With regard to financing to achieve SDG2, Japan believes that it is essential to enhance private investment in addition to government and other public funds, and that climate change countermeasures are particularly important.

Recognizing that sustainable and resilient agriculture and food systems require various coordinated efforts by relevant international organizations, Japan expects FAO to play a central role in these efforts.

Thank you for highlighting this issue, which is explicit in the paper and will be further highlighted in the APRC report if all agree.

Highly appropriate to highlight further collaboration among Rome-Based Agenecies (RBAs). As suggested a mechanism already exists for FAO to work with the private sector and enhance collaboration among RBAs.  

Australia recognises the significant investment that is required to end global hunger by 2030. We support FAO’s ‘two-track’ approach to tackle short-term issues and at the same time address drivers of food insecurity in the longer term.

While we appreciate the analysis of the current levels of financing to address food security in Asia and the Pacific region, including the challenges of LDCs in the region to raise sufficient resources and attract ODA and private investment, we were disappointed to see a lack of recognition and analysis of the financing situation for SIDS (of which 38 percent are located in Asia and the Pacific region). Australia recommends that FAO undertake a tailored study on the financing situation and requirements to address SDG2 in the Pacific region to address this apparent analytical gap.

Australia notes FAO’s quantitative analysis of government expenditure on agriculture (paragraphs 11-14). While we recognise that is an important measure of financing to address SDG2, we consider that a quantitative analysis alone can ignore the potential negative effects of agricultural spending. An estimated USD 540 billion per year of global government spending on agricultural support is environmentally harmful and trade distortionary, and can work against progress towards SDG2. Accordingly, Australia considers a qualitative analysis of government expenditure is necessary to complete the picture.

We appreciate that FAO recognises the multiple sources and combinations of funding and investment that are needed to progress SDG2. Australia considers that all of these sources can make valuable contributions to ending hunger, and that the mix of financing options is not a one-size fits all approach and will depend on the particular circumstances at a country level.

Australia highlights the potential of private sector investment, including in the form of venture capital and impact financing, as promising avenues for funding transformative actions. We underscore the need for governments to foster policy environments that are conducive to attracting private sector investment. We also endorse the need for all actors to work in a coordinated way to avoid fragmented and isolated initiatives and to minimise duplication of effort, and to ensure that private financing solutions are not crowded-out. We encourage FAO to continue to play a role in facilitating private sector engagement in agrifood systems transformation, in line with FAO’s Strategy for Private Sector Engagement.

We acknowledge the necessity for a more targeted analysis that concentrates on the specific circumstances and financial situations of Small Island Developing States (SIDS). However, due to the constraints on the size and scope of the paper, it was not feasible to give exclusive attention to the needs and requirements of country groupings such as SIDS, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), and nations in conflict. Nonetheless, the Agricultural Policy Review Committee (APRC) has undertaken the following initiatives specifically for SIDS:

-        The implementation of a One Health approach to accelerate the transformation of the agrifood system in the Pacific. This approach acknowledges the interconnectedness between the health of people, animals (both terrestrial and aquatic), plants, and the environment, providing a holistic concept for addressing challenges.

-        A Ministerial Roundtable on investment and financing aimed at poverty alleviation and modernization of the agrifood system through the Hand in Hand Initiative (HIHI).

-        A Special Ministerial Meeting for SIDS, where discussions will center on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets, with a particular focus on sustainable transformation of the agrifood system within the specific context of SIDS, LDCs, and LLDCs.

-        The Regional Foresight Exercise (RFE), designed for national, sub-regional, and regional levels, includes SIDS as a distinct group within its specific context. The RFE's objective is to assist member countries, including SIDS, in gaining a better understanding of and anticipating future scenarios to facilitate strategic decision-making in support of sustainable transformation of the agrifood system.

Additionally, FAO has various support mechanisms available to SIDS, which can be accessed upon request from member countries.

We appreciate the concern regarding the potential environmental impact of increased investments in agriculture. However, it is important to note that FAO policies and strategies prioritize sustainable transformation of the agrifood system. Investments that are environmentally harmful and inappropriate will undoubtedly undermine sustainability and impede progress towards achieving SDG2.

We fully agree that the effectiveness of financing approaches is context-specific, and the paper does not claim otherwise.

We acknowledge and agree with the suggestion that FAO should continue to actively facilitate private sector engagement in the transformation of the agrifood system, in line with the Strategy for Private Sector Engagement.

New Zealand notes the update on the major developments and principal results achieved in the Asia Pacific region during 2022- 23. There seems to be a commendable amount of efforts and activities in the region. We fully support the importance of securing finance to support moving towards ending hunger in the region.

We welcome FAO’s recognition of the contribution that repurposed agricultural subsidies with negative impacts can play in the best used of funds to support SDG2. We certainly support efforts to reduce/remove subsidies that are environmentally harmful or trade distorting and hence have a negative impact on the progress towards SDG2.

There is a good update on the developments and activities in the region but it is difficult to see what the results are.  It would be appreciated to hear from members on the results and impacts of some of the activities to get a better insight as to what is working in the region and where efforts are best placed.

We note also the recognition that there is a deterioration towards achieving food security and the paper makes a call for intensified agrifood systems-based approaches. It would be helpful to understand if there is a need to modify or change any of the current practices and activities?  What has worked/ is working and not working?

Of note is also the recognition of the importance of transforming agrifood systems in the Pacific. We would appreciate some dialogue as to what this actually looks like and how to achieve it with opportunity for the Pacific to lead and influence this.

We reiterate the points we have made about the importance of robust data collection and monitoring to inform evidence based decision making, and to seek transparency of information for when the data does not exist or is not robust.  This is of particular importance for the SWP region.

We reiterate that the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) develops and endorses policy recommendations and guidance on a wide range of food security and nutrition topics that can play an important part in improving food security in the region.

Redirecting public expenditure towards sustainable initiatives and those aligned with SDG2 is proven to be more effective in reducing hunger and malnutrition in all its forms. FAO remains committed to supporting member countries in this endeavor.

It is crucial to recognize that the effectiveness of repurposing investments and intervention approaches in agrifood systems will depend on the specific context, including factors such as climate change, supply chain interdependencies, and the heightened risk of supply chain disruptions. FAO's country reports and reports from other public and international institutions offer valuable insights into successful initiatives, which often inform the design of new interventions.

Repurposing investments and intervention approaches in agrifood systems are vital for building resilience and ensuring food security in the face of climate change and supply chain disruptions. However, it is essential to consider the context when evaluating what has worked and what hasn't.

A Special Ministerial Meeting for SIDS is scheduled to take place, with a specific focus on SDG targets and sustainable transformation of the agrifood system in the context of SIDS, LDCs, and LLDCs. This meeting will provide an opportunity for in-depth discussions on how to address the unique challenges and opportunities that these countries face.

1. We note the four studies presented in APRC/24/5 that aimed to estimate the additional investment required to achieve SDG2 targets by 2030 and the proposed financing options, both internal and external.

2. Pronounced deficits in annual investments in pursuing SDGs are highlighted. We underscore the investment needed for climate change adaptation and mitigation which is estmated to be between USD145-­‐155 million annually.

3. The Philippines recognizes the urgency of revitalizing and transforming the country’s agri-­‐food system to accelerate economic growth, reduce poverty incidence and eliminate hunger, including the need to mobilize financing, requiring the combined strengths, insights, and resources of the public and private sectors.

4. Investing in critical physical and digital infrastructure is crucial to boost the resiliency and productivity of our agriculture and fisheries sector.

In general, on infrastructure, our target is to raise spending at above 5 percent of GDP annually until 2028. The investor community is being urged to explore the Philippine government’s 197 Infrastructure Flagship Projects (IFPs), with an indicative investment requirement of about 155 billion US dollars, a significant amount of which is for the construction and establishment of needed agri-­‐fishery related infrastructure. Foremost of these will go for the construction of more irrigation and post-­‐harvest facilities, improved logistics services with the construction of farm to market roads and fish port facilities, improved digital connectivity, and expansion of opportunities for agribusiness with greater access and availability of sustainable energy sources and facilities.

These IFPs shall be prioritized under the government’s annual budget preparation and enjoy the benefits of expedited approval processes consistent with current legal frameworks.

5. The Philippines is working on improving production efficiency through farm clustering or consolidation to take advantage of economies of scale; enable the full adoption of modern agricultural and fishery technologies; and increase access to production inputs, including the provision of credit.

6. Through the landmark New Agrarian Emancipation Act, we freed over 600 thousand Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries of indebtedness by writing off land amortizations amounting to 57 billion pesos.

7. In pursuit of a sustainable energy supply, we have opened up the renewable energy sector to full foreign ownership.

8. Domestic social protection programs are augmented and supported through external funding such as the recent World Food Programme and the OPEC Fund contribution to the food e-­‐voucher national flagship programme supported through grants from the ADB, the Japan Fund for Prosperous and Resilient Asia and the Pacific, and the AFD.

9. To augment financial resources to fast track development of the agri and fishery sector, we continue to tap ODA financing for     agriculture-­‐related programs and projects. For example, the World Bank is implementing, together with the Department of Agriculture three projects, namely, the Mindanao Inclusive Agriculture Development Project or MIADP, the Philippine Fisheries and Coastal Resiliency Project or FISHCORE, and the Scale-­‐Up of the Philippine Rural Development Project or PRDP, which cost around 876 million US Dollars.

The Philippines also obtained budget support financing through a 150 million Euro loan from AFD (Agence Francaise de Developpement) for the Climate Change Action Program. A co-­‐financing operation of a previously signed 250 million US-­‐dollar Asian Development bank (ADB) loan also supports the country’s ambitious climate action and green recovery, including through agricultural resilience components. A 500 million US dollar loan agreement with the ADB for the second subprogram of the Competitive and Inclusive Agriculture Development Program was also secured. This aims to increase the competitiveness and inclusiveness of the agriculture sector.

4. we take note of the Philippine’s specific context and needs to invest in rural infrastructure.

5-9 – We appreciate Philippine’s efforts and achievements in progress towards SDGs, in particular its focus on rural communities.  

1. Thailand recognizes that budgets and investments in the agricultural and food sectors are critical factors in transforming resilient agricultural and food systems in a sustainable and inclusive manner. 

2. During the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Summit 2023 at the United Nations Headquarters, New York City, USA, September 2023, the Prime Minister of Thailand expressed his intention and commitment to steer the country towards sustainable development and Financing for Development (FfD) is one of the key issues to drive sustainable development. Thailand also supports the expansion of Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) to increase funding for the construction of development projects and as a mechanism to better cope with the financial liquidity crisis in the region, highlighting on reducing transaction costs and expanding access to financial services, especially for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs).

3. Thailand issues sustainability bonds and promotes cooperation related to ESG-related instruments in the capital market continuously since 2020 to be used for various project development. In 2024, sustainability-linked bonds will be issued to stimulate the green bond market, as well as the development of the Thailand Taxonomy framework to promote investment activities and sustainable financing in line with international standards.

• Recommendation.
  • Support the national foresight research to identify transformative actions which will further use to engage private sector investment.

2. Acknowledge Thailand’s efforts to improve access to affordable finance in the region with a focus on reduced transaction costs and facilitating access to finance by SMEs. 

3. Thailand’s experience in issuing and managing green and sustainability-linked bonds are commendable and would be beneficial to other countries. FAO recommends sharing these experiences with other countries in the region.

FAO acknowledges and supports the recommendation for foresight studies and public finance repurposing exercises to leverage impactful investments from public and private sectors as well as ODA.