Building resilient food systems - HLPE-FSN consultation on the scope of the report
During its 51st plenary session (23-27 October 2023), the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) adopted its four-year Programme of Work (MYPOW 2024-2027), which includes a request to its High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE-FSN) to produce a report on “Building resilient food systems” to be presented at the 53rd plenary session of the CFS in October 2025.
The text of the CFS request, as included in the MYPOW, is as follows:
Global challenges to food security and nutrition, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, conflicts, extreme weather events due to climate change, natural disasters, loss of biodiversity and land degradation, reveal structural vulnerabilities of agriculture and food systems. These shocks and stresses may disrupt food value chains and, when combined with other factors such as financial or economic crises, may lead to unaffordability and/or unavailability of healthy food. There are also deep inequalities and unsustainable practices in the current food distribution and marketing systems. There is wide recognition of the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of agriculture and food systems, and growing calls to improve their functioning so that they are able to respond to current and future challenges, seeking to diversify sources of inputs, production, markets, supply chain and actors, supporting the creation of small and medium-sized companies, cooperatives, consortiums and other groups to maintain diversity in the agriculture and food value chains. Given the increased frequency of shocks to agriculture and food systems in recent years and the growing risks from a range of sources, it is imperative to explore more deeply how they can be made more resilient – that is, more capable of recovering, adapting and transforming in the face of shocks – as well as more equitable and sustainable, so that they are able to support all dimensions of food security. Understanding the different types of vulnerabilities of agriculture and food systems, and their implications for the different actors involved, will enable CFS to provide a space for exchange and convergence on the policy measures needed to enhance the resilience of local, regional and global food supply chains, including consideration of inclusive and equitable employment opportunities, the role of trade, environmental sustainability, access to healthy diets and human rights.
Objectives and expected outcomes: The objective of the workstream is to create a set of focused, action-oriented policy recommendations on “Building resilient food systems” as a key means of achieving the CFS vision, SDG2, and an array of other SDGs, including SDGs SDG 8, 10, 12, 14 and 15, as a result of the contribution that agriculture and food systems make to livelihoods and natural systems. The workstream will benefit from the findings and recommendations of an HLPE-FSN report on the topic.
To respond to the CFS request, the HLPE-FSN will develop the report “Building resilient food systems”, which will provide recommendations to the CFS workstream of the same title under the focus area: “Fostering resilience of agriculture and food systems to shocks and stresses”. The HLPE-FSN has drafted the scope of the report and seek for the feedback from stakeholders.
Draft scope of the HLPE-FSN report
Food systems have become increasingly complex in recent decades, characterized by growing cross-border trade in food products organized along “just-in-time” distribution systems and the reliance on millions of food system workers to supply inputs and produce, process, move, market and prepare food along the way to its ultimate destination. Different components of food systems have different degrees of vulnerability and resilience to different types of shocks, depending on their characteristics. For example, food supply chains depend on well-functioning transportation networks (Colon et al., 2021), require vast quantities of land, water and fossil fuel energy (Taherzadeh et al., 2021), and rely on regulations to ensure safety and quality (Machado Nardi et al., 2020). In the case of globally oriented food supply chains, these rely on predictable channels of international trade, enabled by globally agreed rules. Domestic food supply chains require robust local and regional infrastructure for inputs, production, stockholding, processing, distribution and marketing. Food supply chains can become strained when any one of the multiple and interconnected factors required for their proper operation is affected negatively. The risks associated with disruptions and existing inequities in these systems can be multiplied when food supply chains rigidly rely exclusively on global or local supplies and labour, or when there are multiple shocks affecting food systems simultaneously (FAO, 2021a). It is important to recognize that food supply chain dynamics are also highly context specific, with unique structures and organization in different regions and countries (Nchanji and Lutomia, 2021).
According to the HLPE-FSN 3rd Note on critical, emerging and enduring issues (2022), these types of shocks have the potential to negatively impact multiple dimensions of food security and nutrition. The 2020 HLPE-FSN report states that we must urgently seize the moment to fundamentally transform food systems and to rebalance priorities to ensure that all people are food secure at all times. The call to action of the United Nations Food Systems Summit (2021) focused on five objectives, one of which is building resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks[1] and stresses[2].
This growing awareness of the impact of shocks on food systems and FSN, and the need to enhance resilience of food systems needs stronger conceptual framing and actionable policy recommendations. The HLPE-FSN report will propose a framework for better understanding resilience in the context of food systems and FSN, and consequently for approaching resilience planning. It will review countries’ experiences in creating more resilient food systems, especially with the objective to identify innovations that can enhance resilience and the policies needed to realize this potential.
This report “Building resilient food systems” will be framed by conceptual understandings and analysis of previous HLPE-FSN reports, especially concerning food systems, the focus on the right to food, and the six dimensions of food security. The report will consider shocks of multiple origins that hit countries often already structurally affected by climate change and other stressing social, political or economic factors. In such contexts, the report will identify how a country can best prepare to unforeseen shocks, while preserving sustainability. The report will identify the food systems’ activities, actors and population groups particularly at risk in protracted crises, whilst prioritizing food security and nutrition outcomes.
Resilience is a systemic and complex topic. It varies across regions, changes according to scale, and may involve trade-offs where the same policies that create resilience in one dimension (e.g. environmental) may have shortcomings in another (e.g. access to food).
The HLPE-FSN reports will investigate numerous dimensions of resilience, including the extent to which individual and household food security and nutrition are resilient based on human and financial resources. Families with abundant human and financial resources may be better able to maintain nutritious diets despite shocks(Stringer et al., 2019), but wealth does not always translate in better nutrition, as access, education and awareness have a great impact on consumers’ choices (Popkin, B. M., 2002)
Second, the resilience of food production must also be evaluated based on agroecological factors at the primary production level. Farms, animal production, fisheries and other agricultural production with abundant biodiversity, healthy soils, water, and landscape heterogeneity are often more resilient than intensive systems during shocks and crises, such as droughts or pest outbreaks. The literature suggests that such systems can recover faster after a shock. Therefore, interventions supporting agronomic practices that boost agroecological health can build resiliency.
A third key element of resilience that should be considered is community resilience, which can be enhanced by social capital and networks, civil society and infrastructure. Communities with well-developed social networks and inclusive infrastructure, functioning civil society organizations, lower crime rates, higher participation in public life and decision making, and better access to services may mobilize collective responses to shocks and thus maintain integrity of food systems even during crises (Fraser, E.D., 2006).
Fourth, the resilience of food supply chains in their entirety must be considered (Davis et al., 2021). Efficient and smooth-running supply chains are a vital part of a functioning food system, yet they can easily get disrupted at the onset of a shock, as it has happened in conjunction with COVID-19 and the restrictive policies enforced to contain the pandemic. In addition, food transportation, processing, packaging and retail are a vital source of economic opportunity and livelihoods for millions. Understanding the resilience of supply chains, therefore, is a critical aspect of understanding food system resilience.
A fifth important element in any resilience framework is linked to the institutional resilience of state/local governments. States, local authorities and other institutions that can provide safety nets, early warning systems and good governance offer greater resilience to citizens and are better able to timely implement effective responses when crises emerge.
In the face of the growing frequency and intensity of shocks, making food systems more resilient, as well as more equitable and sustainable, is essential for FSN. Potential measures to improve the functioning of the supply chain include: encouraging greater diversity at all stages of food production, processing, trade and retail, allowing for a better balance between food supply chains at global, regional and local levels, to reduce overreliance on a single food supply channel; promoting shorter supply chains that support local producers; making supply chains more inclusive by creating more equitable employment and income opportunities; finding innovative means of connecting input suppliers to producers and producers to processors and traders, including through widely accessible digital technologies; instituting more effective measures to ensure environmental sustainability at all points along food systems from production to consumption; increasing the transparency of input and output markets and developing international agricultural trade rules that support resilient food systems; strengthening infrastructure to support supply chains at multiple scales, including the local and regional level; strengthening food environments so that they become more resilient and can play a role in mitigating the impact of shocks on access to food; and adopting more coherent policies that support measures for improving food systems’ resilience.
Understanding the different types of vulnerabilities of agriculture and food systems, and their implications for the different actors involved, will set the stage for the CFS to be a catalyst for exchange and convergence on the policy measures needed to enhance the resilience of local, regional and global food systems, including adequate consideration of inclusive and just employment opportunities, the role of trade, environmental sustainability, access to affordable healthy diets and equitable food environments, underpinned by the realization of human rights.
QUESTIONS TO GUIDE THE E-CONSULTATION
ON THE SCOPE OF THE HLPE-FSN REPORT
Based on this framing, in this consultation we seek inputs to the following thematic areas:
|
|
Different ways of defining resilience :
|
| 2. |
Understanding what we must be prepared for – the nature of shocks:
|
| 3. |
Understanding and mitigating trade-offs:
|
| 4. |
Existing programmes and policies to promote resilience – a gap analysis of current strategies and recommendations:
|
| 5. | Share recent literature, case studies and data that could help answer the questions listed above. |
The results of this consultation will be used by the HLPE-FSN to elaborate the report, which will then be made public in its V0 draft for e-consultation, and later submitted to peer review, before finalization and approval by the HLPE-FSN drafting team and the Steering Committee.
We thank in advance all the contributors for reading, commenting and providing inputs on the scope of this HLPE-FSN report. The comments are welcome in English, French and Spanish languages.
This e-consultation is open until 25 June 2024.
The HLPE-FSN looks forward to a rich consultation!
Co-facilitators:
Paola Termine, HLPE-FSN Coordinator ad interim, HLPE-FSN Secretariat
Silvia Meiattini, Communications and outreach specialist, HLPE-FSN Secretariat
Please note that in parallel to this scoping consultation, the HLPE-FSN is calling for interested experts to candidate to the drafting team for this report. The call for candidature is open until 12 June 2024. Read more here
References
Colon, C., Hallegate, S. & Rozenberg, J. 2021. Criticality analysis of a country’s transport network via an agent-based supply chain model. Nature Sustainability, 4: 209-215.
Committee on World Food Security (CFS) (2023). CFS Multi-Year Programme of Work 2024-2027. CFS 2023/51/7.
Davis, K. F., Downs, S., & Gephart, J. A. (2021). Towards food supply chain resilience to environmental shocks. Nature Food, 2(1), 54-65.
FAO. 2021a. The State of Food and Agriculture 2021. Making agrifood systems more resilient to shocks and stresses. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/ cb4476en
Fraser, E. D. (2006). Food system vulnerability: Using past famines to help understand how food systems.
HLPE. 2022. Critical, emerging and enduring issues for food security and nutrition. A note by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security. Rome.
Machado Nardi, V. A., Auler, D. P., & Teixeira, R. 2020. Food safety in global supply chains: A literature review. Journal of Food Science, 85(4): 883-891.
Matsushita, K., Yamane, F., & Asano, K. (2016). Linkage between crop diversity and agro-ecosystem resilience: Nonmonotonic agricultural response under alternate regimes. Ecological Economics, 126, 23-31.
Nchanji, E.B. & Lutomia, C.K. 2021. Sustainability of the agri-food supply chain amidst the pandemic: Diversification, local input production, and consumer behaviour. In: Cohen, M.J., ed. Advances in Food Security and Sustainability, 6: 1-288. https:// hdl.handle.net/10568/115941
Popkin, B. M. (2002). The dynamics of the dietary transition in the developing world. In The Nutrition Transition (pp. 111-128). Academic Press.
Stringer, L., Fraser, E., Harris, D., Lyon, C., Pereira, L., Ward, C., & Simelton, E. (2019). Adaptation and development pathways for different types of farmers: key messages.
Taherzadeh, O., Bithell, M. & Richards, K. 2021. Water, energy and land insecurity in global supply chains. Global Environmental Change, 67: 102158.
United Nations Food Systems Summit 2021. Secretary-General’s Chair Summary and Statement of Action on the UN Food Systems Summit https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-summit/news/making-food-systems-work-people-planet-and-prosperity
[1] FAO defines Shocks as “Short-term deviations from long-term trends that have substantial negative effects on a system, people’s state of well-being, assets, livelihoods, safety and ability to withstand future shocks. Shocks impacting on food systems include disasters, extreme climate events, biological and technological events, surges in plant and animal diseases and pests, socio-economic crises and conflicts. Shocks may be covariate or idiosyncratic.” SOFA 2021, https://www.fao.org/3/cb4476en/cb4476en.pdf
[2] FAO defines Stresses as Long-term trends or pressures that undermine the stability of a system and increase vulnerability within it. Stresses can result from natural resource degradation, urbanization, demographic pressure, climate variability, political instability or economic decline. SOFA 2021, https://www.fao.org/3/cb4476en/cb4476en.pdf
الموضوعات
- أقرأ 59 المساهمات
الدكتور Juan Carlos Fonseca Sánchez
RESILIENCIA DEL SISTEMA ALIMENTARIO Y GOBERNANZA POLICÉNTRICA SOBRE EL BIEN COMÚN FRENTE AL CAMBIO CLIMÁTICO
El cambio climático conlleva notablemente la escasez de los recursos naturales, pudiendo agravarse en un futuro próximo, creando mayores conflictos por la pugna desde cualquiera de sus múltiples usos, entre ellos la producción de alimentos para una creciente población del planeta. En la literatura económica especializada, Elinor Ostrom define los bienes de uso común como aquellos recursos que presentan una alta sustractibilidad de uso y una gran dificultad de excluir beneficiarios potenciales. Además, por cuanto resultan ser los bienes de todos, pero en su conservación, resultan los bienes de nadie, e incluso, pueden llegar a situaciones extremas de agotamiento. Ostrom y otros autores plantean que los bienes comunes –entre ellos el agua–, siguen siendo manejados dentro de una postura dicotómica entre Estado y mercado, que resulta ineficiente en su gestión. Por tanto, es fundamental fortalecer las instituciones, las redes de cooperación y la gobernanza policéntrica, de cara al cambio climático y otros problemas que afectan a la sociedad. En este escenario, el objetivo general es analizar la importancia de las transformaciones del sistema alimentario y su capacidad de resiliencia frente al cambio climático u otros eventos adversos, considerando la gobernanza policéntrica en el manejo de los recursos; en especial, aquellos de uso común. Con base en la revisión e interpretación de la literatura especializada sobre el objeto de estudio, destaca que actualmente se demandan sistemas alimentarios sostenibles y cada vez más resilientes, para garantizar a largo plazo, el acceso a alimentos suficientes, inocuos y nutritivos, con la finalidad de prevenir y absorber los impactos no previstos de diversos fenómenos. Asimismo, se subraya la necesidad de tomar en cuenta criterios de equidad, inclusión y prácticas de producción y consumo responsables, repensando el papel del Estado y la articulación interinstitucional de los actores.
Dear FSN,
I am Mike Hands, a Founder/Trustee of Inga Foundation in UK. I was a Researcher in the University of Cambridge for 16 years, but based mainly in Central America (1986-2002). We were researching the Ecology of slash-and-burn agriculture in an acid-soil rain forest environment; and particularly conducting long-term trials of different cropping systems for the production of basic grains.
I would like to draw the Forum's attention to Inga Foundation's Land for Life Program in Honduras which has been implementing the findings of the four Cambridge projects since 2012.
The context here is highly-degraded soils on steep, rocky hillsides in the Cordillera Nombre de Díos. Many of these sites have been subject to slash-and-burn episodes repeated over a period of more than a century, in most cases. The farmers who now own these small farms describe them as "estéril" (Sterile); they are generally dominated by invasive fire-climax grasses and/or scrub vegetation.
By planting Inga trees in dense alley-cropping (a-c) configuration; and by adding mineral supplements (Rock-P, Dolomitic Lime and K-Mag), we have been able to restore the fertility and moisture-holding capacity of these soils within 2-3 years.
Around 500 families are currently, and successfully, implementing Inga a-c which is at the heart of a broader agroforestry model known there as the Guama (Inga) Model. Inga a-c is a mulching system that generates its own Nitrogen inputs to the soil. These families have achieved food-security in basic grains in the face of climatic extreme conditions. In the prolonged droughts of 2016, 2019, 2023 and this year, the only farmers to take in grain crops were those using the Inga a-c system. The key to its success is that the soil is never exposed to the full force of the sun; it is protected, firstly by the dense Inga canopy; and secondly, following annual pruning, by a deep mulch of Inga leaves. This retains residual moisture within the soil, making it available to the crop.
The system is being replicated in 15 other humid tropical countries.
Once the families have achieved food-security in basic grains on permanent Inga-c plots, they can remove residual land from the slash-and-burn cycle and can plant more extensively-managed agroforest systems; the remaining three components of the Guama Model. They produce a wide diversity of cash-crops, fruit crops and, eventually, fine tropical timber. The model has transformed the families' economies; it is regenerating springs of fresh water and is re-greening the landscape.
Here is the point regarding resilience: Tree-based systems, like forests, are resilient to both drought and violent storms because the roots anchor the soil, which can receive and retain massive volumes of rainfall without erosive damage. Soil Organic Matter (SOM) under forest acts as a sponge, releasing water slowly. As outlined above, the canopy, litter layer and/or mulch resist violent rainstorms.
The model is outlined in a recent publication by The Royal Society Open Science platform:
Hands, M. R. 2021: The search for a sustainable alternative to slash-and-burn agriculture in the World's Rain Forests: The Guama Model and its Implementation.
Royal Society Open Science. Vol. 8: Issue 2.
The Royal Society. London.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201204
and is better described on: www.ingafoundation.org
Thank you for your kind patience if you have read this far
Mike Hands
Inga Foundation
Il s'agit d'un sujet extrêmement important pour l'avenir de l'Humanité sur la planète. Jusqu'à présent compte tenu de la population mondiale et de l'ampleur des terres émergées disponibles, l'homme ne s'est pas trop posée la question en déforestant et en migrant si nécessaire pour sa subsistance.
Le changement climatique avec ses conséquences sur les variations de notre environnement, et des effets induits (pandémies, notamment) soumet nos systèmes agricoles et alimentaires (on parle trop souvent de systèmes alimentaires, en oubliant la partie agricole, il nous faudrait parler de système agricoles et alimentaires, pour inclure la production) à des chocs qui seront de plus en plus fréquents et forts comme cela est bien indiqué dans la note de couverture. Il me paraît important de souligner deux points dans le contexte de cette consultation.
- A la lecture du document d'appel et de couverture, l'accent est clairement mis sur la partie post production agricole : approvisionnement des marchés, transport des marchandises, distribution, soit plus la partie accès à l'alimentation. Il me semble indispensable de donner autant d'importance à la partie production et résilience de la production, car sans production pas d'approvisionnement, et donc pas d'alimentation. C'est une évidence, mais cela ne me paraît pas assez ressortir de tout le texte. Je plaide donc pour un développement conséquent de cette partie, et la FAO et ses membres, ainsi que le CSA et ses observateurs et partenaires sont bien placés pour aborder ce thème en profondeur.
- Un point crucial dans le cadre de ce thème de la production agricole et de sa nécessaire résilience, il s'agit de la santé des sols. Ce sujet apparaît une seule fois dans le texte de couverture (on y trouve une autre fois les sols, et les terres), or c'est LE sujet central de la résilience de l'ensemble des systèmes agricoles et alimentaires. Sans une santé des sols satisfaisantes, nous ne pouvons envisager aucun avenir sur la planète pour l'Humanité, et encore moins parler de résilience. plus de 30% des sols de la planète sont dégradés à très dégradés et ce sera plus de 80 % en 2050 si rien n'est fait. Je ne parle ici de "qualité des sols" ni même de "fertilité des sols", mais bien de "santé des sols" c'est à dire de la capacité des sols au niveau de leur fonctionnement à délivrer des services à l'environnement (notamment la biodiversité) et à l'homme (à travers la production d'aliments et de produits biosourcés). Cette santé des sols est directement liée à leur richesse en carbone, richesse qui en outre leur confère la capacité de stocker du carbone de façon utile à la lutte contre le changement climatique, et l'érosion de la biodiversité.
L'Initiative internationale "4 pour 1000" est prête à contribuer dans ce sens à ce travail.
Different ways of defining resilience : Animal Rights groups might say a system was 'resilient' if animals always received humane treatment and slaughter e.g. the OIE Terrestrial Code, and the EU 5 Freedoms during any kind of crisis/shock (e.g. swine flu/bird flu). Other shocks include flooding, where animals are left to drown. Heat waves, where animals are left to cook alive with no water. Extreme cold, where animals are left to freeze to death (links for these issues at end). I would appreciate that FAO looked at all the links so you can understand the scale of torture.
During Swine Flu, Bird Flu, the main vulnerabilities facing food supply chain is inhumane disposal of animals. Tens of thousands of pigs and chickens are being buried alive and also burned alive, for the crime of having a virus. This is not a resilient food system. The following examples are all in China - the country of the FAO Director, who talks about green food systems, and humane practices.
https://www.ciwf.org.uk/news/2018/09/pigs-are-being-buried-alive-in-chi…
https://www.kinderworld.org/blog/the-hidden-victims-of-the-swine-fever-…
https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/an-inhumane-and-dange…
https://www.kinderworld.org/videos/meat-industry/pigs-buried-alive-sout…
What are the determinants, assets and skills that lead to resilience at different scales (household, community, national, regional)? You have to have governments who have a heart and compassion for animals. Governments who follow the OIE Terrestrial Code/EU 5 Freedoms correctly. Governments that would fine anyone for burning and burying pigs alive. Sadly governments all over the world ignore the petitions sent to them asking for better treatment of animals.
How can resilience be evaluated and/or measured at different scales (household, community, national, regional)? You need professional evaluators, independent of the governments. They should have a check list. In the case of swine flu, by law the evaluator should attend and ensure that no pigs are being buried or burned alive.
What indicators would measure that food systems are resilient across their different components (e.g. consumption, supply chains, retail and production)? In the case of Swine Flu - an indicator was. Did you burn alive or bury alive the pigs, or did you follow the OIE guidelines correctly. How many pigs were buried alive? How many pigs were burned alive. How many pigs were killed humanely according to OIE guidelines.
Which and where are the weak points in global food systems in terms of ensuring the resilience of food security and nutrition? All animal rights activists will tell you the weak point is governments who do not care. Especially in food systems with animals. China for example, millions of dogs and cats are boiled alive, turtles are boiled alive, octopus are boiled alive, new born lambs are cooked alive as their mothers give birth in ovens, monkeys are eaten alive, and the governments receive thousands of petitions on this subject, but they don't care. In USA, thousands of pigs and chickens are scalded and dismembered alive but the governments ignore petitions. They also call you a terrorist and give you 20 year sentence if you go in to try and report on animal torture. I do hope FAO speaks to governments about this. Animal rights activists are the good guys, and FAO should be helping us. I repeat - the weak point of resilience in animal agriculture are the governments, because they do not care. If they cared, then this would not be happening.
What types of shock are more relevant to food systems and which ones are more likely to affect FSN? What type of shocks have been under-researched, especially regarding their impact on FSN and food systems?
Virus shocks in live stock are under researched. You only have to look at how the animals are being discarded to know that. Heat shocks are under researched, freezing shocks are under researched. I attach evidence at end.
How might different kinds of shocks (e.g. climatic, social, financial or political) affect different regions and different aspects of the food system (e.g. production, processing or distribution)?
There are plenty of climatic shocks e.g. no water that affect live stock who are left to die with no water. There is the shock of swine flu and bird flu. There are shocks because its too cold and animals freeze to death, and because its too hot, animals bake alive.
https://mercyforanimals.org/blog/sickening-new-video-reveals-calves-freezing/
https://animalsaustralia.org/our-work/live-export/lynn-simpson-a-life-live-export-stories/
There was also the shock of Covid. Because a factory in USA had to close during Covid, the pigs were just steamed alive, to get rid of them. The person who tried to report on this was called a terrorist by the US Government.
Thousands of pigs are steamed to death at Iowa's largest pork producer | Daily Mail Online
What types of policy changes are needed to enhance the resilience of local, regional and global food systems, including with respect to global trading rules and considering inclusive and equitable employment opportunities, environmental sustainability, access to healthy diets and human rights? The governments need to be serious and should be accounting to someone at the UN, and should sign up to a PACT. They ignore the OIE Terrestrial Code. The governments need to sign up to the UN Pact and promise they will protect animals from the ROUTINE torture. I call it routine, because if you care to look at all the links and videos I send, you will see its always torture, not slaughter.
What is the role of states in building more resilient food systems, including with respect to providing infrastructure, regulatory measures, international policy coordination and policy coherence?
The governments are not following any regulations when it comes to Animal Welfare. Any regulations that are there are often ignored. This is why there is so much animal torture (its torture not slaughter). The governments do not care.
What measures are necessary to incentivize private sector strategies and investments that promote supply chain resilience? In the case of Animal Agriculture, the measures must be very strict legal laws, imprisonment for bosses who allow animal torture. Imprisonment for factory farming boss who allow factory farms to torture animals. In the case of all these animals scalded alive (being tortured) its because the private sector says there is not enough time to ensure they all receive humane slaughter. They say they cannot afford it in the production line time scales to give animals a humane slaughter. The UNFAO must address this. Millions of pigs in factory farms are not afforded the luxury of bleeding out before being scalded or dismembered, and this is in the USA. In China of course its the same. If the UNFAO and OIE allow this to continue, then everyone has failed the SDGS. The UNFAO forget that animal sentience is a big part of the SDGS.
https://mercyforanimals.org/blog/uk-study-thousands-of-farmed-animals-s…
¿Cómo definen los diferentes grupos la resiliencia (p.ej. las organizaciones de los pueblos indígenas, la literatura científica/revisada por pares, otros titulares de derechos clave)?
Para el sector público la resiliencia se plantea desde acciones prioritarias para adaptar el desarrollo regional a la crisis climática, en áreas claves como infraestructura, turismo resiliente y producción agropecuaria sostenible. Costa Rica aborda la resiliencia a partir de planes regionales. https://www.mideplan.go.cr/regiones-de-costa-rica-priorizan-medidas-de-…
¿Cuáles son los principales tipos de vulnerabilidades que enfrentan las cadenas de suministro y cuáles son las posibles consecuencias para los actores del sistema alimentario (entre ellos, los suministradores de insumos, los productores de alimentos, los comerciantes, los trabajadores del sistema alimentario y los consumidores) considerando los diferentes tipos de perturbaciones posibles?
Para el sector agropecuario una de las vulnerabilidades mas importantes es el financiamiento y seguros agropecuarios adecuados, considerando los riesgos de fenómenos naturales, plagas, enfermedades, tipo de cambio, entre otros aspectos.
¿Qué tipo de desigualdades y desequilibrios de poder están presentes en los sistemas alimentarios y cómo afectan a la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición resilientes, especialmente en el caso de los grupos que se enfrentan a aspectos multidimensionales e interconectados de la desigualdad y la vulnerabilidad?
Establecer sistemas de comercio justos y equitativos.
¿Podría proporcionar casos de éxito y ejemplos de mejores prácticas que puedan aplicarse a otros lugares?
Existe una metodología que se ha implementado en áfrica, denominada SHEP es un enfoque en la extensión agrícola que facilita que los pequeños agricultores lleven a cabo una agricultura orientada al mercado. Ayuda a la persona productora a producir de acuerdo a lo que demanda el mercado, de esta forma se promueve el comercio local. https://www.jica.go.jp/Resource/english/our_work/thematic_issues/agricultural/shep/c8h0vm0000bm5ayp-att/handbook_sp.pdf
I am writing on behalf of Aquatic Life Institute, an organization dedicated to improving the lives of trillions of aquatic animals involved in aquaculture and marine capture fisheries globally. Our work involves collaborating with seafood certifiers to define high-welfare seafood products, engaging with stakeholders throughout the seafood supply chain, and influencing policy changes at the global level. We would like to express our gratitude for the opportunity to participate in this important consultation on building resilient food systems.
Aquatic systems, particularly those involving aquaculture and fisheries, represent a critical intersection of biodiversity and human livelihood. Resilience in these systems can be viewed through the lens of environmental sustainability, the capacity for ecosystems to recover from shocks such as overfishing or habitat destruction, and the ability of communities to sustain their livelihoods in harmony with marine environments.
Aquatic ecosystems are highly sensitive to climatic shocks, including warming waters and increased acidification, both of which dramatically affect marine biodiversity. Social and political shocks, such as regulatory changes and trade restrictions, can also have significant implications, particularly for communities reliant on fishing. These shocks often exacerbate existing vulnerabilities, such as those caused by non-sustainable fishing practices and inadequate management of marine resources.
In building resilience within aquatic food systems, there is often a trade-off between maximizing short-term economic gains and ensuring long-term sustainability. For instance, intensive aquaculture practices may provide immediate economic benefits but can lead to negative outcomes such as water pollution and fish welfare issues. Balancing these trade-offs requires a shift towards more sustainable and welfare-oriented practices that can support resilience without compromising ecological and social integrity.
Our ongoing engagements have highlighted several innovative practices and policies that can enhance resilience. Our engagements at the Aquatic Life Institute emphasize enhancing aquatic animal welfare to build resilience in aquatic food systems. We advocate for enriched environments that meet species-specific needs, sustainable and optimized feed practices, appropriate stocking densities to reduce stress, rigorous water quality management, and humane slaughter methods. These interventions are crucial for maintaining healthy aquatic populations capable of withstanding environmental shocks, thus supporting sustainable and ethical food production practices across the aquatic food supply chain. Policies supporting these practices are crucial and need broader implementation and recognition in national and international frameworks.
To enhance the resilience of aquatic food systems, Aquatic Life Institute recommends the following:
- Advocate for international policies that effectively manage shared marine resources and integrate high standards of aquatic animal welfare alongside environmental sustainability.
- Encourage the adoption and enforcement of welfare standards that ensure humane practices in aquaculture, such as those addressing enriched environments, appropriate stocking densities, and humane slaughter practices. These standards should be designed to maintain ecosystem health and reduce the impact on marine biodiversity.
- Promote research and implementation of ecosystem-based management practices in fisheries that consider the welfare of all aquatic animals involved, focusing on reducing bycatch and improving the conditions of capture to minimize stress and injury.
- Develop clear guidelines and provide support systems for transitioning traditional and small-scale fishers towards more sustainable practices that incorporate welfare considerations, such as reducing the duration of trawls and using gear that minimizes environmental damage and animal suffering.
- Increase public awareness and consumer demand for high welfare and environmentally sustainable seafood products by highlighting the ethical, environmental, and health benefits of such choices.
We believe these focused recommendations will significantly contribute to the HLPE-FSN's efforts to build more resilient and humane food systems globally. We look forward to the development of the report and are eager to support its recommendations through our network and expertise.
Thank you for considering our contribution.
While diversification, as previously mentioned, can strengthen resilience, a certain level of specialisation within the different links of the food chain is often desirable from the perspective of economic efficiency. After all, maintaining and implementing a wide range of activities at a high level within a single enterprise is not always possible.
The foundations for sustainability in the livestock sector are built on high labour productivity, a meaningful production programme, continuous innovation, and the integration of up-to-date scientific knowledge and technology advancements. These elements are crucial for ensuring affordable food and the overall stability of the sector.
The capacity of farmers to unite under one organisation, such as a marketing cooperative, for example, is essential for defending their own interests. These organisations can empower farmers to negotiate better prices for their agricultural products and strengthen their market position. Rather than solely serving as the suppliers of primary products, farmers should actively participate throughout the entire value chain, including trade. Pooling resources can also lead to more cost-effective procurement of raw materials entering primary production, potentially resulting in significant savings. These economic aspects should be central to discussions when considering new strategies.
The development of innovative, value-added processed agricultural products presents a substantial opportunity for primary producers to enhance their economic standing and livelihoods. Innovation, in general, will undoubtedly play an important role in the future of the agricultural sector.
Biotechnology, innovative approaches to animal breeding, and modern data analysis techniques represent promising areas for advancing the agricultural sector. Crucially, creating new and effective economic models is necessary to ensure competitiveness and support agricultural policies. Guaranteeing food security and backing local producers in each country are essential topics for discussion.
Additionally, economic imbalances in foreign trade structures within countries must be acknowledged. For example, developing countries typically export raw materials to developed countries at low prices, whereas developed countries tend to export value-added products at high prices. Low wages in the agricultural sector frequently contribute to this disparity.
A pressing and highly relevant issue currently facing the livestock sector is generational change, which poses a significant challenge. Therefore, achieving a compromise on green demands, driven by new national and international policies, will be crucial. The situation varies from country to country, with differing needs and options in this area. Failure to strike a balance could negatively impact living standards in many countries.
Creating a supportive environment at both the national level and within commercial services is key. This includes providing quality banking services, advisory support, insurance options, and other essential resources. The absence of these services, particularly in developing countries, is a major cause for concern. Promoting high-quality facilities and innovative concepts in this area can significantly improve the situation for farmers.
In many countries, food producers are not on an equal footing with processors, traders, and suppliers. Producers are often at a disadvantage because of their smaller scale, which presents them with economic challenges when it comes to pricing their products. They are also more vulnerable to market turbulence, price volatility, and climate change risks.
Appropriate econometric models can be leveraged to assess the impacts of various measures, quantify changes, and predict future developments. They can also be used to analyse possible interventions and their potential outcomes. Indeed, targeted projects aimed at assisting the introduction of technological, commercial, breeding, and performance monitoring innovations have proven highly effective in developed countries. Similar initiatives can be instrumental in driving positive change within developing nations.
Resilience for primary livestock producers can be defined as achieving an economically sustainable business that respects environmental concerns, utilises natural resources responsibly, produces safe and high-quality food, respects consumer preferences, and ensures a decent standard of living for farmers. Ultimately, it boils down to establishing a viable and sustainable business model.
السيد Julio Prudencio
1. Diferentes formas de definir la resiliencia
- Como definen la resiliencia los…
. En términos generales, los Pueblos Indígenas (PI) definen la resiliencia como la capacidad de afrontar los desastres naturales en base a la solidaridad; a las tradiciones y costumbres de sus ancestros; en base a la amplia participación y a la cultura de cada uno de los PI.
- Cuales las principales vulnerabilidades que enfrentan los PI…
. Los diferentes riesgos político sociales; que se manifiestan, por ejemplo, en los bloqueos de carreteras, paro de transportistas, cerco de poblados, entre otros.
. Los desastres climatológicos: sequía, lluvias torrenciales y a destiempo; inundaciones, desmoronamiento de cerros, inhabilitación de carreteras.
. Problemas económicos como el alza de precios de los productos, la especulación/ocultamiento de productos; el desabastecimiento de materias primas.
- Que marcos de resiliencia existen..
Las tradiciones y costumbres varían de una zona ecológica a otra; y también de un Pueblo Indígena a otro (según sus usos, su cultura…)
- Como medir y/o evaluar la resiliencia…
Determinando claramente los indicadores que pueden variar de una región a otra; o de un PI a otro.
- Que indicadores medirían la resiliencia de los sistemas alimentarios…
En el consumo=Diversificación de los alimentos consumidos
Cantidad de alimentos consumidos por miembro familiar
En la cadena de suministros= el intercambio de alimentos entre poblados
= mayor o menor incorporación al mercado
= formas de incorporarse al mercado
En la producción= Diversificación productiva
- Cuales los puntos débiles de los sistemas alimentarios..
Los puntos débiles son los precios de los alimentos básicos que son determinados por las Empresas Transnacionales que controlan los mercados internacionales haciendo subir o bajar los precios según sus intereses.
A nivel interno de cada país, la especulación/ocultamiento de los alimentos por parte de individuos que lucran con su capital.
2. Comprender para qué debemos estar preparados: la naturaleza de las crisis…
Que tipos de crisis…..
- Las crisis económicas en las que la inflación económica hace incrementar los precios de los alimentos básicos y las materias primas; y el Estado no tiene capacidad de controlar los precios ni el abastecimiento de alimentos y tampoco la distribución de éstos a las poblaciones vulnerables.
- Las crisis generadas por los desastres naturales y el cambio climático, lo que incide en la producción, sobre todo; y también en el transporte/distribución de los alimentos.
- Las crisis generadas por el uso de una tecnología inadecuada a determinado tipo de suelos (Uso de tractores inmensos que destrozan los suelos por su magnitud, quitando todos los nutrientes al suelo; o derrumbando pequeñas colinas que generan microclimas)
Uso de suelos no agrícolas cultivando productos agrícolas (suelos de tipo forestal con cultivos agrícolas)
Uso intensivo de agroquímicos contaminando el suelo, el aire, la tierra, los ríos, matando la biodiversidad e inclusive dañando la salud humana.
- Existen formas de mejorar la resiliencia ante crisis desconocidas…..
Sí, a través de la creación de una Empresa Estatal como el caso de EMAPA/Bolivia por ejemplo, que interviene en el sistema alimentario abasteciendo de materias primas y/o alimentos cuando escasean en el mercado; regulando precios máximos de venta a través de sus reservas de alimentos; a través de la venta directa al consumidor a precios establecidos; interviniendo cuando hay especulación; apoyando directamente la producción de productos básicos; invirtiendo en centros de procesamiento de alimentos o inclusive importando directamente alimentos, entre otros.
Este tipo de empresas deben ser estrictamente técnicas y no de uso político, canalizando subvenciones e inversiones pero a productos esenciales del sistema alimentario, y con tiempos limitados para no crear ineficiencia y déficits económicos.
3. Comprender y mitigar las compensaciones
4. Programas y políticas existentes para promover la resiliencia: un análisis de brechas de las estrategias y recomendaciones actuales:
- Existen asociaciones/iniciativas actuales que hagan ..…
Existen iniciativas productivas llevadas a cabo por algunas ONGs/proyectos de la sociedad civil que están demostrando que la Agricultura de Conservación complementada con la producción agroecológica constituyen las mejores prácticas contra la crisis, generando mayor resistencia.
La lección aprendida es que se conservan más los recursos productivos (tierra, agua, biodiversidad) y se incrementan los rendimientos productivos sin aumentar la superficie cultivada; sin deforestar, sin destruir plantas no forestales.
- Que tipo de cambios de políticas se necesitan…
Se necesita que cambien los Programas de Desarrollo/Políticas Públicas de fomento a las exportaciones (aquellos programas de exportaciones -soya transgénica; palma africana; carne vacuna; oro, entre otros - que corresponden a un modelo extractivista que está destrozando irreversiblemente los recursos productivos y no es sostenible en el tiempo; que no duda en incendiar la Amazonía ni contaminar los ríos con mercurio y con todo tipo de agroquímicos) por Programas y Políticas de Seguridad Alimentaria Nutricional; programas de soberanía alimentaria; de protección de los recursos naturales y productivos sostenibles, generando alimentos sanos y limpios.
Se necesita que se establezcan políticas de consumo adecuado de alimentos sanos y nutritivos, en base al fomento a la producción interna diversificada y hábitos de consumo adecuados (no fritos); establecer limites a las importaciones de alimentos chatarra “preparados” (medidas en el comercio global) que causan sobrepeso y obesidad.
- El Estado debe establecer Políticas Públicas más adecuadas para reconstruir los sistemas alimentarios más resilientes considerando:
. Políticas de subvenciones hacia el fomento y protección de los productos básicos de procedencia interna; hacia los sistemas Agroforestales establecidos en cada región (sobre todo en la Amazonía y el Chaco en América Latina) subsidiando a las familias de los Pueblos Indígenas que protegen el medio ambiente, cuidan la foresta, la biodiversidad, las plantas no maderables e implementan la diversificación productiva (agrícola, ganadera, forestal, plantas no maderables, piscícola)
. Políticas de inversión y apoyo a la agricultura familiar campesina para mejorar su infraestructura productiva (silos, plantas de transformación/procesamiento de productos); mejoramiento de las tierras (dotándolas de más nutrientes); dotación de agua de riego; tecnología adecuada.
. Políticas de mayor capacitación y enseñanza a los agricultores; con técnicos especialistas de campo; con un seguimiento y asesoramiento continuo en el uso de tecnología adecuada; en gestión/administración; en técnicas productivas; en uso de insumos; en creación de bancos de semillas (resguardo/intercambio) entre otros.
. Políticas de créditos y dotación de capital en condiciones accesibles a la economía familiar; apoyando la creación de emprendimientos productivos agroalimentarios.
. Sistemas de información para todos los productores en términos de precios de venta de los alimentos en los principales mercados; costos de producción determinando los costos ocultos; demanda de productos y oferta entre otros, para regular el mercado de alimentos.
. Se debe apoyar la producción y diversificación de semillas de la agricultura familiar y su diversificación, resguardo, investigación constante; sus adecuados resultados ante las variaciones climáticas, impidiendo la privatización de este recurso y conocimiento de los Pueblos Indígenas.
5. Comparta literatura reciente, estudios de casos y datos que podrían ayudar a responder las preguntas enumeradas anteriormente.
Todos las investigaciones siguientes en https://Julioprudencio.com
- Las subvenciones a los productos alimenticios (2024)
- Estrategia Nacional de Desarrollo de la Agricultura Familiar Sustentable (2020)
- Planteamientos para la elaboración de una política pública para el desarrollo sostenible de la agricultura
- L'Agriculture paysanne indigène dans les Andes face au changement climatique
I was responsible for the design, initiation, supervision and development of farmers in the UK which composted municipal and industrial wastes on a variety of scales from 1000 tonnes pa to 125,000 tones per annum, for recycling by composting for use on their own land. The effect on crop production took time to build the SOM (soil organic matter) but heavy dressings did reduce drought stress, cultivation energy and crop disease, and did increase crop yield and consistency., while reducing, and in some cases eliminating purchase of manufactured fertilisers. So - this is Closing the Loop and potentially eliminating the purchase and use of manufactured N fertiliser and the energy (and CO") involved in that production. This group was set up on a Reverse Franchise basis, i.e. the franchisees owned the franchisors and it was the professionals in the centre who took the legal responsibility which enabled small farmers to co-operate on big projectswithout risk to their sovereignty over their own land.
I am now working in collaboration with NIAB (National Institute of Agricultural Botany, University of Cambridge, UK) on again looking to eliminate the purchase and use of manufactured fertilisers by using MNPs ()micro and nano plastics).
Now working on trials with NIAB (National Institute of Agricultural Botany, University of Cambridge, UK) on using MNP’s (micro and nano plastics) which contain Nitrogen nutrient with the objective of managing MNPs and using them as fertilisers instead of manufactured N which, of course, takes very significant energy in manufacture. There are also implications for managing MNP’s which do not have N in the molecule.
Here is my submission to the HLPE-FSN of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS).who are preparing a report on "Building resilient food systems - HLPE-FSN consultation on the scope of the report"
My response to "Share recent literature, case studies and data that could help answer the questions listed". "What gaps are there in the current portfolio of country adaptation / resilience policies?"
FAO African food security country adaptation/ resilience policy experts may want to address the biodiversity and food security policy gaps identified in the following article. “The New Colonialist Food Economy - How Bill Gates and agribusiness giants are throttling small farmers in Africa and the Global South” at https://www.thenation.com/article/world/new-colonialist-food-economy/
We are promoting the use of the Three Sisters Gardening for resilient food systems in Cameroon. Three Sisters Gardening involves planting corn/sunflowers, squash/pumpkin, and bean seeds together in a mound of dirt. The plants work together symbiotically. Beans provide nitrogen for the soil, corn/sunflowers serve as trellises for beans, and squash protects both plants from invasive weeds and pests. The plants work together to make growing a bountiful harvest easier. This is how Native Americans provided food security in the past.
There are two types of Three Sisters Gardening Seed Kits that can be used in Cameroon. One type uses the hybrid field corn, hybrid pole field beans (DOR-701), and hybrid pumpkins or hybrid watermelons that are currently available in Cameroon. The other type of Three Sisters Garden Food Security Seed Kits uses non-hybrid sweet corn, non-hybrid green pole beans, and non-hybrid squash (such as Waltham Butternut or Yellow Crookneck) seeds that are commonly used by gardeners and Native Americans in the USA. Here are some websites that describe how Native Americans used this technique for food security and income:
· The Three Sisters: A Lesson in Sustainable Architecture https://www.transformationholdings.com/agriculture/three-sisters-sustainable-agriculture/
· Growing Native American Heritage: The Three Sisters https://www.farmproject.org/blog/2016/3/31/growing-native-american-heritage-the-three-sisters
· Companion planting is key to food security https://www.renature.co/articles/companion-planting-is-key-to-food-security/
· Native American Gardening https://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/features/home_and_garden/native-american-gardening/article_283dd7de-e8f7-11e8-a239-67504cd77f0a.html
· The Three Sisters: Corn, Beans, and Squash How to Plant a Three Sisters Garden https://www.almanac.com/content/three-sisters-corn-bean-and-squash
· “Northern Cheyenne nonprofit builds gardens to fight hunger” https://billingsgazette.com/news/local/northern-cheyenne-nonprofit-builds-gardens-to-fight-hunger/article_55bf161d-e5da-5bd3-a3ea-42f53f96311f.html
We can only test the hybrid version of Three Sisters Garden Food Security Seed Kits in Cameroon. We would like Cameroon youth to test both the hybrid and non-hybrid version of Three Sisters Collection. It is possible that Cameroon youth will prefer the hybrid version because it may be more resilient to plant diseases and insect pests. They may prefer the non-hybrid version because the seeds can be saved for use in subsequent years and because they will have a unique cash crop that they may be able to sell for more money.
The selection of crops for each Cameroon Province will be reviewed by the Cameroon government. It is expected that some changes will be made because of the different agriculture growing conditions in each Region.
I can't get the non-hybrid seed supplies I need to help small farmers in Cameroon and most other African countries (except South Africa). Initially I noted that most African countries have a very limited number of seed suppliers and that these seed suppliers sold a very limited number of products. I also was told by the Botswana embassy personnel that they wanted to use only non-GMO seeds.
After a little investigation I determined that African countries sell most of their vegetables in the European market and Europeans wanted to buy only non-GMO products. Botswana embassy personnel noted that it is very difficult to distinguish between a GMO seed product and a non-GMO seed product. Most African countries limit the number of seed companies in their country and limit the import of seeds into their country to ensure that they are selling only non-GMO products.
It also is very difficult and expensive to get an Import Permit to import seeds into an African country even when you are importing seeds that have been declared to be non-GMO by a US grower such as those at Seed Saver Exchange. I must use only the seeds that are available unless I want to spend more than two years to get the proper Import Permit and Phytosanitary certification. I may need to wait a few years to obtain non-GMO, non-hybrid green pole bean seeds or non-GMO, non-hybrid corn seeds with strong stalks if I am lucky. These non-hybrid seeds are very common in other parts of the world including Europe. More information on this problem is available for FAO food security experts in the following article. “The New Colonialist Food Economy - How Bill Gates and agribusiness giants are throttling small farmers in Africa and the Global South” at https://www.thenation.com/article/world/new-colonialist-food-economy/
More information on how strict import requirements are inhibiting emerging technologies and innovations in Africa agrifood systems are described here
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14735903.2023.2210005 and https://www.thenation.com/article/world/new-colonialist-food-economy/
The FAO the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) needs to review the seed policies that they have recommended to African countries. The following new projects can change this situation in Cameroon:
· Cameroon, FAO sign $2.7mln deal to support smallholder farmers https://www.businessincameroon.com/agriculture/2304-13775-cameroon-fao-sign-2-7mln-deal-to-support-smallholder-farmers
· OCP Africa renews commitment to Cameroon’s agricultural sector https://www.businessincameroon.com/agriculture/2702-13647-ocp-africa-renews-commitment-to-cameroon-s-agricultural-sector
· Cameroon invests CFA10.5bn to boost rural food security https://www.businessincameroon.com/agriculture/1812-13570-cameroon-invests-cfa10-5bn-to-boost-rural-food-security
· Cameroon govt sets CFA22bn+ food security fund for 2024 https://www.businessincameroon.com/public-management/1001-13587-cameroon-govt-sets-cfa22bn-food-security-fund-for-202
· Ngoulemakong inaugurates first of eight cassava processing plants in 2024 initiative https://www.businessincameroon.com/agriculture/1801-13600-ngoulemakong-inaugurates-first-of-eight-cassava-processing-plants-in-2024-initiative
The files that I attached show how we are using the small farm concepts developed by Dr Booker T Whatley in Cameroon
- Use of the Whatley Small Farm Plan Concepts in Cameroon
- Breadfruit Trees as a Cash Crop In Cameroon
- Cassava as a Cash Crop in Cameroon
- Providing Cameroon Youth with a Premium Food Security Educational Opportunity
The concepts that we are using in Cameroon can be applied to the situation in Gaza. We are suggesting that Cameroon use the Asian Approach to Economic Development that was used successfully by Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, China and at least five other countries in Asia. The first (of three) steps in the Asian Approach to Economic Development plan is to improve the livelihood of small farmers in Gaza so that the farmers will have food security and the ability to make a living. The Israel government and Gaza leadership will use the small farm concepts developed by Dr. Booker T Whatley. Dr. Whatley's small farm concepts were used to lift many small farmers in the southern parts of the US out of poverty. It was particularly successful for black farmers who had small farms. Israel should expect many international government agencies and NGOs will support a Gaza Peace Plan by providing the agriculture equipment and supplies that will ensure that the Gaza farmers will be successful in their food security efforts. See https://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/small-farm-plan-zmaz82mjzkin/ and https://www.gatesnotes.com/How-Asia-Works
تم إغلاق هذا النشاط الآن. لمزيد من المعلومات، يُرجى التواصل معنا على : [email protected] .