المنتدى العالمي المعني بالأمن الغذائي والتغذية

Introduction 

We very much welcome the opportunity to input into the scoping document of building resilient food systems. 

Background 

Our single overarching criticism of the HLPE Inequalities report and the CFS policy development process is this lack of focus on where food insecurity and malnutrition are the greatest. This lack of focus means that we are not applying implementation guidance in contexts where food systems are least resilient and governments capacity to respond are dependent on international aid. 

We have contributed to all five public consultations towards the development of the inequalities report and the ongoing policy development process. We have studied and learned from many of the submissions in each stage of the process. Our double-edged conclusion was that the expertise within the framework of the CFS is currently focused on the contexts of chronic hunger. This we saw was having knock-on implications for reaching the most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition. 

What surprised us most was that despite this focus, the policy recommendations which are still in development aligned very easily with the humanitarian frameworks and the protracted crisis. In a very real way, our review showed us the universality of need. While there is clear policy alignment within the equity working group we would expect to see the same alignment when within the Food Resilience working group.

Overarching recommendation. 

 Our overarching recommendation for the final input into the Inequalities policy development process is the same for the scope of this important report. That is we need to add a knowledge layer of context-specific to those most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition and understand central barriers to implementation. 

This vital knowledge layer aligns with MYPoW by giving direct “attention to the people most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition”. 

It also aligns with our Sustainable Development goals to reach the furthest behind first and will provide a much-needed pathway to end extreme poverty by 2030.

 Broadening the scope of this report to include those most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition presents a partial knowledge vacuum within the HLPE and the CFS. That is because the CFS has traditionally been guided towards chronic hunger as framed within the SOFI Report. This focus can be seen within the inputs in HLPE public consultations as well as the backgrounds of the HLPE sterling committee and writing teams. Please see our short policy input paper for the Reducing Inequalities Workstream on the knowledge vacuum we believe we have identified.   https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/cfs/Docs2324/Inequalities/Inputs_on_priority_policy_areas/_Policy_input_paper_for_the_Reducing_Inequality_Workstream_by_Mothers_First.pdf

We very much welcome the contribution to this platform from the Global Network Against Food Crisis which well frames food systems in fragile settings. https://assets.fsnforum.fao.org/public/contributions/2024/Global%20Network%20contribution_Building%20resilient%20food%20systems.pdf

To aid context specification we suggest the broader scope of the report will require the writing team's scope of experience to extend to acute hunger and malnutrition, particularly in humanitarian crises.

We would like to propose for consideration Daniel Maxwell,  Boston, MA: Feinstein International Center, Tufts University 

https://facultyprofiles.tufts.edu/daniel-maxwell  might be an obvious choice, particularly  considering his recent Landscape report on famine 

https://fic.tufts.edu/wp-content/uploads/Famine-Prevention-Landscape2023.pdf

The remainder of this input paper will focus on three areas where context specificity is import 

1 The Universality of Need.

2. A focused approach to reaching the Furthest behind

3 Human Rights 

4 Conclusion. 

Please find the file attached submission