Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Dear Contributors,

The HLPE-FSN would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to everyone who participated in the consultation on the scope of the report "Building Resilient Food Systems."

We received 58 invaluable contributions from 32 countries, spanning a diverse array of public and private organizations, academic institutions, civil society, and NGOs. These insights will enable HLPE-FSN to effectively address the crucial challenges faced by policymakers and practitioners, ensuring that food systems are resilient and play a pivotal role in achieving food security and nutrition.

Thank you once again for your dedication and input.

Paola Termine, HLPE-FSN Coordinator ad interim, HLPE-FSN Secretariat 

Silvia Meiattini, Communications and outreach specialist, HLPE-FSN Secretariat

Nepal C Dey^1* and Wais Kabir²

¹Climate Change and DRM Cluster, The World Bank, Dhaka, Bangladesh

^*Chief Investigator, Climate Actions, Research and Entrepreneurship Development Ltd, Dhaka 1216

² Former Executive Chairman, Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC), &

Consultant, CIMMYT, Dhaka Bangladesh

1.0 Introduction

Building resilient food systems in Bangladesh is crucial for ensuring food security, enhancing livelihoods, and mitigating the impacts of climate change for the increased population with decreased cultivating land accompanied by land degradation. Bangladesh is ranked seventh among the nation’s most at risk from climate change according to the 2021 World Climate Risk Index. Despite contributing minimally to global emissions, Bangladesh frequently faces climate-driven natural disasters due to its geographical location and low-lying topography. However, the country has made significant progress in achieving food security, with food grain production increasing significantly from 9.774 million tons in 1972 to 64.308 million tons in 2023 [1, 2, 3], Therefore, the aim of the study is to investigate the policies regime and practices that country has adopted for such a record of grain production to building resilient food systems. This paper is prepared based on systematic review of literatures including policy documents, journal articles, country’s outlooks from the homepages of development organizations to investigate the good practices, innovations in the production environment and gap in current strategies. It also encompasses potential policy recommendations for building climate resilient food systems in Bangladesh. 

1. Best Practices and Gaps

Bangladesh has developed a thorough National Food Policy that offers an operational framework for maintaining the country's population's nutrition and food security. The country has long been striving food security while recent policy shift is visible in safety and quality. The goal of the policy is to increase food production while also boosting agricultural practices, distribution and storage infrastructure, and nutrition-sensitive agricultural production. Besides, Social Safety Nets, School feeding initiatives, Women's Empowerment are effective programs that government has been implementing.

The recently formulated National Adaptation Plan (2023-2050) aims to continue these efforts [4], emphasis needs to be given to understand location and technology-specific adaptation capacities in different climatic hazard zones [5]. A systematic review of resilient food systems and innovations across various climatic zones, such as the saline prone coastal areas in the South-west and flash flood prone haor (depressed) areas in the North-east, and drought prone north west could provide valuable insights and recognition for real contributors [5]. By continuing to advance in building resilient food systems and recognizing the importance of localized and technology-specific solutions, Bangladesh can further strengthen its resilience against climate-related challenges. The National Food and Nutrition Security Policy (NFNSP) was approved by the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) in August 2020, and aims to ensure that the country achieves its food and nutrition security-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and fulfills relevant national and international commitments by 2030 [21].

1.1.1 Climate-resilient Agriculture: Bangladesh has been proactive and adept in climate change adaptation, mandated by the Constitution in its 15th amendment, Article 18A [6] on the protection and improvement of the environment and biodiversity. Over the decades, Bangladesh has advanced substantially in building adaptive capacity and resilience through formulation and subsequent implementation of relevant policies and regulatory frameworks for enabling climate resilient sustainable development.

Bangladesh's agricultural sector faces major difficulties because of the country's high sensitivity to climate change. In response, the nation has implemented climate-resilient agricultural techniques like encouraging organic farming, adopting drought-tolerant crop types, and installing climate-resilient irrigation systems. These techniques aid farmers in adjusting to shifting climatic conditions and guarantee the sustainability of food production. A review study of over 20 papers, reports and policy documents has identified major progress, challenges and policy recommendations related to resilient food systems [7]. A case study demonstrated that community-based early response with supply of food immediately after any extreme flooding and other extreme events reduces the risk of food and nutrition insecurity, mainly for children [7, 8], is a proven technique to build resilient food systems. A number of case studies in the drought-prone area demonstrated that in order to addressing water scarcity, conservation of surface and groundwater [9], its sustainability [10], timely its application for improving food production and security, environment and health [11] are some proven climate actions for building resilient food systems. The early warning and climate forecasting system helps to save life and livelihood. 

1.1.1.1 Improved crop Varieties: In Bangladesh, improved rice varieties have been developed and widely used to increase agricultural output and resilience. Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) and Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture has developed 30 climate resistant rice varieties so far, including ten salt tolerant variants, three submergence variations, three drought tolerant varieties, four cold varieties, two tidal submergence varieties, one semi-deep-water variety, and one dual (Sal+Subm) variety [12]. To lessen the effects of frequent flooding, flood-tolerant rice varieties like Swarna-Sub1 and BRRI dhan 51 have been developed. Because of their ability to tolerate protracted submersion, these cultivars allow farmers to reestablish their rice crop even in the wake of major flooding [12]. Develop and distribute crop varieties that are resilient to extreme weather conditions, such as high temperature-resilient crop varieties for each climatic zone would be necessity for improving food security and building resilient food systems. Awareness raising on efficient water management practices, provide training to farmers on CSA management practices, more investment in irrigation infrastructure, rainwater harvesting to cope with water scarcity and irregular rainfall. Short duration crops by research institutes allow additional crops to grow in the cropping pattern and avert risk of flood.

Adoption of climate-resilient farming practices, such as raised bed farming and alternate wetting and drying (AWD) in rice cultivation, has been promoted in Bangladesh. Raised bed farming helps improve soil drainage and reduces waterlogging, while AWD technique reduces water use in rice fields. These practices contribute to water conservation, increase crop productivity, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A case study in the North-west Bangladesh demonstrated that the adaption of AWD reduced irrigation costs by about 25% and average yields increased by 8.1% to 13.7% in rice cultivation [13]. Study also demonstrated that on average, only 10% excess water to Gross Irrigation Water Requirement was lifted when AWD method followed. However, modern water management technologies like AWD are likely to be less effective unless volumetric irrigation methods are used. More emphasis on practicing conservation of irrigation mainly in the dry-period, which is found relatively less in the drought prone area [14]. 

The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and collaborators undertook a case study in Bangladesh to evaluate the effects of integrated farming practices and climate-smart agriculture (CSA) on agricultural productivity and climate resilience. The project includes implementing CSA practices such crop diversity, zero-tillage, and enhanced water management methods. Farmers that adopted these strategies saw improvements in agricultural production, water use, soil health, and resilience to the effects of climate change. 

2.0 Potential Policy Recommendations 

Focus on Food Utilization and Marginalized Populations: Emphasis needs to be given to the proper utilization of food by improving awareness of nutrition, food safety, and hygiene to achieve proper food security gains [15, 16]. Special attention should be focused on marginalized people living in low-income settings and flood-prone areas to build resilient food systems [7, 8].

Diversification of Crops and Livelihoods: Encourage farmers to grow a variety of crops to reduce dependency on a single crop. This can help mitigate risks associated with pests, diseases, and market fluctuations. Also growing high value crops ensures better income and nutritional security. Implement integrated farming systems that combine crops, livestock, aquaculture, and agroforestry to diversify income sources and enhance resilience.

Sustainable Agricultural Practices: Conservation agriculture through practicing no-till farming, improving soil organic matter through applying balanced fertilizer, crop rotation, and cover cropping to improve soil health and water retention. Implement agroecological practices that enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, such as using organic fertilizers, biopesticides, and natural pest control methods. To ensure crop production and ecosystem services, particularly during the dry period and in drought-prone areas, water availability must be secured. This can be achieved through improved management and a joint monitoring system of water availability in canals and river systems, coordinated by the Department of Agricultural Extension and the Bangladesh Water Development Board.

The Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach is being adopted in Bangladesh to reduce pesticide use and promote sustainable farming practices. IPM combines biological control methods, cultural practices, and targeted pesticide use to manage pests effectively while minimizing environmental impacts. A case study in Bangladesh demonstrated that the adoption of IPM practices reduced pesticide use by 50-70% in rice cultivation, resulting in cost savings for farmers and improved ecosystem health.

Floating Gardening Systems: Bangladesh experiences periodic flooding, which complicates agricultural efforts. Farming is now possible during flood events because to the introduction of floating gardening devices, using water hyacinth layered with soil—an old practice which is now expanding in the Southern coastal plains as a climate risk management strategy [17]. Practical Action did a case study on the usage of floating gardens in Bangladesh's flood-prone regions. The study demonstrated that floating gardens enhanced food security, nutrition, and money creation for vulnerable people in addition to offering a way to grow vegetables during floods.

Gher (dyke) farming in the coastal area: Many climate actions such as climate smart technologies have been discovered and farmers themselves in which are being potential in identified here have been used by farmers in the southern coastal plains of Bangladesh for centuries, in response to increasing floods and cyclones [15]. Study also identified that shrimp farming, for example, traditional gher farming—an aquaculture pond in non-saline wetlands with raised dikes for vegetable production—has grown increasingly complex, allowing for the production of shrimp, fish, and prawns. Climbing vine type vegetables are also commonly grown on trellises over the pond. Kangkong (water spinach) cultivation was always done near ponds, and with improved varieties, production can be expanded [15].

Solar-Powered Irrigation: Solar-powered irrigation systems have been constructed to address the country's water shortage and lower the greenhouse gas emissions caused by diesel-powered pumps in Bangladesh. This equipment provides farmers an environmentally friendly and economically practical alternative by using solar energy to power water pumps. A case study from Bangladesh showed how the effective use of solar-powered irrigation systems led to lower fuel costs, greater access to water for irrigation, and higher crop yields [16]. The head of the state declared priority of converting diesel operated to solar irrigation. 

Community-Based Nutrition Programs: Bangladesh has put in place community-based nutrition programs to combat malnutrition. These programs include encouraging the best nursing habits, strengthening complementary feeding for newborns and young children, and improving nutrition teaching and counseling. These initiatives, carried out by community health professionals, have helped to lower malnutrition rates, especially for young children under the age of five.

Public-private Partnerships: To improve nutrition and food security, Bangladesh has encouraged collaborations between the public and private sectors. Collaboration has been made to advance sustainable agricultural methods, provide farmer access to credit, upgrade food processing and storage facilities, and create value chains for agricultural goods. These collaborations have been crucial in fostering innovation, increasing agricultural output, and increasing food accessibility.

These instances highlight a few of the beneficial methods used in Bangladesh to advance the right to food. However, issues like population increase, deteriorating land, and the effects of climate change still exist. To further promote food security, enhance nutrition outcomes, and guarantee the right to food for all Bangladeshis, ongoing efforts and investments are needed. Institutional capacity influences how well these recommendations are implemented in daily life.

Skill-Based Training and Job Opportunities: Provide skill-based training to farmers and rural communities to enhance their adaptive capacity and resilience to any climate disaster. A case study demonstrated discovered that skilled-based occupations, such as service providers holders and businessmen relatively earn better and more resilient to protect livelihood because of stable income and sudden hike of food price might not affect them much as others and thus more food secured in extreme flooding [7, 8]. Create facilities for skill-based training for youth and job opportunities in relevant enterprises to protect the livelihoods of vulnerable people living in different climate hazard areas.

Village-level information hubs: The strengthening of village level information hubs under the Department of Agricultural Extension’s Agricultural Information Service at the Union Parishad complex is a potential starting point to facilitate higher adoption of CSA practices by farmers [17]. Study also identified that ICT sector has increased significantly over the last years and it has the potential to facilitate higher adoption of CSA practices by farmers, through mobile phones and apps.

Strengthening Supply Chains and Market Access: Improve rural infrastructure, such as market access through roads and storage facilities, to reduce post-harvest losses and ensure timely access to markets. Establish strong linkages between farmers and markets through cooperatives, contract farming, and digital platforms to ensure fair prices and reduce market risks.

Access to Finance and Insurance: Enhance access to credit and microfinance services for smallholder farmers, enabling them to invest in resilient farming practices and technologies. Additionally, develop insurance products that protect farmers against crop failures caused by natural disasters, pests, and diseases.

Research and Extension Services: Increased investment in research is needed to develop resilient crop varieties, sustainable farming techniques, and climate-smart innovations. Emphasis should be placed on producing peer-reviewed publications, which are currently insufficient in our countries and research institutes. Conducting village-level water balance studies is essential to understand needs and gaps for better water management, especially during dry periods.  Additionally, agricultural extension linkage services to quick disseminate knowledge and best practices to farmers, particularly focusing on resilience-building techniques.

Policy Support and Governance: Effectively implement policies that support sustainable agriculture, protect natural resources, and provide incentives for resilience-building practices. Ensure the participation of smallholder farmers, women, and marginalized communities in decision-making processes related to agriculture and food systems.

Community-Based Approaches: Strengthen local institutions and community-based organizations (producer organizations) to foster collective action and efficient resource management. More engagement of communities in participatory planning and decision-making to ensure that resilience-building initiatives are context-specific and locally accepted.

Leveraging Technology and Innovation: Digital technologies have recently emerged as effective tools for enhancing agricultural extension services [18, 19]. Digitalization has enabled agri-tech entrepreneurs and startups to create innovative business models for smallholder farmers, reducing transaction and discovery costs [20]. Emerging digital agriculture technologies are expected to improve service delivery, decision-making, value addition, productivity, profitability, resilience, and sustainability across the food supply chain. Increased use of digital technologies, such as mobile apps, remote sensing, and data analytics, can provide real-time information on weather, pest outbreaks, and market prices.

Innovation Hubs: Effective use of innovation hubs and incubators to promote the development and adoption of new technologies and practices in agriculture.

By implementing these recommendations and beyond, Bangladesh can build resilient food systems that are capable of withstanding various shocks and stresses, ensuring food security, and promoting sustainable development. Building resilient food systems in Bangladesh is crucial for ensuring food security, enhancing livelihoods, and mitigating the impacts of climate change. By continuing to advance in climate resilience in food system, recognizing the importance of localized and technology-specific solutions, focusing on proper food utilization, supporting marginalized populations, and providing skill-based training and job opportunities, Bangladesh can further strengthen for building resilient food systems.

References

[1] FPMU (2021). Bangladesh food situation report (April-June, 2021). Food Planning and Monitoring Unit. Ministry of Food, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh.

http://fpmu.gov.bd/agridrupal/sites/default/files/FSR_125.pdf

 

[2] Bangladesh Country Briefs (https://www.fao.org/giews/countrybrief/country.jsp?code=BGD)

[3] FAO (2015). FAOSTAT. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Rome. Available at: http://faostat3.fao.org.

[4] MoEF (2022). National Adaptation Plan of Bangladesh (2023-50). Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh.

[5] Dey N.C et al. (2023). Climate action: Progress, challenges, and policy recommendations. Fact Sheet. Research and Entrepreneurship Development Ltd. Dhaka. (www.redint.org).

[6] GOB (1972). The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Article 18A: The State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to preserve and safeguard the natural resources, bio‐diversity, wetlands, forests and wild life for the present and future citizens. [accessible at: http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/act‐367/section‐41505.html

[7] Dey, N.C., Parvez, M., Islam, M.R. (2021). A study on the impact of 2017 early monsoon flash flood: potential measures to safeguard livelihoods from extreme climate events in the haor area of Bangladesh, Intl. J. Disaster Risk Reduction, 59, 102247.

            https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102247

 

[8] Parvez, M., Islam, R. and Dey, N.C. (2021). Household food insecurity after the early monsoon flash flood of 2017 among wetland (Haor) communities of northeastern Bangladesh: a cross-sectional study, Food and Energy Security, 00, e326.https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.326. 

[9] Dey, N.C., Sujit, K. Bala, and Hayakawa, S. (2006). Assessing the economic benefits of improved irrigation management: a case study of Bangladesh. Water Policy J, 2006, 8(6), 573-84. doi:10.2166/wp.2006.058. 

[10] Dey, N.C., Bala SK, Islam AKM, Saha, R., Parvez, M., Hossain, M.  (2017). Sustainability of groundwater use for irrigation for dry-season crops in the northwest Bangladesh,  Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 2017, 4, 66–77. https://doi.10.1016/j.gsd.2017.02.001.

[11] Dey, N.C., Alam SM, Sajjan, A.K., Ali, M.A., Ibaraki, Y., Ghose, L. (2011). Assessing environmental and health impact of drought in the northwest Bangladesh”, J Environ Science & Natural Resources, 2011, 4(2), 89-97. https://doi.org/10.3329/jesnr.v4i2.10141.

[12] BARC (2021). The 100 Agro Technologies Atlas. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council. The Ministry of Agriculture, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh. Dhaka.https://moa.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/moa.portal.gov.bd/publications/b9f36738_e95a_4c17_9d63_44b883167878/100AgroTechAtlas.pdf

[13] Dey, N.C. Parvez, M., Saha, R., Akter, T. Islam, R. (2017). Application of remote sensing information for assessing excess water on crop productivity and associated costs: A case study in northwest Bangladesh. Proc. Intl. Conf. Geoscience and Remote Sensing. Las Vegas. USA

[14]. Dey et al. (2024). End-term Evaluation of Agro-met Information Services Development Project (2017-‘24). Final Report. Kranti Associates Ltd, Department of Agricultural Extension, GoB and the World Bank, Dhaka.

[15] Rabbi SE and Dey NC (2013). Exploring the gap between hand washing knowledge and practices in Bangladesh: a cross-sectional comparative study. BMC Public Health, 13:89. https://doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-89.

[16] Dey, N.C. Awal, M.A., Malay, et al. (2023a). “Survey on consumer awareness of nutrition, food safety and hygiene”, Technical Report, Meeting the Undernutrition Challenge (MUCH), FAO of the UN and Food Planning and Monitoring Unit, Ministry of Food, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, pp.124.

[17] World Bank (2017). Climate-Smart Agriculture in Bangladesh. CSA Country Profiles for Asia Series. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); World Bank. Washington, D.C. 28 p.. https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2019-06/CSA-in-Bangladesh.pdf

[18] Deichmann, U., Goyal, A., & Mishra, D. (2016). Will digital technologies transform agriculture in developing countries? Agricultural Economics, 47(S1), 21–33. doi:10.1111/agec.12300.

[19] Ortiz-Crespo, B., Steinke, J., Quirós, C. F., van de Gevel, J., Daudi, H., Gaspar Mgimiloko, M., & van Etten, J. (2020). User-centred design of a digital advisory service: enhancing public agricultural extension for sustainable intensification in Tanzania. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 1–17. doi:10.1080/14735903.2020.1720474

[20] FAO (2015). FAOSTAT. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Rome. Available at: http://faostat3.fao.org.

[21] FPMU (2021). National Food and Nutrition Security Policy Plan of Action (2021-30). Food Planning and Monitoring Unit, Ministry of Food, Government of the People’s Re[ublic of Bangladesh.

Introduction 

We very much welcome the opportunity to input into the scoping document of building resilient food systems. 

Background 

Our single overarching criticism of the HLPE Inequalities report and the CFS policy development process is this lack of focus on where food insecurity and malnutrition are the greatest. This lack of focus means that we are not applying implementation guidance in contexts where food systems are least resilient and governments capacity to respond are dependent on international aid. 

We have contributed to all five public consultations towards the development of the inequalities report and the ongoing policy development process. We have studied and learned from many of the submissions in each stage of the process. Our double-edged conclusion was that the expertise within the framework of the CFS is currently focused on the contexts of chronic hunger. This we saw was having knock-on implications for reaching the most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition. 

What surprised us most was that despite this focus, the policy recommendations which are still in development aligned very easily with the humanitarian frameworks and the protracted crisis. In a very real way, our review showed us the universality of need. While there is clear policy alignment within the equity working group we would expect to see the same alignment when within the Food Resilience working group.

Overarching recommendation. 

 Our overarching recommendation for the final input into the Inequalities policy development process is the same for the scope of this important report. That is we need to add a knowledge layer of context-specific to those most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition and understand central barriers to implementation. 

This vital knowledge layer aligns with MYPoW by giving direct “attention to the people most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition”. 

It also aligns with our Sustainable Development goals to reach the furthest behind first and will provide a much-needed pathway to end extreme poverty by 2030.

 Broadening the scope of this report to include those most affected by food insecurity and malnutrition presents a partial knowledge vacuum within the HLPE and the CFS. That is because the CFS has traditionally been guided towards chronic hunger as framed within the SOFI Report. This focus can be seen within the inputs in HLPE public consultations as well as the backgrounds of the HLPE sterling committee and writing teams. Please see our short policy input paper for the Reducing Inequalities Workstream on the knowledge vacuum we believe we have identified.   https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/cfs/Docs2324/Inequalities/Inputs_on_priority_policy_areas/_Policy_input_paper_for_the_Reducing_Inequality_Workstream_by_Mothers_First.pdf

We very much welcome the contribution to this platform from the Global Network Against Food Crisis which well frames food systems in fragile settings. https://assets.fsnforum.fao.org/public/contributions/2024/Global%20Network%20contribution_Building%20resilient%20food%20systems.pdf

To aid context specification we suggest the broader scope of the report will require the writing team's scope of experience to extend to acute hunger and malnutrition, particularly in humanitarian crises.

We would like to propose for consideration Daniel Maxwell,  Boston, MA: Feinstein International Center, Tufts University 

https://facultyprofiles.tufts.edu/daniel-maxwell  might be an obvious choice, particularly  considering his recent Landscape report on famine 

https://fic.tufts.edu/wp-content/uploads/Famine-Prevention-Landscape2023.pdf

The remainder of this input paper will focus on three areas where context specificity is import 

1 The Universality of Need.

2. A focused approach to reaching the Furthest behind

3 Human Rights 

4 Conclusion. 

Please find the file attached submission 

Dear FSN Forum Team and HLPE Secretariat,

thank you for the opportunity to submit inputs on this important topic.
Please find attached the IFOAM - Organics International contribution to HLPE consultation on Building Resilient Food Systems.

Kind regards
Cristina Grandi
IFOAM Chief Food Security Campaigner

Dear FSN Forum Team and HLPE Secretariat,

thank you for the opportunity to submit inputs on this important topic.

We believe that the report should also consider the contribution agroecological approaches, including organic agriculture can offer to build resilient food systems. There is a significant body of peer-reviewed scientific researchavailable on this topic. Below is a list of just a few of these for your consideration for possible inclusion in the report.

Nadia El-Hage Scialabba and Maria Müller-Lindenlauf . 2010. Organic agriculture and climate change. Published online by Cambridge University Press
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/renewable-agriculture-and-food-systems/article/organic-agriculture-and-climate-change/74A590FA3F35A79A858336CF341F416C

One Planet network Sustainable Food Systems (SFS) Programme, 2020. Towards a Common Understanding of Sustainable Food Systems
https://www.oneplanetnetwork.org/sites/default/files/sfs_programme_glossary_towards_a_common_understanding_of_sfs_2020.pdf

FAO and INRAE. 2020. Enabling sustainable food systems: Innovators’ handbook. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9917en

Camilo Andres Ardila Galvis. 2016. Building resilience through food – The case of the Network of Agroecological Peasants´ Markets of Valle del Cauca (Red MAC), Colombia. https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/9376/1/ardila_galvis_c_a_160707.pdf

David Baumgarten. 2023. The Climate Crisis and the Fragility of Food Systems: Towards Resilience and Justice
https://medium.com/@davidbaumgarten/the-climate-crisis-and-the-fragility-of-food-systems-towards-resilience-and-justice-50e0a8ae557c

Elin Röös et all. 2021. Moving beyond organic – A food system approach to assessing sustainable and resilient farming. Global Food Security, Volume 28. Elsevier
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912420301401?via%3Dihub

TP Organics. 2023. Organic and agroecological farming: Safeguarding long-term food security https://tporganics.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/TPO_RnI_food_security_policy_brief_202309.pdf

 

Dear HLPE-FSN, 

I am writing on behalf of the Resilience Analysis for Action (RESA) team, situated within the FAO Agrifood Economics and Policy (ESA) division, which works closely with the Office of Emergencies and Resilience (OER).

On the ways of defining resilience, UN defines resilience as “the ability of individuals, households, communities, cities, institutions, systems and societies to prevent, anticipate, absorb, adapt and transform positively, efficiently and effectively when faced with a wide range of risks…”​. Following this framework, the Resilience Index Measurement and Analysis (RIMA) framework operationalized resilience as “the capacity of a household to bounce back to a previous level of well-being (for instance food security) after a shock”. This aligns with the Resilience Measurement Technical Working Group (RM-TWG), the expert consultation group established under the Food Security Information Network (https://www.fsinplatform.org/), which defines resilience as: “the capacity that ensures adverse stressors and shocks do not have long-lasting adverse development consequences”.​ Resilience should encompass not only the capacity to recover, adapt, and transform, in response to shocks and stresses, but also the capacity to prevent and anticipate these events. This broader perspective underscores resilience as an ongoing capacity, something one has at their disposal both before and after shocks and stresses occur.

In this context, the Shiny RIMA tool (https://www.fao.org/agrifood-economics/areas-of-work/rima/shiny/en/) provides a quantitative estimation of resilience capacity to food insecurity at the household level. Additionally, it assesses the resilience structural matrix of households, identifying the key determinants of their resilience. The four resilience pillars which underscore the resilience capacity of households are: Access to Basic Services (ABS), Assets (AST), Social Safety Nets (SSN), and Adaptive Capacity (AC). 

Since the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 2015, countries have been developing policies that enhance early warning systems and anticipatory actions for risk management. These efforts aim to reduce the exposure and vulnerability of vulnerable households to prevalent hazards, while also considering “residual risk” and devising strategies for potential shocks.  

The Country Programming Frameworks provide valuable insights into future policy priorities. These frameworks are developed collaboratively by FAO country offices, national ministries, and local experts to identify key areas of focus at the country level. From these frameworks, it is evident that countries are developing policies to address specific hazards with consequences at the local level. These policies support households in mitigating the negative impact of shocks, while also supporting them to avoid the adoption of negative coping strategies in the face of shocks. However, it is crucial for policies to also enhance households' capacity to withstand future shocks, thereby reducing the consumption and welfare volatilities associated with such events.

Below are links to some explicative resilience evaluations that have utilized the RIMA methodology to measure resilience to food insecurity. RIMA has been validated over time as a good predictor of food security (Ciani and Romano, 2011; d’Errico et al., 2016) and has been employed in numerous case studies. Other analyses have shown that the Resilience Capacity Index (RCI) is largely correlated with food security and other poverty indicators, making it a valid tool for estimating the capacity of a household to bounce back to a previous level of well-being (for instance food security) after a shock.

1. Mondal et al., 2023. Developing micro level resilience index for Indian Sundarban adopting resilience indicators for measurement and analysis (RIMA) methodology. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geogeo.2022.100129
2. Sibrian et al., 2021. Household Resilience to Food and Nutrition Insecurity in Central America and the Caribbean. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169086
3. Ngesa et al, 2021. Characteristics and Determinants of the Resilience of Smallholder Farmers: Lessons from Application of the RIMA II Methodology in Eastern Africa. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57281-5_67

Kind regards,

Joanna Mihaylova

Dear colleagues,

Please find below some comments from the Sustainable Diets Taskforce, linked to the International Union of Nutrition Sciences. Comments are mainly in the context of the type of food system we should be striving for. Sustainable food systems that are resilient to shocks. It seems that the current proposed scope only looks at food systems as a whole as a second thought. It focused on supply chains, which is okay to a certain extent, but when looking at the entire food system(s) it may be beneficials to rely less on certain (types of) supply chains and more on others. It seems the current scope does not debate this. So overall we emphasize the need to look at the resilience and sustainability of the (entire) food systems instead of just some value chains, especially if there is no tendency to move away from the over reliance on the three main crops ( maize, wheat and rice). More (agro-) biodiversity is needed for a more resilient and sustainable system. Needless to say that resilient food systems need to deliver healthy and sustainable diets as well, considering that levels of malnutrition are at unacceptable high levels and overweight/obesity is increasing. In low-income settings, e.g. in Sub-Sahara Africa this is related to higher frequency of cimate-induced shocks.

While looking at the food system, it becomes apparent to also take into account the measures that can be taken to improve food environment ( where people meet the food system) to support healthy lifestyle choices. Food environment are a good entry point to transform systems. Examples are the food environments in schools are in the work setting, supported by nutrition education and awareness (nutrition litereacy).

1. One way to so this is : To investigate and reform food standards programmes around the world, starting with Codex, so they are more fit for purpose for promoting healthy and sustainable food systems. For example, re-orienting their conventional mandates, governance and risk assessment processes, such that they are more relevant and responsive to contemporary food system problems. It seems that the substantial influence of food standards programmes on food systems often flies under the radar of researchers and policymakers. A paper by Dr Mark Lawrence about this will be published in the coming two months.
2. Related to this, there is a need to reform the metrics that are used for measuring a food’s ‘healthiness’ and ‘sustainability’ in the design of food-based interventions such as front-of-pack labelling. Currently we are witnessing reductionist approaches (narrow LCA methods, nutrient profiling) dominate food policy interventions and these could be leading to unintended consequences.

3.       Also in the food environment, it would make sense to look at how we deal with ultra-processed foods which are eroding traditional food systems and contributing to unhealthy and unsustainable diets (including the packaging issues) and contributing to diet-related non-communicable diseases

Zooming out (from food environment to the food system:

There is also a need to reform how evidence quality is assessed in informing policy and practice to build resilient food systems. We need to be investigating the application of non-GRADE evidence synthesis methods, such as traditional knowledge of indigenous foods and dietary patterns, in sustainable food systems research and policy practices ( publications by Dr B Barbara Burlingame and others).

Kind regards

Stineke Oenema ( co-chair of the Sustainable Diets Task force)

---

[1] Submitted on June 26, 2024 to Svetlana Livinets, FSN Forum Manager at Email: [email protected]

[2] Dr. Santosh Kumar Mishra (Ph. D.) (He/his), Independent Researcher (Scholar) [Post-retirement from Population Education Resource Centre (PERC), Department of Lifelong Learning & Extension (DLLE), S. N. D. T. Women’s University (SNDTWU), Mumbai, India, https://sndt.ac.in]    

Mailing Address:

Dr. Santosh Kumar Mishra (Ph. D.) (He/his), Gomes Residency C. H. S. Ltd., Flat No. 11, 2^nd Floor, Lourdes Colony, Orlem, Off Marve Road, Malad (West), Mumbai-400064, Maharashtra, India [Tel.: (+91) 9224380445 (WahatsApp), Email: [email protected]]  

Note/Comments: (1) Views expressed below are mine and NOT of the PERC, DLLE, SNDTWU, where I was employed previously. (2) Some potion of the contribution has been taken from previously published work, sources have been quoted in the text. 

---

1. Different ways of defining resilience:

• How do different groups define resilience (e.g. Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations, the scientific / peer reviewed literature, other key rights holders)?  

It is pertinent to note that a resilient food system is able to withstand and recover from disruptions in a way that ensures a sufficient supply of acceptable and accessible food for all. Disasters can upend food access and incomes in the short term, stretch food system businesses and safety net programs to the limit, and cause longer-term harm to people and systems that produce and distribute food. Due to structural inequities and racism, the consequences are typically worse for marginalized communities. The hazards are many, and often co-occurring: (1) climate change, (2) pandemic, (3) supply chain disruptions, (4) rising prices for food and production inputs (e.g., fertilizer), (5) conflict, and (6) worker shortages Importantly, a resilient food system is able to withstand and recover from disruptions in a way that ensures a sufficient supply of acceptable and accessible food for all.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://clf.jhsph.edu/projects/food-system-resilience#:~:text=A%20resilient%20food%20system%20is,and%20accessible%20food%20for%20all. 

• What are the main types of vulnerabilities facing food supply chains and what are the potential consequences for food system actors (including input suppliers, food producers, traders, food system workers and consumers), considering different kinds of potential shocks?

Main types of vulnerabilities facing food supply chains:

Failures in the food supply chain can occur at the stages of production, processing, wholesale, distribution, retail, or food donation sources. Each of these levels is vulnerable to events caused by adverse weather, contamination, and insufficient resources.

Potential consequences for food system actors:

Food systems comprise all the people, institutions, places, and activities that play a part in growing, processing, transporting, selling, marketing, and, ultimately, eating food. Food systems influence diets by determining what kinds of foods are produced, which foods are accessible, both physically and economically, and peoples’ food preferences. They are also critical for ensuring:

1. food and nutrition security, 

2. people’s livelihoods, and 

3. environmental sustainability.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.foodsystemsdashboard.org/information/about-food-systems 

• What kind of inequities and power imbalances are present in food systems and how do they affect resilient FSN and especially for those groups facing multidimensional and intersectional aspects of inequality and vulnerability?

What kind of inequities and power imbalances are present in food systems and how do they affect resilient FSN?

Making food systems more equitable is necessary for the sustainability of our food systems and for the wellbeing of people, particularly those most vulnerable. And transforming food systems under a changing climate and accelerating biodiversity loss– to ensure food and nutrition security for all – demands action from all actors. It also requires (a) building agency and the capacities of the underrepresented; (b) changing power relations: both in the formal and informal spheres, and confronting harmful and discriminatory social norms; and (c) practices that are embedded in structures which systematically privilege some groups over others. In addition, there must be:

1. a greater investment in development that is people-centered, consistent with a human rights-based approach; 

2. better and more democratic tools for monitoring and implementing policies on economic, social and cultural rights; 

3. increased implementation of social protection programs; 

4. promoting the right to collective bargaining, livable wages, and social protection measures offered by the private sector; 

5. strengthening the capacity and self-determination of marginalized communities to advocate for their needs and hold governments accountable; 

6. increased social and environmental safeguards and regulations; investments and protections of indigenous knowledge; and 

7. traditional lands; better data; and localized solutions.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/fs-summit-legacy/food-systems-summit-compendium/chapter-2-levers-of-change/equity-in-food-systems/en#:~:text=Income%20and%20Socioeconomic%20Equity,(World%20Bank%2C%202021). 

How do they affect resilient FSN and especially for those groups facing multidimensional and intersectional aspects of inequality and vulnerability?

Today’s food systems are highly unequal, exacerbating hunger and malnutrition around the world and hampering any successful transformative change. When food systems are unequal, it leads to a poor quality of life, low productivity, and perpetuated poverty, limiting people’s opportunities and economic growth. Climate change and conflicts further exacerbate these disparities. Even in rich countries, these inequalities systematically strike certain groups of people, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, and these populations often face compounded disadvantages. In addition, inequalities in food security and nutrition (FSN) fuel instability at large, such as sparking protests, food riots, and political unrest.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.siani.se/news-story/addressing-inequalities-in-food-security-and-nutrition/ 

• What resilience frameworks are there that should be explored? 

The framework is structured around following three components: 

1. the mapping of the actors and the local food system; 

2. the assessment of the resilience of these actors and that of the food system, and 

3. the outcomes of this resilience, assessed in term of local population's food security.

• What are the determinants, assets and skills that lead to resilience at different scales (household, community, national, regional)? 

Food systems are defined as social–ecological systems, formed of biophysical and social factors. The behaviour of a system is defined by an interplay of interacting subsystems, in which feedback plays a key role, rather than a simple chain of cause-effect relationships. Since this process includes feedback loops, the cause-effect relationships are not linear and often not predictable. For example, better access to agri-inputs can lead to more income, which in turn can lead to farmers purchasing more agri-inputs. Systematic attention is required to understand the complex behaviour of food systems. The system behaviour is defined by interactions between elements or subsystems of the system (e.g., between production and consumption), different levels of the systems (e.g. local and national) and the food system and other influencing systems (e.g. food and energy systems).

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.leap4fnssa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Studyreport_food-sytem-resilience_final-11_06_21_CS.pdf 

• How can resilience be evaluated and/or measured at different scales (household, community, national, regional)? 

Food system resilience can be measured at different scales by considering multiple dimensions. At the field scale, resilience can be assessed by evaluating the use of diverse crop varieties, livestock breeds, and forage species, as well as the promotion of ecosystem functions. At the farm scale, resilience can be measured by examining the diversification of crops and livestock, as well as the implementation of adaptive approaches in response to perturbations. Resilience at regional and global scales can be evaluated by coordinating and implementing resilience approaches among farms, providing advice to farmers, and conducting targeted research. 

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://typeset.io/questions/what-are-the-dimensions-of-measuring-food-system-resilience-o5g19b571m

• What indicators would measure that food systems are resilient across their different components (e.g. consumption, supply chains, retail and production)?

It is key to broaden the approaches used in food security assessments and indicators to encompass the entire food system and complement those with a narrow focus on food availability, access and utilization. The state of key natural resources and supporting services such as transport, storage and energy and the management systems of these resources is as important as food production. Additionally, supporting policies and institutions that frame the capacities of people to address food insecurities when they occur also need to be considered. These need to be designed and adjusted in ways that support climate resilient food systems. The process of developing indicators is as important as the results. The adoption of iterative participatory processes to develop indicators is key to ensure their relevance and buy-in from involved communities and to decrease the risks of further marginalizing vulnerable groups. It is also important to identify and engage practitioners and policy-makers acting at the various vertical and horizontal spatial scales and involve them as early as possible throughout this process.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/measuring_food_resilience_honduras_nicaragua.pdf?q=sites/default/files/publications/measuring_food_resilience_honduras_nicaragua.pdf

• Which and where are the weak points in global food systems in terms of ensuring the resilience of food security and nutrition? 

Food security means always having physical, social and economic access to sufficient safe and healthy food. This food must also meet food preferences and dietary needs for an active and healthy life. Ensuring food security poses major challenges as 9.3 billion people worldwide will need to be fed by the year 2050. Reducing food waste, enhancing infrastructure and promoting more efficient production techniques are key ways to improve food security. However, in terms of weak points, food insecurity will become an increasing problem over the coming decades. Food prices are likely to rise due to climate change and a growing world population. Nutritious food is therefore likely to become unattainable for more and more people.

Source: Accessed on June 24, 2024 from: https://www.wur.nl/en/show/food-security-11.htm

• What evidence bases are there to measure resilience and the effectiveness of interventions?

Widespread hunger, malnutrition, and water insecurity have devastating impacts on the health and well-being of millions of people. Evidence on what approaches are most effective to address these challenges and increase resilience can help make better investments and decisions. 

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.3ieimpact.org/research/mapping-evidence-resilience-and-food-security 

2. Understanding what we must be prepared for – the nature of shocks:

• 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? 

Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. Many factors cause food crises and hunger. Nevertheless, the leading causes are poverty, war, economic fluctuations, natural disasters, as well as the ongoing pandemic. In addition, Due to the constant increase in population every year, the food system faces challenges regarding producing adequate amounts of food to feed the entire humanity. It is estimated that, by 2050, the world food system will have to provide food for more than 9 billion people.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.lifefoster.eu/major-challenges-of-the-world-food-system/

• 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)? 

The inability to access sufficient amounts of food is an issue that plagues populations globally. Limited mobility, economic barriers, and a lack of fresh food options prevent certain low-income communities from obtaining healthy and affordable food. This problem has only been exacerbated by the farm policy incentives that drive an excess production of sweets, fats, and meats, and producers choosing to cut costs through extensive food processing and use of high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated soy oil to increase product self-life and convenience. In addition, globally, consumers and farmers alike are unable to access the market or afford the costs of consumption or production. 

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.ampglobalyouth.org/2019/08/16/top-5-problems-global-food-system/ 

• How to balance preparing for short-term shocks (e.g. droughts and floods) versus the need to ensure food systems fit within planetary boundaries and long-term sustainability of systems? 

Food systems around the world are expected to deliver on a formidable “triple challenge”. The first requirement is to ensure food security and nutrition for all. The second is to provide livelihoods to farmers and others in the food chain, and promote rural development. The third is to do all this while ensuring environmental sustainability by (a) using natural resources sustainably (including protecting valuable ecosystems, biodiversity); and (b) reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Source: Accessed on June 24, 2024 from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/edf73cce-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/edf73cce-en

• Are there ways of enhancing resilience to unknown and unforeseen shocks? 

A resilience framework in food security and nutrition (FSN) can help bolster support for interventions, such as safety-net programs, that bridge relief and development. Several decades ago, short-term shocks were only of peripheral concern to most development experts. Helping people survive natural disasters, like floods and droughts, or manmade ones like civil unrest, was considered the responsibility of humanitarian aid organizations. Conversely, humanitarian agencies have historically focused mainly on relief rather than on the kinds of longer-term development-oriented interventions that might reduce exposure or vulnerability to shocks.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.globalhungerindex.org/issues-in-focus/2013.html

3. Understanding and mitigating trade-offs:

• Are there trade-offs between increasing adaptation to one type of shock and creating other types of fragility? 

Today’s food systems are failing to deliver minimum food security and nutrition outcomes and to support equitable livelihoods for over 800 million people worldwide. They are exposed to increasingly complex risks, shocks, and stressors, including (a) conflict, (b) climate change, (c) COVID-19, and (d) the soaring cost of food. They can negatively impact the environment and can contribute to increasing vulnerability, especially in fragile areas. 2. Food systems should have the capacity to provide sufficient, safe, and affordable food and healthy diets for all, while aiming to be resilient in the face of major shocks and stressors, economic disturbance, and climate change, whilst recognizing that widespread violence and conflict as well as catastrophic climatic and other natural events are likely to affect any food system.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.shareweb.ch/site/Agriculture-and-Food-Security/news/F2F%20Rome%202023%20%20All%20slides/Resilient%20Food%20Systems%20Framework_LV_NOV2022.pdf 

• What is the impact on resilience programming of different understandings of food security and nutrition (e.g. focus on nutrition, the four pillars, the six dimensions of food security, etc)?

Since the COVID-19 crisis food systems resilience is becoming an increasingly popular concept in the journey toward global food security. However, defining and assessing resilience remains a challenge. As it is such a broadly applicable concept, it needs to be operationalized for each specific case to make it meaningful. A resilient food system is able to withstand and recover from shocks and disruptions, such as natural disasters, economic downturns, or pandemics while providing access to nutritious, affordable, and culturally appropriate food for all. Incorporating these elements requires a holistic approach and does not add up to a single, straightforward approach to assess and build resilience at food systems level.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.nfpconnects.com/conversations/the-abcd-of-food-system-resilience 

4. Existing programmes and policies to promote resilience – a gap analysis of current strategies and recommendations:

• How are countries preparing for food systems resilience today?  What are the main policies and documents that can provide information on these national level plans?

Global food systems impacts people’s lives and livelihoods, and are a high-emitting sector for carbon emissions, making them a priority in multilateral dialogue. Local contexts vary and agricultural methods must adapt accordingly, so farmers must be at the forefront and centre of change initiatives. Technology and innovation will drive climate adaptation and food systems resiliency; several initiatives have emerged to catalyse the right investment, ecosystem and market conditions for suitable solutions. Progress has been made in prioritizing global food and water systems through milestones like the UN Food Systems Summit, UN Water Summit and UNFCCC dialogues. However, the harsh truth is that up to 783 million people faced hunger in 2022, an increase of 1.3% from pre-pandemic levels.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/12/food-systems-connection-climate-action-cop28/ 

• Are there current or recent partnerships / initiatives proven to contribute to building resilience? What are the lessons learned? 

The global food system (from farm to fork) is facing dramatic changes. Food production has evolved from a predominantly local effort to meet the nutritional needs of small communities to one dominated by sophisticated supply chains that span the globe. The relationship between the production and consumption of food has been impacted by urbanization, population growth, and changes in consumer tastes and dietary habits. Globally, climate change has now risen as a fundamental challenge to the world’s efforts to feed itself. In response to these challenges, technological advancements, data analytics, agriculture research and development (R&D), and new farming practices offer significant opportunities to transform food production and promote more sustainable practices. 

Within this changing landscape, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are a vital tool to achieve a more sustainable, efficient, and equitable global food system. By combining the strengths of the public and private sectors and incorporating actors such as philanthropies, multilateral organizations, and civil society, these multi-stakeholder partnerships can drive and support innovative solutions in food production, distribution, and consumption.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.csis.org/analysis/partnership-opportunities-transform-food-systems 

• Could you provide success stories and best practices examples that can be applied to other locations?

Food companies are uniquely positioned to integrate innovative solutions and mobilize funding to transform food systems in response to climate change. One example is developing climate-resilient crops. Crops can be engineered to withstand extreme weather conditions, offering a profitable and sustainable solution to the challenges posed by changing climates. In addition, food companies are leaders in the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices among their suppliers through practices such as regenerative agriculture, biodiversity enhancement, soil enrichment, and watershed improvement. These practices are vital to creating a more resilient and sustainable agricultural sector capable of withstanding the challenges posed by climate change. Companies are also implementing ground-breaking technologies to address pressing climate change issues. Precision agriculture is a prime example, where data analytics and internet of things (IoT) devices can be used to enhance farming efficiency, reducing waste and optimizing resource use. These are some of the ways that the global supply of food can be made more resilient in light of rising climate-based stressors.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.csis.org/analysis/partnership-opportunities-transform-food-systems

• Is the currently portfolio of resilience programming well aligned to different types of foreseen and unforeseen shocks, scales, or parts of the food system? 

There is now wide agreement that the interactions among climate change trends, ecosystem fragility and geo-political instability have produced new configurations of risks that are increasingly difficult to predict. The combined effect of these new risk configurations has in turn placed a more pronounced set of negative pressures on the agro-ecological systems, economic resources, and social institutions that affect welfare dynamics. Consequently, the well-being of the world’s poor, that portion of the world population with the fewest protections, is now subject to a more challenging series of shocks and stressors. Viewed by many as a strategic approach to deal with the range of unpredictable risks that undermine well-being, resilience has recently emerged as a key concept for policy and program development. The concept of resilience is now at the center of policy discussions.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.fsinplatform.org/sites/default/files/paragraphs/documents/FSIN_TechnicalSeries_1.pdf 

• What gaps are there in the current portfolio of country adaptation / resilience policies? 

Climatic variability has been acquiring an extensive consideration due to its widespread ability to impact food production and livelihoods. Climate change has the potential to intersperse global approaches in alleviating hunger and undernutrition. It is hypothesized that climate shifts bring substantial negative impacts on food production systems, thereby intimidating food security. Vast developments have been made addressing the global climate change, undernourishment, and hunger for the last few decades, partly due to the increase in food productivity through augmented agricultural managements. However, the growing population has increased the demand for food, putting pressure on food systems. Moreover, the potential climate change impacts are still unclear more obviously at the regional scales. Climate change is expected to boost food insecurity challenges in areas already vulnerable to climate change. Human-induced climate change is expected to impact food quality, quantity, and potentiality to dispense it equitably. Global capabilities to ascertain the food security and nutritional reasonableness facing expeditious shifts in biophysical conditions are likely to be the main factors determining the level of global disease incidence. It can be apprehended that all food security components (mainly food access and utilization) likely be under indirect effect via pledged impacts on ménage, incomes, and damages to health. The corroboration supports the dire need for huge focused investments in mitigation and adaptation measures to have sustainable, climate-smart, eco-friendly, and climate stress resilient food production systems. 

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2022.927535/full 

• 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?

Food systems have long faced simultaneous challenges related to environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainability1. The broader debate engaging both academics and societal actors on how to ‘solve’ food system challenges tends to reduce the solution space to dichotomous perspectives. One example is the dichotomy of scale, where one narrative advocates for more localized food systems, while the opposite highlights the need for efficient coordination of food systems at the global level. The “local-global debate” is not new. Shifts to or calls for local or global food systems can be found in response to many historical food system crises. However, the local-global debate is now resurfacing under drastically altered conditions. Thus, it is timely to revisit the core tenets of the local-global debate and understand how to more constructively reframe food system challenges and solutions.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-022-00662-0 

• 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?

Collaboration between governments, civil society, the private sector, and research institutions is key to implementing holistic and inclusive strategies. Effective policy and governance frameworks are essential for driving the transformation of food systems towards climate resilience.

In addition to traditional adaptation strategies, innovation plays a vital role in transforming food systems for climate resilience. Research and development in areas such as climate-resilient crop varieties, biofortification, sustainable aquaculture, and alternative protein sources are critical for addressing food security challenges in a changing climate. Advances in digital agriculture, blockchain technology, and data analytics also offer new opportunities for improving resilience and transparency in food supply chains.

Effective policy and governance frameworks are essential for driving the transformation of food systems towards climate resilience. Integrating climate change considerations into agricultural policies, promoting sustainable land use planning, incentivising climate-smart practices through subsidies and incentives, and fostering international cooperation and knowledge exchange can be adopted. Collaboration between governments, civil society, the private sector, and research institutions is key to implementing holistic and inclusive strategies.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/creating-climate-resilient-food-systems#:~:text=Collaboration%20between%20governments%2C%20civil%20society,food%20systems%20towards%20climate%20resilience. 

• What measures are necessary to incentivize private sector strategies and investments that promote supply chain resilience?

Resilient food systems can withstand short and long-term shocks and stressors such as natural disasters and extreme weather events. They are described as diverse, integrated, self-regulating, adaptive, inclusive, and equitable. Examples of food system resilience, including food sovereignty, are found globally, often led by civil society and Indigenous peoples. These systems guarantee and protect people’s space, ability, and right to define their own models of food production, distribution, and consumption. Food-system resilience begins by supporting sustainable farming businesses that prioritize both environmental and human health. Over the last century, global competition has led to enormous consolidation of agricultural production. Large industrial farms, many of which lack diversity and only produce one or two commodity crops, degrade soil health, reduce biodiversity, pollute water, threaten food security for local communities, limit employment opportunities, and exploit farm workers. Micro, small-, and mid-sized sustainable farms, by contrast, contribute to a vibrant agricultural economy with more farmers and local jobs, keep more money circulating within regional economies, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other off-site environmental impacts on communities. They can also reduce food safety risks for consumers.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://navigatingimpact.thegiin.org/strategy/sa/increasing-resiliency-of-food-systems-through-agriculture/

5. Share recent literature, case studies and data that could help answer the questions listed above.

By 2050, the United Nations expects the percentage of the global population residing in cities to increase from 55 to 68%. Already, up to 70 percent of the food produced worldwide is consumed in urban areas, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Cities are responsible for approximately 70% of global energy-related greenhouse gas emissions.

In order to support urban food systems, the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (MUFPP), an international agreement of mayors aimed at tackling food issues at the city level, was introduced in the year 2015. Bringing together more than 210 cities worldwide, it represents a working tool to help build sustainable urban food systems that are inclusive, safe, and diverse.

The cities that have signed on to the MUFPP are home to projects working to better food production, improve social and economic equity, make diets more sustainable and nutritious, and reduce food waste. Presented below is brief description of ten projects (designed and implemented in different countries) that are aimed at increasing the resilience of urban food systems:

1. Community Urban Gardening Program, Araraquara, Brazil:

Located in Araraquara, São Paulo, the Municipal Community Urban Garden Program is helping the city work toward food and nutrition security. In addition to growing fruits and vegetables, the garden offers a certification program through which participants can gain agricultural experience. To increase its impact, the program is also working to install vegetable gardens in regions around the city.

2. Esquela de Gigantes, La Paz, Bolivia:

Esquela de Gigantes, which translates to School of Giants, is a food and nutrition educational program helping to cultivate organic school gardens. The program strives to emphasize intercultural knowledge and healthy eating habits while improving the academic performance of students. When in-person programs were suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the program shared educational videos and hosted workshops and webinars on gardening and nutrition.

3. Food Policies for a Resilient City, Barcelona, Spain:

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the city of Barcelona is working to make its food system more resilient by introducing new programs and strengthening partnerships. These projects are helping to support a distribution center that allows farmers to sell directly to retailers, strengthen markets that offer sustainably grown food, and improve food aid to help the most vulnerable communities. Through a systemic approach, they hope these new projects can improve the quality of life of residents and reduce the impact of the food system on the planet.

4. H.O.P.E., Surakarta, Indonesia:

In Indonesia, Surakata’s government is working to empower city residents to improve community wellness and food security. Encouraging people to utilize land around their homes, the city hopes that more households will begin growing their own produce. To support these efforts, city agencies are collaborating to provide both agricultural inputs and training for those who are interested. The city is also working to increase food access through a supplementary feeding program for young children.

5. Mérida Nos Une, Mexico City, Mexico:

Mérida nos une is a network intended to bring together residents of Mexico City and build resilience. Through a digital platform of the same name, residents in need of food, basic necessities and services can connect with those able to help. Since April 2020, the project has aided more than 2,600 individuals and families.

6. Mezitli Female Producers’ Market, Mezitli, Turkey:

Mezitli Female Producers’ Market was the first market in Turkey run entirely by women producers. The project reached women in neighbourhoods across the city, providing them with stands to sell their products, which range from olive oils and marmalades to cheeses and baked goods. The project is helping local residents gain independence and today, roughly 650 women producers run stands at nine producers’ markets across the city.

7. Micro-gardening in the City of Dakar, Dakar, Senegal:

To address the social and economic challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, the city of Dakar helped launch micro-gardens to bolster food security in the area. The gardens, located in neighbourhoods across the city, provide residents access to produce. According to residents utilizing the gardens, the spaces promote the consumption of healthy food and increase self-sufficiency in the face of the pandemic.

8. Resident Food Equity Advisors, Baltimore, the United States of America:

Baltimore’s Resident Food Equity Advisors (RFEA) are cohorts of local residents working to drive equitable food policies through an inclusive and collaborative process. Drawing from their own experiences with the city’s food system, each group of Advisors tackles a different issue requiring attention. The most recent cohort of Advisors developed a set of recommendations to improve food equity in and around the Housing Authority of Baltimore City Family Developments.

9. Responding to Food insecurity: a Made in Toronto Solution, Toronto, Canada:

To help vulnerable communities, Toronto’s emergency food providers mobilized to get food to those in need at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. In partnership with nonprofit organizations, the city opened 11 temporary food banks at library branches across the city. In four months, these services reached more than 12,000 households. Once libraries reopened to the public, the food banks moved to other sites around the city and today, two of the temporary food banks are still in operation to meet residents’ needs.

10. Turning the Crisis into an Opportunity, Tel Aviv, Israel:

When COVID-19 hit Tel Aviv, the city’s government focused on helping families eat healthily and affordably by launching an online educational campaign. As part of the city’s Bon Appetit program, they published a variety of videos to help parents prepare nutritious meals on a budget, establish gardens to grow their own vegetables, and cook with their children. Other videos, designed for children, included an interactive story time to encourage viewers to try new foods.

Source: Accessed on June 26, 2024 from: https://foodtank.com/news/2021/10/projects-increasing-the-resilience-of-urban-food-systems/

Good day HLPE Members

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this process. The input herein is from the Chief Direcorate: Food Security team of DALRRD.  

RESPONSES:

Different ways of defining resilience :

How do different groups define resilience (e.g. Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations, the scientific / peer reviewed literature, other key rights holders)? 

The ability to recover and restore the original status quicker. 

What are the main types of vulnerabilities facing food supply chains and what are the potential consequences of the food system actors?

The main types of vulnerabilities facing the food system chains include power (electrical) insecurity affecting the irrigation schedule, and storage facilities because the food needs cold storage facilities.  At the level of production, an increase the cost of production inputs and the production processes. The breakdown of diseases and pests also affects the food system because production gets affected resulting in food shortage for consumers. Additionally, any political uprisings affect the whole chain because the inputs will not reach the farm, workers will be unable to get to their workstations and produced food will not be distributed. 

The food system in South Africa is characterised by under–and–overfeeding. There are malnourished people as well as obese people in the country. The need to transform food systems is critical. The system disadvantages mainly the smallholder and subsistence sector when it comes to access and affordability of inputs, as they are operating on the periphery. 

Furthermore, Climate related shocks inclusive of floods, droughts, biological hazards and conflicts affect food supply chains equally. 

Under researched shocks include biological hazards and these require further research as they don’t have boundaries.

Vulnerable communities (especially women, youth and people with disabilities) are totally displaced and call for more funding support which normally would not be budgeted for. 

 

What resilience frameworks are there that should be explored? 

The Regional Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (RVAA) Programme is one of the frameworks that can be replicated. Concerted efforts to understand livelihoods and how they are impacted by shocks have been the priority for this programme. It is the fundamental view of the RVAA Programme that there is a pressing need to advance from planning for response to planning for and building resilience, which will require poverty analysis as well as resilience measurement and monitoring (SADC, 2018 – Synthesis Report on the State of Food and Nutrition Security and Vulnerability in Southern Africa, 2018).

 

3. Understanding and mitigating trade-offs:

• Are there trade-offs between increasing adaptation to one type of shock and creating other types of fragility? 
• What is the impact on resilience programming of different understandings of food security and nutrition (e.g. focus on nutrition, the four pillars, the six dimensions of food security, etc)?

3.1 Increasing environmental or climate change adaptation through agro-ecology will have a long and sustained positive impact on the quality of the soil structure but may in the short to medium term affect large scale production of food.

3.2 Resilience programming will have an everlasting impact on food and nutrition security pillars as food access, availability, utilization, stability will improve and be able to withstand different shocks and knocks, Developing food and nutrition security resilient strategies aimed at the most vulnerable also ensures that a buffer is created to cushion those likeliest to be hit by seen and unforeseen shocks.

 

4. Existing programmes and policies to promote resilience – a gap analysis of current strategies and recommendations:

• How are countries preparing for food systems resilience today?  What are the main policies and documents that can provide information on these national level plans?
• Are there current or recent partnerships / initiatives proven to contribute to building resilience? What are the lessons learned? 
• Could you provide success stories and best practices examples that can be applied to other locations?
• Is the currently portfolio of resilience programming well aligned to different types of foreseen and unforeseen shocks, scales, or parts of the food system? 
• What gaps are there in the current portfolio of country adaptation / resilience policies? 
• 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?
• 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?
• What measures are necessary to incentivize private sector strategies and investments that promote supply chain resilience?

Existing Policies: 

4.1 The National Food and Nutrition Security Policy which seeks to provide an overarching guiding framework to maximise synergy between the different strategies and programmes of government and civil society.

The Agriculture, Agro-processing Masterplan that serves as a partnership compact for the country:  

Partnerships and measures to improve: 

4.2 Partnership between the department of agriculture and the Commodity Organisations, inclusive of farmer associations. 

4.3 Innovative research is conducted resulting in drought resistant seeds and the re-introduction of indigenous crops.

4.4 Not well aligned due to the fragmented conception, development and implementation, monitoring and reporting of multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder adaptation and mitigation policies and strategies. 

4.5 Improved coordination, monitoring and reporting by different stakeholders involved in ensuring a resilient food system.

4.6 To create a conducive environment for continuous food systems dialogue by multi-sectors and stakeholders and put building blocks (resources – human and capital, legislation, policies, research, monitoring and evaluation framework, etc) in place to ensure achievement of set objectives. Roll-out country specific interventions or initiatives.

4.7 Tax rebates and profit. Roll-out a deliberate country-wide infrastructure programme to improve production, storage and movement of food. Ensure uninterrupted supply of critical resources such as water and electricity. Depoliticize the municipalities and ensure the hiring of skilled professionals.

A Unified Policy for Food Safety and Traceability - need of the hour

To mitigate the societal costs of foodborne illness, a comprehensive policy ensuring holistic food safety measures and robust traceability systems from farm to consumer is essential. This policy mandates standardized integration of food chain records, extensive and precise bidirectional tracking, and timely data collection. It supports producers with improved supply management, food safety and quality traceback, and promotes quality differentiation. For consumers, it builds trust and assurance through transparent traceability. Addressing challenges faced by small and medium enterprises in India, the policy enhances agricultural practices and infrastructure, with collaboration from agencies like FSSAI, APEDA,  NABARD, FPO, ITC’s eChaupal, and Reliance.

 

1. Different ways of defining resilience:

1.1 How do different groups define resilience (e.g., Indigenous Peoples' Organizations, the scientific / peer-reviewed literature, other key rights holders)?

Although they represent just 5 percent of the world’s population, Indigenous Peoples safeguard 80 per cent of the planet’s biodiversity. For Indigenous Populations, resilience means preserving their deep-rooted connections to their traditional lands and environments which is essential to their cultural identity.  Their right to exercise control over these territories is, however, being constantly eroded by land-use change, in turn driven by the relentless expansion of agricultural lands, mostly for animal pasture and the production of animal feed.(Plant Based Treaty, 2023, Safe and Just: The Plant Based Treaty’s vegan donut economics approach to the food system.)

In the words of Ms. Xananine Calvillo, Youth Indigenous Activist, “the food system as it is now, does not only harm the Earth's physical limits but also our social boundaries. Shifting to a plant-based food system will help us create safer and fairer communities”. (Intervention during a Press Conference at the Bonn Climate Meetings, June 2024). Resilience must be understood not only as a physical or environmental concept, but essentially as a social construct, based on the relationship of people among themselves and with the land where they live. 

Ms. Calvillo went on to explain that factory farming agribusiness had taken over the ancestral land of her community, impacting a fragile ecosystem and ancestral plant-based traditions rooted in biodiversity and agroecological practices. Her firsthand testimony is buttressed by the Environmental Justice Atlas, which documents how all conflicts in lands that are home to Mexico indigenous communities are related to animal agriculture industries, specifically as regards the groundwater. For this reason, again quoting Ms. Calvillo “Food systems transformation is also an issue of indigenous rights. Our relation to land is under attack by the expansion of animal agriculture businesses”. 

Supporting the resilience of Indigenous Peoples therefore means supporting our planet’s resilience. This is why we call for transitioning to a plant-based food system and rewilding our planet through a push towards the 3Rs that are the three pillars of the Plant Based Treaty: R1, relinquish the expansion of animal agriculture; R2, redirect major economic resources and large-scale public education towards plant-based food systems; and R3 ,restore and rewild to reverse damage to critical ecosystems and their functions and services. (Plant Based Treaty).

1.2 What are the main types of vulnerabilities facing food supply chains and what are the potential consequences for food system actors (including input suppliers, food producers, traders, food system workers and consumers), considering different kinds of potential shocks?

The current food system centered on animal farming necessarily requires the use of complex value chains because of the multiple steps required in the production of meat and dairy, including among others growing feed crops, transporting them to feedlots, managing livestock, then slaughtering the animals, processing, packaging and distributing. Plant-based foods, on the other hand, could potentially be grown, harvested, and processed directly, in one single field or else with significantly streamlined inputs.(Carbon Briefing, Rich nations could see ‘double climate dividend’ by switching to plant-based foods, 2022). Plant based food system value chains are therefore intrinsically more resilient and - if given adequate tools - more adaptable to the stressors that are impacting the food system.

The vulnerabilities of the production of all kinds of animal protein were starkly exposed by a string of successive value chain crises, triggered by the pandemic, conflicts, geo-political instability and extreme weather events. These supply chain bottlenecks indeed slowed the movement of feed and other inputs, halted slaughterhouses operations, and increased inputs prices resulted in increased suffering for the main actors in this food system: non-human animals, which were crammed in overcrowded facilities, were stranded at sea for long periods of time, and sadly were subjected, in many instances, to mass culling. They also led to job losses or loss of revenue for small farmers and farm workers, and price increases for consumers downstream, and food insecurity for many vulnerable populations.

Extreme weather events and conflicts around scarce resources will in the next decades become more and more frequent as anthropogenic pressures break the equilibrium of the holocene, affecting entire ecosystems. There can be no doubt that failures in animal-centred supply chains will also become ever more frequent and have greater repercussions on non-human animals, on farm workers, and on consumers. 

It is important to understand that while animal agriculture value chains are impacted by the climate and ecological crisis, they are themselves a leading cause of it. For example, raising animals is resource-intensive, and requires large amounts of water, feed, and energy. So at a local level, we witness animal farms drawing increasing amounts of water from aquifers, and later being most affected when these aquifers run dry or become polluted by these very same farms’ runoffs, causing for example the unavailability and increased price of feed and water on the farms, as well as reduced animal “productivity”. 

Redesigning value chains so that they withstand the upcoming period of increased volatility is critical for food security on our planet. This is why we call for transitioning to a plant-based food system and relinquishing the expansion of animal agriculture, while redirecting major economic resources and large-scale public education towards plant-based food systems; and restoring and rewilding to reverse damage to critical ecosystems and their functions and services. (Plant Based Treaty). Specifically, we call for a push towards the 3Rs that are the three pillars of the Plant Based Treaty: R1, relinquish the expansion of animal agriculture; R2, redirect major economic resources and large-scale public education towards plant-based food systems; and R3 ,restore and rewild to reverse damage to critical ecosystems and their functions and services. (Plant Based Treaty).

1.3 What kind of inequalities and power imbalances are present in food systems and how do they affect resilient FSN and especially for those groups facing multidimensional and intersectional aspects of inequality and vulnerability?

Currently, 70 percent of all farmland is operated by just 1 percent of the world’s farms. Mostly these farm owners have little if any connection to the land they operate, which is in the hands of institutional investors. This has a deleterious effect on the vulnerability of food systems. In fact, while small producers diversify their crops and production methods, investors mostly use their lands to grow a very limited set of commodities - mostly soy and corn - and with highly homogeneous production methods. These crops, referred to as “flex crops”, can be used to produce food, animal feed, or biofuel depending on market profitability at any given time. The adoption of this pattern on a massive scale not only results in food production being based more on profit than in meeting human needs but is also a major risk driver (Monbiot, Regenesis: Feeding the World without Devouring the Planet, Great Britain, Allan Lane).

Monbiot further notes: “Four plants—wheat, rice, maize, and soybeans—account for almost 60 per cent of the calories grown by farmers. Four countries (the U.S., Argentina, Brazil, and France) harvest 76 per cent of the corn exported to other nations. Only three nations, Brazil, the U.S., and Argentina, grow 86 per cent of the world’s soybeans (which in turn supply three-quarters of its feed for farm animals)”. As climate change and the breach of other planetary boundaries make our weather patterns more and more unpredictable, and extreme weather events more and more likely, there is an increased probability that one of these crops will fail for one or more consecutive seasons, in one or more of the core producing countries, or that multiple crops will fail simultaneously. It is not hard to imagine the disastrous consequences of failures of this scale, becoming ever more likely. (Monbiot, Regenesis: Feeding the World without Devouring the Planet, Great Britain, Allan Lane pages 32-33) 

This is one of the reasons why we advocate for the diversification of food production and ownership as a critical basis for resilience and food security. Preserving the property rights of indigenous communities –  which are champions of environmental stewardship – and of small farmers – that maintain a healthy diversity in crops and production methods  - while putting a halt to the land grabs by large corporations is fundamental to the increased resilience of food systems. In conclusion, land should be more equally and equitably distributed and placed in community hands so it can be repurposed for reforestation, reclaimingIndigenous rights, green spaces, and edible gardens and allotments, as well as increasing biodiversity and food security. (Safe and Just, page 23).

1.4 What resilience capacities are there that should be explored?

1.5 What are the determinants, assets and skills that lead to resilience at different scales (household, community, national, regional)?

The single most important determinant of resilience is access to accurate information which allows the individual or community to choose the best path for their circumstances. Yet, The Peoples’ Climate Vote, the largest survey of public opinion on climate chaos ever conducted with 1.2 million respondents, reveals the majority of the public is (1) unaware of the relationship between food and climate change, and (2) unaware of the significant contribution of food emissions.(As quoted in Safe and Just Report) 

1.6 How can resilience be evaluated and measured at different scales (household, community, national, regional)?

1.7 What indicators would measure that food systems are resilient across their different components (e.g. consumption, supply chains, retail and production)?

1.8 Which and where are the weak points in global food systems in terms of ensuring the resilience of food systems?

The most important weak points of food systems or in other words the main vulnerability drivers are the overreliance on animal protein, the lack of diversity in the ownership of land, the marginalization of indigenous communities, the lack of climate finance for agri-food systems and the perverse nature of subsidies to agri-food. 

• The dominance of animal protein in Western diets is a major driver of vulnerability for food systems. In fact, for structural reasons, production of meat and dairy depends on long and fragile supply chains which span the globe. These supply chains are increasingly impacted by geo-political conflicts and extreme weather events. Additionally,farming practices such as monoculture and pasture based agricultural systems, which simplify and standardize ecosystems, reduce the resilience and ability of the biosphere to perform vital ecosystem functions further diminishing the resilience and adaptability of the global food system (Safe and Just Report). 
• The lack of diversity in the ownership of land, with 70 percent of all farmland is operated by just 1 percent of the world’s farms, reinforces the dependence on a very limited set of commodities and homogeneous production methods which are estimated <to have a high probability of failure with catastrophic consequences for food security at the planetary level. (Monbiot, Regenesis: Feeding the World without Devouring the Planet, Great Britain, Allan Lane).
• The marginal role to which indigenous people are consigned compounds vulnerabilities in global food systems because it forgoes their traditional knowledge which is, amongst others, vital to ensure an optimal balance between preserving the environment and drawing essential services from it, while respecting planetary boundaries (see Safe and Just Report, page 76). 
• The low level of finance directed to agri-food system and its composition . As note by the World Bank Report, “Recipe for a Livable Planet” (based on data from the Climate Policy Initiative) climate finance from private, public  and multilateral sources combined to the agrifood system were merely 4.3 percent of total climate finance to cover mitigation, adaptation, and dual-benefit investments. This is despite one-third of GHG emissions being generated by the agrifood system. While this is shockingly low, in the face of the formidable challenge of enhancing resilience to shocks and nourishing a global population while staying within planetary boundaries, what is even more worrying is the composition of this finance. First, global climate finance for small-scale agrifood systems, which are those that contribute the most to resilience, is equivalent to just 0.8% of total climate finance tracked across all sectors (see Climate Policy Initiative 2023). Second, most of the finance going to agrifood systems is at odds with the actions needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change. USD 411 billion of support is in forms that are potentially most distorting, comprising market price support and payments linked to output or the unconstrained use of inputs. These policies may encourage over-production and can contribute to GHG emissions if they lead to the overuse of polluting inputs, degradation of soils and increased land clearing (OECD, Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2023: Adapting Agriculture to Climate Change). Similarly, a joint report by FAO, UNDP and UNEP calls for governments to rethink the way agriculture is subsidized and supported, noting that 87% of $540 billion of support to agricultural producers is either price distorting or harmful to nature and health. In short, for the agri-food system to successfully transition towards resilience, equity and sustainability, there is a need to massively increase and overhaul the composition of the finance directed to the system. 

9 What evidence bases are there to measure resilience and the effectiveness of interventions?

2. Understanding what we must be prepared for – the nature of shocks:

2.1 What types of shock are more relevant for food systems and which ones are more likely to affect FSN? What types of shocks have been under-researched, especially regarding their impact on FSN and food systems?

2.2 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)?

2.3 How to balance preparing for short-term shocks (e.g. droughts and floods) versus the need to ensure food systems fit within planetary boundaries and long-term sustainability of systems?

2.4 Are there ways of enhancing resilience to unknown and unforeseen shocks?

3. Understanding and mitigating trade-offs:

3.1 Are there trade-offs between increasing adaptation to one type of shock and creating other types of fragility?

3.2 What is the impact on resilience programming of different understandings of food security and nutrition (e.g. focus on nutrition, the four pillars, the six dimensions of food security, etc.)?

4. Existing programmes and policies to promote resilience – a gap analysis of current strategies and recommendations:

4.1 How are countries preparing for food systems resilience today? What are the main policies and documents that are promoting resilience on these national level plans?

4.2 What are the current or recent partnerships / initiatives proven to be contributive to building resilience? What are the lessons learned?

4.3 Could you provide success stories and best practices examples that can be applied to other locations?

4.4 Is the currently portfolio of resilience programming well aligned to different types of shocks and different household, scales, or parts of the food system?

4.5 What gaps are there in the current portfolio of country adaption / resilience policies?

4.6 What is the impact of the policies and programmes designed to increase resilience at local and global food systems, including with respect to global trading rules and coordinated, inclusive and equitable strategies for addressing environmental sustainability, climate change, biodiversity and human rights?

4.7 How can governance mechanisms be more resilient and participatory with respect to providing data-driven, context-specific advice on strengthening food systems resilience?

4.8 What measures are necessary to incentivize private sector strategies and investments that promote supply chain resilience?

5. Share recent literature, case studies and data that could help answer the questions listed above.

 

1. Harvard Law School, Animal Law Policy Program (2024), Options for a Paris-Compliant Livestock Sector, Available at https://animal.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/Paris-compliant-livestock-report.pdf (Accessed May 2024)
2. Crippa, M., et al. (2021). Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food. 2, 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9
3. Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science. 360, 987-992. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw9908
4. Global Witness, Land and environmental defenders, Available at: https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/environmental-activists/ (Accessed May 2024)
5. Lee C., Soybean Products and Its Environmental Impact, 2021, Available at: https://earth.org/soybean-products-and-its-environmental-impact/ (Accessed May 2024)
6. Kortleve A.J., et al. (2024) Over 80% of the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy supports emissions-intensive animal products
7. Madre Brava (2023) Media Analysis of industrial meat and climate change
8. Clark, M. A., et al. (2020), Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5° and 2°C climate change targets. Science. 370, 705-708. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba7357
9. Climate change tracker, Sources of Human-Induced Methane Emissions. Available at: https://climatechangetracker.org/methane/breakdown-human-induced-yearly-methane-ch4-emissions#datasource (Accessed May 2024)
10. Galoustian, G. (2021). Future Pandemic? Consider Altering Animal Agriculture Practices, Jun 2, Accessed Nov 2023, Retrieved from: https://www.fau.edu/newsdesk/articles/pandemic-animal-agriculture.php (Accessed May 2024)

Answers from Plant Based Treaty Team