Thank you for the opportunity to review the V0 draft above.
At GAFSP[1] we believe we bring the policy-level conversion achieved by the CFS into operations at field level—with coordinated investments and field implementation of the consensus reached.
Using the questions posed by the HLPE Project Team at the onset of the V0 draft, we have the following five comments –from our policy and implementation experience—for your consideration:
1. We commend the Project Team in undertaking this important work and the quality of the V0 draft version. In particular, highlighting the objective of sustainable food systems (SFS) and detailing its components—basically encompassing the entire food chain—gives the adequate breadth of the study and allows the prioritization of elements of the SFS to be studied from an agro-ecological angle;
2. Definition: Definition 2 on “Agroecological Approach to FSN” could come earlier in the text (with perhaps a more summarized discussion) and you may consider adding an “objective” to the definition. For now, it mentions “addressing” FSN—perhaps replacing this with “attaining and maintaining” or with “reaching” FSN may convey a goal that will provide the necessary trade-off when the multiple sectors and concerns mentioned in the definition are put to play;
3. With respect to filling knowledge gaps, we find that lessons learned from multi-stakeholder partnerships such as GAFSP are ideal in that they cover practical interventions by a variety of actors, using diverse methods but under one “umbrella” partnership that should facilitate the development and sharing of lessons at relatively small time and resource costs;
4. On “case studies” that are currently demonstrating some of the recommendations of the draft, we believe that GAFSP’s recent update of its joint M&E system—followed by 8 of the largest multinational investment and/or technical assistance institutions in rural development in the poorest countries—may be of interest. For example, the V0 draft identifies Climate Smart Agriculture as an important element of agro-ecological approach to FSN. At GAFSP, we have incorporated this parameter and are gearing up to its full-fledged monitoring within the next few months.
5. In addition to the linkages to other initiatives or frameworks mentioned in the draft, you may want to detail the link between the agro-ecological approach and the CFS-agreed and promoted Global Strategic Framework for food security and nutrition (GSF). This would allow a quick assessment/confirmation of whether there is compatibility between agreed strategic frameworks for implementation and the recommendations emanating from the agro-ecological study. Although GSF is mentioned in the draft V0 it is not in the context of examining GSF from an agro-ecological perspective.
I reiterate our thanks for the opportunity to review the V0 draft and are ready to further detail or explain any of the comments above—and to provide additional follow-up if some of the recommendations are approved at your end and you see that GAFSP can provide case studies or examples of relevance.
[1] GAFSP is a multi-stakeholder partnership contributing since 2010 to the increase of funding toward food security in the poorest countries. To date, GAFSP has achieved the mobilization of US$1.5 billion in direct ODA and private funding to the sector and billions more in co-financing and blended funding. Reflecting CFS’s focus on policy conversion, GAFSP ensure conversion at the level of prioritizing and implementing the consensus achieved at the policy level. In addition to select developing countries, GAFSP encompasses major CSOs, country and philanthropic donors, as well as the eight major agencies involved in investment, implementation and/or technical assistance for priority food security interventions in the poorest countries. They include: the African Development Bank; the Asian Development Bank; the Inter-American Development Bank; the International Finance Corporation; IFAD; FAO; WFP and the World Bank.
Nichola Dyer