendations
1. FAO should build broad information base through identifying the production potential of agricultural outputs of all countriesby involving experts to this process.
2. FAO should raise the issue on supplying demands for foods, agricultural products through complete internal production of countries that possess fertile soil, labor, financial, water resources. Given this, FAO should invite governments to act responsibly by submitting recommendations and proposals to them.
3. FAO should raise issue regarding food security before world countries and unleash initiative on providing support to less-fertile countries via countries who have broad potential in this field. FAO can especially focus on patronizing children up to 5 years old.
VahidMaharramov,
Azerbaijan,ERC expert on agrarian policy
212) World Society for the Protection of Animals, UK
Theme 1: Key lessons from the current MDG relevant to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition, and challenges towards achieving food and nutrition security in coming years.
A major factor in the failure to prevent hunger and to achieve food and nutrition security to date has been the lack of coordination and balance between animal and plant food production on a local,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
306
national and international scale. Access to small quantities of animal protein is important for the nutrition of malnourished people. However, too often livestock production has been increased and intensified inappropriately, producing meat and milk only affordable by people of higher income, undercutting small scale farmers, and using resources inefficiently compared to food crops. The challenge is in achieving governance – for example by appropriate economic, policy and institutional support – to readdress this balance.
Theme 2: How to address hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges, including drawing upon current initiatives.
To prevent hunger and to obtain food and nutrition security it is vital to achieve sustainability, which means the best balance possible between environmental, economic and social goals. Social goals include both proper food for all people – as emphasised in current initiatives such as the Zero Hunger Challenge – and proper care of livestock. As the FAO has identified, a billion of the world’s poorest people depend on animals for food, income, social status or cultural identification, as well as companionship and security. Furthermore, protection of farm animal welfare can identify benefits for environmental and economic, as well as social aspects of sustainability. The importance of protecting livestock and their environments was stressed by the Rio+20 outcome document:
111. We reaffirm the necessity to promote, enhance and support more sustainable agriculture, including crops [and] livestock ... We also recognize the need to maintain natural ecological processes that support food production systems.
112. We stress the need to enhance sustainable livestock production systems, including through improving pasture land … recognizing that the livelihoods of farmers including pastoralists and the health of livestock are intertwined.
The outcome document also made it clear that the Committee on World Food Security should play an important role in this respect by facilitating country-initiated, multi-stakeholder assessments on sustainable food production and food security. The urgency of an ecological approach was additionally underlined by another initiative, the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development.
Theme 3: Zero Hunger Challenge objectives.
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round
This requires management of both production and consumption, including increased consumption of animal products in some countries (and sectors of the population within countries) and decreased consumption in others.
b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old
This will be helped by access to some food from animals for malnourished children lacking micronutrients. Current practices including intensification of livestock production are often aimed more at supplying (and profiting from) high-income populations and have hindered rather than helped nutrition of poorer populations, both rural and urban.
c. All food systems are sustainable
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
307
As outlined above, this requires an appropriate balance between animal and plant food production, combined with proper care for livestock health and welfare.
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income
In some cases this needs economic support for smallholders, either direct (for example by providing advisory and support structures), or indirect (for example by protecting them from unfair competition from larger urban- or foreign-based companies). Means to effect such an increase could include the transfer of existing technologies from developed to developing countries, enhanced emphasis on developing high productivity technologies for smallholder use, and increased market access for smallholders. Furthermore, enhanced animal welfare will result in enhanced animal health and productivity.
e. Zero loss or waste of food.
Reduction of post-harvest waste is urgent. So too is reduction of inefficiency and waste in production processes. Such inefficiency and waste include feeding of poor-quality feed to livestock, and use of feed such as grain for animals that could instead be used directly for human food. Both practices often also cause problems for animal welfare.
Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global?
Yes, it is important for more regions, countries and areas within countries to move towards food security and self-sufficiency. Areas vary in their suitability for different aspects of farming (including livestock vs. crops), but developing local food policies and supporting local producers is important for long-term security, stability and sustainability – including for socially acceptable, humane, sustainable livestock production.
213) Martine Vergnol, France
[Original contribution in French]
Deux sujets demandent de l'attention à mon avis, avec des répercussions importantes et efficaces sur les populations :
1/ Favoriser l'allaitement maternel exclusif puis en complément d'aliments comme conseillé par l'OMS. Ce qui suppose :- former des personnes compétentes en allaitement maternel pour former les populations en général (faire disparaitre les idées reçues contraires à une bonne pratique de l'allaitement) et pour aider et soutenir les mères en difficulté (chez elle comme à l'hopital).- fortement réglementer les interventions des entreprises vendant des préparations pour nourisson ainsi que biberon et sucette. Bref, suivre le Code de Commercialisation des Substituts du lait maternel.- en cas de problème dans un pays, plutôt que de donner gratuitement des boites de lait artificiel ou de la bouillie pour les bambins aux familles, aider plutôt les mères à allaiter ou à relancer leur production lactée pour subvenir aux besoins de leurs enfants.
Bref, tout existe, mais faudrait-il encore suivre les recommandations et le Code...
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
308
2/ Favoriser l'agro-écologie pour permettre aux populations locales de produire leur alimentation localement, de manière saine et sans être dépendant des industries (sans intrants ni pesticides, ni OGM). Et protéger la vente de ces cultures des importations massives à bas prix provenant d'autres pays.
Cordialement.
Martine Vergnol
[English translation]
In my opinion, attention should be paid to two issues, with a significant and effective impact on populations: 1 / To promote breastfeeding first on an exclusive basis and later on as complementary food as recommended by WHO, which implies:- To train competent people regarding breastfeeding who would in turn train populations in general (make disappear the ideas contrary to a good practice of breastfeeding) and to assist and support mothers in difficulty (at home and at the hospital).- To strongly regulate the interventions of companies which sell infant formula as well as baby bottles and pacifiers. In short, to follow the Marketing Code of Breastmilk Substitutes.- In case of problems in a country, to help mothers to breastfeed or boost their milk production to meet the needs of their children rather than to give free boxes of artificial milk or baby foods to families . In short, everything already exists, but still the recommendations and the Code should be followed... 2 / To promote agro-ecology to allow local people to produce food locally in a healthy way and without depending on industries (without inputs nor pesticides or GMOs); And to protect the sale of these crops against cheap mass imports from other countries. Yours sincerely
Martine Vergnol
214) Ed Werna, ILO, Switzerland
on food security - from an urban labour perspective
The discussion on food security is very interesting and important. From the point-of-view of urban labour, I see two angles:
- First, the production side: how to combine improvements in food production and urban employment. This links to the discussion on urban agriculture. Food processing would also come into the picture.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
309
Proper training of workers and entrepreneurs and improvements in working conditions along the food value chain would add value to food production. And increase in food production creates jobs.
- Second, the consumption side: many urban workers are food insecure themselves. And this is not always or necessarily a case of lack of food availability in the cities where they live. Many cities have enough food supply, and still a number of workers cannot buy it, due to lack of income. This leads to policies to generate employment and/or social protection (cash transfers).
For information on the work of ILO's Sectoral Activities Dept. on food security:http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---sector/documents/presentation/wcms_163460.pdf
215) Alade Adeleke, Nigerian Conservation Foundation, Nigeria
1. So many factors prevent the insulation of the poor from hunger, food insecurity and mal-nutirtion. Appraoch to achieving MDGs should strive to address these factors when seeking solutions for a better future. While the focus on food production is good, there is the need to broaden attention on sfaeguards that dissalows waste, secure efficient natural resource management in favour of sustainable production of food and efforts on energy in support of food based agriculture. Most stand alone MDG thematic areas are highly connected to Hunger, Nutrition and Food Security. Good examples are Energy, Management to and Access to Water Resources, Environmental Sustainability and Natura Resources and the issue Governance. Efficiency in provision and management of energy in sustainable ways will help promote production, food storage and bio-technology applications. But energy provision and management have suffered stebacks in the face of poor governance, poor leadership and in some cases ineqality in resource allocation and prioritisation to favour the poor and the needy. 2. Investment in research and development to support wild crops is paramount. Materials in the wild have been a great source of food and fibre for poor households in the last Millenium and have degraded heavilly in the past fifty years as the world natural resource becomes more depleted. Promotion of food biodiversity most particularly through flora and fauna conservation provides great support for other sources of food through traditional and modern farming techniques. Emphasis on food from the wild is needed as an integral part of planning for fight against hunger in the coming years. Promotion of crop varities of local origins and sometimes local hybrids will only help broaden the world food sources. Over globalisation of the most popular strains of food is good for trade and boost in pridcution but broadening local sources of food materials will help the world poor to be insulated against hunger in the events of eventualities such as large scale flooding, sea level rises, and some other natural disasters that may impact on mass food production anyhow and anytime.
216) Nestor Ngouambe, MINADER, Cameroon
[French version]
Transformation agricole et sécurité alimentaire.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
310
dans un contexte de mondialisation et surtout du changement climatique où les pertes post récoltes vont grandissantes, la transformation agricole s'avère être incontournable pour la sécurité alimentaire dans le monde.
les techniques de transformation artisanales des produits alimentaires sont progressivement maîtrisé par les petits producteurs notamment les femmes. mais au vu de la forte demande, il est important de passer au stade de la transformation semi industrielle de ces aliments.
Au Cameroun les femmes et les jeunes sont très engagées dans la transformation des racines et tubercules précisément le manioc. le manioc est une racine qui se concerne au maximum 72 heures après sa récolte. cependant c'est l'une des racines les plus consonnés au Cameroun après les céréales. les femmes s'active à le transformé en Fufu, farine de manioc, gari, bâton de manioc, et plus récemment en pâtisserie alimentaire (gâteau, pain, pâtte alimentaire). Le groupe d'initiative Commune dénommé " Sécurité Alimentaire du Cameroun- SAC" est un exemple d'initiative à soutenir pour la sécurité alimentaire. ces jeunes dynamiques transforment le manioc en divers produits dont le jus de tapoica, patte alimentaire... et contribue à la réduction des pertes post récoltes et à la sécurité alimentaire des populations. malgré ces efforts, une sensibilisation des populations est importante afin qu'elle puisse se familiariser à la consommation des produits transformés localement. aussi un accent doit être mis sur la sécurité sanitaire des aliments.
c'est pour ainsi dire que la transformation des produits agricole joue un rôle clé dans la sécurité alimentaire des populations. et un accent particulier doit être tourné vers ce secteurs productif.
[English version]
Small scale farmers fed the world. In Cameroon, about 90% of food production is made by small farmers with less than one hectare of land surface cultivation. the production goals of those farmer is based on subsidence just a little surplus is sold. Since 2008, Cameroon launched a new vision of development based on growth and employment. according to this goals, Cameron have a be considered as emergent country by 2035 year. and agriculture is considered as corner stone leading to achieve this goals. so Ministry of agriculture and rural development aims to move from small scale agriculture to enterprise agriculture. In this context, I am asking that what sustainability of small scale farmer whose are still ensuring 90% of food production? Those categories of farmer are there ready to manage their farm like agricultural enterprise? there will be still able to continue feeding Cameroonian? will they easily access to land in other to mechanized their activities in this context where foreign investor have privileges on local farmer? Based on this question, i am afraid on the increasing level of food insecurity. we have to improved the capacity of small scale farmer, give to then more input to increase their yield to their small land cultivation. by doing so and according to the fact that they actually ensure 90% of food production, they will be able to feed all Cameroonian by producing 100% of food.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
311
217) Memoona Manzoor, Pakistan
What should we do to overcome the Hunger, Food &Nutrition Insecurity with reference of Pakistan? Current situation in Pakistan : Source: Pakistan National Nutrition Survey, 2011
Taken from Dawn News paper 9th May, 2012. Steps to help eradicate Hunger from Pakistan:
1. Improve Cultivation techniques on Country Level.2. Properly taught Formers for the selection of seasoned crops.3. Increased the Food of Animal origin.4. Evaluation of the needs of food at household level.5. Control the prices of food.6. Improve storage conditions.7. Implementation of food laws by the Government of Pakistan to control contaminations.8. Appointment of properly trained staff in the assessment of malnutrition.9. Facilitate the small scale former (livelihood activities).10. Establishing of feeding programs.
218) Concern Worldwide, Malawi and Zambia
Theme 2: What works best?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
312
Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights.
Organization: Concern Worldwide
Authors of submission: Bryan Berenguer Food Income, and Markets Manager, Concern Worldwide (Lilongwe,
Malawi) Constantine Mulinde Conservation Agriculture Coordinator, Concern Worldwide (Lilongwe,
Malawi) Carl T. Wahl Conservation Agriculture (CA) Coordinator, Concern Worldwide (Mongu,
Zambia)
Through our field programmes in over twenty-five countries, Concern Worldwide has gleaned a significant amount of learning regarding what works and what doesn’t work in fostering food and nutrition security. Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a method of agriculture that Concern is promoting in many of our programs as it has been shown to significantly increase crop yields over both the short and long term.
Below are several key learnings from our Conservation Agriculture projects in Malawi and Zambia that related to the post-2015 discussion:
1. The hiring of female extension officers should be made a priority in agriculture programmes carried out by both government ministries and donor agencies. Enabling women to produce greater yields, particularly in non-staple foodstuffs, would greatly increase overall household nutrition, as well as provide more diverse market opportunities for women.
Directly addresses: MDG #1, target C; Indirect – MDG #3, 4, and 5
2. Adjustment of government policies to reduce their emphasis on maize production and marketing, so that greater market opportunities for non-maize foodstuffs can be exploited. This can be accomplished in the following ways:
a. Reducing floor price of maize to reflect actual market prices.b. Utilizing the existing grain depots and other infrastructure as clearing houses for
bulking, storage, and selling of all crops (other than maize). c. Increasing quotas for the purchase of crops other than maize
Furthermore, governments and agencies should collaborate to create district-level agricultural marketing plans to help connect rural producers directly to local, urban, and peri-urban markets.
Directly addresses: MDG #1, targets A& C;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
313
3. Implementation plans for agriculture, in which CA is strongly emphasized, need to be carried out at the district level in conjunction with farmers at a variety of economic levels in order for interventions to present a diversity of CA methods that match local agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions. These plans should be vetted by CA task forces made up of relevant stakeholders, and then used as frameworks through which agencies must adhere to in their implementation of CA programs.
Directly addresses: MDG#8, Targets A, B and C
4. We strongly caution against the free distribution of hybrid seeds and fertilizers as a means of incentivizing adoption of CA, as it irrevocably creates a dependency that can rarely be sustained following project completion. Programmes implementing CA need to present a diversity of methological and technological options for the farmers to experiment with and innovate to fit their particular situation; this could include mulching (bio-mass transfer), cover-cropping, intercropping, agroforestry, etc. Input distribution should be limited to sustainable “one-off” seeds; in particular, the use of open-pollinated varieties that can be harvested and replanted in subsequent seasons with little yield loss.
5. We at Concern are not opposed to the use of Green Revolution technologies, including seeds, fertilizers, chemical herbicides and/or pesticides. As such, farmers with means in areas with agro-business infrastructure should be supported in accessing loans through microfinance agencies in order to adopt CA. However, it must be recognized that the high costs, limited access, and management regimens that are a prerequisite of these technologies cannot be sustained over the long-term by most small-scale farmers in sub-Saharan Africa without first building their capacities within their existing local resource base. Furthermore, a diversity of approaches may lead to greater diversity of nutritional and economic resources produced by the implementing households.
Directly addresses: MDG#7A, 8F Indirectly addresses: MDG #1C
219) Conchi Quintana, World Rural Forum, Spain
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Saludos cordiales desde el Foro Rural Mundial, asociación responsable de la coordinación de la Sociedad Civil para la preparación y promoción del Año Internacional de la Agricultura Familiar, AIAF- 2014.
La Agricultura Familiar representa un sector de valor estratégico debido a su función económica, social, cultural, ambiental y territorial. Los hombres y mujeres dedicados a la Agricultura Familiar producen el 70% de los alimentos del mundo, en un contexto de falta de apoyo generalizado.
La Agricultura Familiar es la base de la producción sostenible de alimentos destinados a la seguridad alimentaria y a la soberanía alimentaria, de la gestión ambiental de la tierra y su biodiversidad y de la preservación de la importante herencia sociocultural de las comunidades rurales y las naciones.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
314
La Agricultura Familiar, campesina, pastores, pesca artesanal, comunidades indígenas, representa el modelo más sostenible en la lucha contre el Hambre y la Malnutrición. Incluso el Banco Mundial, Informe sobre la Agricultura 2008, considera que los alimentos deben ser producidos cerca de los consumidores, de los que pasan hambre. El 75% de éstos son mujeres y hombres pequeños campesinos, jornaleros sin tierra.
Nuestras reivindicaciones a nivel general
Para mejorar las condiciones de los hombres y mujeres dedicados a la Agricultura Familiar y liberar todo su potencial como agentes principales en la lucha para acabar con la pobreza y el hambre en el mundo, tenemos que fortalecer su voz, transformar las instituciones y abogar por políticas que respondan a sus necesidades.
En este sentido 200 hombres y mujeres líderes de organizaciones campesinas nacionales, regionales e internacionales, de grupos de la sociedad civil y movimientos sociales y de las principales instituciones académicas y de investigación de cuatro continentes del mundo reunidos en Bilbao, España, en Octubre 2011,con motivo de la Conferencia Mundial de Agricultura Familiar bajo el lema "Alimentar al mundo, Cuidar el Planeta" acordaron una Declaración Final en la que establecieron los principales retos a superar a fin de dar sentido a la reivindicación general presentada en este punto.
1. Asegurar que las instituciones públicas sean responsables ante el conjunto de las familias de agricultores, aplicando mejores políticas agrarias que proporcionen servicios específicos de calidad (infraestructura, extensión, investigación e innovación tecnológica, información, difusión pública, educación, respuestas de emergencia, etc.).
2. Fortalecer las organizaciones y los movimientos de agricultores familiares para aumentar su influencia sobre las políticas, las instituciones y los mercados.
3. Definir las inversiones y el desarrollo de políticas, en consulta con las organizaciones de agricultores familiares que se dedican específicamente a atender las necesidades de la Agricultura Familiar.
Ver documento completo de la declaración en defensa de la Agricultura Familiar tras la Conferencia Mundial de Agricultura Familiar bajo el lema "Alimentar al mundo, Cuidar el Planeta". Octubre 2011, Bilbao, España.
Mujer agricultora
Por otra parte, una cuarta parte de la población mundial está compuesta de mujeres agricultoras, a menudo cabezas de familia, que representan unos 1.600 millones de personas. (FUENTE: Fundación Cumbre Mundial de Mujeres, Ginebra).
El cierre de la brecha de género en la agricultura generaría beneficios considerables para el sector agrícola y la sociedad. Si las mujeres tuvieran el mismo acceso a los recursos productivos que los hombres podrían aumentar el rendimiento de sus explotaciones agrícolas de un 20% a un 30 %. La mejora en los rendimientos permitiría superar la subsistencia y destinar parte de la producción a los mercados locales. De esta manera, se logran impactos positivos a varios niveles. Por un lado las mujeres obtendrían mejores y mayores beneficios, el territorio se mantendría productivo y la población tendría un mejor acceso a alimentos.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
315
Los posibles beneficios variarían según la región en función de cuántas mujeres se dedican actualmente a la agricultura, cuánta producción o tierras controlan, y la amplitud de la brecha de género a la que se enfrentan. (SOFA 2011)
Las áreas prioritarias para la reforma son las siguientes:
- Eliminar la discriminación de la mujer en el acceso a los recursos agrícolas, la educación, los servicios de extensión y financieros así como los mercados de trabajo;
- Invertir en tecnologías e infraestructura que permitan ahorrar trabajo y mejorar la productividad de modo que las mujeres dispongan de más tiempo libre para dedicarse a actividades más productivas;
- Facilitar la participación de la mujer en mercados de trabajo rural que sean flexibles, eficientes y justos. (FAO. 2011. El estado mundial de la agricultura y la alimentación 2010-11: Las mujeres en la Agricultura).
Los próximos Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenibles deben considerar estas realidades marcando metas muy concretas para mejorar situación de la Agricultura Familiar en general y de la Mujer Agricultora en particular. En la definición de estos objetivos concretos deben participar activamente los principales protagonistas del proceso: los y las agricultores familiares.
En este sentido, el FRM anticipa que va a presentar una propuesta formal, a desarrollar en profundidad durante el año 2013, para solicitar a Naciones Unidas la inclusión del apoyo a la Agricultura Familiar Sostenible como un Objetivo de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODM) en la lista de objetivos a formalizar a partir del año 2015. La propuesta va a ser fruto de un intenso trabajo entre responsables de Organizaciones Agrarias y de Desarrollo, en colaboración con centros de investigación y organizaciones multilaterales. Todas las organizaciones involucradas en este trabajo reconocen el papel crucial de la Agricultura Familiar para erradicar el hambre y la pobreza en el mundo de forma sostenible, de forma que su apoyo se convierta en un indicador esencial de Desarrollo.
Muchas gracias por su atención.http://www.ruralforum.net/ffwconference/declaracion.asp?id=es
Miren Larrea y Conchi QuintanaArea de Contenidos del Foro Rural Mundialwww.ruralforum.netwww.familyfarmingcampaign.net
[English translation]
Best regards from the World Rural Forum, an association responsible for the coordination of civil society in the organization and promotion of the International Year of Family Farming, IYFF-2014.
Family Farming represents a strategic value sector because of its economic, social, cultural, environmental and territorial role. The men and women dedicated to family agriculture produce 70% of the world's food, in a context of widespread lack of support.
Family Farming forms the basis of sustainable food production for food security and food sovereignty, of environmental management of land and its biodiversity and the preservation of important socio-cultural heritage of rural communities and nations.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
316
Family farming, pastoralists, artisanal fishing, indigenous communities farming, do represent the most sustainable model in the struggle against hunger and malnutrition. Even the World Bank report on agriculture (2008), believes that food should be produced near consumers, near the hungry.Of these, 75% are small farmers and landless laborers.
Our main demands
In order to improve the lives of women and men dedicated to Family Agriculture and unleash their potential as key players in the fight to end poverty and hunger in the world, we have to strengthen their voice, transforming institutions and advocating for policies that meet their needs.
Thus, 200 women and men, leaders of national, regional and international farmers organizations, civil society groups and social movements and key academic and research institutions from four continents of the world gathered in Bilbao, Spain, in October 2011, for the Family Farming World Conference with the theme "Feeding the World, Caring for the Earth". The Conference adopted a Final Declaration listing the main challenges to overcome, in order to give sense to the main claim presented.
1. Ensure that public institutions are accountable to all family farmers, implementing better agriculture policies that provide specific quality services (infrastructure, extension, research and technological innovation, information, public awareness, education, emergency response, etc..) .
2. Strengthen family farmers organizations and movements to increase their influence over policies, institutions and markets.
3. Define investments and policy development, in consultation with the family farmers organizations which are specifically dedicated to addressing Family Farming needs.
See the the full text of the statement in defense of Family Farming after the Family Farming World Conference with the theme "Feeding the World, Caring for the Earth". October 2011, Bilbao, Spain.Woman farmer
Besides, a quarter of the world's population is composed of women farmers, often household heads, representing about 1,600 million people. (SOURCE: Women's World Summit Foundation, Geneva).
Closing the gender gap in agriculture would generate significant benefits for the agricultural sector and society. If women had the same access to productive resources as men, they could increase yields in their farms by 20% to 30%. This improvement in yields would overcome subsistence farming and allocate part of the production to local markets. Thus, there are positive impacts at various levels. On one hand, women would obtain better and higher profits, the territory would remain productive and people would have better access to food.
The possible benefits vary by region depending on how many women are currently engaged in agriculture, how much production or lands they do control, and the extent of the gender gap faced. (SOFA 2011)
The priority areas for reform are:
- To eliminate discrimination against women in the access to agricultural resources, education, financial and extension services and labor markets;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
317
- Investing in technologies and infrastructure that save labor and improve productivity, so that women have more time to devote to more productive activities;
- Facilitate the participation of women in rural labor markets that are flexible, efficient and fair. (FAO, 2011. The State of Food and Agriculture 2010-11: Women in Agriculture).
The next Sustainable Development Goals should consider these realities, setting very specific goals to improve the situation of Family Farming in general and women farmers in particular. In the definition of these objectives, the main players in the process should be actively involved: family farmers.
In this sense, the WRM anticipates that it will submit a formal proposal, to be developed in depth during 2013, to request the United Nations to support the inclusion of Sustainable Family Farming as a Sustainable Development Goal in the list of goals from 2015. The proposal will be the result of intense joint work between leaders of Agriculture and Development organizations, in collaboration with research centers and multilateral organizations. All the agencies involved in this task acknowledge the crucial role of Family Farming to eradicate hunger and poverty in the world in a sustainably way, so that their support will become a key indicator of development.
Thank you very much for your attention.
220) George Kent, University of Hawai'i (Emeritus), United States of America
Current global discussions on food security and nutrition neglect the needs of infants and young children. Optimal breastfeeding (initiation within an hour after birth, exclusive breastfeeding for six months, and continued breastfeeding for up to two years and beyond) is under pressure in both low-income and high-income countries. The International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes is not fully implemented, and there are several issues that are not covered by that Code. The infant formula manufacturers are planning large-scale increases in infant formula use throughout the world, and no agencies are prepared to assess the likely impacts. On the basis of extensive scientific research that has already been done on formula feeding in comparison with breastfeeding, the new wave of formula feeding is likely to result in considerable harm to the health of both infants and mothers.
As suggested in my recent book on Regulating Infant Formula, many of the issues could be addressed at the global level through a new Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The new Optional Protocol could present a set of widely agreed principles regarding the nutrition of children.
Working under the auspices of the United Nations General Assembly, the nations of the world could negotiate a draft OPCN. Drafts could be prepared by national governments working together with nongovernmental organizations. The drafters could draw from the many documents that already propose sound principles relating to children’s nutrition such as the World Health Organization’s Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding and the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. There are many other documents, now scattered, whose core ideas could be pulled together.
After the draft OPCN was adopted by the UN General Assembly, it would be open to ratification by the nations of the world. Ratification would indicate the nation’s acceptance of the OPCN and its commitment to conform its national laws to it.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
318
The OPCN would not replace international bodies such as the United Nations Children’s Fund or the Codex Alimentarius Commission, nor would it replace national regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The OPCN would help to harmonize the work of all participating countries at the national level. It would be the apex document, setting out important principles relating to the nutrition of infants and young children.
The drafters of the OPCN would have to accommodate diversity and recognize the important differences in cultural approaches to raising children in different places. As a global document, it would focus mainly on widely accepted principles, and leave the details of implementation to be worked out in different countries according to their particular circumstances.
One of the basic principles of the OPCN would be that children have a right to foods that are both safe and nutritionally adequate. The concepts would be defined at the global level, but implemented concretely at the national level. This approach would place children’s nutrition decisively into the human rights framework. Like other forms of international law, it would not result in immediate compliance, but it would establish clear and widely agreed standards, and it would support the preparation of strong law at the national level. A new Optional Protocol on Children’s Nutrition, linked to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, would help to establish coherent regulations for ensuring that infants and young children everywhere are well nourished.
Aloha, George Kent
221) Ariane Marcar, Warwick University, United Kingdom
The challenges we face towards achieving food and nutritional security are substantial, if not daunting. We are putting our whole agricultural system at risk through a series of converging factors that have become global in nature (climate change, increased soil degradation and water stress, decrease in soil fertility, industrial and agricultural pollution, rapid demographic growth we can ill afford and commodity speculation forcing food prices upwards).
One cannot get away from the triangle: population-C02-natural resources. Right now the combination population-technology is widening the gap between humanty's footprint and the available biocapacity. The biotehcnological solutions proposed to date are also either inadequate, problematic or still experimental and so not capable of redressing the situation within the temporal limits we now have to work in, in which we are confronted with having to try and feed an 2 extra billion or more by 2050! Therefore unless we bring our population levels down and restore soil fertility we are unlikely to succeed. This means promoting agro-ecological alternatives over agricultural intensification.
It is in these two areas that we need to focus all our efforts, as well as on making sure temperatures to do not rise above 2 C. I attach a paper on why another Green Revolution in Africa (or elsewhere for that matter) is unadvisable, as the points are relevant to both themes I and II. Why we do not need another Green Revolution for Africa: the demographic implicationshttp://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Dr.%20A.%20Marcar,%202012,%20Why%20Africa%20does%20not%20need%20another%20green%20revolution;%20the%20demographic%20implications_0.pdf
Respectfully submitted by Dr. A. Marcar.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
319
222) Ariella Rojhani Rojhani NCD Alliance, United States of America
We are currently facing a triple burden of malnutrition: under-nutrition, micronutrient deficiency, and over nutrition/overconsumption, often within the same countries, communities and households.
The triple burden of malnutrition is symptomatic of underlying problems: poverty, inequalities and dysfunctional food systems.
A single focus on under nutrition is insufficient to address either the range of nutritional problems affecting every country in the world, or the oncoming tsunami of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancers, asthma and other NCDS linked to overweight/obesity.
223) Angela Cahill, Ireland
The key building block for child survival, growth and healthy development is provided exclusive breastfeeding for six months, with continued breastfeeding for up to two years or beyond with the addition of safe and nutritionally adequate complementary foods. These optimal infant feeding practices, as defined in the Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding, provide the foundations for the achievement of the health-related Millennium Development Goal. Scientific research has shown that breastfeeding is good for mothers, babies and societies. In conditions of poverty and in emergency situations, breastfeeding is a real lifeline and artificial feeding is a huge risk to infant survival. Implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent relevant WHA Resolutions Independent monitoring clearly shows that companies continue to systematically and aggressively market foods for infants and young children using techniques that mislead parents about the risks of artificial feeding and undermine breastfeeding. Such marketing is acknowledged to have a direct, negative impact on the realization of rights of children and women, in particular on the right to health and to adequate food.
Correct and unbiased information There is a poor understanding of the fact that breastfeeding should be regarded as a norm and artificial feeding as a substitute that can never be equal to the norm , and how much support a mother needs to succeed in practicing exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months and to continue for 2 years or beyond. The need for supportive health care systems Commercial pressures lead to inadequate support provided to women by the health care system. Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI), the backbone of which is formed by the ‘Ten steps for successful breastfeeding’, is a key initiative to ensure breastfeeding support within the health care system.
224) Anna Hudson, Ireland
Please specifically include breastfeeding in the new Millennium Development Goals.
Breastfeeding is free, it requires no sterilization of equipment which can be a problem in areas which lack access to clean water, it is better for babies and reduces infant mortality rates and better for mothers.
The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes should be fully implemented.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
320
225) Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition [GAIN] Switzerland
Please find below the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) position paper, "A World Free from Hunger and Malnutrition: Food and Nutrition Security in the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda." The Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) is a global foundation which currently assists nearly 670m people facing malnutrition in over 30 countries. This short note sets out why and how we believe better nutrition should be integrated into global development priorities post 2015. Our major call is for Zero Stunting – eliminating the factors which blight the physical and mental development of children for ever - to be a new benchmark for global development success.
A World Free from Hunger and Malnutrition
Food and Nutrition Security in the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda
The Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) is a global foundation which currently assists nearly 670m people facing malnutrition in over 30 countries. This short note sets out why and how we believe better nutrition should be integrated into global development priorities post 2015.
Our major call is for Zero Stunting – eliminating the factors which blight the physical and mental development of children for ever - to be a new benchmark for global development success.
Severe food and nutrition insecurity continue to dominate the lives of a third of humanity, and will become even more difficult to address due to the growing complexity of global challenges, such as population growth, increasing consumer demand from the growing middle class in developing countries, high and volatile food prices, energy scarcity, urbanization, the new competition between food and fuel, and climate change. The world faces an unprecedented challenge, which will loom larger as the global population increases to 9 billion by 2050, and one, which underpins the viability of all other development goals.
In parallel with food insecurity, global obesity rates are rising rapidly, including among children under the age of 5 , and will have significant cost implications for health care systems and nations due to increased obesity related chronic diseases and lost productivity. The prevalence of hunger and undernutrition, coupled with the increasing incidence of obesity, known as malnutrition’s ‘double burden’, indicates that systemic and structural challenges exist within our current global food and health systems and will affect how we approach the prevention of malnutrition. These challenges impact across every aspect of development. Addressing these challenges will require smarter policy decisions in how we approach and finance development’s priorities, and how we leverage markets to work better for the poor.
Scaled-up investments in science and technology, strengthened health systems with better linkages to other sectors at the planning and community levels, supported by international evidence-based technical guidance, and support for improved country capacities are fundamental to accelerating progress and achieving development objectives. Technological innovations such as biotechnology, information and communication innovations, and biofortification, are crucial to increasing agricultural productivity, building resilience to weather-related shocks, enhancing the nutritional value of food crops, and ensuring food safety.
Innovative Partnerships to Deliver Impact
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
321
In response to the need to better integrate sectors in addressing malnutrition, the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement, a country-led, global effort to advance health and development through improved nutrition, convened a diverse range of public and private partners to drive the effort to reduce stunting and chronic undernutrition. Innovative, country-led collaborations between governments, the private sector, international organizations (including the United Nations), academia and civil society are integral to the ‘Collective Impact’ approach to fighting hunger and malnutrition that delivers sustainable impact at a scale that no single organization can achieve alone .
Equally important is working with a diverse set of partners on the ground – partners who work all along the food value chain and understand the needs of the community, who are embedded within the local or regional culture, and who can leverage public and market-based channels for investment to ensure access to, and consumption of, affordable and nutritionally adequate food. These efforts have the potential to foster change on the ground, spurring innovation and entrepreneurship, and create self-sustaining cycles of growth.
The post-2015 Development Agenda
A new global partnership should bring together a full range of stakeholders and strike a balance between meaningful global commitments and the flexibility to implement them at the global, regional, national and sub-national levels. Given the changing development landscape, the post-2015 framework should emphasize the interplay between prevention and treatment, while instituting a systems approach to the development of solutions that build local capacity, integrate sectors where a mandate for social impact is shared and roles in partnership are defined not by how an organization is incorporated, but by opportunity and capacity tailored to context.
Although progress has been made, two billion people in the world suffer from various forms of malnutrition. Malnutrition is an underlying cause of death of 2.6 million children each year – a third of child deaths globally. 171 million children around the world – 1 in 4, and 1 in 3 in developing nations – are chronically malnourished, which leads to physical and mental stunting. If current trends continue, this number could be as high as 450 million within the next fifteen years. Undernutrition accounts for 11 per cent of the global burden of disease and is considered the number one risk to health worldwide. Evidence also shows that diets that provide inappropriate nutrition contribute to obesity and the slew of attendant health problems, such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.
Poor and maternal and infant nutrition irreversibly damages not only the lifelong mental and physical capacities of individuals, but also the growth of communities and the economic performance of entire countries. Countries may lose two to three percent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a result of iron, iodine, and zinc deficiencies. Armed with this information, many governments and donor agencies now agree that improving nutrition – particularly during the 1000-day period from conception to a child’s second birthday when the impact is greatest – is the pressing development issue of our time.
Recommendations: nutrition must be at the heart of the post-2015 development framework
As the post-2015 development agenda is shaped, it is clear that nutrition is inextricably linked to health, livelihoods, and food security to deliver equity, capacity development and economic growth. Nutrition is the foundation for development, and addressing the challenges of its double burden of malnutrition is relevant to poor and rich countries alike.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
322
A focus on global improvement of nutrition will drive investment and prioritization for the double burden of malnutrition that will have positive, far-reaching impact on equity and economic development in all countries.
A broader, holistic approach is needed, as malnutrition is the ultimate expression of systemic and cultural challenges in our global food and health systems. While a health systems focus has allowed us to make significant gains, particularly in reductions in some of the most severe consequences of malnutrition, it is too narrow a mechanism to get us to significant reductions in malnutrition overall.
GAIN recommends that to have meaningful impact on the future of the international development agenda and to guarantee food and nutrition security, improved nutrition must become a specific focus in the post-2015 development framework, especially the nutritional status in the 1000 days window from conception to the age of two, and tackling the scourge of stunting.
Zero stunting – a new and critical development goal
Because of the complex causal factors that determine good nutrition outcomes, it is critical that a long-term approach is taken to streaming nutrition interventions across broad development activities.
We therefore recommend that a post MDG framework identify a central, long-term goal of eliminating stunting. Stunting is an indicator of chronic malnutrition, and is important for understanding not only outcomes, but also the determinants of maternal and child health. Furthermore, levels of stunting – both physical and mental – strongly correlate with development, with stunting statistics a good measure of success for development in general. We propose this specific deliverable target of zero stunting as the best indicator of whether the world’s children are getting the right start in life.
Measuring Progress for All
We also propose that the post-2015 framework also include a range of indicators that have relevance, for both the agriculture and health fields and which can track the rapidly changing trends toward the double burden of malnutrition, including wasting, stunting, micronutrient deficiency rates, dietary diversity, and obesity rates. Given nutrition’s multivariate nature, it is no longer useful to have only two indicators for nutrition if we are to understand the implications of food insecurity and poor eating practices.
The following indicators in addition to stunting should be measured for the population as a whole:
Wasting, an indicator of acute malnutrition is needed to capture trends in acute food insecurity situations such as war, drought and other emergency situations.
Micronutrient deficiencies, both a nutrition and agriculture indicator is needed to capture the measurable contribution of agriculture in addressing malnutrition.
Childhood Obesity rates, a nutrition indicator, is useful to help to track the growing trend of the double burden.
In addition, Dietary Diversity, a qualitative measure of food consumption, reflects household access to a variety of foods and is also a proxy for nutrient adequacy of the diet of individuals. It should be tracked as a development indicator.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
323
226) Pamela Morrison International Board Certified Lactation Consultant, United Kingdom
Please consider specifically highlighting breastfeeding as currently recommended by WHO and UNICEF as being one of the most important factors in achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. In particular, funding currently over-supplied to providing thousands of babies and young children annually on emergency supplies of Ready to Use Therapeutic Foods would be better spent on teaching their mothers about the value of exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life and continued breastfeeding with normal household weaning foods for at least 2 years. Such a strategy would enable mothers, and indeed countries to use their own sustainable resources rather than relying on hand-outs given as "aid". Lastly, please consider as a matter of urgency disseminating the current recommendations for breastfeeding and antiretroviral therapy for HIV-positive mothers - please see WABA’s International Policy on HIV and Breastfeeding: a Comprehensive Resource, released 3 December 2012, see http://www.waba.org.my/whatwedo/hcp/ihiv.htm#kit
226) Roxanne Howdle, United Kingdom
Please prioritise implementing WHO goals and Baby Friendly Initiative with regards to breastfeeding (mainly preventing all promotions and samples) in UK, Europe as well as continuing to resist attempts by Danone and Nestle to illegally promote infant formula products around the world.
228) Juanita Jauer Steichen, IBFAN/LLL FRANCE/COFAM/REGAAL, France
Policies on infant nutrition and health such as the World Health Organization’s Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding and the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes as well as overwhelming evidence-based research have demonstrated the crucial rôle of breastfeeding on infant ntrition and infant and maternal health. Yet breastfeeding rates continue to fall around the world, largely due to the impact of the aggressive marketing of formula, and the social manipulation by advertising, undermining breastfeeding as the biological and social norm for infant feeding, even among the poorest populations. Follow-on and growth milks have been determined to be unnecessary, despite unsubstantiated claims by industry to the contrary, and, along with special babyfoods through early childhood, present a continued financial burden to families with no nutritional advantage over family foods. The International Code and WHA Resolutions are insufficiently legislated, and there is growing concern about the widespread conflicts of interest between industry and health sectors. Please see IBFAN's position statement on Sponsorships for more detail.
Breastfeeding is a fundamental human right, and recognised as such by the Convention on the Rights of the Child.Exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months, followed by continued breastfeeding along woth appropriate complementary foods to age two years or beyond, represents food, health and care, as it prevents malnutrition, protects both mother and child against disease (with protection increasing with duration of breastfeeding) and reduces economic differences.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food addressed the World Breastfeeding Conference 2012 in New Delhi, emphasising the importance of breastfeeding as a human right for both the mother and the child, the neeed for the full implementation of the International Code on the Marketing of breastmilk Substitutes as well as maternity protection for working mothers and better education for girls and women.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
324
Peer support in the form of mother to mother breastfeeding support groups or breastfeeding peer counsellors have been found to be one of the most effective ways of increasing both initiation and duration of breastfeeding.
The World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative launched by IBFAN/WABA in 2004 is a tool to evaluate the state of breastfeeding according to different criteria, and allows countries to monitor breastfeeding rates and implement actions for improvement. Currently used by 83 countries, the WBTI should be implemented worldwide in order to improve breastfeeding rates, maternal protection at work, education, ans Code implementation.
During emergency situations – wars, floods, earthquakes, epidemics – breastfeeding saves the lives of those most vulnerable, infants and young children. lives. When food distribution comes to a halt, when fuel, drinling water, medicine and health services are unavailable, the breastfed baby or infant has significantlt improved rates of survival.. In 1998, during the first three months of conflict in Guinea-Bissau, the death rate among 9-20 month old non breastfed children was 6 times higher than those who were breastfed.
Breastfeeding is vital for the MDGs.
Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Breastfeeding is economical and provides high quality, irrepalceable nutrition through breastmilk, and its complex and species-specific composition.
Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education
Well-nourished babies and infants are equiped to learn. Breastfeeding is shown to improve cognitive and neurological devlopment.
Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women
Empowers women who realise that they can meet their child's emotional and nutritional needs through breastfeeding. Gives all children an equal good start in life.
Goal 4 Reduce child mortality
Reduced infection, better nutrition, reduced risk of malnutritio.
Goal 5 Improve maternal health
Many benefits - decreased maternal postpartum blood loss,lower incidence of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer, as well as the probability of decreased bone loss post-menopause. …
Goal 6 Fight HIV and other diseases
Research shows that breastfeeding in conjunction with ARV treatment protects the child
Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability
Breastfeeding is green ! Environmentally friendly, it has an invisble carbon footprint when compared to that of formula production..
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
325
Goal 8 Develop a global partnership for development
The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding encourages collaboration and partnerships in multiple sectors on national, local and international levels. Optimal infant feeding has a major impact on health outcomes and on economic productivity.
229) Felicity Savage World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action and Infant Feeding Consortium, United Kingdom
During the current MDG Framework, it was shown conclusively that breastfeeding is critical to child health, preventing stunting, and with life-long benefits; that current health care practises undermine breastfeeding; and that exclusive breastfeeding rates can be increased by counselling and support before during and after delivery in health facilities and the community.
Therefore it should be the right of every mother and child to receive such support, and provision of skilled help to 100% of women and infants should be an objective of the Post 2015 Global Development Framework.
The other proposed objectives for the Zero Hunger Challenge make no sense and are unachievable without provision for laying the foundations of health and nutrition in the first six months of a child's life, and continuing up to 2 years.
230) International Baby Food Action Network, Switzerland
FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY FROM THE START OF LIFE
Submission to the E-Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security
There is growing concern today about the increasing global burden of malnutrition – both under nutrition and obesity – with health consequences throughout the life course. Malnutrition is a major factor in child health and survival; it has been estimated to be an underlying cause of up to 50–60 percent of under-five deaths . Today, almost a quarter of the world’s children, especially in Africa and Asia do not get adequate food . At the same time, there is a rising incidence of nutrition related noncommunicable diseases including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Malnutrition – both under- and over – sets in during the first two years of life, mostly during infancy . Food and nutrition security during this period means ensuring early and exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months, followed by introduction of complementary foods along with continued breastfeeding up to two years. A growing body of evidence points to the key role of infant and young child feeding practices, especially early and exclusive breastfeeding, in mitigating both forms of malnutrition and in the prevention of child mortality. Nonetheless interventions that address these practices have not received adequate attention during the MDGs era, and thus there is an unused potential for achieving progress in food and nutrition security in the childhood but also in the adulthood. The post-MDGs development agenda should bridge this gap and make a priority of such interventions. 1. Breastfeeding contribution to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
326
The key building block for child survival, growth and healthy development is provided by early initiation of breastfeeding and exclusive breastfeeding for six months, with continued breastfeeding for up to two years or beyond with the addition of safe and nutritionally adequate complementary foods. These optimal feeding practices constitute a public health recommendation by the World Health Organisation (WHO) for normal growth, health and development.
As defined in the Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding, they provide the foundations for the achievement of the health-related Millennium Development Goal (MDG) and contribute to the achievement of all the other MDGs.
Breastfeeding and complementary feeding are key to child survival and health. Scientific research has shown that breastfeeding is good for mothers, babies and societies. In conditions of poverty and in emergency situations, breastfeeding is a real lifeline and artificial feeding is a huge risk to infant survival. Exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months of life has also been associated with decreased infant deaths in HIV-exposed infants when compared with mixed feeding and exclusively replacement feeding . For all babies, breastfeeding enhances neurological, visual and motor development and reduces incidence and severity of diarrhoeal and respiratory diseases.
Sub optimal breastfeeding increases newborn infections by six times, diarrhoea by 3 times and pneumonia by 2.5 times. These three are major killers of infants before they reach their first birthday.
Complementary feeding of infants and young children older than 6 months in addition to continued breastfeeding is also key to survival. Growth reference analyses for developing countries has consistently shown falling off after the early months, while research has shown that little can be done for growth recovery after the first two to three years.
Breastfeeding tops the list of effective preventive interventions for child survival. Together with appropriate complementary feeding these two have more impact even than immunisation, safe water and sanitation .
Breastfeeding reinforces immunization. Breastfeeding provides the baby with anti-bacterial, anti-viral and anti-parasitic agents and strengthens the infant's developing immune system to fight off disease . Breastfeeding confers active and passive immunity; it primes the infant's immune system and improves the "take up" or antibody response to vaccines. Colostrum is so rich in antibodies and so high in anti-infective properties that it has been called "the first immunisation".
Breastfeeding enhances neurological, visual and motor development; it protects against obesity, respiratory infections and diarrhoea, and against allergies, skin disease and asthma. In this way, breastfeeding complements other key interventions to improve child health.
The effect of continued breastfeeding is sustainable: it does not require booster shots.
Breastfeeding is one of the most cost-effective nutrition interventions, as stated by the World Bank in 2006. The beneficial nutrition interventions with the lowest unit cost were salt iodization at $ 0.20 to $0.50 unit cost per participant and breastfeeding promotion in hospitals at $0.30 to $0.40, if infant formula was removed from maternity wards. However if infant formula is not removed from maternity wards, the report indicates that the unit cost increases to $ 2 to $ 3 per infant . This increase shows the high cost to health care systems and governments incurred by importing or purchasing expensive breastmilk substitutes.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
327
Early and exclusive breastfeeding contribute to improving women’s health in the period following childbirth and in later life. Breastfeeding benefits for maternal health include improved postpartum recovery, reduced iron loss, delayed fertility return, decreased breast and ovarian cancers and reduced bone loss with aging.
Breaking the inter-generational circle of malnutrition. For mothers to breastfeed their babies optimally, they need skilled support and access to adequate nutrition in their own right to deliver this crucial intervention. The lifecycle approach is key to breaking the intergenerational vicious circle of malnutrition in girls/women.
Breastfeeding and child spacing. "More births are probably prevented world-wide each year by breastfeeding than by all other contraceptive methods combined" . In the 21st century, 200 million women who want to limit their childbearing have no access to contraception or family planning services (ref. see Gay Palmer page 133 and 396). In Africa, it is estimated that in 2009, only 28% of married women use contraceptives . In some African countries, births might increase by 50% if breastfeeding stopped.
Moreover, women who artificially feed risk becoming pregnant again too soon; closely spaced pregnancies damage the health and endanger the lives of both mothers and children. Women are able to raise healthier children by spacing births using the Lactation Amenorrhea Method (LAM). LAM provides a method of birth spacing that women themselves can control, independently of pressures from their husbands and relatives.
Breastfeeding and Gender Equality. Women’s unique roles of child bearing and breastfeeding place them in vulnerable positions, socially, economically and nutritionally. Globally, women are disproportionately affected by poverty, illiteracy, discrimination and violence. Women’s reproductive rights and productive roles require adequate support to ensure that they obtain equality at all levels of society.
The persistent injustices and discrimination experienced by women around the world led the UN to adopt the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 1979. This document specifically states that maternity is a social function, that women should benefit from appropriate medical services in connection with pregnancy and lactation, and that there should be support to enable parents to balance family and work responsibilities including participation in public life. This last point is also underlined in Article 18 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
Breastfeeding is an integral part of women’s reproductive health and as such, represents a right for women. However, women can only enjoy the full health benefits of breastfeeding when they receive accurate information to make an informed choice about infant feeding, are able to exercise their right to breastfeed without coercion and pressure, and when governments, communities, health professionals and families protect this right.
Importance of breastfeeding and complementary feeding in achieving MDGsIn 2003-2004, the Working Group on Breastfeeding and Complementary Feeding of the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition (SCN) developed a matrix that resumes the contribution of optimal infant and young child feeding to the achievement of each of the 8 MDGs. Table 1 represents the finalized matrix.
SCN Breastfeeding and Complementary Feeding Working Group 2003/200426
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
328
Contribution of Breastfeeding, Complementary Feeding, and Related Maternal Nutrition to the Millennium Development Goals
MDGs Goals and Targets
Contribution of Infant and Young Child feeding (i.e., Early and Exclusive Breastfeeding, continued breastfeeding with complementary feeding and related maternal nutrition)
Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Breastfeeding significantly reduces early childhood feeding costs, and exclusive breastfeeding halves the cost of breastfeeding 1. Exclusive breastfeeding and continued breastfeeding for two years is associated with reduction in underweight 2 and is an excellent source of high quality calories for energy. By reducing fertility, exclusive breastfeeding reduces reproductive stress. Breastfeeding provides breast milk, serving as low-cost, high quality, locally produced food and sustainable food security for the child.
Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education
Breastfeeding and adequate complementary feeding are prerequisites for readiness to learn 3. Breastfeeding and quality complementary foods significantly contribute to cognitive development and capacity. In addition to the balance of long chain fatty acids in breast milk which support neurological development, initial exclusive breastfeeding and complementary feeding address micronutrient and iron deficiency needs and, hence, support appropriate neurological development and enhance later school performance.
Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women
Breastfeeding is the great equalizer, giving every child a fair start on life. Most differences in growth between sexes begin as complementary foods are added into the diet, and gender preference begins to act on feeding decisions. Breastfeeding also empowers women:
increased birth spacing secondary to breastfeeding helps prevents maternal depletion from short birth intervals,
only women can provide it, enhancing women’s capacity to feed children increases focus on need for women’s nutrition to be considered
Goal 4 Reduce child mortality
By reducing infectious disease incidence and severity, breastfeeding could readily reduce child mortality by about 13%, and improved complementary feeding would reduce child mortality by about 6% 4. In addition, about 50-60% of under-5 mortality is caused by malnutrition due to inadequate complementary foods and feeding following on poor breastfeeding practices 5 and, also, to low birth weight. The impact is increased in unhygienic settings. The micronutrient content of breastmilk, especially during exclusive breastfeeding, and from complementary feeding can provide essential micronutrients in adequate quantities, as well as necessary levels of protein and carbohydrates.
Goal 5 Improve maternal health
The activities called for in the Global Strategy include increased attention to support for the mother's nutritional and social needs. In addition, breastfeeding is associated with decreased maternal postpartum blood loss, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer, as well as the probability of decreased bone loss post-menopause. Breastfeeding also contributes to the duration of birth intervals, reducing maternal risks of pregnancy too close together, including lessening risk of maternal nutritional depletion from repeated, closely-spaced pregnancies. Breastfeeding promotes return of the mother’s body to pre-pregnancy status, including more rapid involution of the uterus and postpartum weight loss (obesity prevention).
Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
Based on extrapolation from the published literature on the impact of exclusive breastfeeding on MTCT, exclusive breastfeeding in a population of untested breastfeeding HIV-infected population could be associated with a significant and measurable reduction in MTCT.
26 UN Standing Committee on Nutrition. Working Group on Breastfeeding and Complementary Feeding: Contribution to Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Available at: http://www.unsystem.org/scn/Publications/AnnualMeeting/SCN31/31_breastfeeding.htm
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
329
Goal 7 Ensure environmentalsustainability
Breastfeeding is associated with decreased milk industry waste, pharmaceutical waste, plastics and aluminium tin waste, and decreased use of firewood/fossil fuels for alternative feeding preparation 6, less CO2 emission as a result of fossil fuels, and less emissions from transport vehicles as breastmilk is locally produced.
Goal 8 Develop a global partnership for development
The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding fosters multi-sectoral collaboration, and can build upon the existant partnerships for support of development through breastfeeding and complementary feeding. In terms of future economic productivity, optimal infant feeding has major implications.
1 Bhatnagar, S., Jain, N. P. & Tiwari, V. K. Cost of infant feeding in exclusive and partially breastfed infants. Indian Pediatr. 33, 655-658 (1996). 2 Dewey, K. G. Cross-cultural patterns of growth and nutritional status of breast-fed infants. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 67, 10-7 (1998). 3 Anderson, J. W., Johnstone, B. M. & Remley, D. T. Breast-feeding and cognitive development: a meta-analysis. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 70, 525-35 (1990). 4 Jones, G. et al. How many child deaths can we prevent this year? Lancet 362, 65-71 (2003). 5 Pelletier, D. & Frongillo, E. Changes in child survival are strongly associated with changes in malnutrition in developing countries. J. Nutr. 133, 107-119 (2003) 6 Labbok M. Breastfeeding as a women's issue: conclusions and consensus, complementary concerns, and next actions. IJGO 1994; 47(Suppl):S55-S61
2. Challenges and opportunities
Barriers to optimal infant and young child feeding contribute to 1.4 million preventable deaths annually in children under five, the majority of whom are dying already during the first month of life.
Initiating breastfeeding within the first hour of birth can reduce neonatal mortality by 20%, but shockingly, more than half the world’s newborns are not breastfeed within an hour of birth. Exclusive breastfeeding for six months and continued breastfeeding for 12 months may prevent under five child deaths by 13%, complementary feeding may contribute to reduce 6% child deaths (Lancet 2003). Globally only around 37% % of infants under six months are exclusively breastfed. Infants need continued breastfeeding along with adequate amounts of complementary foods after they are six months old and continued breastfeeding for two years or beyond. Yet, only a minority of children continue breastfeeding until the age of two.
Status of policy and programmes to improve breastfeeding and complementary feeding practices
The latest Countdown to 2015 report on maternal, newborn and child survival analyzed the progress in 68 priority countries, in the period 1990-2010 of key interventions that contribute to achieving the MDGs for child mortality and maternal health. Early initiation of and exclusive breastfeeding as well as complementary feeding are again listed among the most effective interventions. Nonetheless, the report points to insufficient coverage of effective maternal, newborn and child interventions. Among these early initiation of breastfeeding has a median coverage of 48%, exclusive breastfeeding of 34% and complementary feeding (6-9) months of 66% (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Median coverage for effective maternal, newborn and child interventions in 68 Countdown countries. Source: Countdown to 2015 decade report (2000—10): taking stock of maternal, newborn, and child survival. The Lancet 2010.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
330
The report also reviews the adoption of evidence-based policies that contribute to maternal, newborn and child health. The enactment of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and the adoption of a maternity protection policy in line with ILO recommendations have been implemented in only 22 and 1 country respectively (see Figure 2). Assessment of the implementationof the 2002 the Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding using the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative (WBTi) in 51 countries has shown that most countries are lagging in having policies and programmes in all 10 indicators .
Figure 2: Status for adoption of evidence-based policies related to maternal, newborn and child health in 68 countries. Source: Countdown to 2015 decade report (2000—10): taking stock of maternal, newborn, and child survival. The Lancet 2010.
The two figures clearly demonstrate that breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding interventions do not receive adequate attention. Despite the well-established importance of breastfeeding and complementary feeding in early period of life, little international funding is
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
331
provided for interventions to enhance these practices . Furthermore, an analysis by Action Against Hunger (ACF) shows that breastfeeding is the 3rd least popular intervention in terms of funding and that product-based micronutrient interventions are now dominating the nutrition scene .
Challenges
Some of the main challenges that hamper the achievement of optimal infant and young child feeding practices are listed below.
• Implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes
Protecting breastfeeding and adequate complementary feeding is essential. Promotion of breastfeeding alone is not sufficient. The negative impact of inappropriate promotion of breastmilk substitutes must continue to be challenged. Companies too often undermine breastfeeding by making unethical and unfounded claims about their products and by marketing them in coercive and deceptive ways, in violation of the International Code.
The Code, adopted by the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981 and followed by numerous resolutions, is a minimum global standard, aiming to promote appropriate infant and young child feeding by protecting it from commercial malpractice. Even if countries have adopted many or at least some provisions of the Code in national legislation, Code violations continue as enforcement is inadequate.
Companies are obliged to comply with the Code regardless of any government action, yet monitoring by civil society shows that none of the large multinational companies live up to this obligation. Independent monitoring of commercial practices and exposing Code violations must be expanded.
• Correct and unbiased information
Information available to people regarding exclusive breastfeeding and other optimal infant feeding practices is grossly inadequate, often biased due to commercial interference. There is a poor understanding of the fact that breastfeeding should be regarded as a norm and artificial feeding as a substitute that can never be equal to the norm. The level of support a mother needs to succeed in practicing exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months and to continue for 2 years or beyond is underestimated and few resources have been spent in this area.
• Maternity protection
Breastfeeding is that aspect of nurturing that covers both child feeding and child care, requiring mothers and babies to be together. More and more women work and often far from home and in the informal sector. It is necessary to make adjustments in the workload of mothers of young children so that they may find the time and energy for breastfeeding; this should not be considered the mother’s responsibility, but rather a collective responsibility. It is important to note that the main reason given by majority of working mothers for ceasing breastfeeding is their return to work [following maternity leave]. The challenge in terms of breastfeeding protection is the adoption and the monitoring of an adequate policy of maternity entitlements that facilitate six months of exclusive breastfeeding for women employed in all sectors, with urgent attention to the non-formal sector.
• Supportive health care system
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
332
Obstacles to optimal breastfeeding practices are created by the continuing pressures exerted by the baby food manufacturers, either directly on parents and caregivers, or indirectly through the health care system and health care providers. Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI), the backbone of which is formed by the ‘Ten steps for successful breastfeeding’, is a key initiative to ensure breastfeeding protection and support within the health care system. Revitalization of the Baby-friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) and its expansion is a key strategy to implement.
• The challenge of rising public-private partnerships (PPPs)
The sponsorship and funding of health workers, researchers, NGOs and policy makers has been a key strategy of the baby food industry and food industry in general that opens the door to undue influence on scientific bodies, policy makers and governance mechanisms that promote voluntary approaches rather than effective regulation.
The public private partnerships and alliances between businesses, NGOs and the UN that are being set up to conquer child malnutrition and deal with the challenge of NCDs, increase these risks as adequate safeguards to deal with conflicts of interest are neglected, and “trust” and “mutual benefits” prevail as guiding principles. Industry funded foundations also influence policies promoting business friendly policies and programmes
Several WHA Resolutions have highlighted these risks and have called for 'governance' in health policy and programme setting to be protected from the undue influence of those who stand to gain financially from decisions.
Industry involvement at a core strategic level can also favour market-led responses to infant and young feeding that sideline the critical role of breastfeeding and appropriate complementary feeding that the Countdown report demonstrates. Malnutrition is now seen as a profitable business that will assist business’ ‘top strategic priority' which is to change traditional food patterns and cultures, extend the bottle-feeding period, encourage snacking on highly processed imported products.
• Trade related challenges
Multilateral and bilateral trade and investment agreements that countries have entered into or are currently being negotiated are formalising a supra-national system of binding global governance that provides multinational corporations new rights. Many of these agreements contain investment chapters or clauses which allow investors to sue governments directly at an international arbitration tribunal for measures put in place for the protection of the public welfare but which an investor sees as having infringed upon an investment or on expected profits. Such agreements could impact on the sovereignty and ability of governments to make and implement policies, laws, regulations or programmes in the public interest and could undermine wide swaths of domestic consumer, environmental, workplace and other vital safeguards.
Any initiative to eradicate hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition should include checks and balances to counter such agreements. The texts and all relevant documents relating to such agreements should be open to public scrutiny and negotiations suspended while comprehensive cost-and-benefit analysis is carried out and all detrimental clauses removed. The safeguards contained in human rights conventions do take precedence over multilateral and bilateral trade and investment agreements and WHA resolutions relating to public health which are set by the world’s highest health policy setting body should also take precedence.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
333
3. Directions for the future
In December 2012, the World Breastfeeding Conference took place in New Delhi bringing together more than 800 representatives of civil society, governments, international organisations, breastfeeding groups, social movements and individuals from 82 countries, all concerned about the continuing inequality in health and nutrition and the dismal situation of food security and malnutrition worldwide.
The 2012 World Breastfeeding Conference Declaration and Call to Action called on all concerned parties to accelerate action for the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding as a human right which should be entrenched in policies and programmes as a necessary condition. This Call to Action comes in timely with the new consultations on the post 2015 development agenda, and thus we would like to propose some of the fundamental actions to the attention of this discussion.
In order to achieve food and nutrition security from the start of life, the post 2015 development agenda should prioritize interventions that empower mothers to provide optimal infant and young child feeding to their infants and young children. In particular, the following actions should be taken:
1. Adopting a human right-based approach to the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding at international, national, sub-national and community levels.
2. Establishing institutional mechanisms to avoid and manage conflicts of interest in health and nutrition decision-making and programme implementation.
3. Supporting all women with a comprehensive system of maternity protection at work, including the non-formal sector, with a provision of financing.
4. Ensuring appropriate and adequate education and training of all health care professionals and allied health and community workers both in pre-service and in-service, and in all sectors, to counter widespread ignorance and to provide skilled support to lactating women.
5. Establishing clear budget lines for breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding policy and programme interventions to ensure adequate human and financial resources in order to enhance optimal practices.
6. Investing in the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative including mother friendly practices and link it to community initiatives. Further this should be rooted in all maternal and neonatal health programmes, and with due attention to low birth weight babies.
7. Publicising widely the multiple risks of artificial feeding, bottles and teats as well as early complementary feeding through all kinds of media campaigns.
8. Ensuring universal access to accurate information and counselling on breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding to all mothers, and to do that provide skilled counsellors in the health facilities and in the community so that they are available for any situation.
9. Monitoring and track the Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding in every country using World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative (WBTi) and advocate to bridge the gaps.
10. Protecting breastfeeding from commercial sector, by strictly enforcing the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent related World Health Assembly Resolutions and prohibit all kinds of promotion of commercial foods for children for two years or beyond.
11. Promoting the use of affordable and diverse, locally grown, indigenous foods for timely and appropriate complementary feeding after six- months along with continued breastfeeding.
12. Enhancing and supporting breastfeeding related research with public funding.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
334
http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/post%202015_08%2001%202012_IBFAN%20input%20%282%29.pdf
231) Carmen Florentina Radu, Start Focus, Romania
What I would very much like to be developed is a global strategy and a common vision for 100 years in terms of food. And such a strategy is necessary. 100 years means hope, getting several generations into the topic and having a sustainable structure, for a common goal. With just a few years strategy, although it encourages to more rapid actions to achieve it, such case can be dropped out far more easily and contested, without reaching the sustainability point. Developing a strategy for 100 years would mean A. getting all the results of the researches until now and was was learned also through the MDGs, B. envisioning a future with healthy, affordable, safe food through consultations, for different age groups, different areas of the world according to their regional particularities, more developed and sustainable C. setting the goals D. establishing guideline steps(of 5, 10 years each), aid and monitoring structures.
Regards,
Carmen Florentina Radu
232) Unilever, the Netherlands
Considering the large number of reports which have been written over the past number of years on food and nutrition security, I will focus on a number of specific recommendations which were included in initiatives with Unilever contribution.
- Recently our CEO Paul Polman argued in the Financial Times: “Now is the time for action to achieve global supply security”. He specifically provided 3 recommendations:
* We need increased investment in agricultural production and productivity, especially in Africa and Latin America. Governments and businesses need to direct investment towards strengthening whole value chains and support for smallholder farmers, particularly women.
* We need active policy programmes for food & nutrition security in individual developing countries, based on partnerships with the private sector, donors and civil society. Investments in fighting malnutrition would benefit people more than any other type of investment with a return of $30 for every $1 invested. Investment in nutrition can translate to a 2-3 per cent increase in a nation’s GDP each year, breaking the cycle of poverty that traps families and nations.
* We should eliminate the use of unsustainable biofuels. Most first generation biofuels are neither environmentally efficient nor cost effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the demand they place on land is destabilising world food supply and increasing prices.- In 2012 several private sector actors did work together in the so-called B20 Task Force on Food Security. This Task Force, co-chaired by our CEO Paul Polman, provided recommendations for the G20 in Mexico in June last year (see B20 report).
Recommendations with regard to Strengthening land rights were included:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
335
Recommended industry commitments:
* Follow the Voluntary Guidelines for the Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests agreed through the Committee on Food Security (CFS).* Ensure that agricultural investments are transparent, responsible and compatible with the Voluntary Guidelines as implemented by national authorities. Industry to respect special regulations on large-scale land acquisitions where such policies or guidelines are not in place.* Develop robust investment standards through the Committee on Food Security.Recommended public-sector commitments:* Promote and adopt the Voluntary Guidelines for the Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests agreed through the Committee on Food Security.* Establish adequate legal frameworks and enforcement measures to formalize and ensure land rights, and recognize informal and customary tenure, with specific safeguards for smallholders.* Commit to contract transparency and appropriate dispute settlement procedures.* Provide appropriate temporary measures, including special regulations on large-scale land acquisitions, as long as adequate legal frameworks are not implemented.* Develop robust investment standards through the Committee on Food Security.- Recently we have contributed to the UN Global Compact Key Pillars on Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture. This report contains an extensive list of good practices by private sector entities, working together with governments and civil society. This UN Global Compact report also refers to adequate principles for responsible investment in farmland and the activities of the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI-platform):
The Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform is an industry initiative comprised of some of the world’s largest food companies who seek to support the development of sustainable agriculture worldwide. Created in 2002 by Nestlé, Unilever and Danone, SAI recognizes that food companies are the biggest purchasers of agricultural raw materials in the world and that by working together they bring scale, resources and expertise to the challenge of creating more sustainable food systems.
Today, the SAI Platform counts over 30 members, including Coca Cola, Kraft Foods, Heineken and McDonalds, who all agree that sustainable agriculture is “a productive, competitive and efficient way to produce agricultural products, while at the same time protecting and improving the natural environment and social/economic conditions of local communities”.- We welcome current initiatives including the Zero Hunger Challenge and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition. We support the UN Secretary General in setting objectives, targets and indicators for the Post-2015 Global Development Framework. We believe that eliminating hunger and malnutrition should be embedded in national food & nutrition programmes. These programmes should be time-bound and monitored annually at local level.
Global institutions, including the FAO, have an important role to play. Key tasks include:
* Monitoring progress at global level with annual scorecards.* Sharing best practice in the areas of agricultural production, food security and nutrition.* Supporting developing countries with their food & nutrition security programmes while sharing expertise with the private sector.* Produce support for the implementation of national programmes by bringing together local stakeholders.
- We welcome the Action Plan included in the FAO Strategic Framework for 2014-2017. We have noted the commitment from Member Countries together with their development partners to adopt evidence-
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
336
based and inclusive governance mechanisms for eradicating hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. We particularly welcome the agreed actions which include “the promotion of governance systems which ensure the implementation of agreements such as the Voluntary guidelines on the Right to Food, and on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security; and on Responsible Investment in Agriculture.”
- In accordance with the conclusions of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), we are prepared to contribute to the stakeholder consultations on the principles for responsible agricultural investments in the coming year.
We look forward to the High Level consultation which will be hosted by the Government of Spain (March 2013) in order to provide concrete actions and positive outcomes at local level. Now is the time for action!
Willem-Jan LaanDirector Global External AffairsUnilever10 January 2013
233) Secretary General for International Development Cooperation at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, Spain.
This brief document is part of the Spanish position paper regarding post2015 development agenda process. It includes core messages and concerns for the Government of Spain on food and nutrition security.
THEME 1 a) Key lessons learned during the current MDGs Framework, in particular in relation to the MDGs relevance to Hunger, Food insecurity and Malnutrition.
• The main lesson of MDGs is MDGs themselves as the first global common agenda for development setting time-bound targets resulting from years of debates and discussions within global community. MDGs relevance and usefulness are rooted in the availability of a common global framework that allow programmes, resource management, coordination, harmonization, alignment and, as a consequence, effectiveness. • Nevertheless, one of the main weaknesses of current MDGs is that they are quantitative outcome-focused objectives and nor qualitative outputs nor process are formally considered. When talking about sustainable development results, process is as relevant as the results themselves. Future development agenda should, thus, consider setting process indicators. • Development goals cannot be approached individually but as a whole, since the achievement of each and all of them will conduct peoples towards development. An individual approach might guide development process towards a short-term progress accounting for a short group of individuals.
b) What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
337
• There is a core difference between 2000 when MDGs were set and now. Political will regarding development, and particularly regarding Hunger and Food Insecurity has risen and development has become an international policy issue high top in the agendas. This is, thus, a very challenging situation.• Efforts regarding food and nutrition security have been fostered worldwide latest years i.e. the renewed Committee on Global Food Security, the Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realization of the Right to adequate Food in the context of the national food security, the Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security, the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) or the working group within the G20 amongst others. These efforts concreted in different initiatives should be considered as a cornerstone for the future development agenda as regards food and nutrition security. Lessons learned from above mentioned and others are a very good input to start from since most of them are the outcome of participatory and inclusive processes that have been fed with experiences at country level.• Effectiveness is definitely the main challenge for future development agenda. In this respect, the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation is the reference post2015 development agenda should be built upon since it provides the tool on the “HOW” we should work on development. Effectiveness will allow sustainable results and according to development effectiveness principles.• Another challenge is the sustainable use of natural resources and how to prevent climate change and mitigate its effects especially in agriculture.
THEME 2. a) What works best? What we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on?
• 3 out 4 food insecure people depend directly or indirectly on agriculture for their living. It is also important to add that 75% of people suffering from abject poverty live in rural areas. This people devote 60-80% of their income to buy food.• Following the WB’s WDR 2008, agriculture is both a way for achieving food security and household income, which are the two dimensions of MDG 1: poverty and hunger. That is the paradox of hunger, that most hungry people are food producers, small-farmers. It should be clearly stated that any development goal regarding hunger reduction should be considered simultaneously in its two dimensions, as progress in food and nutrition security may in some cases deepen rural poverty for the rural poor if their participation on the provision of food security is not ensured. In this regard, agriculture development by smallholders may contribute to economic growth and substantially to poverty reduction.• Combining measures of improvement of livelihoods within vulnerable groups and risk prevention and management actions would result in better food and nutrition security indicators.• Figures and reports conclude that same groups and same places periodically suffer food insecurity due to their vulnerability to shocks comprising their permanent access to adequate food, compromising the realization of the right to food.• Determining proper targets and indicators require a proper identification and classification of vulnerable groups as well as the causes of their vulnerability.• In this regard, local or community-based food and nutrition insecurity surveillance systems contribute to prevent critical situation within vulnerable groups. • Social protection systems have demonstrated their positive impact in reducing vulnerability and strengthening resilience among vulnerable groups. Strategic food reserves as part of safety nets provide an opportunity for small producers as food providers as long as they avoid spoiling local markets.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
338
THEME 3. a) Please provide us with your feedback on the list of objectives- or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
• The future development agenda should adopt a rights based approach. Rights based approach means focusing on the most vulnerable, adopting human rights principles: participation, non discrimination, transparency, accountability. The right to food approach means that the main goal of food security is the realization of the human right to adequate food for every man, woman and child wherever and whenever.• Hunger Zero Challenge makes reference to women linked to nutrition. However, women’s role in food and nutrition security goes far beyond. Women make the difference as providers of food security at household and national level since However, women situation regarding food and nutrition security relates to access and control of productive resources like land, credit or technology.• Development agenda- objectives and targets- must be country-specific and country-driven. In this respect, targets and indicators should be defined locally, regionally and nationally. Global outcomes cannot undercover local situations. For example, hunger MDG at global level looks better that looking country-by country since figures in India or China have a high impact in global absolute figures.
234) Alison Linnecar, IBFAN, Switzerland Infants and young children are particularly vulnerable to infections because at birth their immune system has not yet matured. Breastfeeding is a living fluid, providing anti-microbial substances such as lactoferrin and secretory IgA antibodies, while at the same time boosting the maturation of the infant's own immune system Formula fed infants do not benefit from this protection because formula is a processed product and contains no live cells. Furthermore, powdered infant formula (PIF) is not a sterile product and indeed "During production, PIF can become contaminated with harmful bacteria such as Enterobacter sakazakii and Salmonella enterica. This is because, using current manufacturing technology, it is not feasible to produce sterile PIF." (1) Enterobacter sakazakii, now renamed Cronobacter sakazakii, and Salmonella species are heat-resistant bacteria that can cause severe invasive infections such as meningitis and bacteraemia in newborns and older infants. Such infections are rare but can be fatal or result in long-term disability. Chemical contamination of infant feeding equipment and utensils is of further concern. Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals such as Bisphenol A and phthalates are found in certain plastics and can leach into prepared feeds and foods. Since infants are at a stage of rapid development, research evidence shows possible long-term negative health effects from fetal and postnatal exposure to these chemicals. Breastfeeding has been shown to provide beneficial effects to mitigate results of exposure. Breastfeeding is environmentally friendly; producing zero waste and using no scarce natural resources such as water, land and raw materials. It is a valuable and renewable natural resource which comes straight from producer to consumer and requires no processing or transportation. Optimal breastfeeding practices contribute to spacing births and can help a mother plan her family when contraception is unavailable, unaffordable or unacceptable for religious or cultural reasons. Formula feeding leaves a heavy ecological footprint which is demonstrated using indicators of use of scarce resources: water use for dairy farming and manufacturing; land use for raising cattle and growing soy; raw materials for packaging and energy for dairy farming, manufacturing and processing
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
339
and transportation. In addition, formula feeding produces greenhouse gas emissions and non-biodegradable waste, contributing to global warming and polluting the environment. For all these reasons, breastfeeding contributes to a healthier population, a healthier environment and to sustainable development. Optimal breastfeeding practices should be protected, promoted and supported as a key objective of the post-2015 Global Development Framework.
(1) Executive Summary, in 2007 WHO Guidelines on safe preparation, storage and handling of powdered infant formula: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/micro/pif_guidelines.pdf and the 3 meeting reports of the WHO/FAO expert consultations on Enterobacter sakazakii and Salmonella: http://www.fao.org/food/food-safety-quality/a-z-index/enterobacter/en/
Please see also:Written Submission by IBFAN stakeholder meeting WHO FAO on BPAhttp://www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015/sites/post2015/files/resources/Written_Submission_by_IBFAN_stakeholder_meeting_WHO_FAO_on_BPA.doc
Alison Linnecar
235) Peter Greaves, United Kingdom
As a nutritionist who was much involved in UNICEF in the 80's with the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding, I strongly believe that breastfeeding, exclusively for 6 months and for up to 2 years afterwards together with appropriate complementary foods, should figure prominently in the new MDGs, and fully support the position taken by IBFAN in this consultation.
236) Kaija Korpi-Salmela, FAO, Italy
Dear FSN,
Below are some comments on the introduced Themes:
Theme 1:
I agree fully with the targets under MDG 1. However, the chosen indicators for 'reduction by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger' could have been better. Underweight can be attributed to both acute and chronic malnutrition, and therefore it offers a rather weak basis for programming. Stunting, on the other hand, is a good indicator of chronic malnutrition and therefore more suitable as an indicator for a long-term target. Therefore I'm glad to see that stunting, instead of underweight, has been selected for the Zero Hunger Challenge.
The second indicator, 'the proportion of population below the minimum level of dietary energy consumption' is difficult to measure. The minimum level of dietary energy required varies by the sex, age, health status, and level of physical activity. The international standard of 2,100 Kcal/day is only applicable to a part of the population. Therefore any new indicators selected for the post-2015 period should be more practical in terms of a) getting the data and b) planning interventions.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
340
Main challenges and opportunities: A big opportunity is the heightened global awareness of food security and nutrition as a result of the price crises in recent years. Challenges are posed by increasing population, especially in Africa, water scarcity (especially when not properly managed), and lack of suitable land for expanding cultivation.
Theme 2:
All the raised issues are pertinent to achieving food and nutrition security. These concepts should, however, be broken into more concrete and tangible recommendations and objectives. For example, what do 'political commitment' and 'accountability' really mean in the context of food and nutrition security? After that it would be far easier to evaluate their role and meaningfulness in this context. It also would be worth considering setting different targets for different regions, and even countries, taking their starting point and capacity into consideration. This may, however, be difficult politically.
On achieving nutrition security: basic things account for a lot. Access to education for girls and women, improved care practices, access to safe water and basic health care, and adequate sanitation would go a long way in addressing the problem of malnutrition. Access to adequate food is not enough to combat malnutrition if children (and adults) face infections on a continuous basis due to problems with hygiene and sanitation.
On achieving food security: the key is to focus on smallholders in developing countries. Their access to markets, credit, inputs, and know-how has to be facilitated to enable higher food production, which in turn will improve income levels and food security situation in the households. In order to feed the growing population from only marginally increasing cultivated area, the yield has to increase substantially. In this improved practices such as agroforestry and vertical cultivation (growing food on the same land under the soil, on the ground, and above ground) should bring many advantages.
Theme 3:
All objectives, and at the very least their targets should be time-bound. Without a 'deadline' there is no impetus to achieve results, and preparation of implementation strategies becomes very difficult.
Objective a) This objective is very challenging and almost impossible to monitor. For it to make sense, the targets and indicators need to be a lot more concrete.
Objective b) This is a good objective. In addition, setting of targets and indicators is relatively easy and data for monitoring exists.
Objective c) This is a difficult objective. There is a lot of controversy on what 'sustainability' actually means, and how you would define it. These questions need to be tackled first (from the framework of food and nutrition security) before any targets or indicators can be set.
Objective d) Another objective which is difficult to achieve and hard to monitor. Also, it has to be noted that the poor in rural areas usually have different income sources. They often cultivate land, but food and income from that is rarely enough to cover their food and non-food needs. Most have additional food and income sources, such as casual labour, or gathering and sale of natural resource products. Focus on agricultural production alone would not suffice if the objective remains this wide.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
341
Objective e) An ambitious objective, which focuses on an issue which has not been properly addressed so far. The objective would need to have targets which focus on different parts of the food system (producers, food processing, transport, marketing, and consumers) in order to achieve results.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments, this has been very interesting and thought-provoking!
237) Concern Worldwide, Ethiopia
Theme 2: What works best?
Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights.Organization: Concern Worldwide (Ethiopia office)Author of submission:
Adèle Fox
Below are several key learnings from our project integrating Infant and Young Child Feeding and the Productive Safety Net Programme in Ethiopia:
Two years ago, Concern Worldwide documented the poor nutritional situation in Ethiopia and the multiple obstacles hampering previous efforts to improve it. It concluded that a multi-sectoral approach to improve infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices and to increase access to food were among the responses needed. In 2010, the IYCF – Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP) project was launched as a pilot multi-sectoral approach aimed at reducing malnutrition in Dessie Zuria. It targeted poor households enrolled in the existing PSNP as well as the general population and addresses both the direct and root causes of malnutrition. The project aimed to develop an effective, sustainable and scalable model to improve IYCF practices in the most vulnerable households. The final results have been impressive, with large improvements in IYCF practices and a positive response from the communities and stakeholders involved in the project.
A number of factors contributed to the success of the IYCF – PSNP project. The project took a multi-sectoral approach, involving actors across a wide range of groups and sectors. It went beyond simply behaviour change communication, targeting the enabling environment as well as social norms, and involving the community at large. The project used multiple platforms and approaches to disseminate messages, and used a targeted approach to behaviour change, basing project activities and messages on formative research and emphasizing simple, do-able actions rather than health education messages.
Multisectoral approach: This project engaged actors from a range of sectors, including agriculture, education, women’s affairs, and health. This aspect was described as a key strength of the project, with each sector working together towards a common purpose, leading to increased ownership and accountability. A multi-sectoral approach also provides greater opportunities for engaging with communities. Cooking demonstrations, school clubs, and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
342
agricultural support were all combined to provide an overall aim of preventing malnutrition among children.
A multi-level approach: As well as working across sectors, the project also created strong links between woreda, kebele and community levels through a cascading style of training and through the continued provision of support and supervision.
A social and behavioural change approach: Early assessments showed that simply providing behaviour change communication alone was unlikely to be effective, given widespread food insecurity and other barriers to behaviour change. This project went beyond simply carrying out BCC, to influencing the community and social norms as a whole, as well as addressing barriers to practicing recommended IYCF behaviours.
The results of this project suggest that it is effectively fostering behaviour change, and increasing levels of awareness among woreda officials, kebele level leaders and community members alike. It has differed from previous efforts to reduce malnutrition because it has shown people how to make simple, practical changes and reinforced the messages through a multitude of actors, contact points and methods, vastly increasing the likelihood of behaviour change. It is also focused on prevention of malnutrition rather than cure. The approach has been able to reach a large number of people who are widely dispersed over challenging terrain. Channelling activities through the PSNP creates additional contact points and ensures targeting of the poorest households.
238) Jodine Chase, Breastfeeding Action Committee of Edmonton, Canada
This letter is to support the many contributions you have received calling for BREASTFEEDING to be specifically mentioned in the new MDGs. It is not necessary for me to repeat the compelling arguments made by other experts - my intent in writing is to add my voice to their call. Thank you. Jodine Chasebreastfeeding advocatemember, Breastfeeding Action Committee of Edmonton (BACE)
239) Richie Alford, Send a Cow, United Kingdom
Context - the issue is not about food production - globally there is enough food available for 12 billion people to eat today - so the issue is more of distribution. In this distribution, the issue is about power and access. Today more people are overweight and obese, rather than hungry - so again the issue is not solely limited to one facet it is multi-faceted. Clearly it is important to worry about the hungry and ensure global systems care for them; but there is a growing cost to society in treating the consequences of over-eating and obesity as well which must not be forgotten. Theme 1 - the MDGs have been a clumsy way of setting development targets. An imposed global target leads to bad dvelopment; doing the thing the wrong way to get the right result (short-term fixes over
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
343
permanent solutions). Targets need to contain social and environmental considerations and fit the context of a nation or region, and cannot work well from a global perspective. Theme 2 - Food Sovereignty as a framework marks the way forward from where we are now. The world knows how to build a suitable food production system and it is set out in the ISTAAD report, that has been conveniently ignored, by those who should take notice, for too long. Theme 3 - The four goals of the Zero Hunger Challenge (A, B C and E) are clear and understandable. Goal D doesn't make any sense as written as there are too many implicit variables within it. "80% food produced by smallholders" is clearer. For the Zero Hunger challenge to be truly global, the counterpoint to hunger needs to be incorporated. For example target B ought to include and "Zero obese children under the age of five years old".
240) Slow Food, Italy
Please find below Slow Food's contribution to the Consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security:Introduction
Slow Food is a member of the Italian coordinating committee for the Global Coalition Against Poverty (GCAP), which actively participates in the Beyond 2015 international campaign coordinated by Concord, which hosts the international and European secretariat. In particular, as GCAP Italia we are part of the European Task Force, and within it, the leaders of the thematic working group on “economy, trade, finance, production and consumption”. We are also leading and implementing a broad national consultation that will involve institutions and civil society and allow participation in the international debate through the construction of a national position.
Theme 1
For the first time in human history, the Millennium Development Goals represented a global desire to fight hunger and poverty through an integrated approach. The underlying concept is that the goals cannot be reached individually, but must be all reached together, because they cannot be separated from each other. In fact, wherever results have been seen, wherever visible advancements have been made in improving the overall lives of populations, government plans have integrated interventions in the fight against hunger, maternal and child health, the fight against pandemics, environmental protection, and so on.
Now, however, it is necessary not just to renew the commitments, moving the deadline by which the goals must be reached, but to reinforce the goals themselves. If we think specifically about the objectives relating to hunger, food security and malnutrition, it is the global food system that must be changed, as it is blocking the achievement of the goals. This is and must remain the primary objective, including in post-2015 developments. At Rio+20 it was confirmed that we cannot talk about development without first resolving world hunger. The central role of food must be the point of departure for a new form of politics, for a new economy and new social relationships. The central role of food implies the belief that the right to food is the primary right of humanity—ensuring not only human life but also that of the whole planet.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
344
Among the main challenges and opportunities in making the objective of wiping out hunger a reality is the assumption of certain obligations for states, according to what is already contained in the definition of the right to food set out by the High Commissioner for Human Rights:
- the obligation to respect, meaning to refrain from interfering with the means of subsistence of their citizens and their capacity to provide for themselves.
- the obligation to protect, implying the constitution of a system of rules on food safety, environmental protection and land ownership.
- the obligation to fulfil, implementing suitable policies to ensure that the weakest have access to resources or, in extreme cases, providing direct assistance to at least allow freedom from hunger.
The first obligation alone would suffice to reveal the harmfulness of the industrial food system determined over the past 60 years by the international organization of markets. For Slow Food and Terra Madre, this obligation concerns respect for traditional, sustainable forms of agriculture, the only ones that have always protected agrobiodiversity, resources and cultural diversities. Their standard-bearers are small-scale food producers, women, the elderly and indigenous peoples.
In addition, it has to be considered that neither innovation and new technologies in themselves nor GMOs have proved to be the solution to fight hunger. We also don’t share the belief of those claiming that food production must be increased massively to solve the hunger problem. Given that one third of the food produced is lost or wasted, it is not necessary to stress our planet earth further but rather to be able to apply alternative sustainable models in the production and in the supply chain.
These elements are fundamental to us and must be incorporated in the post-2015 challenges and opportunities. They must be included in the global objective of reforming the production and consumption systems through the inclusion of incentives that switch from economic profit to universal well-being.
241) Nathalie van Haren, Both ENDS, Netherlands
Theme 1: The most important challenge towards achieving food and nutrition security is the issue of access to and control over land and water. Secure tenure rights to land will contribute to fullfill the human right to food as women producers, small-scale farmers, forest people will be able to grow what they need to feed for their families. In addition, secure tenure rights to land will allow people to make long term investments in the land, in trees and in the soils, in agro-ecology.
Theme 2: The voluntary guidelines for the responsible governance of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security (VGs) that were adopted by the UN CFS were developed in a very participatory way and can count on broad support amongst civil society. However, these guidelines should not remain a beautiful paper solution, but will need to be implemented. Therefore, the SDGs should make a reference to the VGs.
Theme 3: There should be specific targets on:
- respect, protect and support the right to food
- implementation of the VGs
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
345
- participation of local people in policy processes affecting their right to food
- promote and invest in agro-ecology
242) Carol Bartle, Te Puawaitanga Ki Otautahi Trust , New Zealand
The relationship between breastfeeding and infant feeding and the MDG
MDG 1
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Malnutrition – both under- and over – sets in during the first two years of life, mostly during infancy. Food and nutrition security during this period means ensuring early and exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months, followed by the introduction of complementary foods along with continued breastfeeding for up to two years or beyond. These optimal feeding practices constitute a public health recommendation by the World Health Organisation (WHO) for normal growth, health and development. A growing body of evidence points to the key role of infant and young child feeding practices, especially early and exclusive breastfeeding, in mitigating both forms of malnutrition and in the prevention of child mortality. Nonetheless interventions that address these practices have not received adequate attention during the MDGs era, and thus there is an unused potential for achieving progress in food and nutrition security in childhood. In conditions of poverty breastfeeding is life-saving and the use of breast-milk substitutes is a huge risk to infant survival.
MDG 2
Achieve universal primary education
Breastfeeding and quality complementary foods significantly contribute to cognitive development. In addition to the 150 polyunsaturated long chain fatty acids in breast milk which support neurological development, initial exclusive breastfeeding and complementary feeding address micronutrient and iron deficiency needs, support appropriate neurological development and enhance later school performance.Research related to cognitive development and breastfeeding
Small for gestational age children (growth-restricted) demonstrated improved cognitive function when exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life (Rao, 2002, Acta Paediatrica 91:267-274)
Significant association between duration of breastfeeding and verbal IQ. Conclusion was that these findings add to a growing body of evidence to suggest that breastmilk feeding may have small long term benefits for child cognitive development (Horwood, Darlow & Mogridge, 2001 Archives of Disease in Childhood, Fetal and Neonatal Edition Vol 84 No 1, 23-27)
Duration of breastfeeding and childhood cognitive abilities and
academic achievement between ages 8 to 18. 18-year
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
346
longitudinal study of a birth cohort of more than 1000 children showed that Increasing duration of breastfeeding was associated with consistent and statistically significant Intelligence scores / IQ at ages 8 and 9. The findings persisted after taking into account the age of the mother and her socio-economic status (Breastfeeding and later cognitive and academic outcomes – Horwood & Ferguson 1998, Pediatrics 9, 99)
Significant benefit to child development conferred by breastfeeding and it is related independently to longer periods of breastfeeding: Increase in scores with increased BF duration. 3880 children followed from birth to 5 years. (Quinn, O’Callaghan, Williams, Najman, Andersen & Bor, 2001 Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, October Vol 37, No 5,465-469)
Breastfeeding and developmental delay: findings from the millennium cohort study (n = 14660) UK. The proportion of infants who mastered the developmental milestones increased with duration and exclusivity of breastfeeding, Infants who had never been breastfed were 50% more likely to have gross motor coordination delays than infants who had been breastfed exclusively for at least 4 months. Infants who had never been breastfed were 30% more likely to have gross motor delays than infants who were given some breast milk for up to 2 months. (Sacker, Quigley & Kelly 2006)
Largest randomised control trial ever conducted in the area of human lactation. Strong evidence that prolonged and exclusive breastfeeding improves children’s cognitive development. 17,046 breastfeeding infants and 31,889 followed up at 6.5 years (81.5%) (Kramer et al., 2008 - Arch Gen Psychiatry, 65, 5, 578-584)
MDG 3
Promote gender equality and empower women
Women’s unique roles of child bearing and breastfeeding place them in vulnerable positions, socially, economically and nutritionally. Globally, women are disproportionately affected by poverty, illiteracy, discrimination and violence. Women’s reproductive rights and productive roles require adequate support to ensure that they obtain equality at all levels of society.
Breastfeeding is an integral part of women’s reproductive health and as such, represents a right for women. However, women can only enjoy the full health benefits of breastfeeding when they receive accurate information to make an informed choice about infant feeding, are able to exercise their right to breastfeed without coercion and pressure, and when governments, communities, health professionals and families protect this right. Maternity protection is critical for the promotion and protection of gender equality and this includes access to health services, adequate paid parental/maternity leave provision,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
347
mother/breastfeeding friendly workplaces and breastfeeding protection. It is important for the empowerment of women to create environments that make it possible for women to make informed decisions about infant feeding.
It is important to note that the main reason given by majority of working mothers for ceasing breastfeeding is their return to work [following maternity leave]. The challenge in terms of breastfeeding protection is the adoption and the monitoring of an adequate policy of maternity entitlements that facilitate six months of exclusive breastfeeding for women employed in all sectors, with urgent attention to the non-formal sector
MDG 4
Reduce child mortality
It has been reported that within the World Health Organisation’s global dataset of 65% of the world’s infant population aged one year or less, only 35% are exclusively breastfed between birth and four months of age. The UNICEF State of the World’s Children Report in 2012 found that 136.7 million babies were born globally and only 32.6 % were exclusively breastfed to 6 months. On 1 May 2012 UNICEF issued a statement of concern about the major declines in breastfeeding rates across East Asia in relation to deteriorating infant and child health. This was linked in the report with a lack of maternity protection and aggressive marketing of breast-milk substitutes throughout the region. The inequity between industry and health departments is of note here. US$100 million per year spent on advertising breast milk substitutes in the Philippines which is over half the Dept of Health’s annual total budget – for everything. In the Philippines, on average, less than half the infants born are exclusively breastfed by three months of age and by six months less than 25% are exclusively breastfed.
Lauer, et al., (2006) report that as many as 1.45 million lives are lost due to suboptimal breastfeeding in ‘developing countries’. Stuebe & Schwarz (2009) confirmed that infant feeding decisions significantly affect mother-child health outcomes globally, even in settings with clean water and good sanitation. Not-breastfed infants are exposed to increased risk of infections and non-infectious morbidity and mortality.
During disaster and emergency situations, which are increasing on a global scale, interrupted breastfeeding and inappropriate complementary feeding heighten the risk of malnutrition, illness and mortality, and uncontrolled distribution of breast-milk substitutes, for example in refugee settings, can lead to early and unnecessary cessation of breastfeeding (WHO/UNICEF, 2005).
Support for pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers, continued breastfeeding, relactation and wet-nursing saves infant lives and prevents further morbidity. Breastfeeding is the only sustainable, safe way to feed and protect infants in non-disaster times, as well as during times of disaster and emergency.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
348
There is a link between dairy industry expansion and a deterioration in global infant and young child health. If the infant formula category grows each year then this represents a significant, and growing, number of infants, who either experience a total lack of breastfeeding, and the immunologic, developmental and nutritional protection that this bestows, and/or infants who have their breastfeeding duration shortened, or who have premature loss of exclusivity protection. By 2020, according to Dairy Giant Fonterra, ‘developed’ countries will be consuming 32 million tonnes more of milk products than they did in the late 90s, “but that rise will be dwarfed by demand in ‘developing countries’ which will consume 177 million tonnes more” (Blundall, S. 2007. The Price of Milk. NZ Listener, June 2-8,Vol 208, No 3499).
The World Health Assembly resolutions in 2010 contained these statements:
Concerned that in emergencies, many of which occur in countries not on track to attain Millennium Development Goal 4 and which include situations created by the effects of climate change, infants and young children are particularly vulnerable to malnutrition, illness and death
Recognizing that national emergency preparedness plans and international emergency responses do not always cover protection, promotion and support of optimal infant and young child feeding
Breastfeeding has established itself significantly within research as the optimal method of feeding infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) first released a policy statement on breastfeeding and the use of human milk in 1997, which cited 111 research articles. This statement was revised both in 2005 and 2012, due to “significant advances in science and clinical medicine” which utilised new research to further establish the importance of breastfeeding (AAP, 2005 & 2012). The AAP statements identify health, nutritional, immunologic, developmental, psychological, social, economic and environmental benefits. The AAP recognises the protective effects of human milk against sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, allergic diseases, Crohns disease, ulcerative colitis and other chronic digestive diseases. It also emphasised that research shows strong evidence that human milk feeding decreases the incidence and severity of diarrhoea, lower respiratory tract infection, otitis media, bacteraemia, bacterial meningitis, botulism, urinary tract infection, necrotising enterocolitis and late-onset sepsis in preterm infants. Optimal breastfeeding is at the top of the list of effective preventive interventions for child survival. With breastfeeding and appropriate complementary feeding there is a more positive impact than that achieved with immunisation, safe water and sanitation. Breastfeeding reinforces immunization. Breastfeeding provides the baby with anti-bacterial, anti-viral and anti-parasitic agents and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
349
strengthens the infant's developing immune system. Breastfeeding confers active and passive immunity, primes the infant's immune system and improves the ‘take up’ of antibody response to vaccines. Colostrum is so rich in antibodies and so high in anti-infective properties that it considered to be ‘the first immunisation’ an infant receives. The immune system of human milk provides a continuum of the maternal immune protection that extends from the transfer of immunoglobulin G (IgG) from the mother via the placenta to the baby in utero, and then from the mother via breastfeeding and breastmilk to the child up until the second year of life (Slussor & Powers, 1997). Cregan (2008) also discusses how this continuum of support for the immature human infant unfolds by describing how a new mother’s mammary glands take over from the placenta to provide developmental guidance. The complex components of breastmilk which are uniquely human are irreproducible and include lactoferrin, a single polypeptide chain glycoprotein which forms two lobes, both of which bind iron (Hanson, 2004). Lactoferrin is quite resistant to degradation in the gut and the stools and urine from a breastfed baby contain significant amounts of lactoferrin, including large fragments. Special receptors in the baby’s gut uptake lactoferrin and the large lactoferrin fragments. Lactoferrin is bactericidal for many gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria and it also has anti-viral and anti-fungal properties. Lactoferrin destroys microbes without inducing tissue engagement and inflammatory responses and also prevents production of several pro-inflammatory cytokines (Hanson, 2003). It is thought that lactoferrin protects breastfed babies against urinary tract and bowel infections.
MDG 5
Improve maternal health
Lactational amenorrhoea (LAM) is linked to optimal breastfeeding, mother-baby contact and reduction in conception and pregnancy due to ovulation suppression. Exclusive breastfeeding for six months, and continuation of breastfeeding for up to two years and beyond, with the addition of appropriate foods from six months, is optimal. Hrdy (1999) describes breastfeeding as the foundation of family planning in primates, including people. Lactational amenorrhoea for eighteen months is described as requiring, on average, about eighty minutes of a baby suckling at the breast per day which occurs over a minimum of at least six breastfeeding episodes (Hrdy 1999). Other factors described as important by Hrdy were maternal nutritional status, workload, and environmental conditions. It has been suggested that lactational amenorrhoea is responsible for the prevention of more pregnancies in ‘developing’ countries than all the other methods of contraception available (Madani et al. 1994). Radwan et al. (2009) found a ninety-eight percent protection rate against pregnancy after childbirth for six months in a cohort of 593 women in the United Arab Emirates. Duration of LAM was significantly related to the age of infant formula and solid foods introduction. Child spacing is beneficial for maternal health.
Breastfeeding has a positive impact on the health of mothers.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
350
Previously identified health protective effects include a reduced risk of pre-menopausal breast cancer (Zheng et al., 2001); a protective effect of duration of lactation and a 25 percent reduction in both premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer in women who were breastfed as babies (Freudenheim et al., 1997; Freudenheim et al., 1994); a reduction in the risks of ovarian cancer (Su & Pasilich et al 2013, Riman, Nilsson & Persson, 2004; Tung et al., 2003); a possible reduction in the risks of osteoporosis and hip fracture (Karlsson, Ahiborg, & Karlsson, 2005); contraceptive effects reported at 98 percent in the first six months after the birth (Kennedy, Rivera, & McNeilly, 1989). Important studies have emerged related to cardiovascular health:
Incidence of myocardial infarction in middle to late adulthood – Stuebe et al., (2009) assessed the duration of lactation and maternal incident myocardial infarction in the prospective cohort of 89,326 parous women in the Nurses’ Health Study. Women who breastfed for a lifetime total of two years or longer had a 37 percent lower risk of coronary heart disease. After adjustment for early adult adiposity, parental history and lifestyle factors, women who had breastfed for a lifetime total of two years or longer had a 23 percent risk reduction.
Duration of lactation and risk factors for cardiovascular disease – Schwarz et al., (2009) examined data from 139,681 postmenopausal women. Dose-response relationships were seen and women who reported a lifetime history of more than twelve months of lactation were less likely to have hypertension, diabetes high cholesterol or cardiovascular disease than women who had never breastfed.
Anxiety reduction and lower blood pressure in breastfeeding women – Unväs Moberg (2003) has contributed a huge body of work to increase the understanding of the hormone oxytocin. When mothers nurse their babies, their blood pressure decreases and the levels of the stress hormone cortisol decrease. This indicates a reduction in the activity of the sympathetic nervous system and a diminished adrenal response (Unväs Moberg, 2003, p. 97) Measurements of brain activity in nursing animals show that many sleep while they nurse their young. The positive behavioural and physiologic changes persist through the entire duration of breastfeeding. Unväs Moberg, Johansson, Lupoli and Svennersten-Sjauna (2001) suggest that oxytocin facilitates not only relaxation and calm in the mother but it also stimulates maternal interaction and the attachment process.
MDG 6
Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
The World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action HIV and Breastfeeding Resource has been written for use by policy-makers, national breastfeeding committees, health workers and others working for public health globally. Research shows that HIV-positive mothers who
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
351
receive effective ARV treatment can have a close to zero transmission rate of HIV to their babies during pregnancy, birth, and the recommended period of breastfeeding - exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months and continued breastfeeding with the introduction of age-appropriate complementary feeding for up to 2 years or beyond. There is now enough evidence to recommend ARVs during breastfeeding.
MDG 7
Ensure environmentalsustainability
The cost, to the purchasing consumer, of the breast-milk substitute products on the shelf represents a miniscule part of the total negative cost to the planet and human health. Increasing numbers of dairy herds, unnatural intensive farming methods potentially involving bovine growth hormones, the resulting need for expensive antibiotic use for chronic mastitis-sick cows, the associated damage to land and infrastructures, pollution, significant water contamination, nitrate contamination, water wastage and consumption, increase in greenhouse gases, manufacture of powdered milk, production of novel ingredients to add to the product, packaging, transport internally on roads and overseas by air and sea, waste products created by both the manufacturing process and the packaging designed to entice product usage, add up to a giant carbon footprint and contribute to an unsustainable future. Gabrielle Palmer provides a comprehensive list of the waste associated with infant formula feeding in her book ‘The Politics of Breastfeeding’. For example, tins for packaging infant formula to supply one million babies use 23,706 tonnes of metal and the paper resources amount to 341 tonnes, plus the added costs of all the paper promotional material supplied to not only parents but paediatricians, nurses, midwives and other health workers. Palmer reports that just one of the many baby bottle and teat manufacturers reported distribution of twenty million bottles a year and to add to this is the problem of non-biodegradable/non-recyclable tetra-pak cartons used for liquid ready-to-feed products.
MDG 8
Develop a global partnership fordevelopment
The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding (GSIYCF) fosters multi-sectoral collaboration, and can build upon the existent partnerships for support of development through breastfeeding and complementary feeding. In terms of future economic productivity, optimal infant feeding has major positive implications. Supporting and encouraging countries to establish national breastfeeding/infant and young child feeding coordinators and national breastfeeding/infant and young child feeding committees will keep infant feeding issues on agendas and work towards meeting obligations under human rights treaties including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the GSIYCF, and the International Code of Marketing Breast-milk Substitutes and subsequent, relevant World Health Assembly resolutions. Protecting and supporting breastfeeding and adequate complementary feeding is essential. Promotion of breastfeeding alone is not sufficient. The negative impact of inappropriate and misleading promotion of breastmilk substitutes requires action. The Code, adopted by the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981 and followed by numerous resolutions, is a minimum global standard, aiming to promote appropriate infant and young child feeding by protecting it
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
352
from commercial malpractice. In the preamble of the International Code it states “In view of the vulnerability of infants in the early months of life and the risks involved in inappropriate feeding practices, including the unnecessary and improper use of breast-milk substitutes, the marketing of breast-milk substitutes requires special treatment, which makes usual marketing practices unsuitable for these products”
Advocacy and action (adapted from Melton, 1987)
Representation for vulnerable people – infants and young children, pregnant, recently birthed and post-birth mothers
Empowerment – appropriate education, instilling confidence, skills, ability, increasing capacity
Enabling - development, growth, opportunity, strengthening Raising status – of breastfeeding, women, infants and children Taking action - Allocation or reallocation of resources Increasing accountability of governments, institutions and corporations
Proposal for action *
1. Adopt a human right-based approach to the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding and
infant and young child feeding at international, national, and community levels.
2. Establish institutional mechanisms to avoid and manage conflicts of interest in health and nutrition
decision-making and programme implementation.
3. Support all women with a comprehensive system of maternity protection at work, including the
non-formal sector – to include an appropriate length of paid maternity leave (minimum 26 weeks)
with flexibility and to include support for breastfeeding women returning to the paid workforce –
breastfeeding and lactation/expressing breaks provision.
4. Ensure appropriate and adequate education and training of all health care professionals and allied
health and community so they can provide skilled support to breastfeeding women. This includes
education about health worker responsibilities under the International Code and resolutions.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
353
5. Establish clear budget lines for breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding policy and
programme interventions to ensure adequate resources to enhance optimal practices.
6. Invest in the Baby Friendly Initiative programme – both BFHI and BFCI and include mother/family
friendly practices.
7. Ensure that neonatal intensive care services start working towards avoidance of separation of
mother and infant and commence work towards the development of single family room/spaces.
Paying attention to the issue of parents bonding to their NICU babies is critical, and attention to
breastfeeding support is also paramount, as not being breastfed has been suggested as a risk factor for
child abuse and neglect. Support of Kangaroo-Mother-Care practice should be mandatory from care
levels 3-1.
8. Ensure universal access to accurate information and counselling on breastfeeding and infant and
young child feeding to all mothers. Provide skilled counsellors throughout health facilities, not just in
maternity facilities, as breastfeeding women admitted to hospital and breastfeeding mothers with
infants and young children admitted to hospital generally have minimal, if any, access to assistance
with breastfeeding and lactation needs. Skilled support also needs to be available in the community.
9. Monitor and track the Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding in every country using
World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative (WBTi).
10. Protect breastfeeding by enforcing the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes
and subsequent, relevant World Health Assembly Resolutions.
11. Promote the use of affordable and diverse, locally grown, indigenous foods for timely and
appropriate complementary feeding after six months along with continued breastfeeding.
12. Enhance and support breastfeeding related research with public funding.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
354
* Adapted from work submitted by IBFAN
Relevant Human Rights Treaties for a HR Framework
1. Universal Declaration on Human Rights
Article 16:3 The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by
society and the state
Article 25:2 Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance 2. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Article 10:2 Special protection for mothers during a reasonable period before and after childbirth
Article 10:3 Special measures of protection and assistance should be taken on behalf of all children
Article 12:1 The rights to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. The provision for
the healthy development of the child3. Convention on the elimination of discrimination against women (CEDAW)
Article 12 1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women
in the field of health care in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health care services, including those related to family planning.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph I of this article, States Parties shall ensure to women appropriate services in connection with pregnancy, confinement and the post-natal period, granting free services where necessary, as well as adequate nutrition during pregnancy and lactation.
4. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
54 articles
Articles divided into three main types of rightsProvision rights
Minimum standards of family life and access to parental care, health, education, physical care, play, recreation, culture and leisure
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
355
Rights to a healthy toxic free environment
Protection Rights
Rights to be safe from exploitation, childhood injury, family violence, physical punishment
Participation Rights
Rights to physical integrity and to have views and opinions respected
Preamble
Childhood is entitled to special care and assistance Recognises that children are living in difficult conditions globally
Article 2
All rights apply to all children without exception. It is the State's obligation to protect children from any form of discrimination and to take positive action to promote their rights
Article 3
The best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration Article 6
State parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child
Article 24
The rights of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health. Article 24
1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health. States Parties shall strive to ensure that no child is deprived of his or her right of access to such health care services. 2. States Parties shall pursue full implementation of this right and, in particular, shall take appropriate measures: (a) To diminish infant and child mortality; (b) To ensure the provision of necessary medical assistance and health care to all children with emphasis on the development of primary health care; (c) To combat disease and malnutrition including within the framework of primary health care, through the application of readily available technology and through the provision of adequate nutritious foods and clean drinking water, taking into consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution; (d) To ensure appropriate pre-natal and post-natal health care for mothers;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
356
(e) To ensure that all segments of society, in particular parents and children, are informed, have access to education and are supported in the use of basic knowledge of child health and nutrition, the advantages of breast-feeding, hygiene and environmental sanitation and the prevention of accidents;(f) To develop preventive health care, guidance for parents and family planning education and services. 3. States Parties shall take all effective and appropriate measures with a view to abolishing traditional practises prejudicial to the health of children. 4. States Parties undertake to promote and encourage international cooperation with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the right recognized in the present article. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.
Best WishesCarol BartleMaternal, infant and young child health promoter/educatorCoordinator: Canterbury Breastfeeding Advocacy ServiceTe Puawaitanga Ki Otautahi Trust153 Gilberthorpes RoadHornbyChristchurch 8042New Zealand
243) Directorate General for Development Cooperation / Istituto Agronomico per l'Oltremare Italy
Theme 1:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
Over the years development approaches have gone through several phases affecting operating methods and the types of planned and implemented interventions.
Food security, agriculture and rural development are no exception.
Recently, to improve alignment with the strategies and programmes of partner countries, national level participation and sector programmes has been encouraged; these programmes include different types of interventions such as initiatives for public aid for development, private investment, national and local interventions, etc. (e.g. the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme - CAADP).
Particular attention has been dedicated to strengthening institutions in order to guarantee programmes’ sustainability and ownership..
Furthermore, in order to be effective, aid for food security, agriculture and rural development must take the sector’s specifics into account:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
357
• the central importance of gender issues (the majority of small subsistence farmers are women);
• the key role of the private sector and civil society;
• the importance of non-renewable natural resources (water, soil, biodiversity, climate, etc.) and frameworks regulating how they are managed;
• Inter-sectorial nature of the issue that involves different types of policies, competences and actors (e.g. energy, health, etc.);
• the local scope of problems, risks and opportunities (e.g. environmental, economic, social, etc.);
• the value of territorial and decentralized cooperation and the promotion of development programmes based on the participation of local community and grass-root organisations.
Some of the key lessons could be so summarised:
1. There is a strong interdependency among the MDGs. The multifacets/ sectorial dimension of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition imposes to tackle at the same time several causes and determinants, hence MDGs (e.g., Goals 2, 3, 7 and 8). On the other hand, fighting hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition is critical, for example, to reduce under-five mortality rates (Goal 4);
2. It is not always easy to translate the broad MDGs into action, notably as far as priority setting, specific patterns and determinants, division of labour and resources among Ministries and institutions are concerned. An example could be provided by the limited attention paid in some countries to pastoral, fishery and forestry issues in spite of their importance to several communities and to the national economy and welfare;
3. In such regard and considering the specificity of the agricultural sector, sound Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers helped in defining priorities and specific plans of action to achieve the MDGs which is, hence, not only a technical but also a key political exercise. Under this internationally shared framework, it was possible to convey national efforts to achieve common goals and to compare results;
4. The MDGs should reflect with clearer emphasis the strong association between hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition, on one side, and natural resources management, economic and socio-cultural issues, on the other.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
In order to achieve the food and nutrition security objectives there many interconnected challenges and opportunities.
Main challenges:
• Rapid deterioration of natural resources, in particular water and land fertility, fisheries and forests
• Rapid population growth
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
358
• Climate change and its effect on traditional agricultural systems
• Inter-sectorial nature of the issue
• Need to develop and adopt more effective policies at global, national and community level
• Local scope of problems, risks and opportunities
• Possible inequities in the access to land and water
• Increased prices of oil products and their effects on the cost of and on the demand for agricultural inputs (e.g., biofuels)
• Price volatility of agricultural products
Main opportunities:
• Growing demand for agricultural, livestock and fishery products
• Food security continues to be high up in the political and development agenda with high concern from civil society and media
• New investments in policy research and in technologies with revised approach to innovation systems
• Clear resilience shown by many traditional, mixed and semi intensive farming systems against all the odds and in spite of limited support from some national governments
• Better understanding of broader action frameworks such as: strong interdependence between emergency, recovery and development; need for effective inter-sectorial collaboration and coordination; importance of processing and marketing, of farming system evolution and of interdependence between the public and the private sector in agriculture and rural development
• Improved governance at the international level
• Ongoing Reform processes of major International organisations (such as:
FAO,
CFS, CGIAR), which will improve coordination , for example within the UN Rome
based food agencies
• In some countries, strengthened organisations of smallholder family farmers
• Economic growth and new market developments linked to the urban/rural dynamics
Theme 2:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
359
experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
We believe four issues are critical:
1. there is the need to translate the vast amount of knowledge and experience into practical, science-based, shared solutions and actions;
2. governance and equity issues need to be properly addressed by regional and national policies;
3. ownership of the whole process from national authorities who, on their turn, have the responsibility to involve and to adapt the policies to the different communities/ key actors (e.g., women, small scale farmers, pastoralists, commercial sector)
4. development rhetoric, therefore ambitious goals and objectives, should be avoided as much as possible in favour of feasible and tangible results.
Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org [1]), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS provides a comprehensive policy framework for coordination and harmonisation of policies and intervention at all levels, where the CFS provides the global forum for improving mutual understanding and collaboration between different
stakeholders: Governments, International Organisations, Farmers Organisations, CSOs, Research & Education, etc. In our view the work of the CFS on F&NS should be further supported and continued.
The Zero Hunger Challenge provides an overarching international agenda for action, encompassing objectives for developing, emerging and developed countries. We value the approach of merging development objectives with the objectives of sustainability. Another strength is its simplicity to understand and to communicate.
Theme 3:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge
(ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round
b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old
c. All food systems are sustainable
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
360
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income.
e. Zero loss or waste of food.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
We consider the objectives set out in the Zero Hunger Challenge initiatives important for achieving global food security. These are at the same time ambitious and concrete; one could dispute about our current capacity to define an appropriate set of indicators for monitoring progress towards their achievement; nevertheless we consider that these objectives provide the direction for the required changes in order to achieve sustainable global food security and nutrition. Their quantitative dimension should be carefully articulated at the country and sub-country level to show the intensity of the required changes. The time horizon should be country specific and set according to the intensity of the change needed.
244) WWF International, Switzerland
As outlined in the UN Secretary General’s Zero Hunger Challenge, eliminating hunger and achieving universal food security requires a range of measures and investments. WWF’s contribution to the consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security addresses just one element of that challenge: protecting and enhancing the ability of the natural world to supply a growing human population with a nutritious, sufficient and diverse food supply. Please see the attached paper for responses under Themes 1 and 3.
INTRODUCTION:
As outlined in the UN Secretary General’s Zero Hunger Challenge, eliminating hunger and achieving universal food security requires a range of measures and investments. (UN Zero Hunger Challenge, http://un-foodsecurity.org/sites/default/files/EN_ZeroHungerChallenge.pdf. ) WWF’s contribution to the consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security addresses just one element of that challenge: protecting and enhancing the ability of the natural world to supply a growing human population with a nutritious, sufficient and diverse food supply.
Theme 1 What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The MDGs dealt with issues in ‘silos’, which undermined the ability to address environmental sustainability and human well-being in an integrated way. There are few quantifiable targets in the overall goal on environmental sustainability (MDG7) with no quantifiable targets on sustainable development (7a) and biodiversity loss (7b). The result is that concerted action on these areas has been weak and we have seriously underinvested in protecting and enhancing the natural resources and ecosystem services vital to fulfilling human needs.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
361
From a hunger and food security perspective specifically, we continue to see serious losses in productive soil and in food crop, fisheries and livestock biodiversity. The linkages between nutrition, local cultivars, and traditional knowledge have also been overlooked resulting in further biodiversity and agro-biodiversity loss, impoverishment of local diets and diminished community and household resilience in cases of food crises (the loss of ‘famine food’). Similarly, the implications of climate change and natural disasters and resulting disruptions in food production have not been adequately addressed and integrated in future food production models.
The current MDG framework also gave no attention to the sustainable management and protection of freshwater resources and ecosystems, and the vital functions and services they provide for tackling poverty, hunger and malnutrition. These include the role of ecosystems in storing, providing and cleaning water for agriculture, maintaining fertile soils, and sustaining fisheries and aquaculture. The impacts of agriculture, which accounts for 70% of global water withdrawals for human use, on water quantity and quality must also be better managed, as must the competing demands for water for other economic activities, including energy production, with consequences for food security. The Post2015 Development Framework must be structured to ensure strong cross-sectoral coordination and attention in decision- and policy-making to the potential tradeoffs and synergies that emerge from the water-food-energy nexus.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Meeting the food, water, energy, shelter, health and employment needs of a growing population in a way that does not compromise the Earth’s ability to support us demands a radically different approach to growth and development in the post-2015 period. The post-2015 development framework must support this by focusing and driving action on key drivers of environmentally sustainable and socially and economically inclusive growth.
Key challenges and opportunities for achieving food and nutrition security will include: Embedding the value of biodiversity and ecosystems services, and related traditional
knowledge, to food production in public and private decision making; Redesigning laws, policies, institutions and public participation and accountability
mechanisms to ensure sustainable, equitable access to, and benefits from, natural resources for food production;
Designing solutions for poverty eradication and food security in rural and urban settings tailored to different sets of drivers (e.g. market prices, distribution, access to natural resources, tenure security, safety nets, subsidies) and degrees of vulnerability.
Linking issues of biodiversity conservation and management, and food security, with the role and empowerment of women in rural contexts as guardians and stewards of agricultural and marine biodiversity;
Shifting away from resource-intensive, wasteful food consumption and production patterns. See for example WWF’s work on sustainable agriculture and aquaculture;
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
362
Ensuring long-term food productivity and food production resilience by protecting soil quality and terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems (including rehabilitation of degraded and abandoned land), promoting the integrated management of freshwater, land and coastal and marine resources and addressing the water-food-energy nexus in a changing climate.
Investing in innovation and research in agriculture (productivity, quality and diversity of cultivars) and infrastructure to reduce post-harvest losses;
Determining internationally comparable indices for food quality monitoring.
Theme 3: For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. All food systems are sustainable d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income e. Zero loss or waste of food.
Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
WWF believes that the following principles must guide the development of the post-2015 development framework and a future set of goals:
Integration – one process leading to one set of goals for sustainable development and building upon MDG achievements. The essence of sustainable development is to bring the social, economic, and environment spheres together. Therefore, the processes to develop ‘SDGs’ should be wholly merged with processes to agree ‘development goals’ after September 2013.
Universality– all countries need to take action: In order to address the global challenges we face, all countries must take ownership and action. Inspired by the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, a universal but nationally tailored set of goals is necessary to improve the lives of people most affected by poverty and injustice while staying within planetary boundaries.
Cross-cutting – mainstreaming environmental sustainability and social equity throughout the framework: Environmental sustainability and social equity should be core elements embedded across the post-2015 framework. The MDGs dealt with issues in ‘silos’, which undermined the ability to address environmental sustainability and human well-being in an integrated way. At the same time, given their significance, environmental sustainability and social equity must be specifically recognizable and measurable elements of goal statements, targets or indicators in order to be effectively addressed.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
363
Human rights-based approach -- ensuring equality within and between countries: States need to acknowledge good governance and the rule of law, including the respect of human rights, as fundamental for sustainable development. States must also move towards greater equity in access to natural resources, and foster equitable, pro-poor and sustainable development paths, including by developing metrics beyond GDP.
WWF believes the goals should be time-bound to 2030, with interim milestones.
Feedback on proposed goals:
WWF would support discussion around the objectives identified by the UNSG under the ZHC. These objectives are close to what WWF has begun identifying internally as critical directions for linking food security and environmental sustainability. We believe, however, it would be important to include more explicit language in the ZHC objective set on the need for active investment in the protection and enhancement of the natural resource base as the foundation for food security, through a rewording of objective c as below and adding a complimentary objective “f”:
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. All food systems are environmentally sustainable d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income e. Zero loss or waste of food f. Ecosystems that underpin food security are protected and enhanced.
References could also helpfully be made to other relevant and agreed targets, including the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Aichi Targets 6,7, 8, 13 and 14.
The draft goal and target set around food security below has been developed internally within WWF to stimulate discussion on how best to integrate social, economic and environmental dimensions and capture some key inter-linkages between them. These are aspirational statements offered to help generate discussion and have not been explored from the perspective of the technical feasibility and affordability of measuring progress towards them.
Universal access to food by 2030. This could include targets such as:
1. Affordable and equitable access to a sufficient and safe food supply, from sustainably managed terrestrial, marine and freshwater resources, sheltered from excessive volatility of food prices. 2. Redirected public support, regulations, economic incentives and trade policies to drive investment and innovation in sustainable agriculture and food production, reduce waste in the food chain and ensure the long-term productivity and resilience of natural resources and ecosystem services.3. Increased access for local and smallholder farmers to agricultural credits, information and technology, security in land tenure and water rights, and markets to support sustainable agriculture and rural development.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
364
4. Long-term food productivity and food production resilience ensured by protecting soil quality and terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, and promoting the integrated management of freshwater, land and coastal and marine resources
245) Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Switzerland
Theme 1 : What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition? What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
Challenges:The efforts to eradicate hunger and malnutrition in the pre-2015, including MDGs, have been facing several challenges.Firstly, the challenge to ensure equitable distribution of food has not been tackled sufficiently. In 1974, the Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition recognized that both higher food production and a more equitable and efficient distribution of food as fundamental responsibilities of the Governments. Since then, the world has had enough food to feed its entire population so far, but the efforts have been focused mostly on food production, and not on how to eradicate structural obstacles, such as discrimination and denial of rights, that prevent certain groups of people to access existing food. Secondly, the world has been facing the challenges arising from globalization, including growing demand for resources (such as land, energy, water) across the borders, intensifying impact of international markets and trades on national food markets, and increasing number and scale of extreme climate events. These are causing food price volatility and harsher competition over resources, resulting in further reducing the capacity of certain groups, smallhold and landless farmers, fishers, pastoralists, urban poor, in accessing and producing foods with disproportionate impacts on women among them. In order to tackle these issues, due attention needs to be paid to strengthening modes of international cooperation and meaningful reform of global governance institutions, processes and policies.Thirdly, re-investment in agriculture has had positive and negative impacts. After the 2007-08 food price crisis, the international community has made steady progress in increasing investment in agriculture, which has been critically needed. On the other hand, a rush of investments in agricultural lands lead to further food and nutrition insecurity of people who lost access to land due to the investments. It would be crucial to ensure that new investments in agriculture are in support of models of agricultural development which improve local food and nutrition security, reduce rural poverty, and preserve the environment and the ecosystems resilience against threats emerging from climate change.Fourthly, the role of private business enterprises and impacts of their activities are intensifying. While States are primarily responsible for achieving the right to food for people in their territories, it is not feasible to achieve food and nutrition security for all without involving the private sector. While private business enterprises can have a positive and significant role in achieving food and nutrition security, there are concerns over negative impacts certain activities of the private sector actors have had, including on access to resources and productive inputs, food price volatility, food safety, environmental pollution, labour conditions for employers in relevant sectors, violence against people
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
365
claiming their rights, etc. It would be important to hold business actors account to their human rights responsibilities.Lastly, there has been a general lack of governance, accountability and justice mechanisms at national and international levels through which people can exercise their right to participation and access to justice and remedies in the area of food and nutrition security. Often, people who claimed their right to food or the right to participation faced exclusion, repression, violence and denial of access to justice, freedom of expression and assembly.
Opportunities:While we are facing challenges, there are initiatives and efforts made to tackle such challenges.• Efforts have been made to implement the right to food at country level. The right to food is no longer perceived as a rhetoric or theory. Instead, in the past 20 years, concrete efforts to implement it are being made at many countries. For example, the Special Rapporteur on the right to food documented efforts made at country level, both in Africa and Latin America (http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/otherdocuments/note06-septembre2012-en-v2.pdf , and http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/otherdocuments/20120620_briefing_note_05_en.pdf ) • Reform of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) in 2009 created a new global centre of governance on food security. It has adopted an innovative participatory process, enabling not only States but also civil society, the private sector and international organizations to participate in deliberation of its strategy, policy discussion, standard setting, etc. The CFS has been addressing several challenges outlined above. For example, it successfully developed the Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security (adopted in 2012) through such participatory process, and working on principles on responsible agricultural investment, social protection, etc.• UN human rights mechanisms have been actively addressing the right to food. In 1999, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights articulated the understanding of the right to food provided under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Committee has been monitoring regularly the implementation of the right to food at country level through its review of State party reports and constructive dialogue with States. In 2000, the Commission on Human Rights (predecessor of the Human Rights Council) has created a mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food. Since then, two mandate holders appointed under this mandate have rigorously analysed the issues relevant to the right to food, and recommended concrete measures necessary for the realization of the right to food. In 2007, the Human Rights Council held the first thematic special session focusing on the food crisis and the right to food. In 2012, the Council has set up an Open-Ended Working Group to discuss a declaration on the rights of peasants other people working in rural areas. Civil society organizations are actively using the UN human rights mechanisms for monitoring the right to food at country level.• FAO has advanced in their tools and expertise on integrating the right to food into food and nutrition security. For example, in 2004 the FAO Council has adopted the Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security, a major tool to operationalize the right to food. FAO has also developed a number of tools and methodologies to implement the right to food.• Commitments made at the Rio + 20 conference reaffirmed “the necessity to promote, enhance and support more sustainable agriculture” as well as “the need to maintain natural ecological processes that support food production systems”, and “resolving to increase sustainable agricultural production” globally (A/RES/66/288, Annex, paras. 110-111). The Outcome document also tasks the CFS in "facilitating country-initiated assessments on sustainable food production and food security” (para. 115). These commitments resonate with their commitment for the right to food.
Theme 2:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
366
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
What works:• Experience shows us that to a large extent the success of efforts to address hunger and food and nutrition insecurity depend on whether such efforts are informed by the view of the victims of hunger and malnutrition. • At the national level, appropriate legal and institutional frameworks are essential to: (i) ensure the adequate participation, particularly, of the most food-insecure segments of the population; (ii) identify, at the earliest stage possible, emerging threats to the right to adequate food, by adequate monitoring systems; (iii) improve coordination between the relevant ministries and between the national and sub-national levels of government; and (iv) improve accountability, through the setting of targets, with measurable indicators, defining the timeframe within which particular objectives should be achieved.• National parliaments and parliamentarians together with organized civil society groups, social movements and human rights institutions, have played a fundamental role in placing the right to food on top of political agendas.
Experiences:• At the regional level, Latin America and the Caribbean have seen positive progress as a result of regional initiatives based on the right to food, such as the Iniciativa América Latina y Caribe Sin Hambre¸ launched in 2005 with the objective of eradicating hunger in the region by 2025, and the Parliamentarian Front against Hunger in Latin America and the Caribbean (PFH).• For country experiences, please see the following briefing notes by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food:From Charity to Entitlement: Implementing the right to food in Southern and Eastern Africa (http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/otherdocuments/20120620_briefing_note_05_en.pdf) A Rights Revolution: Implementing the right to food in Latin America and the Caribbean (http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/otherdocuments/note06-septembre2012-en-v2.pdf) • As to ensuring participation, UNDP developed a tool to apply a rights-based approach to laws and policies on plant regimes. This could be an example of how to develop and review food-relevant policies in a participatory manner. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/poverty-reduction/trade_content/towards-a-human-rights-based-approach-to-food-security--a-self-a/
Theme 3:For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. All food systems are sustainable
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
367
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income e. Zero loss or waste of food. Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
The post-2015 development framework should address the following:• Aligning itself clearly with States’ normative obligations, including those under international human rights law. This will clarify responsibility of States, including measures they are expected to take, and entitlements of people. This would allow measuring not only outcomes but also means. This would strengthen a basis for accountability of States, not only vis-à-vis donors or the international community, but most importantly, vis-à-vis their people based on the rule of law. The methodology and framework developed for human rights indicators (e.g. see: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx) allow linking States’ obligations and realization of food and nutrition security for all, through measuring commitments, measures and outcomes. Already some countries are applying these methodologies and framework to their public policies relevant to food and nutrition security (e.g. Nepal, Bolivia, Kenya)• Advancing the three closely-related concepts, i.e., equity, equality and non-discrimination. They should be cross-cutting key principles for any goals/agenda for post-2015. This means that any goals or indicators set should allow for disaggregation to reveal exclusion and inequalities. In particular, it is crucial to guarantee gender equality and place the empowerment of women at the centre of food security strategies, primarily in order to guarantee the right to food of women but also because it is the most cost-effective measure to reduce hunger and malnutrition for all.• Ensuring free, active and meaningful participation of rights-holders in designing and deciding on objectives, targets, indicators, and means to achieve goals for post-2015 agenda, as well as monitoring and evaluation of its implementation.• Recognising responsibilities of both developed and developing countries, in particular in order to address international factors affecting food and nutrition security, including international markets, trades, investments, environmental protection, biodiversity, climate change, use of resources (energy, water, lands, fisheries, seeds, etc), etc. This angle would be relevant to all ZHCs.• Addressing roles and responsibilities of the private sector and States’ duties vis-à-vis activities of the private sector, based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The roles and responsibilities of the private sector and corresponding duties of States should be addressed throughout the food chain, including investments in agriculture and in relevant resources (such as land).• Goal and time-frame setting which allow a transformative change, which accommodates long-term change (e.g. for full realization of the right to food), and at the same time fostering accountability and progress in the immediate and medium terms.• Ensure coherency and coordination among all goals/issues identified for post-2015 agenda. Likewise, ways to facilitate policy coherency and coordination among actors, institutions and mechanisms to implement such goals at international and national levels would need to be considered. (For example, in order to achieve improved governance and apply a rights-based approach, closer interaction and coordination between the CFS and the UN human rights system may be needed at international level.) As for ZHC, in addition to over-arching issues mentioned above, which would be relevant to all ZHC, more specific feedback on each Zero Hunger Challenge are as follows:a. 100% access to adequate food all year round: Understanding of the concepts such as “access” and “adequacy” of food should be gained in line with the human right to food as articulated by the UN human rights mechanisms. For example, “access” is understood not only as physical access, but also as economic access to food (affordability of food). “Adequacy” of food is understood as being nutritious,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
368
safe and culturally acceptable. This challenge should be addressed both through enabling people to produce adequate food for their consumption as well as through decent employment and a social protection system which enable people to afford adequate food without compromising the enjoyment of other human rights.b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old: It would be important, as recommended by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, that under-nutrition is addressed together with, micronutrient deficiency and overnutrition by reshaping food systems, and through a life-cycle approach. Therefore, means to achieve this target should be defined narrowly, but allow a comprehensive approach to nutrition.c. All food systems are sustainable: Need to address challenges of globalization and responsibilities of developed countries, in particular taking into account sustainability of global as well as national food systems. Also, sustainable food systems should be respectful of human rights of people involved, including labour rights of waged agricultural or fishery workers, access to safe and affordable food by consumers, availability of adequate food for future generations, rights of indigenous peoples to their lands, resources, and culture, etc.d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income: “Smallholders” should include smallhold (incl. landless) farmers, fishers, pastoralists as well as smallhold food processors. e. Zero loss or waste of food: Important to address responsibility of developed countries (e.g. food waste at consumption level in developed countries), as well as developing countries.
246) Phyll Buchanan, Breastfeeding Network, United Kingdom
The current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015) helped improve the health of mothers and babies in the UK. This work needs to continue, particularly the focus on early and sustained exclusive breastfeeding with appropriately timed introduction of solid food. This will help address malnutrition - over and under nutrition and keep a focus on infant mortality which appears to be beginning to increase once again in the UK.
247) Ronald Vargas, FAO-Global Soil Partnership, Italy
I will refer now to a field that is continuously forgotten when referring to the main challenges towards achieving food security.
Sustainable management of soils has not been soundly addressed by any of the MDGs and nor by food security strategies and actions.
When looking at pillar 1 of food security referred to availability and considering the challenges of population growth, it is estimated that food production should be increased by 60%. Yet, soil degradation has been a very active process in most of the developing regions. Healthy soils are crucial for producing healthy and nutritious food, still because it is everywhere, we tend to overlook the fact that soil is a limited natural resource. Therefore, if we want to properly deal with the challenges of food security ahead, we should develop an integrated approach towards sustainable development and not only focus in some components of the system.
Definitely, the sustainable management of soils should be considered as one target or component of the post 2015 sustainable development goals and of the zero hunger challenge.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
369
248) HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation, Switzerland
HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation is one of the oldest and largest Swiss development NGOs presently engaged in 32 countries. The main primary stakeholders of HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation are rural poor in developing countries, hence those people most affected by food insecurity. In several of our projects, the improvement of food security in rural areas is an explicit and inherent part of the intervention strategy. Moreover, the majority of projects have direct or indirect implications on the food security situation of rural livelihoods. Therefore the topic of food security has always been and will continue to be a fundamental topic for the organisation both at the level of project implementation and advocacy work.
We are thankful to FAO and its partners for launching this discussion about a post 2015 development agenda related to hunger, food and nutrition security. The wealth of contributions to this discussion provides a substantial input to develop a “Post-2015 Development Agenda and Framework”. We would like to contribute few thoughts on theme three, namely the set of objectives that has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under the Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old c. All food systems are sustainable d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income e. Zero loss or waste of food.
We would like to congratulate the UN Secretary General for this initiative and the importance given to the theme of hunger and nutrition. We are impressed by the clarity of the message and its comprehensiveness in a very condensed form. However, if the Zero Hunger Challenge shall serve as a starting point for the formulation of a post 2015 development framework we believe that certain aspects deserve more precise definition or additional attention.
1. General observation: “The right to food” should form the basis for a future development agenda in this theme. It therefore deserves to be mentioned and referred to explicitly. Even if the goal is “Zero Hunger” we believe that in order to reach this goal it needs particular attention and affirmative action directed at the most disadvantaged. Often women are among the most disadvantaged. It is not enough just to list them (as done in “100% increase in small holder productivity”). The disadvantaged groups need to be identified in each particular context and specifically targeted interventions need to be designed and undertaken. The focus on food and nutrition excludes the problem of loss and degradation of natural resources and the competition for fertile land and water by non-food crops, in particular for agro-fuel.
2. 100% access to adequate food all year round. The FAO food security concept rightly builds on the four pillars “availability, access, utilisation and stability”. It seems to us that aspects of “food utilisation” are in the “Zero Hunger Challenge” somewhat concentrated in the thrust “Zero stunted
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
370
children less than 2 years old.” Particularly the access to save drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) has to go side by side with the access to food for all other population groups, too.
3. All food systems are sustainable We highly appreciate the importance given to sustainability. We however expect a stiff debate on what is called “sustainable”. We would like to stress the equal importance of the three dimensions (social, ecological and economic) of sustainability. Minimal requirements for a sustainable agriculture could be further defined, e.g. using the principles of LEISA (Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture) or organic agriculture.
The aspect of energy consumption in food production is worth to be actively addressed, too.
Similarly we support the mentioning of “responsible governance of land, fisheries and forests” but fear that there will be divergent definitions of what is called “responsible”.
4. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income The mentioning of “improving land tenure” is in our view a too weak formulation. Smallholder productivity will only increase if farmers can rely on secure and legally protected property rights in the long run and have access to other productive resources and services. What is needed is a secured / legally protected access to productive resources (land, water, seeds, forests, bio-diversity, fisheries) and a secured access to assets (financial and non financial services, information, and knowledge).
5. Zero loss or waste of food We highly appreciate the inclusion of this aspect. Food losses, energy consumption and green house gas emissions increase with the transport of food. We therefore suggest to highlight here the promotion of short value chains to local and regional markets. Labelling alone is not sufficient.
Labels need to be trustworthy and therefore need to be supported by adequate certification schemes (e.g. participatory guarantee schemes).
We again would like to thank for the opportunity to contribute to this consultation.
Yours sincerely
HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation
Peter Schmidt Co-head Advisory Services Zürich, January 9th, 2013
249) Kathleen Kurz, DAI, United States of America
Theme 1. Key lessons MDGs 2000-2015
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
371
Stunting among children under 5 years (height/age) is a good indicator for malnutrition, and reflects as well changes in poverty and hunger. Importantly, it also portends the strength of the human capital developing for the next generation of a country’s leadership and workforce. Stunting assesses the accumulated effects of negative factors on children’s nutritional status, and as such it needs to be accompanied by indicators of the factors determining it: 1) dietary diversity and adequacy; 2) behaviors such as breastfeeding, complementary feeding, and keeping the family’s environment hygienic to prevent illness; and 3) adequacy of health services to treat the most prevalent childhood diseases compromising nutritional status -- diarrhea, respiratory infections, and malaria. The process for achieving the MDGs requires more time, though much progress has been made. Food-based agricultural approaches for improving nutrition in particular requires time for the two disciplines to understand each other’s language, find commonality in approaches, objectives and indicators, and learn how to improve nutrition through the food families consume from own production or purchase. Theme 2. What works best and is governance important? Governance, including accountability and political commitment are exceedingly important for providing a strong country platform by which lasting reductions in poverty, hunger and malnutrition can be achieved. Theme 3. Zero Hunger Challenge The ZHC is a welcome proposal from the UN Secretary-General and a valuable rallying call. To chart success toward zero hunger, a set of sub-objectives with indicators, interim targets, and time limits would also be valuable.
250) Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, United States of America
Please include breastfeeding as part of your Millenium Goals to reduce child mortality. Both UNICEF and WHO recognize that breastfeeding substantially lowers the rate of diseases that kill children. Including breastfeeding in the revised MDGs would do much to help breastfeeding advocates around the world put breastfeeding on local, state, and national agendas.
Thank you for your consideration.
251) Lou Pingeot, NGO Working Group on Food and Hunger at the United Nations, United States of America.
Theme 1: Challenges and Opportunities
In September 2011, the NGO Working Group on Food and Hunger at the United Nations submitted a policy statement to the UN General Assembly, addressing global policy around food and hunger issues, and highlighting the key areas that need attention. While the statement was published in 2011, these issues are relevant and need to be addressed in the post-2015 agenda. The fourteen points raised in the statement were the following:
1. Ecological Approaches to Food Production
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
372
2. The false promises of the “New Green Revolution” & Agro-Industrial Ideologies3. Local Food Production and Food Sovereignty4. Global Food Governance & the Committee on World Food Security5. Land Rights and Land-Grabbing6. Financial Speculation in food commodities markets7. The impact of biofuels on food availability8. Water9. Soil Protection10. Responsible investment in agriculture11. Agricultural Families and Agricultural Labor12. Nutrition & Food Quality13. Other Issues (use of pesticides, ‘western’ diets, biodiversity, over-fishing etc.)14. Food Enough for All Please find the full statement as an attachment.
The NGO Working Group on Food & Hunger was founded in December 2008 to coordinate NGO advocacy at the United Nations in New York on issues of hunger, malnutrition, agriculture and food production, and related matters. Spurred by the food crisis of 2008, the Working Group promotes better understanding and more effective action on these issues at UN headquarters. The Working Group brings together a number of NGO participants in New York, as well as corresponding participants from other worldwide locations. The Working Group maintains contact with civil society work at the Committee on Food Security in Rome.
For more information about the Working Group, please visit http://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/world-hunger/ngo-working-group-on-food-a-hunger.html.
Lou Pingeot
Program CoordinatorGlobal Policy Forum777 UN Plaza, 3DNew York, NY 10017+1 212 557 3161www.globalpolicy.org
252) Jennifer Peddlesden, Canada
Key lessons - Under nutrition (malnutrition) and over nutrition (obesity) are programmed mostly during infancy. Prevention of either means ensuring early and exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months, followed by introduction of complementary foods along with continued breastfeeding up to two years and beyond. A growing body of evidence points to the key role of infant and young child feeding practices, especially early and exclusive breastfeeding, in mitigating over and under malnutrition. Breastfeeding is one of the best preventions for disease later in life for both the child being fed human milk and the mother herself. Breastfeeding also provides protection for the infant and child from communicable diseases. In developing nations which lack clean water, access to public healthcare, human milk is not only healthful but can be lifesaving, and in developed countries is shown to provide normal health compared to use of artificial baby milks which results in sub-optimal health. (1)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
373
In conclusion, both the WHO/UNICEF International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent relevant WHA Resolutions, and the Global Strategy on Infant and Young Child Feeding are key directives, that if applied broadly worldwide will accomplish the ideals set out in the health-related Millennium Development Goal (MDG) see table summary from this 2004 document. (2) (1)Victora C. Nutrition in early life: a global priority. The Lancet 2009; 374(9696):1123-1125.)(2) Ip S, Chung M, Raman G, et al. Breastfeeding and Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes in Developed Countries. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Apr. (Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 153.) Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK38337/
Key challenges - the commercialization of food world wide, and the encrochment by commercial food industry interests into the decision making of non-governmental bodies around the world. To quote Baby Milk Action " Several WHA Resolutions have highlighted these risks and have called for 'governance' in health policy and programme setting to be protected from the undue influence of those who stand to gain financially from decisions. Insustry involvement at a core strategic level can favour market led response to infant and young child feeding that sidelines the critical role of breastfeeding and appropriate complementary feeding"... of 'home' foods. See coicoalition.blogspot.com
What works best. A respect for the rights of the child! It is a child's right to have it's mother's milk. (3) An approach that respects human rights, and one which incorporates the basic tenets of medical ethics ( after all, over and under nutrition end up being medical problems!); autonomy and veracity (parents getting the truth about the risks of NOT breastfeeding when a choice of feeding is available); beneficence and non-maleficence (acknowlegement without guilt, that NOT receiving human milk for the first six months is harmful), and justice (the same rules for all babies, children, familes and mothers no matter where in the world they live).
(3) Convention on the Rights of the Child, 24.1.g http://www.unicef.org/crc/ (4) Nygren-Krug, Helena. A human rights based approach to non-communicable disease. http://www.swisshumanrightsbook.com/SHRB/shrb_03_files/16_453_Nygren.pdf (5) Ball O. Breastfeeding is a human right. Breastfeeding Review. 2010;18(3)9-19
SCN Breastfeeding and Complementary Feeding Working Group 2003/2004Contribution of Breastfeeding, Complementary Feeding, and Related Maternal Nutrition to the Millennium Development Goals
253) Nikki Lee, Self-employed, United States of America
Breastfeeding promotion, protection and support is a global activity that addresses all 5 components of Theme 3.
Breastfed infants will have virtually 100% access to adequate food all year round. Most women can breastfeed, when their society welcomes and encourages it.
Breastfed children grow appropriately, and healthily.
Breastfeeding is an ecologically sound activity, a sustainable and renewable resource.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
374
254) Thomas Forster, New School for Public Engagement, United States of America
Dear all,
The remarks I make under the themes of this consultation are drawn partially from a 2011 FAO position paper for which I was a coordinating author titled Food, Agriculture and Cities: the challenges of food and nutrition security, agriculture and ecosystem management in an urbanizing world. The full paper can be found at http://www.fao.org/fcit/fcit-home/food-for-the-cities-position-paper/en/. In addition this builds on recent policy language included in the Rio+20 outcome document calling for urban rural linkages for food and nutrition security.
Theme 1:
The key lessons from the initial Millennium Development Goals (MDG) must include, among many things stated by others, a recognition of a changed context for achieving food and nutrition security for all in the mid-21st century. The urbanization of world population, and the consequent challenges of feeding cities and rural hinterlands in a world of economic and environmental volatility, demand fundamental change in the way food systems are conceived, implemented and made more resilient. As these challenges have become increasingly evident, especially following the food price and economic crises of the last five years, there are also innovative ecosystem approaches that have civil society and multilevel government support for policy, programmes and resources in every region, in both low and high income countries.
Theme 2:
New approaches combine systems-based and integrated crop, livestock and forest landscapes in both rural and urban settings. New approaches include integrating new agricultural landscapes with both targets of climate change mitigation and adaptation and with targets of reducing poverty and hunger. New approaches also integrate these ecological, social and economic targets with local and national political commitment. While such multi-dimensional integration is not ubiquitous by any means, it is evident in pockets of innovation across the world. This is very hopeful. To spread these examples of good practice and multi-targeted outcomes, it is necessary to have a multipronged approach such that three critical groups in all society – civil society, local authorities and national governments – all take ownership of such integrated sustainable development approaches in setting targets.
Theme 3:
The targets of the ZHC are a useful beginning, but there should be explicit reference to integrated solutions as mentioned above. There should also be explicit reference to the need for integration of urban and rural areas to achieve the targets of sustainable diets and resilient food systems to meet the continuing economic and environmental challenges that will characterize the future in all regions. In this spirit I would add the following to existing goals a, c and e:
a. 100% access to adequate and healthful food all year around c. All food systems and diets are sustainable e. Zero loss or waste of food in both rural and urban areas.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
375
255) Ann Yarwood, United Kingdom
In a week that saw the news that Australia is "suffering" from a "formula shortage'" thanks to bulk buying Chinese consumers who are sending infant formula home after the milk fiasco there, there seems to be an urgent need for mentioning the importance of BREASTFEEDING (and making the WHO code a more robust tool that protects all mothers and children) in the Millenium Development Goals. I'd like to add my voice to others who have called for BREASTFEEDING to be included.
Regards
Ann
256) Paula Hinson, La Leche League, United Kingdom
Please don't overlook the importance of breastfeeding as a key contributor to child survival, health and healthy development. Exclusive breastfeeding until around 6 months and continued breastfeeeding alongside complementary foods for 2 years and beyond is the optimum feeding practice.
257) Lai Yin Stenqvist, Sweden
There are many proofs already that the cheapest and most lasting way to feed the hunger is to help small farmers to help themselves. They must have the right to have land, water and the knowledge of organic farming, storage and selling. This knowledge is not known to many decision makers and the public. It is necessary to find ways to spread this concept to them.
258) Sara Wuehler, Micronutrient Forum secretariat, unofficial comments, Canada
The new Micronutrient Forum has been working on strategy development topics that may provide some insight into the process, but not available for this deadline. If you will take suggestions beyond this date, please let me know.
In the mean time, my personal input is the following:
Theme 1:
lessons learned: a) Current global and national support, although improved, is still insufficient and/or not evenly distributed to those sectors where progress and funding is required, i.e. nutritional aspects of various interventions; b) More time/ effort is needed to move beyond uni-sectoral approaches and recognize the whole-ness that is needed for effective programs and interventions
Challenges:
a) Getting various groups to set aside prejudices and recognize each-others’ contributions and essentiality in the mix
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
376
b) Removing the threats and waste introduced by warring and greedy countries and leaders
c) Getting countries to develop population-driven long-term agendas, as opposed to donor or politically driven agendas that drop as soon as the funds end or the next political leader takes over
Theme 2:
what works:
a) Programs and interventions MUST come from within each country (encouraging topics by providing funding is self-limiting)
b) International organizations must recognize and work from the fundamental premise that no matter what we do, we cannot force countries or individuals within countries to comply (obesity and non-communicable disease in Europe and North America are classic examples)
Theme 3: These objectives are a mixed bag of some thought and some essentially unattainable goals that do not take into consideration the fundamental causes behind the “clinical signs”
Should build objectives that approach the cause:
a) All countries have functioning cross-sectoral working groups that develop country-specific plans aimed at reaching universal year-round access to appropriate and adequate food, reducing chronic malnutrition (as demonstrated by reductions in stunting), developing sustainable food systems aimed at improving the quality and quantity of food and minimizing any waste and loss of these foods;
b) All political leaders demonstrate their commitment to long-term national development by developing nutrition and health systems that continue to function separately from a given political party.
Now THAT would be something to accomplish
259) Maria Alexandra Cadena Fernandez Cor Pro Adulto Mayor NGO, Colombia
[Original contribution in Spanish]
Es vital trabajar en las familias , en la construcción de ciudadanos vitales como solución a la erradicación de la pobreza y el trabajo con la población desplazada.
UNA HUERTA VERTICAL EN CADA HOGAR DEL MUNDO
Tema 1:
Cuáles cree usted que son las lecciones clave aprendidas durante el actual Marco de los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio (ODM) (1990-2015), en particular en relación con los ODM relevantes para el hambre, la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición?
¿Cuáles considera los principales retos y oportunidades para lograr la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en los próximos años?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
377
Lo primero que debemos resaltar es que se ha llegado a una cantidad de publico mucho mas amplio , que se ha concientizado de :
No estamos solos en nuestro trabajo, las ong del mundo han dado una gran batalla y a partir de los objetivos, se ha multiplicado el conocimiento de ellos. La preocupación es general y los avances han sido demasiado grandes eso resulta positivo Se han identificado las amenazas y ellas vienen de los grandes productores de productos, abonos, químicos quienes ven menoscabada su proyección de alcanzar utilidades. Los gobiernos no solo propenden por la mejoría de sus poblaciones sino que existen demasiados intereses creados, si la guerra es un negocio, uno a veces pensaría que el hambre también, ahora hay que pensar y considerar ella a quienes favorece.
Tema 2:
¿Qué funciona mejor? Sobre la base de los conocimientos actuales, díganos por favor cómo deberíamos abordar los desafíos por venir del hambre, la inseguridad alimentaria y la malnutrición. Proporciónenos sus propias experiencias y puntos de vista. Por ejemplo, ¿qué importancia tienen las cuestiones de mejora de la gobernanza, los enfoques basados en los derechos, la responsabilidad y el compromiso político para lograr la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición?
Por otra parte, ¿cómo podemos aprovechar mejor las iniciativas en curso, como el Desafío Hambre Cero, lanzado por el Secretario General de la ONU en la Conferencia Río +20 de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Desarrollo Sostenible (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), y el Marco Estratégico Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y la Nutrición elaborado por el CFS?
Nuestra Organización Cor Pro Adulto Mayor ONG con sede en Colombia ha considerado que el mundo se cambia a través del trabajo en familia, dentro del nucleo , la pequeña celula, cambio de concepciones , Iniciamos una cultura basada en “ WE ARE THE FIFTY ELEMENT” en la cual cada hombre, mujer, joven, niño, abuelo hacen parte del engranaje de la madre tierra, quienes activamos o desactivamos el mundo somos cada uno de nosotros.
Esta concientización que parte hace diez anos , en etapas claras y efectivas , inicia desde la visibilizacion de los ADULTOS MAYORES en la reconstrucción de los valores, del reconocimiento de la historia de los pueblos, en las labores de cultivo de productos, el identificar en cada uno de las regiones según los climas cuales son las especies , hortalizas y frutales autenticas de cada región. Una vez el ADULTO MAYOR genera Modelos de Comportamiento se busco integrarlos y multiplicar sus historias dentro de las Aulas Escolares y nos convertimos en VIGIAS DEL PATRIMONIO INMATERIAL, desde allí se han desarrollado varias tareas, multiplicando el conocimiento de los Parques Naturales, la música, los refranes pero sobre todo el sentido de pertenencia con la Naturaleza.
En la siguiente etapa, se busco la integración y visibilizacion de los grupos vulnerables como la identificación de los resguardos indígenas, las lenguas e identificación por medio del trabajo conjunto con 20 organizaciones sociales para el estatuto para la igualdad. El reconocimiento de los valores de todos , de sus ancestros y el respeto de cada uno por la Naturaleza.
Si bien es cierto el poblador urbano en su inconsciente desea llevar la Naturaleza a el, era necesario ampliar el horizonte a la poblaci0n desplazada por la violencia ,que hoy en dia es un fenómeno que se da en varios de los continentes , en Colombia las familias de desplazados llevan con ellos hasta las gallinas y ello tiene mucho que ver con su arraigo. Analizando cada uno de estos componentes , hemos
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
378
propuesto como elemento básico para la erradicación de la pobreza, iniciar desde la infancia temprana , programas de UNA HUERTA VERTICAL POR HOGAR , su logística va desde los comedores comunitarios en los cuales se les integre formación en AGRICULTURA URBANA el manejo de las huertas.
El objetivo es cultivar en los pobladores urbanos de todos los estratos sociales , el cultivo personalizado de las huertas , colocando en espacios de las paredes de aproximadamente 1, 50 a 2.00 de alto por 1.50 de ancho elementos encajables que posibiliten el cultivo de : hortalizas , especies, aromaticas y frutas pequeñas .logrando la integración de la naturaleza a la familia, inculcar en los niños alimentación saludable incluyendo vegetales cultivados por ellos en su alimentación diaria, posibilitar una fuente de empleo a las madres cabezas de hogar, compañía a las personas con discapacidad o a los Adultos Mayores, se plantea la interaccion de 300 grupos de agricultores urbanos con huertas en Bogota capacitados desde hace mas de tres anos por el Jardin Botanico, ecargados de los germinados de las plántulas, colocar los germinados en envases reutilizables , implementar un transporte ambiental como las bicihuertas , redes de diseñadores de productos huertas para el hogar y los instaladores de las huertas verticales quienes tendrán la tarea del mantenimiento y la rotación de los cultivos asi mismo la labor de formación al nucleo familiar.
Hemos llegado hasta el Congreso de la Republica en Colombia, apoyando el proyecto de ley para la Agricultura Urbana y realizamos el foro ciudad sostenible Agricultura Urbana el 16 de noviembre de 2012 , y cuyas memorias y video colocamos a su disposición.
Nuestro trabajo se ha unido a otras organizaciones de iberoamerica y a las instituciones como la Delegacion de Cuautemoch en ciudad de Mexico , con quienes hemos realizado intercambio de experiencias y programado para el 5,6 y 7 de Junio de 2013 el 1er Congreso Iberoamericano de Agricultura Urbana y Seguridad Alimentaria.
Este programa pensado hacia el 2015 , puede dar grandes resultados en todo el mundo, multiplicando experiencias desde cada hogar, en todos los niveles, erradicando la pobreza, el hambre y logrando amalgamar todos los objetivos en uno solo: La protección de las generaciones futuras y con ella a Nuestra Tierra.
http://prezi.com/qecwj2iyse0n/desarrollo-sostenible/?kw=view-qecwj2iyse0n&rc=ref-17118748
Tema 3:
Para que el Marco de Desarrollo Global después de 2015 sea completo, global (y regional o nacional), serán identificados objetivos, metas e indicadores para abordar el hambre, la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición. Se ha presentado un conjunto de objetivos por parte del Secretario General en virtud del Desafío Hambre Cero
a. 100% de acceso a una alimentación adecuada durante todo el añob. Cero niños de menos de 2 años de edad con retraso del crecimientoc. Todos los sistemas alimentarios son sosteniblesd. 100% de aumento en la productividad e ingresos de los pequeños agricultorese. Cero pérdida o desperdicio de alimentos.
Le rogamos nos haga llegar sus comentarios sobre esta lista de objetivos, o nos aporte sus propias propuestas. ¿deben algunos de los objetivos ser específicos de cada país, o de carácter regional, más que global? ¿deben de tener los objetivos una duración determinada?
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
379
Nuestra organización colocaría un solo objetivo que sería medible
UNA HUERTA VERTICAL EN CADA HOGAR DEL MUNDO.
[English translation]
It is essential to focus on families, on creating vital citizens as a solution to the eradication of poverty and on working with displaced population.
A VERTICAL GARDEN IN EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN THE WORLD
Topic 1:
What do you think are the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular with respect to the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition related MDGs?
What are the main challenges and opportunities to achieving food and nutrition security in the upcoming years?
Firstly, we should highlight that the goals are more widely known to the public, who has become aware of:
Our work is not isolated. World NGOs have done a great job. The goals are better known.
There is widespread concern and progress has been too significant. This is positive.
Threats have been identified and those are driven by major producers of products, fertilizers and chemicals whose projected benefits are impaired.
Governments not only tend to improve their populations welfare. There are too many vested interests. If war is a business, sometimes it can be thought that hunger as well. We have to think in who benefits from hunger.
Topic 2:
What works best? Based on the existing knowledge, please tell us how should we address the upcoming hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges. Share your own experiences and points of view. For example, what importance do governance improvement, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment have in achieving food and nutrition security?
Furthermore, how can we take better advantage of current initiatives like the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition developed by the CFS?
Our NGO Cor Pro Adulto Mayor, based in Colombia, considers that the world will be changed trough family work, modifying views within this small nuclear cell. We started a philosophy based on the motto "WE ARE THE FIFTY ELEMENT" by which every man, woman, young person, child or
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
380
grandparent are part of Mother Earth’s mechanism. The world is activated or deactivated by each of us.
This awareness raising process started ten years ago and has been structured in clear and effective stages. It starts with the ELDERLY reconstructing former values, acknowledging the peoples history, growing products and identifying the suitable region for each species, vegetable and fruit according to its climatic conditions. Once the ELDER generate behavioral models, these were integrated into school education. We became watchmen of intangible heritage. Several tasks have been developed, broadening the knowledge of natural parks, music and sayings and especially the sense of belonging to Nature.
In the next stage, the integration of vulnerable groups was targeted. The identification of the indigenous heritage and languages was undertaken in close cooperation with 20 social organizations for the development of a Statute on Equality. The respect for nature and the values of present and former generations were acknowledged.
Although urban dwellers unconsciously want to bring nature to the city, broadening the horizon of the displaced population as a result of violence was necessary, as this displacement is currently taking place in several continents. In Colombia, families of the displaced population even take chickens with them. This behaviour is linked to their origins. Analysing each of these components, we have proposed a key element for poverty eradication: ONE VERTICAL GARDEN PER HOUSEHOLD programs, starting from early childhood. These would cover from urban agriculture training in community canteens to the maintenance of gardens.
The target is growing food in urban households of every social stratum. The customized crop should consist of modular elements placed in an available wall space of approximately 1.5 to 2 meters high and 1.5 meters wide, enabling the cultivation of: vegetables, spices, aromatic herbs and small fruits. These gardens would integrate family and nature, promote healthy diet for children by including in their daily diet vegetables grown by themselves, employing women head of family and taking care of the disabled or the elderly. The interaction with 300 groups of urban farmers with gardens in Bogota and trained during more than three years by the Botanical Garden has been proposed. These groups are responsible of the seedlings germination and its subsequent insertion in reusable containers, the implementation of environmental means of transport like bicycles, the design of specific products for these plantations, the installation of vertical gardens, the maintenance and rotation of its crops and family training.
We have reached the Congress of the Republic in Colombia, supporting the draft law for Urban Agriculture, and have organized the sustainable city forum Urban Agriculture on 16 November 2012, whose report and video are available.
In our work, we have cooperated with other Iberoamerican organizations and institutions like the Cuautemoch Delegation in Mexico City, with whom we have shared experiences and planned the 1st Iberoamerican Congress of Urban Agriculture and Food Safety on 5, 6 and 7 June 2013.
This program developed for 2015 can yield excellent results throughout the world, multiplying experiences from every household at all levels, eradicating poverty and hunger, and unifying all the targets in a single objective: the protection of future generations and, hence, of our Planet.
http://prezi.com/qecwj2iyse0n/desarrollo-sostenible/?kw=view-qecwj2iyse0n&rc=ref-17118748
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
381
Topic 3:
To ensure that the Comprehensive Development Framework is comprehensive and global (and regional or national) after 2015, goals, targets and indicators to address hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition shall be identified. The Zero Hunger Challenge initiative launched by the Secretary General pursues five objectives:
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round.b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainable.d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income, particularly for women.e. Zero loss or waste of foodPlease submit your comments on this list of targets, or provide your own proposals. Should some of the objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should they be fixed-term?
Our organization would have a single measurable objective:
A VERTICAL GARDEN IN EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN THE WORLD
260) Marcos Arana Cedeño, Observatorio Ciudadano por el Ejercicio del Derecho a la Salud – IBFAN, Mexico
[Original contribution in Spanish]
TEMA 2.
El Estudio Multicéntrico de Crecimiento que llevó a cabo la Organización Mundial de la Salud y publicó en 2005 mostró que los niños nacidos en países con diferentes grado de desarrollo, ambiente geofísico y contexto cultural, crecen de manera óptima y no presentan diferencias significativas si se tienen garantizadas ciertas condiciones mínimas (Peso normal al nacer, alimentación con lactancia materna exclusiva durante los primeros seis meses, una lactancia materna continuada complementada con alimentos complementarios locales higiénicamente preparados, no exposición al humo (de cigarro o de leña), acceso a agua segura y suficiente, acceso a servicios de salud de calidad e inmunizaciones, y si sus madres tienen mínimamente una educación básica. Esta conclusión del estudio de la OMS concluye indirectamente que si uno o más de estas condiciones mínimas no son satisfechas, el crecimiento y desarrollo de los menores será afectado. Las condiciones mínimas identificadas en el estudio y seleccionadas como criterios de inclusión para el estudio corresponden a derechos socioeconómicos fundamentales (alimentación, agua, salud, educación y vivienda). Por esta razón, cualquier acción de combate decidido contra el hambre y la desnutrición que busque un impacto sostenido, tiene que avanzar de manera progresiva a cubrir esas condiciones mínimas para todos los niños, principalmente durante la etapa inicial de sus vidas (los primeros tres años). Un paso cualitativo en la agenda post 2015 debería centrarse en incrementar progresivamente el porcentaje de niños para los cuales todas esas condiciones mínimas son garantizadas mediante acciones simultáneas. El indicador de progreso para estas acciones propuesto es el porcentaje de niños menores de tres años viviendo en familias con el total de estas condiciones mínimas satisfechas.
TEMA 3.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
382
En una gran proporción de los países en desarrollo, porcentajes que van del 27 al 40 por ciento de los embarazos se presentan en mujeres menores de 18 años. Durante los últimos años, en países como México, Colombia y muchos otros,, el número de embarazos en adolescentes se ha incrementado significativamente.
Existen también múltiples estudios que señalan que una proporción significativa de estos embarazos no sólo no son planificados, sino que incluso son embarazos no deseados. Esta situación impone serias consecuencias para las decenas de millones de jóvenes mujeres que en el mundo que viven esta situación, entre las que resaltan las siguientes:
Interrupción del proceso educativo. El embarazo entre niñas y adolescentes constituye una de las principales causas de abandono de la escuela. En la mayor parte de los países no existen facilidades ni incentivos para que las niñas y adolescentes que se convierten en madres continúen su formación educativa. Esto reduce las oportunidades de trabajo bien remunerado y se convierte en un factor que retroalimenta los ciclos de pobreza con efectos transgeneracionales.
Mayores riesgos maternos. Los riesgos de complicaciones del embarazo y del parto son mayores entre las mujeres adolescentes. Por ende, la contribución de los embarazos entre adolescentes a la mortalidad materna es muy significativa.
Mayor vulnerabilidad de sus hijos. Al identificar tasas diferenciadas de desnutrición moderada y severa en menores de cinco años y de mortalidad infantil, los hijos de madres menores de 18 años presentan las tasas más elevadas. Esto es debido a una multitud de factores entre los que se encuentra la frecuente falta de apoyos de la pareja y del grupo familiar para la crianza de los hijos, acceso reducido a alimentos y servicios de salud, entre otros.
En varios contextos existe una correlación entre el embarazo en la adolescencia y la práctica de actividad sexual no protegida, lo que hace que este grupo tenga un riesgo elevado de enfermedades de transmisión sexual y de la ocurrencia de nuevos embarazos. Salvo las experiencias que se desarrollan en algunos países, principalmente industrializados, existen pocas actividades para promover sexo seguro y planificación familiar para las madres adolescentes.
Propuesta para una agenda post 2015
El desarrollo de acciones específicas dirigidas, no sólo a la prevención de embarazos no planificados en adolescentes, sino también para proporcionar a las jóvenes que ya son madres o están en el camino de serlo apoyos específicos para su reinserción en el proceso educativo a través de becas e incentivos, de facilidades para su asistencia a la escuela. Acciones de consejería para apoyar a que las madres adolescentes retomen su proyecto de vida y para el control de su salud sexual y fecundidad, así como orientaciones prácticas para la lactancia materna, la práctica del método de lactancia-amenorrea para la regulación de la fecundidad (LAM), orientaciones y grupos de apoyo mutuo y comunitario para el cuidado de los niños.
Una porción difícil de cuantificar de los embarazos en adolescentes es resultado de violencia sexual, lo que hace urgente que en una estrategia integral de atención se incluya el apoyo sicoemocional necesario.
Los porcentajes de embarazos en mujeres menores de 18 y de 16 años se proponen como dos indicadores de desempeño para evaluar el impacto de los compromisos que se establezcan sobre esta materia.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
383
[English translation]
TOPIC 2.
The Multicenter Growth Reference Study conducted by WHO and plubished in 2005, showed that children born in countries with different levels of development, environment and cultural context, grow optimally and do not show significant differences if they have guaranteed certain minimal conditions: normal birth weight, exclusively breastfed for the first six months, continued breastfeeding supplemented with local food hygienically prepared, no smoke exposure (cigarette or firewood), access to safe water and adequate access to quality health services and immunizations, and if their mothers have a minimun basic education.
The WHO study concluded indirectly that if one or more of these minimal conditions are not met, the growth and development of children will be affected. The minimum requirements identified in the study and selected as inclusion criteria correspond to basic socio-economic rights (food, water, health, education and housing). For this reason, any strong action against hunger and malnutrition that seeks a sustained impact, needs to move progressively to meet these minimum standards for all children, especially during the initial stage of their lives (first three years ).
A qualitative step in the post-2015 agenda should be to progressively increase the percentage of children for whom all these minimum conditions are guaranteed. The proposed progress indicator for these actions is the percentage of children under three years living in families that meet the total of these minimum conditions.
TOPIC 3
In most developing countries, 27 to 40 percent of pregnancies occur in women under 18. In recent years, in countries like Mexico, Colombia and many others, the number of teenage pregnancies has increased significantly.
Many studies indicate that a significant proportion of these pregnancies are not only unplanned, but are also unwanted pregnancies. This carries serious consequences for tens of millions of young women who live in this situation over the world, including the following highlights:
Disruption of the educational process. Girls and teenage pregnancy is a major cause of dropout. In most countries there are no facilities or incentives for girls and teens who become mothers to continue their education. This reduces opportunities for well-paid jobs and becomes a factor that feeds the cycle of poverty with transgenerational effects.
More maternal risks. The risks of complications of pregnancy and childbirth are higher among teenagers. Thus, the contribution of teen pregnancy to maternal mortality is very significant.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
384
Increased vulnerability of the children. When identifying different rates of moderate and severe malnutrition in children under five and infant mortality, children of mothers under 18 have the highest rates. This is due to several factors, among them the frequent lack of support for the couple from the family group to raise the children, reduced access to food and health services.
In many contexts there is a correlation between teenage pregnancy and the practice of unprotected sex, which implies that this group has a high risk of sexually transmitted diseases and the occurrence of new pregnancies. Except from the experiences that are bein implemented in some countries -mainly industrialized ones-, there are few actions to promote safe sex and family planning for teenage mothers.
Proposal for a post-2015 agenda
The development of targeted specific actions, not only for the prevention of unintended pregnancy in teenagers, but also to provide young women who are already mothers -or pregnant- a specific support for their reintegration into the educational process through scholarships and incentives and facilities for school attendance. Counseling to support teenage mothers to resume their life project and to control their sexual health and fertility, and practical guidance for breastfeeding, practice of lactational amenorrhea method (LAM) for birth control, guidance and support groups and community care of children.
A percentage of teenage pregnancy -difficult to quantify- is the result of sexual violence. It is urgent to have a comprehensive support strategy, including psychological and emotional support.
The percentages of pregnancies in women under 18 and 16 years are proposed as two performance indicators to evaluate the impact of the commitments agreed on this field.
261) Juan Carlos Garcia y Cebolla, FAO, Italy
Theme 2:What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
In the development field, the concept of governance achieved prominence at the end of the 1980s and beginning of 1990s with the recognition that development policies were failing, in part because insufficient attention had been paid to political and institutional processes and outcomes. These concerns also were reflected in the field of food and nutrition security , and took special relevance due to challenges aroused by the globalization, with different positions that looked at the global level as the most challenging level, or at the national level as the critical point where governance weaknesses constrains the adequate provision of public goods.
After the 2007-2008 crisis, all the stakeholders have recognised the need to reconfigure the prevailing arrangements for food and nutrition governance at global level and also the critical role of governance
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
385
at national and local level. This consensus was expressed in World Summit on Food Security Declaration (2009) that underlines the need to “Foster strategic coordination at national, regional and global level to improve governance, promote better allocation of resources, avoid duplication of efforts and identify response-gaps.”; it has also seen in the move to reform the FAO Committee on Food Security (CFS). Simultaneously the scope of governance has passed from the visions limited to government responsibilities to the recognition of the role of civil society and private sector.
The current governance of food and nutrition security reflects its multidimensionality and cuts across many areas of policy such as development, production, health, trade, science, human rights and climate change. At global level there is no single international institution with the exclusive mandate to address food and nutrition security; instead there are multiple institutions that are responsible for various aspects. In addition, other common types of international institutions, such as special programs or funds, and informal institutions have a relevant impact and play determinant roles (e.g. the G8/G20). All those elements configure governance of food and nutrition security as a complex regime with rules and functions determined in distinct international fora, and a heterogeneous nature in terms of membership composition and decision-making procedures. At national levels a similar complex regime prevails, with public and private institutions and stakeholders interacting in a multisectorial scenario influenced by the international framework and external actors.
The complex regime of governance food and nutrition security has not achieved the results intended and is under strong scrutiny. It does not provide mechanisms that ensure that humankind overcomes the challenges it face yet, it is however the product of a long process of cooperation. Improving it requires to understand the gaps, conflicts and weaknesses that cause its poor functionality.
The first is an issue of overall institutional architecture which creates overlaps of authority and jurisdictions of different bodies and institutions.
The second issue is the lack of internal coherence and consistency when it comes to principles, laws and regulations, stemming from the lack of consensus on hierarchy of different laws and gaps in the global regulatory system to resolve contradictions, as it is the case between trade and human rights.
The third issue is a two part problem: 1)lack of practical linkages between bodies that necessarily should be linked, and 2) absence of follow up between them, that is to say, a disconnect between deliberative institutions where consensus on diagnoses and recommendations are reached and those international bodies that handle negotiations and decision-making needed to put in practice what is agreed upon by the former.
Those issues are not specific to ‘food and nutrition security’ governance; they are also seen in a variety of development areas, such trade or environment, themselves governed by complex regimes. The global governance system yet does not offer effective solutions to resolve the contradictions resulting from the above mentioned issues.
Building the Post-2015 Global Development Framework.
The reform of Committee on Food Security (CFS) has been very successful but there needs to be a continued international effort to strengthen the mechanisms for enabling the participation of all stakeholders and countries in a meaningful way and facilitate more inclusive dialogue processes. The regional integration bodies could play a bigger role acting as a node that facilitates the link between the global and the national level in the dialogues and deliberative aspects, but also by taking action to
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
386
enable States in implementing recommendations from CFS, thus filling some gaps of the governance regime.
The regional actors could also play a relevant role to build a global framework sensitive to regional and national contexts and capacities and facilitate national ownership. Building frameworks in this way facilitates their adoption thru stronger commitments and realistic timeframes.
Within the process of developing the global framework there should be space for committing to global governance as a goal or target in and of itself. This should fill some gaps related to overlapping mandates, lack of adequate mechanisms to resolve conflict of principles, laws and regulations, and other system failures.
FAO member States approved the Voluntary guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security that constitutes a framework for enhancing food and nutrition security governance at national level. The Right to Adequate Food can also be a reference point to overcome some of the inconsistencies of food and nutrition security governance at global level.
Improving governance at national level matters and is a critical aspect but it has to be complemented with a clear and sound improvement at international level, otherwise we will perpetuate the weaknesses and failures of past decades.
Juan Carlos García y CebollaTeam Leader – Right to FoodAgricultural Development Economics Division (ESA), FAOViale delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italyhttp://www.fao.org/righttofood/
262) Eminence and Bangladesh Civil Society Network for Promoting Nutrition (BCSNPN), Bangladesh
Breastfeeding, a smart choice for working women.
Introduction: Mothers are the fastest-growing segment of current global workforce. In the past 20 years, the percentage of new mothers in the workforce has increased which makes women more challenging when they become pregnant. In most cases, those mothers are not able to return works due to lack of support in work place or lack of care giver who can take care of their baby during her absence that make it challenging to continue her jobs and results is discontinuation of job in this stage. Those continue their job phase lots of challenges to continue breastfeeding to their child and started bottle feeding. It is well documented that one of the primary reasons for early breastfeeding cessation is the Mother’s return to work.
Breastfeeding is a low-tech, low-cost health promotion behavior that has received increasing support from public health authorities worldwide over the past 50 years. It has become increasingly clear that breastfeeding is the best option for infant and young child feeding, and that not breastfeeding exposes mother and child to higher risks of ill health in both the short and long term.
Inappropriate Infant and Young Child Feeding practices is one of the major cause of child malnutrition. Initiation of breastfeeding within one hour, exclusive breastfeeding for first six months and continued
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
387
breastfeeding for 20 to 23 months have been identified as major indicators for achieving Millenium Development Goal 4, reducing child mortality one third by 2015.
Barriers to optimal infant and young child feeding contribute to 1.4 million preventable deaths annually in children under five, the majority of whom are dying already during the first month of life. Initiating breastfeeding within the first hour of birth can reduce neonatal mortality by 20%, but shockingly, more than half the world’s newborns are not breastfeed within an hour of birth. Exclusive breastfeeding for six months and continued breastfeeding for 12 months may prevent under five child deaths by 13%, complementary feeding may contribute to reduce 6% child deaths (Lancet2003). Globally only around 37% of infants under six months are exclusively breastfed (Lancet2003). A 16-country study found that adequate maternity leave policies might increase breastfeeding sufficiently to prevent one to two neonatal deaths per 2,000 live births.
Human milk and infant formula are not equivalent and are not equally suitable options for infant feeding. Research has found that for every $1 spent on breastfeeding support, companies save $3. This is because in companies which support breastfeeding women return to work earlier,fewer health-care dollars are spent, fewer sick days are taken, employees report greater job satisfaction, companies report reduced staff turnover.
Health insurance studies have documented that infants who are exclusively breastfed for three months or longer have overall health care costs that are $300-$400 less per year than infants who are bottlefed. Evidence reported in a two-year study of 343 employees an annual savings of $240,000 in health care expenses. Breastfeeding also Lower Absenteeism & Turnover Rates One-day absences to care for sick children occur more than twice as often for mothers of formula feeding infants. A study of multiple companies with lactation support programs found an average retention rate of 94%.
Given this atmosphere of unacknowledged demand, there is an urgent need to educate employers on the value and feasibility of worksite breastfeeding support programs for business profitability. So a worksite breastfeeding support initiative can easily build upon the increased awareness of the importance of breastfeeding, utilizing a combination of outreach and education strategies to reach both employers and empoyees.Breastfeeding support in workplace improve retention, mitigates lost productivity/absenteeism, earlier return from maternity leave, higher employee loyalty and create a family friendly business. Challenges and opportunities:
The challenge in terms of breastfeeding protection is the adoption and the monitoring of an adequate policy of maternity entitlements that facilitate six months of exclusive breastfeeding for women employed in all sectors, with urgent attention to the non-formal sector. Lack of support in Workplace, family members, poor Implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes makes mother more difficult to continue breastfeeding.
The Innocenti Declarations (1999, 2005) and WHO Global Strategy for IYCF (2002) call for provision of imaginative legislation to protect the breastfeeding rights of working women and further monitoring of its application consistent with ILO Maternity Protection Convention No 183, 2000 (MPC No. 183) and Recommendation 191. MPC No. 183 specifies that women workers should receive:
• Health protection, job protection and non-discrimination for pregnant and breastfeeding workers• At least 14 weeks of paid maternity leave• One or more paid breastfeeding breaks daily or daily reduction of hours of work to breastfeed
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
388
Furthermore, Recommendation 191 encourages facilities for breastfeeding to be set up at or near the workplace.
Many country’s make good progress in tracking maternity protection and could manage six months maternity leave with payment, however, long ways needs to go to achive this.
Directions for the future:
• Aware employers with this maternity protection law and encourage for incorpoarting into their existing policy.• Prenatal education classes for the pregnnat women in the work place• Orientation of employes with the advantages of breastfeeding• Establish baby creche in all work places.• Improve knowledge amongst both employers and employees regarding importance of proper breastfeeding and complemnetary feeding practices.
263) Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security, Canada
Contribution from the Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security
The achievement of food security requires the sustainable increase of food production and access to food. More, and nutritionally adequate, food needs to be produced using less global inputs (land, water, fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides and other chemicals) per unit of produce. This needs to be achieved in the face of dwindling resources and increasing competition for those resources, whilst simultaneously responding to the impacts of climate change on farming systems and natural ecosystems and reducing the impact of agriculture on the environment. The challenge is indeed significant but most commentators conclude that it can be met.
Biodiversity has a central role to play in meeting the challenge. Biodiversity underpins ecosystem services which are essential for sustainable food production at all scales, from industrialised to small-holder subsistence farming. Some key examples where significant progress can be made include:
• Reversing the degradation of soils, which underpin all agricultural production. Conserving or restoring soil biodiversity and ecosystem functions delivers multiple benefits including: improved nutrient cycling and availability for crops, hence improving fertiliser use efficiency on-farm and reducing off-farm impacts; restoring soil organic carbon content, with multiple on-farm benefits in addition to contributing to mitigating climate change; improving water cycling, including soil water storage, thereby improving crop-water productivity as well as increasing resilience to increasing climatic variation; improving nature-based pest and disease regulation, thereby improving integrated pest management and enhancing prevention of spread of invasive alien species. Practitioners can determine the most feasible approach based on local environmental and socio-economic conditions, but restoring soil health, and the biodiversity underpinning it, must be the cornerstone of any sustainable agriculture strategy. Much success is being achieved by the farming community and needs to be mainstreamed and upscaled. The International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Soil Biodiversity (http://www.cbd.int/agro/soil.shtml) was adopted in 2008 by the Parties to the CBD specifically to strengthen efforts in these regards. At CBD COP-11 Governments and
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
389
international organizations launched the “Hyderabad Call for a Concerted Effort on Ecosystem Restoration” (http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/TEEB/Hyderabad-Call_vOct17-8am.docx-1.pdf);
• Genetic diversity is essential to maintain options for farmers, resilience of farming systems and productivity increases through improved breeds and varieties, particularly in response to increasing climatic change and increased variability. Maintaining the diversity of genetic resources available to farmers, preferably in-situ (landraces on-farm and wild relatives in natural ecosystems) but where necessary ex-situ, and including maintaining the cultural knowledge of farming, and the communities associated with this biodiversity, is an essential requirement for sustainable food security. We need to significantly strengthen support to the important efforts of the farming community, particularly small-scale farmers and indigenous and local communities, to conserve and sustainably use these critical genetic resources;
• Reversing the decline of pollinators, which are essential for sustaining crop productivity, as outlined further in the International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Pollinators (http://www.cbd.int/agro/pollinator.shtml);• Recognising that the needs are not simply for food security in terms of minimum requirements of calories and protein, but for food security which includes adequate provision of vitamins, minerals, micro-nutrients and other essential components of a healthy diet. A diverse source of foods, produced on healthy soils, is essential for food and nutrition security. Biodiversity has a central role to play in achieving a healthy diet, as outlined further in the Cross-Cutting Initiative on Biodiversity for Food and Nutrition (http://www.cbd.int/agro/food-nutrition/).
These, and other, needs and approaches are well captured in the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011-2020) and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets (http://www.cbd.int/sp/). The central purpose of this plan is to promote the contribution that biodiversity can make to achieving sustainable development. The plan and targets, therefore, are not just for the environment or biodiversity community but represent a framework for action for all interested in sustainable development. The contribution of biodiversity to achieving food security in a post-2015 world is one of the most significant areas in which progress can be made.
As indicated in the UN Rio+20 outcome document "The Future We Want", biodiversity has a critical role to play in maintaining ecosystems that provide essential services, which are the foundations for sustainable development and human well-being.
The UN General Assembly declared 2011-2020 the United Nations Decade on Biodiversity, with a view to contribute to the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets, decided in 2010 in Nagoya, Japan by the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention. This Strategic Plan for Biodiversity considers biodiversity as an opportunity for human well-being and poverty eradication. That is why the 20 Targets to implement the Strategic Plan relate not only to conservation and sustainable use, but also relate to reducing direct pressures on biodiversity and, most importantly, addressing the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across all sectors of government and society.
Overall, the Targets aim to bring about a considerable change in our lifestyles, and particularly in our development paradigm – over the next decade we must move firmly away from unchecked consumption and towards sustainable use.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
390
264) Martin Wolpold-Bosien, FIAN International, Germany
Warm greetings from, and best wishes for 2013! With this email, I would like to send you some contributions to the ongoing consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition. 1) As a first contribution, I attach some key documents that were produced by the Civil Society working group before and after the elaboration of the First Version of the GSF. In my opinion, these are two key documents that bring together a: Civil society alternative approach to the framing of global policies on food security and nutrition (“CSO Working Document on the GSF” which was elaborated as an input for draft 0 of the GSF); Civil society assessment of the GSF after the approval of its First Version by the CFS in October 2012 (“CSO final assessment of the GSF...”). This document analyses the approved GSF from the perspective of the major CSO concerns and proposals that were brought to the attention of CFS stakeholders during the consultation and negotiation process. I strongly believe that these CSO positions should be taken into account when discussing the Post-2015 framework. In short, CSO expressed after approval of the GSF by the CFS in October 2012 in their “Statement of social movements and other civil society organizations on the Global Strategic Framework of the Committee on World Food Security CFS”: “We welcome the adoption on October 17, 2012, of the first version of the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF). The GSF, as the overarching framework, will be the primary global reference for coordination and coherence in decision-making on food and agricultural issues. It is an important achievement of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS). We as social movements and civil society organizations participated intensively in its elaboration. The GSF constitutes a step forward in promoting a new model of governance on food, agriculture, and nutrition. This document is built upon the human rights approach, women’s rights and the recognition of the central role of smallholder farmers, agricultural and food workers, artisanal fisher folks, pastoralists, Indigenous Peoples, landless people, women and youth to food and nutrition security. The GSF also recognizes that formal employment of rural workers and assurance of minimum living wages are key for food security and nutrition. The document mentions the potential of agro-ecology and provides important guidance on nutrition based on the Right to Food Guidelines. It also reaffirms the strong commitment of States to the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Lands, Fisheries and Forests, including through agrarian reform. The GSF negotiations reached an important consensus on human rights-based monitoring and accountability, which implies that States, intergovernmental institutions and the private sector are held accountable for their actions and omissions regarding their obligations under international human rights law.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
391
Several issues that are important to civil society are not addressed in the current version of the GSF in particular Food Sovereignty. We affirm our commitment to ensure that the new paradigm for food security policy will be based on food sovereignty. We expect countries and all actors to fully support the implementation on the GFS on all levels. We will contribute to make use of this important tool for our initiatives and struggles at local, national and international level.” 2) As a second contribution I would like to stress three key human rights challenges for the debate on the post MDG period that address at the same time essential shortcomings of the MDG, especially MDG 1: a) Primacy of human rights: Although the inclusion of human rights terminology and references has increased significantly in international frameworks dealing with food security and nutrition, it is still not fully understood and accepted that human rights are the primary responsibility of States and have primacy over any other policy area as stated in Article 1 of the Vienna Declaration adopted by consensus at the UN World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. In this perspective, it was an important achievement that the Vision Statement of the reformed CFS states that “the CFS will strive for a world free from hunger where countries implement the voluntary guidelines for the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security”. The formulation of the post 2015 framework should recognize this primacy. b) Qualifying policy coherence: The concept of coherence should be understood in terms of “human rights coherence”. In other words, government policies must be reviewed with the objective of ensuring they do not result in negative human rights consequences including on the right to food. This qualification is needed to avoid unintended effects resulting from having different policy objectives. Policy coherence is not an end in itself. Policy coherence must be human rights based, which essentially means that all policies with negative impact on human rights must be stopped, revised and made consistent with human rights requirements. c) Human rights based monitoring and accountability: These terms have gained increasing acceptance among most actors in the food security and nutrition field, and were recognized in the First Version of the GSF. Although we know that States, intergovernmental institutions and private actors are hesitant to accept monitoring mechanisms that assume legal accountability for human rights impacts, we also know that without such accountability, no substantial change in national and international policies can be expected. If we believe that hunger is largely a product of policy failures to meet human rights obligations, including extraterritorial obligations, we must insist on establishing and strengthening accountability mechanisms at all levels. 3) Finally, as a third contribution and reference on how to include the Right to Adequate Food into global policy frameworks and how to apply a human rights approach in national food and nutrition security strategies, the FAO Right to Food colleagues published in collaboration with FIAN two Factsheets in March 2012: 1) The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition: A Right to Food Perspective2) Human Rights - a Strategy for the Fight against Hunger From our point of view, the elements and conclusions of these fact sheets are as well valid for the Post 2015 consultation and could be taken into account in the context of the process.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
392
I hope that these few contributions seem useful to you. If you have further requests or need some more information, please let me know. Warm greetings, Martin Wolpold-BosienRight to Food Accountability Programme CoordinatorCoordinador para América CentralFIAN International Secretariat
265) Cyprus Island-wide NGO Development Platform (CYINDEP)
Introduction
CYINDEP, the Island-wide NGO Development Platform, held an international conference on the 22 nd
and 23rd of November entitled ‘The World We Want – Global Civil Society Symposium: Food Security and Nutrition in the Post-2015 Framework’. The Symposium provided the space for stakeholders (civil society, academia, international institutions governments and private sector) to discuss, share ideas and experiences on key challenges and opportunities related to food and nutrition security in the context of a post-2015 development framework.
The following response to the e-consultation on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security is a conclusion of the working sessions throughout the Symposium and reflects the expertise and experience of the approximately 100 participants, representing different voices from civil society of 23 countries from around the globe.
Theme 1(i) What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The MDGs have not managed to address the issue of food security and malnutrition in general – they have not been tackling the core issues behind the problem (biofuels, unfair land ownership traditions, land grabbing etc)
In the MDGs, there is no conceptualization of what would actually lead towards better food security
The MDGs were designed as top down approach and did not encourage the international community to achieve significant progress for the most vulnerable people
The MDGs did not were not created based on human rights and did not right to foodLesson: HOW to get where we want to go is just as important as WHERE we want to go – we need to look what policy interventions would work both at the national and international level, but at the same time, we cannot to be too prescriptive but make sure that these policy measures are coherent
(ii) What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
ii.a. Challenges
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
393
The main challenges to achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years need to be addressed in three different clusters: availability and production; access and distribution; and governance. The following challenges have been identified by the participants of the Global Civil Society Symposium:
1. Availability / Food production Increasing demand for energy, land and water and as a result an increase of pressure on
resources Consumption patterns (excessive consumption of food and other resources in richer and
Middle-Income Countries) Climate change and its affects on land and food production Environmental degradation in the way we produce and ‘do business’ Urbanization, youth moving away from agriculture
2. Access / distribution Power structures related to food production and dissemination:
o Lack of access to resourceso Control of resources – often by large Multinational corporationso Investment policies leading to exploitation of resourceso Distribution, e.g. land of the size of Germany being used to send food to Europe from more
food insecure countries, rather than utilizing the land towards local food security Inequalities within society are increasing Instability of food prices Increased amount of conflicts that affect food distribution and access to food including using
food as a political weapon3. Governance
Lack of government accountability to the right to food Lack of policy coherence for development
o Initiatives are incoherent, policies such as trade and energy policies are harming the achievements and goals of development policies
o Policies are not specific enough and not addressing the root causes Despite voluntary agreements, lack of political will and commitment to implement them High levels of corruption, leading and combining with weak governance Particular difficulties associated with fragile states, including corruption, mass displacement,
conflict etc. Lack of adequate regulatory mechanisms that would restrict exploitation of natural resources Tax invasion: substantial financial flows out of developing nations
B. Opportunities1. Access / Distribution
Innovative technologies exist for food production Greater focus on Nutrition (Nutrition is not a problem of food) Economic growth as an opportunity to enhance access to food More focus on waste management Changing consumption patterns towards local and seasonal produce
2. Governance Greater Policy Coherence for Development on national and international level, especially with
regards to trade agreements Volume agreements not sufficient, need to be combined with clearly defined Policy Coherence
for Development
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
394
Right to access of information: Open data needs to be available about progress made with regards to achieving goals and targets
National and international laws/ regulations enhancing transparency, accountability and proper regulation of agreements – ensuring right to land, food, water etc.
More binding and all inclusive accountability mechanisms, ensuring that policies are not encouraging and promoting what is not working
Encourage national and international decision-makers to build upon local knowledge in order to achieve greater sustainability when implementing development projects
Social accountability needs to be strengthened Monitoring current investments in food security The starting point of all countries must be country-specific and differentiated Country-specific targets, enablers, incentives Global general goals and time-bound targets on global level up to some time Working at local, national and global levels for a more comprehensive approach to
sustainability Increase control and knowledge about and within the private sector, looking also to reduce
corruption Improving reporting standards nationally and globally Government policy to promote the production and consumption of local produce
o Produce and consume locally and within season Establish participatory decision-making processes on all levels Involve a broad range of stakeholders
Theme 2(i) What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security?
The following are examples of what works, although not specific to national or regional context: Farmers cooperatives Social accountability
o Citizen educationo Engagement of citizenso Feedback mechanisms
Incentives for sustainable food production Sustainable and efficient production technologies ZERO goals approach – to reach everyone Country-level targets Human Rights Based Approach Enhancing infrastructure CSA & urban farming, changing consumer patterns Measuring current investment on nutrition Diversifying food sources Reducing food losses through regulations, technologies and education
Theme 3For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identifies towards tackling hunger, food
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
395
insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round Food must be affordable Food must be diverse and nutritious Must be based on human rights and inclusive in order not to discriminate any groups of
societyb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old
Must be based on human rights and inclusive in order not to discriminate any groups of society
c. All food systems are sustainable Food systems must be globally sustainable Food systems in order to be sustainable must be diverse Attention must be given to resilience building in fragile countries
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income Increase in smallholders’ market share Promote cooperative ownership Develop necessary infrastructure for small holders
e. Zero loss or waste of food Through technology, regulations and education
Further to the above, the participants of the Global Civil Society Symposium have identified the following points to be taken into consideration:
We need to take into consideration the inter-linkages of different themes. What might work best for food security could also be in other areas, how the food system is linked to the environment, living standards, and social wellbeing? Social structures need to be taken into account – not just any food but right food, in terms of quality, traditions, religion etc. Malnutrition isn’t always caused by scarcity of food.
How to link these things e.g. with the private sector, and use the good sides of the private sector for food security? Cradle to cradle: system where big companies like Ford change their system into sustainable system, while still making profit. These kinds of examples could be useful. It’s not business as usual but still business.
Increased awareness and information are needed to highlight issues of waste Legislation at national level to reduce wastage should be encouraged Promote and enforce social responsibility to ensure wastage of MNCs etc is used before it expires Policies need to be adaptable to country context Legislation to ensure efficient distribution of food is crucial Increased technology and expertise in developing countries, as huge wastage due to lack of storage Good Practice: World Food Programme “Purpose for Progress” Regulation of private sector is needed, including a maximum level of profits to be defined Raise tariff barriers and promote local community produce Policy changes need to also focus on environmental issues Engaging directly with farmers, not just civil society speaking on their behalf Consumer protection agencies to work alongside governments Donors to look at strategies (such as zero hunger) and to design their funding programmes around
this Statistics and Report often do not take social factors into account, and do not reflect relative
poverty
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
396
266) Marielle Dubbeling RUAF Foundation, Netherlands
The current challenges posed by climate change and its interaction with cities, urban poverty and food security are recognized globally. In its 2010 report, the World Bank makes a plea for innovative “outside-the-box” solutions to climate change adaptation and points out that environmentally sustainable solutions for food, water, energy and transport as integrated components of a city climate change adaptation and disaster risk management plan are needed (World Bank, 2010).
Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry (UPAF) is one of these “outside-the-box” solutions currently being considered. UPAF can play a strong role in enhancing food security for the urban poor, greening the city and improving the urban climate, while stimulating the productive reuse of urban organic wastes and reducing the urban energy footprint
The current challenges posed by climate change and its interaction with cities, urban poverty and food security are recognized globally. In its 2010 report, the World Bank makes a plea for innovative “outside-the-box” solutions to climate change adaptation and points out that environmentally sustainable solutions for food, water, energy and transport as integrated components of a city climate change adaptation and disaster risk management plan are needed (World Bank, 2010).
Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry (UPAF) is one of these “outside-the-box” solutions currently being considered. UPAF can play a strong role in enhancing food security for the urban poor, greening the city and improving the urban climate, while stimulating the productive reuse of urban organic wastes and reducing the urban energy footprint. See further the attached document
267) Anna Herforth Independent Consultant, United States of America [first contribution]
Theme 1
One of the lessons learned from the MDGs is that the poverty, hunger, and malnutrition goals within MDG1 were poorly linked, and results poorly correlated. For example, of the 21 countries that have already achieved the hunger goal, only 6 have achieved the underweight goal; including Mali, which has made no progress on underweight (World Bank Guidance Note on Multisectoral Approaches to Nutrition, forthcoming 2013). Some indicator of access to diverse foods (such as dietary diversity) is one way that the goals of hunger and improved nutrition can be integrated.
Main opportunity: that there is increasingly interest within the agriculture sector in how to improve nutrition impact. In my opinion, reframing the concept of food security back to its roots -- nutritious foods for a healthy and active life -- is the single most important thing we can do, from an advocacy perspective. Agriculture projects often aim for improved food security, and if the common understanding is that food security means diverse, nutritious foods – so that becomes a measured goal of agriculture investments – this would be a giant step toward nutrition outcomes from agriculture. This general view was also supported within the FSN Forum Discussion 83, by contributions from Rachel Nugent and others.
The main challenge is how to increase incentives and accountability within the agriculture sector to reduce hunger AND malnutrition, while protecting natural resources. Indicators that measure access
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
397
to diverse foods, and indicators of sustainability of production and distribution, would be an important part of accountability.
Theme 2
Consensus on how agriculture can work for nutrition would be very helpful to provide a basic idea of how to get action started in national agriculture plans and projects. FAO has recently supported a Synthesis of Guiding Principles on Agriculture Programming for Nutrition published by a dozen institutions:www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/wa_workshop/docs/Synthesis_of_Ag-Nutr_Guidance_FAO_IssuePaper_Draft.pdf
This report provides several guiding principles, each one supported by a large majority of the institutions, to address hunger, food insecurity and nutrition in an integrated way. A brief is attached.
Theme 3
The objectives should be time bound: this creates the opportunity to determine whether countries are on track or not, which has been politically powerful.
Specific feedback on each objective:
a. 100% access to adequate food all year round: Access to adequate food, of course, needs to be understood as diverse, nutritious foods for a healthy and active life; not just calories.
b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old: Given our definition of stunting as -2 SD below the mean, zero stunted children is not possible, since in a healthy population, 2.5% of children will fall below that cutoff. Politically speaking, 0% sounds powerful, so the wording could be changed to 0% excess stunting.
c. All food systems are sustainable: Sustainability needs to be defined simply and clearly with indicators. Otherwise governments cannot be held accountable to it. Lack of accountability to indicators of sustainability is the bane of decades-long calls for sustainability. Only what gets measured gets managed. A research agenda put forth by Bioversity International calls for clear metrics on sustainable diets and food systems, certainly an agenda well worth pursuing if we are serious about this goal, as we must be. (https://www.securenutritionplatform.org/Pages/DisplayResources.aspx?RID=138)
d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income: Extremely important that we define productivity and income carefully. If productivity is taken to mean tonnes/ha of staple grains, that would be a missed opportunity, not what is most important as a global target to reducing hunger. Micronutrient deficiencies (hidden hunger) persist, and we have much more obesity now than in 1990. Increasing just staple grains and calories will not solve these problems. Productivity increases for non-staple crops (legumes, vegetables, fruits) are essential to balance local and global diets. Income also must be carefully defined. Women’s income is particularly important for hunger and malnutrition reductions. If we focus only on the household level, we may miss the most important route income can take: through the hands of women.
e. Zero loss or waste of food: Reducing food waste is a no-brainer for increasing food availability, and I very much support its inclusion in this list of targets. Food waste is also tied to water waste, which is also critical to human well-being (see SIWI report link below). Again, clear indicators need to
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
398
be identified for different stages: production, transport, marketing, and consumption. Addressing aflatoxins in soils and storage is an important component of reducing food waste, since contaminated grain should not be consumed.
268) France
[Original contribution in French]
Thème 1 :
Quels sont, à votre avis, les principaux enseignements qui peuvent être tirés du Cadre (1990-2015) des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le développement (OMD), en particulier en ce qui concerne les OMD liés à la faim, à la sécurité alimentaire et à la malnutrition ?
La définition d'OMD et la simplicité de l'approche OMD ont permis une forte mobilisation politique des gouvernements et des opinions publiques dans la lutte contre la pauvreté et contre la faim.
Cependant les OMD traitent de la question de la faim, de l'insécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition de manière insuffisamment complète et trop fragmentée :
Au regard des 4 piliers de la sécurité alimentaire que sont la disponibilité, l'accès, la qualité nutritionnelle et la stabilité, l'OMD 1 pourrait être complété par des cibles (ou indicateurs), notamment sur les aspects de disponibilité et de stabilité qui ne sont pas pris en compte.
L'OMD 3 traite des questions de genre. Le rôle des femmes dans la lutte contre la pauvreté et l'insécurité alimentaire est important. Les OMD 4 et 5 traitent de mortalité infantile et de santé maternelle, en particulier à travers la dimension nutritionnelle. L'OMD 7 qui a pour objectif d’assurer un environnement durable devrait être mis en œuvre dans sa dimension transversale. Il traite notamment de l’accès à l'eau potable et salubre qui est un facteur de sécurité alimentaire.
La définition d’indicateurs est intéressante car elle permet de fixer des objectifs quantifiés et de mesurer leur atteinte. La pertinence des indicateurs doit être réfléchie en termes dynamiques. Ex. diviser par deux les personnes souffrant de la faim en valeur absolue conduit à une croissance de cet indicateur du fait de la démographie, alors qu’il y a eu une réduction en %.
L'appropriation des OMD par tous les acteurs concernés est essentielle : une définition des OMD/ODD à partir de consultations préalables inclusives et globales est souhaitable. La consultation du Comité de la Sécurité Alimentaire mondiale est en ce sens à saluer.
La France est donc favorable à la mise en avant de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle par un objectif dédié dans un agenda international après 2015, issu de la convergence des processus de révision des OMD et de la réflexion intergouvernementale sur les ODD.
La prise en compte des quatre piliers de la sécurité alimentaire permettrait ainsi de s'attaquer aux causes structurelles et favoriser une approche multidimensionnelle de la sécurité alimentaire. En particulier, il est essentiel de mieux prendre en compte les aspects relatifs à la sécurité nutritionnelle (qualité de l'alimentation, santé/nutrition, éducation et culture).
Quels sont, à votre avis, les principaux défis et opportunités pour parvenir à garantir la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle dans les années à venir?
Les principaux défis pour atteindre la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
399
La croissance démographique exponentielle, et ce principalement en Afrique : 9 milliards d'habitants dans moins de 40 ans.
La forte pression sur les ressources naturelles comme l'eau et la terre pour nourrir le monde mais aussi pour répondre aux autres besoins (fibres, valorisations industrielles…), et ce de manière durable : il faudra produire plus en utilisant moins de ressources.
L’accès à l’énergie (servant à la production, au transport, à la transformation des produits agricoles et à l’alimentation) à un prix correct.
La tension structurelle des marchés agricoles et l'augmentation de la volatilité des prix des denrées agricoles.
Les effets du changement climatique. La crise économique, la nécessité de créer des emplois décents. La nécessité de renforcer une recherche interdisciplinaire qui permette de mieux comprendre les
interactions entre les différents défis et développe des travaux de prospectives permettant de développer des scénarios sur les dynamiques de transformation à long terme.
Les principales opportunités
La réforme réussie du Comité de la Sécurité Alimentaire mondiale, instance de concertation multi-acteurs doit permettre une meilleure coordination des politiques et un fort engagement en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle.
La mise en œuvre du plan d'action du G20 adopté sous présidence Française doit permettre d'apporter des réponses à la question de la volatilité des prix.
D’une manière générale, l’accent mis sur la sécurité alimentaire dans les grandes initiatives politiques internationales (Défi faim zéro du SGNU, Rio + 20, G8, G20, CAADP, etc.).
Pour répondre aux défis, le nouveau cadre post 2015 devra être ambitieux et intégrer la dimension du développement durable : le chantier qui s'ouvre sur les ODD suite à la Conférence internationale de Rio+20 devrait être intégré à celui du post 2015 pour ne former qu'un seul agenda et favoriser une approche multidimensionnelle de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle.
Thème 2:
Quelles sont les mesures les plus efficaces? Sur la base des connaissances existantes, veuillez nous signaler quelles seraient les mesures les plus efficaces pour s'attaquer aux problèmes de la faim, de la sécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition dans l’avenir. Faites-nous part de vos propres expériences et de vos observations. Par exemple, quelle importance attribuez-vous aux questions de l'amélioration de la gouvernance, des approches fondées sur les droits, de la responsabilisation et de l'engagement politique pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle?
1.L'expérience française dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire et de nutrition au plan nationalPour lutter contre l’insécurité alimentaire et la malnutrition, la France s’appuie sur un ensemble de droits, lois, règlements, et mécanismes (dont certains partagés au niveau de l’Union européenne) dont on peut citer inter alia :
un système de protection sociale développé (sécurité sociale, assurance chômage, système de
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
400
retraite) ; une législation en matière d’emploi protectrice visant au développement d'emplois décents (Salaire minimum…)
qui intègrent ou sont complétés par des mécanismes ciblés pour les plus vulnérables (par exemple la CMU pour la santé, et le RSA)
une politique agricole et alimentaire forte, assortie de politiques foncières (par exemple la politique des structures) et appuyée par une recherche agronomique performante (disponibilité)
des politiques de subvention / des politiques fiscales nationales et locales facilitant l'accès aux produits alimentaires (taux de TVA réduit sur les produits alimentaires, tarifs de cantines subventionnés)
un Plan national nutrition santé (PNNS) (avec des objectifs et un suivi précis, des campagnes de communication et promotion, des engagements des industriels, etc.)
des mécanismes d’appui pour la fourniture d'aide alimentaire aux populations les plus vulnérables (Programme européen d'aide aux plus démunis (PEAD), Programme national d'aide alimentaire (PNAA), exonérations fiscales pour les dons aux associations…).
une interface science-décision qui s’est appuyée sur un effort de prospective associant les différents acteurs à la formulation des scénarios élaborés.
L’expérience nationale montre l’importance d’une volonté politique forte, fondée sur les droits, de l’allocation de moyens suffisants, et d’une participation et concertation de l'ensemble des acteurs. La société civile, le secteur privé, les collectivités locales jouent un grand rôle dans ce domaine.
2. L'expérience française dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition au plan international (coopération et développement)
La plateforme interministérielle sur la sécurité alimentaire, le GISA
Le GISA est une plateforme française multi-acteurs sur la sécurité alimentaire créée en 2008 qui rassemble, sous la co-présidence du Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et du Ministère de l'Agriculture, les autres ministères concernés (Economie, Environnement, Recherche), l'Agence Française de Développement, la société civile et des instituts de recherche.
Son objectif est de proposer, à partir d'une approche pluri-disciplinaire et intersectorielle de la sécurité alimentaire, des mesures pour renforcer la sécurité alimentaire dans les pays du Sud.
Un engagement fort en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition
Mobilisation d’une Aide Alimentaire Programmée (AAP), qui contribue à la prévention et à la gestion des crises alimentaires (y compris la réhabilitation post-crise), et soutien aux populations vulnérables sur le plan nutritionnel menacées par la détérioration de leurs conditions d'existence. En 2012, 19 pays ont bénéficié de l'aide alimentaire programmée française, pour un montant total de 35 millions d'euros.
Soutien politique et financier à la réforme du CSA et au HLPE (concrétisation du partenariat mondial pour l’agriculture et la sécurité alimentaire), soutien du multilatéralisme (nécessité de politiques sectorielles convergentes), action en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire dans le G20 (Plan d’Action), soutien au processus de négociation et de mise en œuvre des Directives volontaires pour la gouvernance responsable des régimes fonciers.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
401
Engagements de l’Aquila (AFSI) Une Recherche qui s’est structurée autour des ces enjeux (AIRD, AGREENIUM) afin de mieux
mobiliser les compétences et une coordination ministères/institutions de recherche avec la CRAI qui complète bien le GISA sur le volet recherche. La sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle est ainsi au cœur de 2 métaprogrammes de l’INRA (Déterminants et impacts de la diète, interactions et transitions ; Etude des transitions pour la sécurité alimentaire mondiale), des travaux INRA – CIRAD de prospective (Agrimone, duALine, Agrimonde terra) et d’alliances et grands projets collaboratifs internationaux de recherche où les organismes français jouent un rôle majeur (JPI FACCE, Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases, Global Alliance on Food Security Research, Food secure).
La France soutient dans ses actions des approches fondées sur les besoins (alignement avec les PNIA, recherche-actions…), sur les droits, et sur la consultation et la coordination des acteurs. Ce sont des approches ayant fait leurs preuves.
L'appui au développement de politiques agricoles adaptées, aux agricultures familiales et à l’intégration régionale sont également des axes forts de l'appui français à la sécurité alimentaire.
Par ailleurs, comment pouvons-nous tirer le meilleur parti possible des initiatives actuelles, telles que le Défi Faim Zéro, lancé par le Secrétaire général des Nations Unies à la Conférence Rio+20 des Nations Unies sur le développement durable (www.zerohungerchallenge.org) et le Cadre stratégique mondial sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition élaboré par le CSA ?
De nombreuses initiatives sont à saluer : La mise en place de la HLTF qui vise une meilleure coordination des agences onusiennes et
autres institutions internationales en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition Le mouvement SUN qui impulse une action collective internationale sur la nutrition, vise
à accroître l'efficacité des programmes sur la nutrition et à favoriser la mobilisation de fonds.
Les résultats de RIO + 20 qui invitent à développer des approches durables en matière de sécurité alimentaire.
La réforme du CSA et la mise en place du HLPE, dont les premiers résultats sont très encourageants et montrent que des efforts conjoints et une volonté politique forte conduisent à de réelles avancées (Directives volontaires, GSF…). Il convient à présent de contribuer à diffuser les « produits du CSA » et de communiquer plus efficacement pour sensibiliser les niveaux nationaux et régionaux. Les canaux de diffusion peuvent comprendre, pour la France, son réseau d’ambassades, l’AFD et ses programmes, les réseaux de recherche et d’enseignement supérieur, etc.
Thème 3:
Pour assurer le déploiement intégral du Programme de développement pour l'après-2015 aux échelons mondial, régional ou national, il faut définir des objectifs, des buts et des indicateurs pour aborder les problèmes de la faim, de l'insécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition. Un ensemble d'objectifs a été proposé par le Secrétaire général des Nations Unies dans le cadre du Défi Faim zéro:
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
402
a. 100 % d’accès à une alimentation adéquate toute l’annéeb. Zéro enfant de moins de deux ans souffrant d’un retard de croissancec. Tous les systèmes agro-alimentaires sont durablesd. 100 % d’augmentation de la productivité et des revenus des petits exploitantse. Zéro perte ou gaspillage de produits alimentairesVeuillez nous faire part de vos observations sur cette liste d'objectifs ou formuler vos propres propositions. Certains de ces objectifs doivent-ils être propres aux pays, ou à l'échelle régionale, plutôt que mondiale? Les objectifs doivent-ils être limités dans le temps?
Les 5 objectifs définis par le Secrétaire Général des Nations Unies à la conférence de Rio+20 sont très ambitieux. Ils sont une bonne base pour aboutir à des objectifs partagés. Ils prennent en compte les 4 piliers de la sécurité alimentaire et de la nutrition, et font le lien avec la nécessaire durabilité des systèmes de production (adaptation des systèmes de productions au changement climatique, durabilité des systèmes de production, de distribution et de consommation, limiter le gaspillage dans la chaine alimentaire). Néanmoins, le 3ème objectif (systèmes alimentaires durables) est particulièrement large et difficile à mesurer.
Certains aspects pourraient être renforcés ou ajoutés :
- Le besoin d'augmenter la productivité agricole de manière durable d’un point de vue économique, social et environnemental n'est pas assez souligné dans l'objectif sur l'accès à l'alimentation, alors que l'augmentation de la demande agricole est un réel enjeu.
- La question de la création d’emploi et de revenus, et de conditions de vie attractives en particulier en milieu rural.
- L'intégration des territoires aux marchés alimentaires par l'amélioration des infrastructures publiques est une condition nécessaire pour désenclaver certains territoires ruraux les plus vulnérables face à la sécurité alimentaire et soutenir le revenu des petits producteurs.
- La question émergente de la suralimentation, de l’obésité et des maladies non transmissibles également très présente dans les pays touchés par l'insécurité alimentaire n'est pas abordée dans le Défi Faim Zéro. De manière générale la question de la nutrition mériterait d’être élargie (au-delà de la question cruciale de l’alimentation maternelle et infantile).
La France est favorable à une réflexion sur un objectif global et universel qui intégrerait les 4 dimensions de la sécurité alimentaire, et la nutrition, et comprendrait des indicateurs mesurables et équilibrés prenant en compte les composantes économique, environnementale et sociale du développement durable.
[English translation]
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
403
Answer to the e-consultation on post 2015 (France) Theme 1:
What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The definition of the MDGs and the simplicity of the MDGs approach have allowed for a
strong political mobilisation from governments and the public opinion in the fight against poverty and hunger.
However, the MDGs address the issue of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in an uncomplete and too fragmented way
Considering the four pillars of food security, that is availability, access, stability and nutritional quality, MDG 1 could be complemented by targets (or indicators) including the aspects of availability and stability which are not taken into account.
MDG 3 addresses gender issues.Women play an important role in the fight against poverty and food insecurity. MDGs 4 and 5 deal with infant mortality and maternal health, in particular from a nutritional point of view. MDG 7, which aims at ensuring environmental sustainability should be implemented transversally. It deals in particular with access to safe drinking water which is a factor of food security.
The definition of indicators is interesting because it allows to set quantified targets and to measure their achievement.The relevance of indicators should be reflected in dynamic terms. Eg For demographic reasons, dividing by two the number of people suffering from hunger in absolute value leads to an increase of this indicator, while there was a reduction in pourcentage.
The ownership of the MDGs by all stakeholders is essential: MDGs / SDGs should be defined on the basis of prior inclusive and comprehensive consultations.The Consultation of the Committee on World Food Security in this regard is most welcomed.
France is therefore in favor of highlighting food security and nutrition through a dedicated objective in an international post 2015 agenda, resulting from convergence between the review of the MDGs and an intergovernmental discussion about the sustainable development goals (SDGs).
Taking into account the four pillars of food security would thus allow to address the structural causes and promote a multidimensional approach to food security.In particular, it is essential to better take into account aspects related to nutrition security (food quality, health / nutrition, education and culture).
What, in your opinion, the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food security and nutrition in the coming years? The main challenges for achieving food and nutrition security are the following:
The exponential population growth, mainly in Africa: 9 billion people in less than 40 years.
The pressure on natural resources such as water and land to feed the world but also to meet other needs (fibers, industrial developments...), in a sustainable manner: we must produce more with fewer resources.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
404
Access to energy (for production, transportation, processing of agricultural products and food) at a fair price.
The structural tension of agricultural markets and the increased volatility of agricultural commodity prices.
The impact of climate change. The economic crisis, the need to create decent jobs. The need to strengthen interdisciplinary research to enable a better understanding of the
interactions between the various challenges and develop a forward-looking work to prepare scenarios for the dynamics of long-term transformation.
The main opportunities
The successful reform of the Committee on World Food Security, multi-stakeholder dialogue instance, should enable a better coordination of policies and a strong commitment to food security and nutrition.
The implementation of the action plan adopted under the G20 French Presidency should allow to respond to price volatility.
In general, the emphasis on food security in major international policy initiatives (Zero Hunger Challenge UNSG, Rio +20, G8, G20, CAADP, etc.).
To meet the challenges, the new post-2015 framework must be ambitious and integrate Sustainable Development: The road ahead of us regarding the SDGs following the International Conference on Rio +20 should be integrated with the post 2015 Agenda to form a single agenda and promote a multidimensional approach to food and nutrition security. Theme 2:
What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? 1. The French experience in the field of food security and nutrition at national level
To fight against food insecurity and malnutrition, France relies on a set of rights, laws, regulations, and procedures (some of which are shared throughout the European Union), which include inter alia:
a well developed welfare system (social security, unemployment insurance, pension system), a legislation protecting employment for the development of decent jobs (minimum wage ...)
which include or are supplemented by targeted mechanisms for the most vulnerable (eg Universal Health Coverage (CMU), and the Earned Income Supplement (Revenu de Solidarité Active, RSA))
a solid agricultural policy and food, together with land policies (eg structural policy) supported by an efficient agricultural research (availability)
subsidy policies / national and local tax policies facilitating access to local food products (reduced VAT rate on food prices, subsidized canteens)
a National Health and Nutrition Plan (PNNS) (with precise targets and follow-up, communication and promotion campaigns, industrial undertakings, etc.).
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
405
to support mechanisms for the provision of food aid to the most vulnerable populations ( European food aid programme for the most deprived persons (PEAD), National Programme for Food Aid (PNAA), tax exemptions for donations to associations ...).
an interface between science and decision-making based on a prospective effort involving the various stakeholders in the formulation of scenarios .
National experience shows the importance of a strong political will, based on rights, of the allocation of sufficient resources, and of participation and consultation of all stakeholders. Civil society, the private sector, local communities play an important role in this field.
2. The French experience in the field of food security and nutrition at international level (cooperation and development)
Interdepartmental platform on food security, GISA ((Groupe Interministériel sur la Sécurité Alimentaire)
The GISA is a French multi-stakeholder platform on food security created in 2008 to bring together, under the co-chairmanship of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Agriculture, other relevant ministries (Economy, Environment, Research), the French Development Agency, civil society and research institutes.
The objective is to provide, from a multi-disciplinary and cross-sectoral approach to food security, measures to strengthen food security in countries of the southern hemisphere.
A strong commitment to food security and nutrition
Mobilization of Scheduled Food Aid Scheduled (AAP), which contributes to the prevention and management of food crises (including the post-crisis rehabilitation), and provides support for vulnerable populations nutritionally at risk because of the degradation of their livelihoods. In 2012, 19 countries have benefited from the French scheduled food aid programme, for a total of 35 million euros.
Political and financial support to the reform of the CFS and HLPE (implementation of the global partnership for agriculture and food security), providing support for multilateralism (need for sectoral policies to converge), action for food security in the G20 (Action Plan), supporting the process of negotiation and implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land,
Aquila commitments (AFSI) A Research structured around these issues (AIRD, AGREENIUM) to better harness the
skills and promote coordination between departments / research institutions with CRAI that complements the research dimension of the GISA platform. Food and nutrition security and nutrition is at the heart of two metaprograms of INRA (Determinants and impacts of diet, interactions and transitions; Study of transitions for global food security), INRA – CIRAD’s prospective work (Agrimone, Dualine, Agrimonde terra) and alliances and major international collaborative projects in research where French organizations play a major role (JPI FACCE, Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases, Global Alliance on Food Security Research, Food secure).
Through its actions, France supports approaches based on needs (alignment with the National Programme of Agricultural Investment (Programme National d'Investissement Agricole (PNIA), action
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
406
research...), on rights, and on consultation and coordination of the stakeholders. These approaches are proven. Support for the development of adequate agricultural policies, family farms and regional integration are the main thrusts of the French support to food security.
Furthermore, how can we make the best use of existing initiatives such as the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the Secretary-General of the Rio +20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development ( www.zerohungerchallenge.org ) and the Global Strategic Framework for food security and nutrition developed by the CFS?
Many initiatives are appreciated:
The implementation of the HLTF which aims at improving coordination between UN agencies and other international institutions for food security and nutrition
The SUN movement that fosters a collective international action on nutrition, and aims at increasing the effectiveness of nutrition programmes and promoting fundraising.
The results of RIO +20 calling for developing sustainable approaches to food security.
The CFS reform and the implementation of HLPE, the first results of which are very encouraging and show that joint efforts and strong political lead to real progress (Voluntary Guidelines, GSF...).Now twe should help to spread the "CFS products" and communicate more effectively to raise awareness at national and regional levels. Distribution channels may include, for France, its network of embassies, AFD and its programmes, research networks and higher education institutions, etc.
Theme 3:
For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound? The five objectives defined by the Secretary General at the United Nations Rio +20 Conference are very ambitious. They are a good basis to achieve shared objectives. They take into account the four pillars of food security and nutrition, and make the link with the required sustainability of production systems (adaptation of production systems to climate change, sustainability of production,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
407
distribution and consumption systems, reducing waste in the food chain). However, the 3rd goal (sustainable food systems) is particularly large and difficult to measure. Some aspects could be strengthened or added:
- The need to increase agricultural productivity in a sustainable manner from an economic, social and environmental perspective is not emphasized enough in the target aiming at the access to food, while the increase in agricultural demand is a real challenge. - The issue of job creation and income and attractive living conditions, especially in rural areas. - The integration of territories to food markets by improving public infrastructure is a prerequisite for opening up some rural areas most vulnerable to food security and income support to small producers. - The emerging issue of overeating, obesity and non-transmissible diseases also very present in countries affected by food insecurity is not addressed in the Zero Hunger Challenge. Generally the issue of nutrition deserves to be expanded (beyond the critical issue of maternal and child nutrition).
France is in favor of a discussion on the overall and universal objective integrating the four dimensions of food security and nutrition, and including measurable and balanced indicators, taking into account the economic, environmental and social components of sustainable development.
269) PAHO/WHO, Brazil
Dear FSN Moderator
We congratulate the Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition for organizing this consultation on "Hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition: towards a post 2015 Development Agenda". Our comments focus on themes # 1 and # 2, i.e. the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security and health within the Post 2105 Global Development Framework and indicators.
Ensuring food and nutrition security and health in an integrated way is essential for poverty eradication, reduction of inequity and for the Post 2105 Global Development Framework. While almost 1 billion people suffer from under-nutrition in poor countries, more than a billion adults worldwide are overweight. This double-burden of malnutrition affects mainly low and medium income countries. At the same time diarrhoeal diseases caused by contaminated food and water kills 1.5 million children every year and is a leading cause of malnutrition in children under five years old. The UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge launched at Rio+20 calls for multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholders partnerships to end hunger .
Successful strategies for advancing food and nutrition insecurity and health have been identified, however there is a tendency to address these issues through siloes approaches, which reduces their effectiveness and impact. To improve sustainable food production, access to adequate and safe food and to reduce chronic malnutrition governments need to strengthen in a coordinated way their policies and strategies related to development, agriculture, health, environmental and social
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
408
protection among others. This requires an integrated approach towards the reduction of food and nutrition insecurity, improvement of food and water safety, sanitation systems, environmental health and protection of natural resources. The future we want should ensure that these strategies are integrated in development plans and addressed by all stakeholders from a gender equality and human rights perspective.
In order to be successful, development objectives need to be linked closely to the local, national and regional realities and need to be developed following a bottom up approach and including civil society. The Pan American Alliance for Nutrition and Development is an inter agency initiative that aims to promote intersectoral, coordinated sustainable programs with a human rights framework, and with a gender equality and intercultural equity perspective to accelerate the MDGs and to contribute to the post 2015 agenda. Other initiatives such as REACH also foster intersectoral coordination.
One of the top recommendations the Rio Dialogue Days is to develop food systems that are sustainable and promote health. Health indicators can strengthen accountability over the social impacts of development policies, contributing to the governance for sustainable development. Food policies should consider nutrition security and health as an outcome, including communicable and non communicable diseases. Core indicators of sustainable agriculture, food and nutrition security have been proposed by WHO in the context of Rio+20 addressing: i) Health outcomes: such anemia in women of reproductive age; stunting in children under 5 years; obesity in children under 5 and in adults; ii) Food access and dietary quality in association with sustainable foods production: adequate access to fruits, vegetables and protein supply; excessive adult saturated fat consumption; household dietary diversity; and food contamination and foodborne diseases iii) Food market/trade policies supporting health and sustainability: e.g. countries that have phased out use of antibiotics as growth promoters; health impact assessment in agricultural policies and food trade plans; compliance with food safety standards (additives, hormone, pesticides and veterinary drug residues). The integration of these key issues through effective, transparent partnerships is fundamental to move towards an agriculture systems that ensures food and nutrition security and promote health. This requires countries' commitment and aligned donor support for cross-sectoral programming and implementation among UN agencies and other stakeholders.
For more information see: http://new.paho.org/mdgpost2015/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Policy-Brief-Partnership-for-Integration1.pdf http://new.paho.org/mdgpost2015/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Indicators-Food-and-Security.pdf http://new.paho.org/nutricionydesarrollohttp://new.paho.org/nutricionydesarrollo/?p=1816 http://www.unsystem.org/scn/Publications/AnnualMeeting/SCN35/Denise%20COSTA%20COITINHO.pdf
M. Cristina Tirado-von der PahlenFood Safety Regional Adviser PAHO/WHO, PANAFTOSA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
270) National Movement Women and Mothers against Violence, Bulgaria
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
409
Herewith we endorse the position and we are strongly agree that "breastfeeding should be specifically mentioned in the next Millennium Development Goals". In our more than 17 years work on the issues we and our colleagues from NM "Women and Mothers against Violence" are convinced that promotion and support of breastfeeding is the best guarantee for baby's and mother's health and better quality of life especialy in the situation of economic and financial crisis. We support all arguments in IBFAN Statement and endorse it completely.
You can add our support to the list of submissions on the Post 2015 consultation.
Sincerely yours,Prof. Dr. Roumjana Modeva, PresidentProf. Dr. Mariela Todorova, Main Coordinator and Project Manager
271) Barbara Burlingame, FAO, Italy
Theme 1: Key lessons
1. “Diet” needs to be addressed as the fundamental unit of nutrition; i.e., not individual nutrients and not individual foods. The nutrition world has a long, unsuccessful history of dealing with (mal)nutrition outside the context of a whole diet.
2. “Agriculture”, imbedded in “environmental sustainability”, needs to be the focus of all efforts to provide long-term solutions to the multiple problems of malnutrition.
3. The main challenges include treating malnutrition with real foods and diets and less as a clinical problem with industrial/pharmaceutical interventions. Opportunities include adopting the concept of sustainable diets, with important emphasis on minimizing food losses and waste, valuing local food biodiversity, and re-evaluating traditional food systems. Diets, foods, and nutrients for human nutrition should be regarded as “ecosystem services”, thus bringing sustainable environments into the nutrition world.
Theme 3:
The ZHC hits the proverbial nail on the head, providing a useful framework for addressing the problems of malnutrition. The concept of sustainable diets encompasses all aspects of the ZHC, and can be considered one of the direct responses. [Definition: Sustainable Diets are those diets with low environmental impacts which contribute to food and nutrition security and to healthy life for present and future generations. Sustainable diets are protective and respectful of biodiversity and ecosystems, culturally acceptable, accessible, economically fair and affordable; nutritionally adequate, safe and healthy; while optimizing natural and human resources. FAO, 2010.]
272) Anna Herforth Independent Consultant, United States of America [second contribution]
For this response I am drawing on the FSN Forum Discussion #83, which I co-led with Cristina Lopriore: http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/forum/discussions/agriculture-for-nutrition
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
410
Three key messages came out of Discussion #83, relevant to the topic of hunger, food insecurity, and malnutrition.
One: We need to be thinking more about food/diet quality in addition to food quantity. Diversification of food production was strongly supported. There were also calls for increased use of underutilized foods, biofortification, and better processing. Many comments strongly supported reducing food waste – several people noted a research need for how to curb food waste and preserve perishable fresh foods, a difficulty for making nutritious diets more accessible.
Two: Food production is tied to environmental resources and production must be sustainable. There were comments about incorporating climate change considerations into all decisions/investments in food production. There were other comments about supporting soil and biodiversity to produce more, more diverse, and more nutritious foods.
Three: The biological reduction of hunger/malnutrition is not a sufficient goal; we need to support people’s dignity, culture and rights in the process. This has to do with supporting traditional diets (related to the first point on underutilized foods) and biodiversity (related to the second point on natural resources), and also with how “development” projects are done. We need to increase participation and the ability for people to determine the solutions that would best fit their own needs, and also get better at disseminating existing knowledge, technologies and research results wherever they are applicable and appropriate.
For further elaboration of these messages in the contributions, see the Discussion #83 website, listed above.
273) Alfredo Arturo Corredor Becerra, Colombia
[Original contribution in Spanish]
En atención a la invitación a evaluar la situación actual respecto de la seguridad alimentaria deseo compartir un documento que elaboré por interés personal en la búsqueda de aportar al problema actual global de la sostenibilidad, a pesar de tener un enfoque particular para Colombia la propuesta tiene un alcance mundial si aplicamos las conclusiones de los documentos que son base de este escrito y sea el momento para mencionarlo toma como fuente documentos elaborados por la ONU. Este es un primer borrador y aunque no es exhaustivo, si marca una dirección y espero que el concepto general sea revisado y discutido, pues como lo menciono en el documento, la seguridad alimentaria está pendiendo de un hilo porque estamos acabando con la única oportunidad degarantizar la subsistencia del hombre sobre el planeta al explotar indiscriminadamente los recursos naturales. Pienso que está llegando el momento en el que un vaso de agua será más valioso que un diamante, si conservamos los ecosistemas tendremos el líquido más valioso de la Tierra que es el agua, con ella renaciendo y manejándola adecuadamente tendremos posibilidades de mitigar el cambio climático y encontrar las fuentes de alimentación, a la vez si valoramos el capital humano y su conocimiento ancestral y lo utilizamos inteligentemente romperemos los ciclos viciosos que generan la pobreza, el hambre y el subdesarrollo. Quedo atento a sus comentarios y sugerencias, Un cordial saludo,
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
411
Alfredo Arturo Corredor Becerra
[English translation]
In response to the invitation to assess the current status of food security, I want to share a paper I drafted because of my commitment in seeking to contribute to the current global problem of sustainability. Despite having a specific approach on Colombia, the proposal has a global scope if we apply the findings of documents that are the basis of this paper. I want to mention that these background documents were drawn up by the UN.
This is a first draft and, although not comprehensive, it shows a direction, and I hope the general concept will be reviewed and discussed. Because as I mentioned in the paper, food security is hanging by a thread because we are destroying the only chance of ensuring the survival of man on earth by exploiting natural resources indiscriminately. I think we are approaching the time when a glass of water will be more valuable than a diamond. If we preserve ecosystems we will have the most precious liquid on Earth, i.e., water. A correct water management will increase our chances to mitigate climate change and ensure food production. At the same time, if we value human capital and ancestral knowledge -and use it wisely-, we will break the vicious cycle that generates poverty, hunger and underdevelopment.
Looking forward to your comments and suggestions,
Best regards Alfredo Arturo Corredor Becerra
274) Tracy Gerstle, CropLife International, Belgium
Theme 1:What do you see as the key lessons learned during the current Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Framework (1990-2015), in particular in relation to the MDGs of relevance to hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition?
The original MDG on food security is effective in focusing the global community on the key development challenges to address poverty and hunger. However, by focusing only on the challenges and not identifying the underlying causes and pathways to address hunger and food insecurity, the MDGs risks promoting unsustainable actions, while missing the opportunity to promote collective action and innovation in identifying and scaling up solutions.
Post-2015 food security targets should identify the overarching desired outcome, e.g. eliminate hunger, supported by outputs that measure progress in identifying the underlying causes, e.g. increasing incomes and increasing smallholder productivity in food insecure countries. There should be a range of outputs to allow sufficient flexibility to reflect the range of differing causes of food security across regions, so countries can prioritize outputs as meets their needs.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
412
The next generation of targets should also consider how to promote integrated solutions across sectors such as food, water, energy, landscapes and ecosystems—given the inherent linkages and the need to maximize synergies and to minimize unintended impacts.
What do you consider the main challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years?
With our population expected to reach nine billion by 2050, farmers will need to increase food production substantially despite finite natural resources. Addressing food waste and over nutrition can help to lessen these pressures, but climate change and harsher growing conditions, poses a real threat to the ability of the world’s farmers to provide for themselves and their families. Improving the way farmers operate will be critical to sustainability increasing food production and alleviating poverty for the world’s 2.5 billion farmers, particularly in developing countries where there are substantial yield gaps.
We believe the first step will be recognizing the environmentally friendly practices already being used in agriculture, and determining how these sustainable practices could be shared with more farmers. Today, farms around the world utilize crop protection products and plant biotechnology to increase crop yields, improve incomes and reduce their environmental footprint. For example:
• In Brazil, farmers who use biotech soybeans, cotton and corn varieties have reduced their water usage by 16.2 billion litres from 1996 to 2010.• Farmers in Kenya who use pesticides to produce disease-free passion fruit improve their income by 400%.• Bt cotton farmers in India earn between $378-$520 more per hectare than growers using conventional cotton varieties, which has led to $9.4 billion in farm income gains due to Bt cotton adoption from 2002-2010.• In Canada, adoption of no-till practices in canola, enabled by crop protection products and plant biotechnology, sequesters nearly one million tonnes of carbon each year.• Each year, crop protection product prevent nearly 50% yield loss in wheat crops around the globe.
In every region of the globe, farmers are using plant science to enhance their sustainability and protect their lands for future generations. Governments, NGOs and the private sector must examine how we can promote policies that support farmers to use good agricultural practices today, while continuing to improve upon the sustainability of practices in the future.
Opportunities offered by expanding access to good farming practices and plant science are as follows:Fighting Poor Nutrition:Creaitng healthier diets through new varieties and abundant food choices Conserving Water:Reducing water needs through plant science technologiesFeeding Nine Billion:Improving yield through new varieties and protection from pestPreserving Soil:Reducing soil erosion by enabling conservation agricultureProtecting Biodiversity:Safeguarding biodiversity by reducing the need for additional landResponding to Climate Change:Managing our changing climate through innovative technologies
Importantly, while we believe in the opportunities posed by plant science to address the aforementioned challenges, its important to allow flexibility in the Post-2015 frameworks and SDG targets for countries and farmers to employ a range of farming practices and technologies, as there are no “one size fits all solutions in agriculture: given the wide array of landscape and agro-ecological zones.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
413
Theme 2: What works best? Drawing on existing knowledge, please tell us how we should go about addressing the hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition challenges head on. Provide us with your own experiences and insights. For example, how important are questions of improved governance, rights-based approaches, accountability and political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security? Furthermore, how could we best draw upon current initiatives, including the Zero Hunger Challenge, launched by the UN Secretary General at the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (www.zerohungerchallenge.org), and the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition elaborated by the CFS?
The private sector is at its best in leveraging market-based solutions to address some of the most intractable problems in addressing poverty and sustainability. In this spirit efforts would include:
Increase investments and mobilize existing commitments to address the SDGs on food security and sustainable agriculture
Ensure that investments use resources sustainably, including farming inputs, both through internal investment policy and public-private collaborations to measure and track resource use at a landscape and farm level
Promote diversity in economic opportunity, by expanding market access and support to smallholder farmers and particularly women
Commit to good governance and sustainable business practices, using frameworks including the UN Global Compact and the PRAI (Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment) as recognized by the G20 in Seoul in November 2010, and value chain sustainability consortiums and standards including Utz, and the Responsible Soy Roundtable and Field to Market
Invest in agricultural research and development partnerships to promote innovation and to build local capacity, particularly building capacity among developing country researchers and institutions
Invest in extension and knowledge sharing that assists in scaling farmers’ adoption of good farming practices, and planning to be resilient to climate change and potential yield losses
To succeed, we also need to see concerted efforts by governments, both in the developed and the developing world—particularly as we as a global community look to expand beyond the MDGs to truly global SDGs that seek to secure future food security via sustainable agriculture.
Carry through the MDG Commitments to poverty reduction, while integrating the global post-2015 agenda
Engage the private sector as an equal partner and stakeholder in the post-2015 development agenda for food security and sustainable agriculture
Develop national food security strategies, in partnership with the private sector and other stakeholders, to align priorities and to promote collaboration
Encourage the sustainable use of resources via policy measures, including incentives Identify and scale good practices as a national and international level that maximize public-
private partnerships and collaboration, with the New Vision for Agriculture and Grow Africa as examples of effective partnerships
Develop a means to track and to promote collaboration among business and other stakeholders who make commitments (across the many different processes currently on-going on sustainability and food security)
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
414
Invest in agricultural research and development at both the domestic and international levels, particularly building capacity among developing country researchers and institutions
Invest in extension and knowledge sharing the will assist in scaling farmers’ adoption of good farming practices, and planning to be resilient to climate change and potential yield losses
Support free global, regional and local trade that enables investments in agriculture Promote a positive enabling environmental, with security for citizens, zero tolerance for
corruption, support of intellectual property and systems to ensure good governance Adopt and promote policy frameworks and legislation that ensure good governance in land
tenure and promote investment at all farm sizes and which include women
Theme 3:For the Post-2015 Global Development Framework to be complete, global (and regional or national) objectives, targets and indicators will be identified towards tackling hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. A set of objectives has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC):a. 100% access to adequate food all year roundb. Zero stunted children less than 2 years oldc. All food systems are sustainabled. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and incomee. Zero loss or waste of food.Please provide us with your feedback on the above list of objectives – or provide your own proposals. Should some objectives be country-specific, or regional, rather than global? Should the objectives be time-bound?
The Zero Hunger Challenge is a good starting point and importantly it puts the focus where the greatest attention is needed in terms of addressing the needs of hungry people around the world, while promoting sustainable agriculture. However, as the SDGs will be global integrating sustainability and development, food security should be similarly scoped and ambitious, considering hunger, malnutrition, and obesity (or over-nutrition), and the links to the four commonly accepted dimensions of food security: availability, access, stability and utilization.
Scoping of the targets for food security, should allow for pathways that address the underlying causes particularly in terms of poverty, by promoting economic growth in key sectors that provide incomes and employment for poor people, including agriculture, as well as considering the role of safety nets for the most vulnerable
Ensure that the proposed pathways and targets provide countries and farmers flexibility in terms of the farming practices and technologies, as there are no “one size fits all solutions in agriculture” given the wide array of landscapes and agro-ecological zones
Key Outputs/Measures related to Food Security include:
1. Changes in incomes, employment and investment in agriculture2. Closing the yield gap in food insecure countries, particularly for smallholder farmers 3. Adoption of farming practices and technologies that will promote environmentally sustainable
intensification and regeneration, including integrated pest management (IPM), measured via continuous improvements in use of water, energy, soil and land on all sizes of farms
4. Changes in land use, including reductions in the rate of deforestation 5. Presence of legislation and policies that support free global, regional and local trade
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
415
6. Scaling access to public and private extension, knowledge and climate-smart farming practices and technologies that will enable farmers to be resilient to climate change and potential yield losses
7. Promoting food safety and reducing food waste, through access to better storage, processing and handling practices and technologies
There also needs to be indicators around hunger, malnutiriton and obesity, but we do not include these here, as these targets do not fall directly within our area of expertise.
Submission byTracy GerstleDirector, Global Public PolicyCropLife Internationalwww.actionforag.org www.farmingfirst.org
275) Jean Laurent Bungener, France
Theme 1:
There are no real progress because scientific ecology has not been integrated inside development program. Market and business have dominated the vision of development. Now this is changing. But to achieve this goal it is important to transform the key human resources challenges. using the right people at the right places. Biologist and there systemic vision and multidisciplinary skills have to be formed to manage social, market and agronomic works.Botanical, zoological and ecosystem knowledge must have the first places, it is on this foundations that human nutrition could be secured. Agroecology is not agronomy, investment should take time into account, and human behavior would be adapted to natural efficiency. So technology would be adapted to soil ecology, human and animal resources , and richness of population.
Theme 2
Field size and property rights, peace, and cooperative organization are the best way to manage self controlled action on agro-ecological system which are commons. the more actors you have the more controls are done, see water distribution in the alpine Swiss countryside. The next 20 years land use could be a rush for the richer against the poorer(see Korea, china or Saudi Arabia in Africa) , protecting the farmer against investor with land rights, high prices and investment is the first goal, the next target is improving their knowledge.
Theme 3
From the rainy countries to the driest the goal couldn't be achieve in the same time,- Number of biomass produced per acre /year- liter of water used to produce 1 daily portion for 1 human- amount of fertilizer, pesticides, and energy used per acre/year- work force and work time needed for producing 1 ton of cereals/year- capital gain per acre/year- index of education
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
416
- most common disease/year
276) Aruna Sharma, IAS, India [second contribution]
ALL NOT LOSTMandatory interventions to achieve MDG by 2015 on Hunger, Food and Nutrition Security
MDG was the first focused intervention advocated by UN agencies with a time frame to achieve the listed bench mark. Now entering 2013 the fear is that it may remain rhetoric. The challenge is therefore to systematically have focused interventions so that in coming 3 years the results could be nearer the set goal. The write up is to list as to how in the span of balance 3 years accelerate the interventions and ensure that one does touch the committed bench mark.
The MDG framework did remain rhetoric to considerable extent. The number of children suffering from hunger and malnutrition have not shown decline in the desired ratio. The reason being:
Hunger is not issue of only food availability and health care but it is an issue that needs to be handled in Convergent manner inclusive of livelihood, habit formations, health care, right kind of food availability and focused approach. Thus, the main challenge is to have effective format to bring out this Convergence of Resources and implementation outcome oriented plan.
To achieve is more important than just documenting as to why we failed. The approach to achieve is now much more important so that we do not fall in trap of creating impression that such slogans do not mean business. The managerial skills across the globe have shown successful achievements in time frame. Thus, to achieve MDG is now more an issue of effective Management than just availability of food grains.
Statistics show that 870 million people do not have enough to eat and 98% of them live in developing countries. To narrow the geographical zone two-third of the world’s hungry live in just 7 countries; namely Bangladesh, China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia and Pakistan. If we do micro-analysis definitely countries like China, India, Pakistan and Indonesia do not have an issue of availability of food. There, it is more an issue of ensuring right kind of food (nutritious food) reach the hunger. These countries cover major percentage of the 870million people. 60% of them are women. Besides, more than 50% of women do not get the necessary supplementary diet and maternal care. Thus, the interventions need to be more a convergence of health care and food intake.
The focus till date in these countries had been on availability of Food and Health Services. The need is for paradigm shift to that of Food Intake and gaining access to health services. This may not be possible by just empowering women but by ensuring women to understand that they hold the key for healthy child and the family thus ensures proper food intake of adolescent girl, pregnant and lactating women besides the new born child.
The need is therefore to have intervention:
A, Not just empowerment but mind set change of society that the ‘Food Intake’ of women is vital for the health of family.
B. Shift from ‘having access’ to that of ‘gaining access’.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
417
C, Convergence of health and food intake interventions: at the lowest level of administration i.e. village. Besides to ensure sustainability the convergence with livelihood scheme is a must.
Changing mind-set is difficult and therefore has to be incentivized by having programs of reward for family that have healthy women population. All IEC is to focus on intake of food by women and her health care. The ‘Women’ be the game changer in the interventions and that will accelerate the move to MDG achievements.
The second issue is to understand the difference between ‘having access’ to that of ‘gaining access’. Food is available in the country and it is also available in the family as all these countries have schemes and programs for cheap food grains to such families. However, the slow rate of achievement clearly reflects that availability per se does not ensure intake. Thus, the need is to ensure ‘intake’. The focus in coming three years in the listed 7 countries should be to ensure the intake and thus transform having access to that of gaining access. 100% access to adequate food all year round: It needs paradigm shift from 'having access' to 'gaining access'. To explain, the countries with high percentage of reported hunger and malnutrition do have overflowing food grain stocks, programs, schemes and appropriate legislation but it only ensures 'having the access' The challenge is how to we ensure that the target group do 'Gain access' so as to take advantage of the efforts of concerned Government, UN agencies and NGOs. Thus, Gaining Access is absolute assurance that the real target group is identified and they do take the advantage of all the programs, schemes and most important FOOD.
In country like India that does numerically contribute to major percentage of population that suffer from under nutrition or mal-nutrition, it is very important to have holistic plan with not just listed activities but listed work plan if the rhetoric is to be converted to reality in the three years time. It is important to have rights based approach but it is equally important to make a ‘working outcome based model’. The micro analysis clearly enlists that the countries do not suffer from lack of food, or having legislation or sufficient programs and schemes---the real issue is lack of resource convergent implementation plan focused and targeted. The strategy is therefore, to have convergent plan to enhance livelihood of targeted families, IEC for awareness and habit change for healthy life, health care and gaining access for food requirements. Such experiments have shown successful sustainable results.
Zero-hunger challenge initiative launched is the right way of approaching as it in-builds zero tolerance to get sustainable outcomes of interventions. However, it is imperative to swithover to Convergence approach for balance three years of MDG. In CFS the convergent model can be demonstrated.
The body care and hygiene are integral part of food intake. The convergence has to be between health care and food intake pattern. Strong input of nutrition specialist is a must. It is important to constantly monitor the graph of women and malnutrition child. The suggestions for corrective measures of food intake have to be that is locally available and affordable. These interventions would ensure impact and step towards desired goal of MDG. Livelihood interventions in terms of increasing productivity of the land of target groups and also non-farm activities will ensure that the interventions made for achieving MDG remain sustainable and avoid collapse of the target families.
MDG is achievable and what it needs is ‘Zero Tolerance’. It is important for FAO to come with a slogan that in coming three years full throttle efforts will be made to achieve MDG. There is need to have micro and macro monitoring of interventions and concurrent impact evaluations to do the course corrections. It is important that each of concerned State Government commits and achieve the MDG.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
418
Dr Aruna Sharma, IAS, Government Official and practitioner Development Economist, India
278) People’s Health Movement, Viet Nam
Nutrition post-2015
If we have made so much progress on the MDGs, then why is the central message after twelve years still the same? We are still facing a world with hunger, widening inequalities and continuous destruction of our planet. Instead of jumping into the process of defining new goals we need to analyze why, behind the numbers and statistics of progress, the situation has not changed.
MDGs focus on ends while being silent on the means. The values and principles expressed in the Millennium Declaration were lost in translation and we were left with a set of quick wins in which progress was measured in terms of country averages. The MDGs were defined and implemented in a top-down process and issues of governance, participation and empowerment were insufficiently addressed. This all has been said many times over.
World leaders have tried to solve our problems by simply doing more of what caused these problems in the first place. We cannot realistically expect more of this to get us out of it. If we want the next set of goals to change the situation we need to have the courage to make a radical turn in our approach.A principled approach, tackling the causes of the causes
We therefore support the Task Team’s call for transformative change and a holistic approach with a focus on the core values of human rights, equity and sustainability. We call upon the UN to add empowerment to the list of core principles. Instead of translating the core values and principles of the Millennium Declaration we should put them at the centre of the agenda. This is also being said many times over.
We welcome the suggestion to define a set of “development enablers” to guide countries on how to achieve the desired end(s). However, one size does not fit all. Policy choices need to be discussed at country level in a democratic and participatory way. Overarching principles and values agreed at the global level can guide policy choices, but countries should be given space to move on different paths with different speeds.
Looking into the proposed “enablers” to achieve inclusive social development, we welcome the concept of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) –-since the underlying causes of malnutrition pertain to food, care and health. UHC can potentially promote equity and health systems strengthening overall, instead of the current disease-focused approach which leaves nutrition at the fringes. If defined correctly, realizing UHC is a means to achieving the progressive realisation of the Right to Health and of nutrition. However, the concept is broad and there is no consensus to date on its precise meaning. We oppose the promotion of a minimalistic insurance model that would offer “basic packages of care” (often excluding nutrition) and would operate within a market-based system of healthcare. UHC must be achieved through organized and accountable systems of high quality public provision of comprehensive primary health care that includes nutrition services and of a fully functional referral system governed by need of care.In addition, we are worried that the focus on “service delivery” will divert attention from action on the structural determinants of malnutrition and tackling the root causes of preventable ill-health, malnutrition and premature deaths. Equal access to health care and nutrition services address an
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
419
underlying social determinant of malnutrition, but just one of them. Striving for UHC should be part of a comprehensive strategy focusing on the social determinants of health and of nutrition in general. Although the UN and WHO define health services as including “prevention, promotion, treatment and rehabilitation”; we are concerned that the promotional services for nutrition will encompass action only on some of the determinants of health, e.g. water and sanitation, but leaving out others, e.g., trade and power relations. If one really wants to use nutrition as a benchmark for progress in other fields of development and to promote a health-and-nutrition-in-all-policies approach, a more pro-active attitude will be needed. The holistic approach advocated for by the UN Task Team means going beyond health and and nutrition and looking at the other fields to ensure policy coherence and synergies between the different goals. Human rights, including the right to health, the right to nutrition, equity and sustainability should be put at the center of all policies. We call on WHO and on FAO to take this approach a step further and to engage with all the other sectors that affect health and nutrition, including global trade.Engaging with other sectors is crucial. We look at the global crisis as a consequence of the failure to go beyond the individual sectors (health, food, education) to address the social, political and environmental determination of their shortcomings --that additionally result in an erosion of people’s food sovereignty, in higher levels of poverty, as well as in a lack of fair and equitable access to water, housing, sanitation, education, employment and universal and comprehensive social services. The new sectoral goal(s) should not be solely about service delivery, even if broadly interpreted; we need to address the causes of the causes.In our view, the UN has, so far, not gone far enough in suggesting an alternative course for the development paradigm. The global food, fuel and financial crises have exposed systemic failures in the workings of financial and commodity markets and major weaknesses in the mechanisms of global governance. We have argued, in the PHMs Global Health Watch 3, that the multiple crises not only show the failure of the current institutional framework of the global economy, but also of the currently dominant neoliberal paradigm of economics itself. It demonstrates the non-viability of capitalism in its current form, characterised by perpetuating extreme inequalities traceable to poorly extreme inequality and poorly regulated markets, and dominated by the interests of a small rich minority embedded in the corporate and financial sectors. We take strong exception with the fact that none of the currently circulating proposals and documents from UN-institutions challenges the prevailing paradigm of economic growth. The UN Task Team calls for “stable, equitable and inclusive economic growth, based on sustainable patterns of production and consumption”, but the word ‘redistribution’ does not appear once in the entire document. For us, it is not about poverty reduction by all efforts going to uplift the poor; it is about disparity reduction. The Commission on the Social Determinants of Health stated rightly that “income redistribution, via taxes and transfers – the latter of which are key to social protection – are more efficient for poverty reduction than economic growth per se.” Moreover, in a carbon-constrained world, a strategy of growth does not make sense. A paradigm break is needed post-2015. Governance
We strongly welcome emphasising issues of governance. We agree with the UN that better governance of the economic and financial sector will be key to maintaining regulatory frameworks that respect human rights and protect the environment. The current global trade and investment regime is seriously undermining universal social entitlements and rights, as well as the power of states to regulate the activities of corporations and of private financial institutions.We need to redesign our political culture and our institutions, both nationally and globally; to create relations based on solidarity; and to put in place the mechanisms of accountability needed to run the global political, economic and social structures in a manner that is just, equitable and sustainable. Genuine equality of influence should be at the heart of all decision-making.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
420
We are further adamant about the need to divert from the prevalent ‘charity’ model in global relations to a rights-based approach with clearly delineated responsibilities and related accountability-mechanisms. One of the major shortcomings of the current MDGs has been the imprecise definition of the global partnership for development. Many of the commitments made by the international community have remained unfulfilled because of the absence of accountability frameworks and undemocratic global governance. To be achievable and sustainable, the new development goals will have to be embedded in an agreement that allocates new responsibilities, both national (states towards their inhabitants) and international (the international community towards states needing assistance). We cannot ignore issues of governance and finance: there need to be clear agreements on how to pay and who will pay. In this respect, we call for fair and progressive taxation regimes within and between countries that will enable a transformative and equitable redistribution of resources and power instead of relying on charity.Governance not only requires allocation of responsibilities, but also organisations and mechanisms to ensure accountability. Uneven progress towards the health and nutrition MDGs may be due, at least in part, to the uneven creation of organisations, institutions and regimes for supporting the achievement of the MDGs. There are simply too many global health actors and initiatives – better coordination and a truly country-driven approach to health improvement will require a radical rationalisation and shrinkage of the global health and nutrition architecture. In addition, there is inadequate monitoring of the policies and actions of donors --they are largely immune from scrutiny or censure. PHM calls upon WHO and FAO to play a significantly more active role in this call for more global democratic governance and to seek a more coherent and accountable system of global health governance. PHM will support WHO and FAO in such an endeavor.Empowerment
Finally, and most importantly, the implementation of a post-2015 development agenda will depend critically on the legal and economic empowerment of people, especially those most excluded, and of their civil society organizations, to participate effectively in national and local decision-making. People should be at the centre of the new development agenda and be engaged at every stage of the process; defining, implementing and monitoring of the new development framework. This links with accountability; the ability of people to hold institutions accountable for the delivery of quality services; it calls for responsiveness, recourse and transparency; and for setting and adjusting priorities and targets --and people’s empowerment is key for this.
Empowerment should be one of the core values of the new development framework. We cannot achieve equality in health and nutrition without addressing power imbalances at local, national and global level. There is promising work ongoing using community monitoring for accountability and social action in both the health and the food and nutrition areas. Such processes have to play an increasingly important role in measuring and monitoring progress. The national and global surveys currently used give a very distorted picture about people’s lived reality. Community monitoring does not only provide richer data, but also enables people to claim their human rights.In terms of community participation and empowerment, the UN consultation process is largely falling short. The country consultations are supposed to target the poor and marginalized, but the guidelines suggest to include only representatives of various groups in the consultations (e.g., NGOs, community-based organizations (CBOs), universities and research institutions, private sector entities). These consultations shouldn’t be simply about extracting information to help define global goals that will then be implemented in a top-down approach. They should be used to put in place mechanisms of continuous community engagement. We must set up a constant feedback loop that will enable people to effectively engage in the entire process and hold their governments accountable for their promises. We call for community consultations, not as a one-time information collection effort, but as a first step towards democratic global governance.
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
Proceedings /
421
PEOPLE’S HEALTH MOVEMENTWWW.PHMOVEMENT.ORG
www.fao.org/fsnforum/post2015 [email protected]
![[TITLE WITH CAPITAL LETTERS]pure.au.dk/portal/files/79630819/AW_Bacteria_and_protozoa_in_soil... · Protozoa ›Protista: unicellular eukaryotic organisms: protozoa, unicellular algae,](https://static.fdocuments.us/doc/165x107/606ca0b8d91e76743244800e/title-with-capital-letterspureaudkportalfiles79630819awbacteriaandprotozoainsoil.jpg)
