To whom it my concern.
I wish to express compliments to the HLPE and its Project Team and Steering Committee Members, along with the HLPE Secretariat and Drafting Team for the comprehensive document.
I fully agree that availability of reliable data is essential for any decisions to transform our failed/broken food systems. The zero draft provides an excellent basis for further discussions and in this regard the inclusive and transparent preparatory process is much appreciated.
I am making now some comments only on the collection/control/ownership of data and the privacy/security/protection of data. These are undoubtedly the most important issues and the Authors touched the related valid concerns in Chapter 4.1.1. However, it would be indispensable to make further efforts to provide a deeper analysis of the situation and include in the conclusions some guidance and recommendations in this regard.
Ownership of data and information means power to control and it would be unacceptable and a huge mistake to give this power to corporations and monopolies, for obvious reasons.
In addition, some data to be collected might contain confidential, sensitive personal data, including data of smallholders, family farmers, consumers and others.
For the above reasons, guarantees and appropriate safeguard mechanisms are required, to protect privacy and security but also to build confidence and trust.
As the document itself mentions, there is a risk that people may have concerns that “…their data may end up in the wrong hands, be used against them, be used to exploit them, or put them in precarious positions in the future.” This issue should be duly addressed in the next version, because it is a real danger, again as acknowledged by the authors: “This can also lead the risk of agro-food market dominance by few monopolies that have control or ownership of data.”
There is another challenge mentioned in the chapter 4.4.2. Trust and transparency issues: “If the decision-making process is hidden from the person directly affected by the outcomes, then the underlying technologies can raise trust issues.” This again confirms the need for respecting the principle of inclusivity.
I think the above short comments can clearly confirm and justify the need for elaborating this part in more details, in addition to the summary of governance challenges mentioned in chapter 5.4.
It would be also necessary that in its last (“to be completed”) chapter on Conclusions and Recommendations, the document could provide clear guidance, including on the needed appropriate safeguard mechanisms.
I am looking forward to the revised version of the draft.
Best regards,
Zoltan Kalman
Sr. Kálmán Zoltán