[original received in English on the FSN Forum in Europe and Central Asia]
1. From your knowledge and experience how have trade agreements and rules affected the four dimensions of food security (availability, access, utilization, stability)?
a: Rules & agreements are always have an We & They situation. But when disaster happen & people ask for resolution these hardly factual. This moments most of LDCs are giving subsidies to the agriculture. they are getting well return. Now if pongee-schemers try to do their old jobs-I believe they will not be successful.
Availability-yes capital goods are available, also the disaster tools.
Access-the structure is shaping now.
Utilization & stability-they do have problem, but it needs time. After 1990s-the globalization wiped lots. Time must be given to recover.
2. What is your knowledge and experience with creating coherence between food security measures and trade rules? Can rights-based approaches play a role?
a: Might plays-not confirm, because a clever respondent could turn table to own side. This type of skill is absent in LDCs- they might not perform well. FAO- could provide assistance.
Also any disaster happen, there is many organs work on but the recovery or disaster management is not well manage to development curve. Like country A-has north & south. Now south have disaster but north has not. Now development of north will be eaten by these south factors, because the recovery give food but not helping the corps growing & many.
We stop-the right-based approaches could be an option. This could also help the patent free movement. If food & corps patents are on UN hand & claim as the global right for all people! Hope a better world.
3. How can a food security strategy, including components that explicitly support small-scale farmers in agro-biodiverse settings, be implemented in ways that might be compatible with a global market-based approach to food security?
a: I have doubt, because most places we destroy the ecology itself for market based approaches. We must think again.
Because the small entrepreneurs are easy hunt for big farms & natural reasons. The element of social business could be remedy. If few of rich countries & bunch of LDCs just for agro-products make a social business among them if it's successful then other can come. May be the factors of global markets can be useable.
FAO- can be a leader with other UN entities. UNCTAD have experience in market, the social business can be better tested with their diagram.
Rich country could be Scandinavian countries could lead with a bunch of LDCs, the LDCs also operate agro-product among them in social business module.
LDCs are not coping with the cost, this is a potential move for FAO.
Moshfaqur Rahman