HLPE Report Response
The Global Partnership welcomes the opportunity to comment on the V0 draft of the HLPE report on “Data collection and analysis tools for food security and nutrition.”
We have identified four gaps in the report that we would like to highlight and comment on as an organization with experience collaborating with a wide range of stakeholders engaged in creating, curating, and analyzing agricultural data and statistics. Furthermore, we have several suggestions for case studies for national-level data collaboration and have included links to further information that the authors could incorporate into the draft where applicable.
We inform our input based on a series of informal dialogues and informant interviews with key stakeholder groups over the period December 2020 to April 2021 as part of our research for the publication of the following reports: Data for Food Security: How can the international community drive transformative change? (June 2021) and From local Needs to Local Knowledge: Better data to End Hunger (July 2021).
Our comments on the report are as follows:
1. Absence of a defined strategy for the production and use of data that explicitly addresses the incentives, privacy, safety, and agency of smallholder producers.
Chapter 5 of the V0 report highlights the intricacies of good data governance. It also considers governance principles, data protection, transparency, mechanisms, links to conventional and novel data sources, and the global and regional initiatives addressing governance challenges. However, there is a gap and a potential opportunity to build consensus on the norms and principles of good data governance for Food Security and Nutrition (FSN) as it pertains to the needs of smallholder producers as the most vulnerable members of the FSN system.
Creating a clear vision and integrated strategy supported by a data governance framework that protects smallholder producers' privacy, safety and agency is key to reducing inequalities in global food systems. Using the V0 report as an opportunity to share real-world best practices and case studies while addressing the balance between government, corporate, and farmer interests is critical to reducing systemic inequalities in the FSN system.
There are many examples of initiatives that promote good data governance norms and principles that integrate the needs of smallholders, such as in Tanzania, where the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, and FAO worked together with farmers and the Tanzania Bureau of Statistics to use data to improve the uptake of extension services and livestock vaccination.
An example of a platform with a clear vision and integrated strategy for data governance is the Africa Regional Data Cube, now known as Digital Earth Africa. This project piloted the use of Earth Observation (EO) data and satellite technology to support Ghana, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Senegal, and Tanzania to develop policies for agriculture, food security, deforestation, urbanization, and water access.
Ensuring that data collection and analysis benefit those impacted by those most marginalized in the global food system of the global food system and that all stakeholders see direct benefits to data sharing as an incentive, instead of only as a means of gathering aggregated statistics, is critical to avoid exacerbating inequalities and building trust amongst stakeholders.
As it stands, the HLPE draft recognizes the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration in section 4.5.2 but does not address the issue at a global level, nor does it explicitly mention smallholder producers.
Therefore, we recommend the report reflect upon whether a global multilateral dialogue on FSN data and agricultural statistics issues, including issues pertaining to smallholder rights and governance, could be of use, what value this type of forum could add, and how it could be established. The report should also consider the role of Rome-based agencies, member states, and other stakeholders in facilitating dialogue and building trust and consensus.
2. Insufficient emphasis on the importance of national data and statistics systems and local capacity building.
As the report highlights, the capacities of national statistical offices (NSOs) are often lacking at the country level. Despite the limitations of the NSOs, they rely heavily on agricultural surveys and censuses, which due to their time and resource-intensive nature, lead to data quality and timeliness challenges to data collection and analysis at national and sub-national levels.
Resource constraints at the national level are also detrimental to the digitalization of data and statistics pertaining to FSN and impact the quality and availability of data and data infrastructure and the ability to train and upscale staff, resulting in a vicious circle of insufficient resource allocation towards national data and statistics systems.
Furthermore, the inadequate and unsustainable funding of activities undertaken by national statistical systems often leaves them reliant on external financing, which is often short-term and project-based.
Without nationally trained staff and alignment on data and statistics for agri-food systems at national and subnational levels, there is a risk of financing projects and initiatives that do not align with country priorities and that leave projects with high national importance underfunded or discontinued.
Strengthening countries' capacities requires time, resources, and persistence to facilitate realistic solutions that collect, analyze, and maintain country-level FSN data and statistics. The HLPE report could be an opportunity to discuss the importance of developing national data strategies for collaboration on agri-food system data, including guidelines for data sharing and use, legal mandates, and the roles and responsibilities of different actors in the data value chain, including donors and international organizations.
A good example of country level work initiated by a national statistical office partnering with public and private sector actors collaborating on agri-food system data can be found in Ghana where the country’s Statistical Service set up a multi-stakeholder data collaborative. This collaborative brings public and private actors together to enable the use of mobile technology and data on weather patterns and crop market prices to provide climate-smart agricultural services to farmers.
Novel approaches bolstered by digital skills and the ability to use new technologies for data collection and analysis are fundamental as countries transition from paper-based data collection to digital data collection. These points can be elaborated further when considering the benefits/opportunity cost (aim number 3 of the HLPE report).
3. Addressing the need for a framework for aligning and coordinating assistance from international organizations and donors.
There is a deluge of projects in the FSN space, each focused on different issues or aspects of the global food system. The draft report mentions this problem, but a gap remains in addressing the need for a framework to align donor support and extrabudgetary contributions to international organizations like FAO and the other Rome-based agencies (RBAs).
Emphasizing country-level alignment and collaboration is needed between donors, government, and other stakeholders. This alignment is essential at the country level, as projects funded by international organizations and private donors can produce positive results but are often limited to the end of project cycles, thus severely limiting their sustainability.
Several of our national partners reported an overreliance on donors to fund and sustain digital innovations, creating a scenario where their national statistical offices are left chronically underfunded.
A forum for the RBAs to regularly interact with member states on data and statistics could be a valuable starting point to build mutual understanding on FSN data and statistics, governance issues, and a consensus on the principles and norms that should guide resource allocation.
Global Partnership emphasizes this need and outlines arguments for this forum in our Data for Food Security report. We argue that this approach can have a knock-on effect in accelerating action to support FAO’s digital transformation by ensuring more predictable and sustainable investment and support for its data and statistics activities and improving the visibility and effectiveness of its data and statistical work and country-level support using flexible approaches to strengthen national capacities.
4. Failure to connect key sections with the overarching goal of the report.
The HLPE V0 draft addresses many challenges and issues related to different aspects of FSN data and statistics but fails to link these discussions across the different sections and create a coherent call to action with clear steps for different stakeholders.
Currently, the conversations surrounding new technologies, ethics, data governance, collaboration, and partnerships with key stakeholder groups, ranging from smallholder farmers to the diplomatic community in Rome, are driven by the perceived risks in the system. There is a particular concern about data extraction and the motivations of powerful actors, leading to significant mistrust in the system.
A discussion that emphasizes the incentives and benefits of being part of the solution to these concerns and addressing even the most marginalized stakeholders in the FSN data ecosystem could provide a powerful way to contextualize the report's content with current policy failures.
Given the timeliness and continuing concerns about the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on FSN, solutions focused on real-time and accurate data that benefit marginalized stakeholders can serve as a compelling narrative to link several aspects of the V0 draft with real-world best practices.
For example, the Kenyan national government has worked with government and non-government stakeholders to find data-driven solutions to enable the Ministry of Agriculture to track the availability of food staples at the subnational level and identify appropriate subnational responses to food security challenges as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Highlighting legal and regulatory frameworks and emphasizing the role that partnerships and multi-stakeholder collaboration have in building trust, giving all stakeholders a voice, and evening the playing field could serve as a compelling way to frame the conclusion section of the report in a way that connects several key sections of the report.
Mr. James Henderson