New Food System Integrated Program to support the transformation of food systems into nature-positive, resilient, and pollution free system
The world continues to face challenges to meet food and nutrition needs of existing 8 billion people equitably, and to ensure that nature, on which food production is based, is protected and enhanced to meet needs of future generation. Currently, at least 38% of the world’s total land area is under agriculture[i] production, and agricultural production accounts for up to 90% of global deforestation[ii]; and 50% of the freshwater biodiversity loss[iii]; and 70% of global freshwater withdrawals[iv]. According to a new study, food systems about third of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions[v]). The consequences of unsustainable food production extend into aquatic systems. This makes agriculture the largest source of water pollution, which then runs off into aquatic ecosystems and coastal areas.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of UN (FAO) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) are developing a global program to support selected nations to catalyze the transformation to sustainable food systems that are nature-positive, resilient, and pollution-reduced. This program – Food Systems Integrated Program – will be funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), and co-financed by countries, GEF agencies and other partners. The Food Systems Integrated Program is the second largest program approved in the GEF’s programming cycle for 2022 – 2026, known as GEF-8. FAO and IFAD aim to align the program with the outcomes of the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit and collaborate with partners, such as the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the Nature Conservancy, and the Regional Development Banks to deliver greater results.
The Food Systems Integrated Program will focus explicitly on sustainable, regenerative, nature positive production systems and support efficient value/supply chains covering selected food crops (maize, rice, and wheat), commercial commodities (soy, oil palm, coffee and cocoa), livestock, and aquaculture.
To maximize potential for transformative change, the Program will operate at two levels -global and selected national/sub-national levels - and promote work around transformational “levers” (governance and policies, financial leverage, multi-stakeholder dialogues, and innovation and learning) for advancing systems transformation.
At the global level, the Program will support:
- Strengthening global policy coherence for more sustainable food systems.
- Leveraging public, private and financial sectors through encouraging concrete actions on both the production and demand sides toward use and expansion of sustainability standards and commitments to environmental and socially responsible sourcing.
- Catalyzing new opportunities across spatial (landscapes/ jurisdictions) or vertical (supply chain) dimensions to help maximize scale potential for impact within and beyond national boundaries.
- Catalyzing access to knowledge, technical expertise, and capacity development on issues that represent common challenges across multiple countries or specific geographical regions (including south-south exchanges).
At the country level, and depending on the context, the objectives of the projects are:
- Creating an enabling environment to shift toward sustainable and regenerative food production systems through a diversity of approaches.
- Reducing livestock’s impact on the environment and contribution to zoonotic spillover and supporting production of alternative protein sources.
- Expanding investment in sustainable aquaculture management that is explicitly linked to land-based practices, impacting freshwater and coastal marine ecosystems.
GUIDING QUESTIONS TO THE ONLINE CONSULTATION
As a part of program development, FAO and IFAD, in consultation with the GEF and other key partners have developed the Theory of Change (TOC) and the Draft Results Framework for the Program.
The Food Systems Integrated Program development team invites your views and suggestions on these two documents.
Theory of Change:
1 |
Do the barriers identified reflect your experience as Community Based Organizations (CBOs) / Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), private sector and local communities (women, men, youth, indigenous peoples)? Are there key barriers that are missing in TOC? |
2 |
Do the first level Outcomes appropriate and adequate for transformation of food systems’ impacts on the environment? |
Draft Results Framework:
3 |
Are the Outcomes planned appropriate and adequate for food systems transformation? |
4 |
What could be examples of types of intervention and outputs that could ensure stronger engagement and ensure capacities of CBOs/ NGOs, the private sector, and communities (including women, men, and youth, indigenous peoples) to continue food systems transformation? |
5 |
What might be specific contributions of each stakeholder group to the achievement of the components? |
In addition, the Program development team seeks inputs on your experiences and advice on:
|
Note: The two documents are available for downloading on this webpage and comments are welcome in English.
The inputs received will contribute to finalize the Theory of Change and the Results Framework for the Food Systems Integrated Program. Furthermore, both documents will be presented to the GEF Council, most probably in June 2023 for their approval and these will guide country child projects in Argentina, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Chad, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Eswatini, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and Türkiye.
We thank in advance all the contributors for reading, commenting, providing inputs on these two documents, and sharing case studies.
Sameer Karki
Technical Officer with the FAO-GEF Coordination Unit under the Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment of FAO
[ii] https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/cop26-agricultural-expansion-drives-almost-90-percent-of-global-deforestation/en
[iii] https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/global-food-security-at-risk-from-growing-threats-to-rivers-which-support-one-third-of-world-s-food-production
[v] https://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/1379373/icode/
The Food Systems Integrated Program was approved in February 2024, and the documentation is now public here: https://www.thegef.org/projects-operations/projects/11214
- Leer 64 contribuciones
In this topic "New Food System Integrated Program to support the transformation of food systems into nature-positive, resilient, and pollution free system" important issues have been mentioned. To achieve the goals and its objectives we need to discuss all above subjects under umbrella of "climate change" as important driver.
Sra. Marie-Therese Maurice
I wish to comment on the transformational aspect of the program as presently described - i.e., whether changes to food systems will be transformational from this investment, and whether these will be accompanied by concomitant benefits to global biodiversity, climate mitigation and adaptation, as well as actions to reverse land degradation.
The program as described appears to describe a balanced approach with improved on-farm practices, landscape level management interventions, and small to medium scale business interventions leading to improved livelihood benefits, mitigation of pollution from agriculture, improved on-farm and land management practices, and reduced impacts to biodiversity. These are coupled with macro level interventions to improve policies and governance related to food systems.
While the above interventions will be beneficial, as currently described it is difficult to imagine how these benefits will transcend incrementality and become truly transformational in nature. For instance, referring to the recent Global Biodiversity Framework adopted in December, it is not clear from the theory of change and results framework how transformational benefits for biodiversity on the scale needed by 2030 will be delivered through this major investment.
The majority of the impacts to the global environment, particularly biodiversity loss and GHG emissions, derive from the production of meat protein at large scale - particularly beef - and the majority of the demand for this production stems from wealthier countries. For some time there has been significant consolidation going on in this sector, which is defined by increasingly vertically integrated production models led by led by private companies (often very large and multinational) with corresponding backing from large financial institutions which together represent the majority of the meat protein we consume - along with the biodiversity, GHG, and pollution impacts this type of production model entails. A focus on small to medium sized farming and agricultural enterprises will make a positive contribution on reducing pollution, GHGs, and delivering biodiversity benefits. However, it is unlikely that interventions largely focused at this level will transform global food systems.
Inputs to ToC:
Under Barriers to Sustainable, regenerative nature positive FS- Impacts: ever increasing competition for land use for agriculture versus non-agriculture use (wining over the formers) with fragmentation and shrinkage is one more result in a populous country like India......need inclusion in the ToC.
BARRIERS TO NATURE POSITIVE FOOD SYSTEMS TRANSFORMATION: More frequent extreme weather events (agricultural drought, tropical cyclones, heat wave and Nor Westers (evening thunderstorms in pre-monsoon), etc. are contributing disturbances in efforts to promote nature positive farming
Long term outcome could include: Policy and regulations enactment is the need of the hour, that could ensure convergence and synergetic approach among mainstream development agencies among within government departments and among CSOs. At present the biggest flaw in the business as usual is all these departments and development players are working in silos fixed headed with individual mandates.
I think this issue is timely considering the challenges related to climate change and dietary habits of the people which entirely based on the food supply in the existing market systems. This situation if not conclusive has brought the change of the disease concentration and pattern. Therefore, this is an important project.
Related to the project theory of change and concepts, I think it is comprehensive, but i would emphasize on issues that should be taken much consideration.
1. seek methods/systems how this goes in harmony with the pastoralist livelihood systems where owning huge number of livestock has given high indigenous value
2. private-public investment in developing countries is not well functioning and not attractive so devise a way-out solution
3. Please make consideration on how to conform with particularly the developing government's direction of increasing agricultural productivity (extension approaches) without considering green growth like applying inorganic fertilizers, pesticides and etc.
4. It is also better to assess the best practices of sustainable land management related projects which very often run by non-governmental organizations. In my experience, there are a problem of sustainability issues.
5. I think it is also important to think of this project should give opportunity to agricultural colleges/universities, agricultural research institutions and other relevant institutions to involve that can serve as demonstration.
6. It is also important if you can link it to as employment creation particularly for youth and women.
The concepts of meeting the mandate of food security and nutrition with concern of the ecosystem is what i term as farming with nature as we live with nature because it is human activities that annul the normal balance of nature in his/her quest to satisfy his/her desire for food, clothing and shelter.
As the lead farm manager of Lower Niger River Basin Development Authority Integrated Farm working over the last 2 years, I observed that the first work in meeting this mandate is on working on the mindset of way of life of human being such that it is tailored towards being conscious about the ecosystem most importantly the environment. Our concern should be on awareness, sensitization and capacity development in form of "tell one to tell others" or train the trainers approach". I applied for a grant with the title: Capacity Building on Embracing Novel Sustainable Integrated Farming System Concept for Smallholdings Farming Families within the Kampe River Basin Catchment; A Resilient Approach to Climate Smart Agriculture and Disaster Risk Reduction.
The idea is to encourage others and to choose a micro rural area region and study both the people and nature around them; coming up with awareness concepts on how they may embrace the idea of sustainable Integrated Farming System as a way of farming with nature. I am also trying to work with collaborators with the intention of mainstreaming digitalization into the above concept considering the rate at which information and communication concepts is having way into globalization for both rural and urban population.
I wish to embrace partnership from all players globally to execute such project for the sake of benefiting humanity. You may as well go through the attached as a comprehensive approach in ensuring we attain the goal of food for all, by all, and in all i.e. most ecofriendly way. Thanks
Cher Modérateur , Mesdames et Messieurs, chers collègues, bonjour
Pour asseoir un système alimentaire durable, il convient aussi de penser au rôle du numérique et de la digitalisation dans le secteur agro-alimentaire. Avec la mondialisation et l'urbanisation galopante ainsi que le fort accroissement de la population, le système alimentaire doit être tracé de la fourche à la fourchette. Ceci permet d'une part de bien contrôler la production et l'exploitation agricole et d'autre part de connecter via des plateformes les consommateurs, les agriculteurs, les petites et moyennes entreprises, les commerçants, les transformateurs etc. L'avantage aussi de la digitalisation se situe dans la maîtrise des normes alimentaires et facilite les informations sur le produit tant du point de vue nutritionnel que du point de vue sécurité sanitaire. L'Assurance qualité notamment la traçabilité des produits est nécessaire pour garantir la qualité des aliments. Cela pourra augmenter le rendement des entreprises agroalimentaires. Le numérique facilite également une bonne gouvernance, évite aussi les gaspillages alimentaires et les pertes pos-récoltes, post-mortem et post-captures. ll informe à temps sur les caractéristiques, le stockage et le conditionnement des produits. Ceci est d'autant plus nécessaire que les consommateurs de nos jours deviennent de lus en plus exigeants par rapport aux normes et qualité des produits. Bref la digitalisation a un intérêt capital sur toutes les composantes du système alimentaire de la production jusqu'à l'impact sur la santé, en passant par la transformation, la sécurité sanitaire, la qualité des aliments et le régime alimentaire. Il sera un bon outil pour l'éducation nutritionnelle et les habitudes alimentaires. La digitalisation permettra une bonne diffusion des recommandations alimentaires nationales et des tables de composition alimentaire..
Cependant il sera nécessaire notamment de former, de sensibiliser et de communiquer avec tous les acteurs sur l'importance de la digitalisation. Il est évident que le travail prendra de temps notamment pour le secteur informel. faut procéder aussi à l'alphabétisation des acteurs qui sont dans le besoin, en vue de maîtriser les outils du Technologie de l'Information et de la Communication (TIC).
L'inconvénient dans certains de nos pays se résume à l'accès difficile aux énergies, au délestage et au coût de l'internet et des appareils. Mais l'importance du numérique est en tout cas bien établie dans la recherche et nécessite d'être exploitée dans tous les domaines du développement.
Enfin la durabilité des systèmes alimentaires passe également par l'organisation régulière des Forum et colloques scientifiques regroupant tous les intervenants et acteurs de l'agroalimentaire.
Dear FSN Moderator,
Shashi Bhooshan Sharma
I wanted to express my gratitude for sharing information on the Theory of Change and Draft Result Framework. Your comprehensive explanation covers everything one would expect in a project management document.
I do, however, believe that there are simpler alternative options to achieve the goal of sustainable, regenerative, and inclusive food systems that are nature-positive, resilient, and pollution-free. With this in mind, I have prepared a brief document outlining a framework for achieving such food systems. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me if you require any further information or clarification.
3Ps: A Framework for Achieving Sustainable Food and Agriculture Systems Worldwide
Agriculture continues to be one of the least efficient industries, causing significant harm to our natural resources and posing a threat to the health of the planet. It is responsible for a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption, and land use change. Furthermore, agriculture can have negative impacts on biodiversity, soil health, and ecosystem function.
In order to promote conservation, efficiency, and resilience, agriculture must shift to sustainable practices that are environmentally responsible. Achieving this goal will require a total reform of the global agriculture value chain, from production to consumption, in order to ensure food security, protect the environment, and promote human health and safety. The adoption of a 3P Strategy for the agri-food value chain could be the solution to address the multifaceted challenges of ensuring sustainable and equitable food production, distribution, and consumption. The three Ps in this framework are Produce, Protect, and Provide. Implementation of this framework was recommended and considered integral to achieving planet-friendly green revolution (see link) https://greens.org.au/wa/magazine/planet-friendly-green-revolution.
P1: Produce food sustainably. The first P emphasizes the importance of sustainable food production practices that do not compromise the long-term productive capacity of ecosystems. The concept of treating land as a principal resource, and food production practices and technologies as investment strategies, is an important shift in mindset towards sustainable agriculture. The diversification of food sources is also crucial for achieving food security, as it reduces reliance on a few crops and promotes the exploration of alternative sources of protein and nutrition. It involves maximizing resource use efficiency, diversifying food sources, and investing in innovative agricultural technologies that promote ecosystem health and resilience. The goal is to ensure that we produce food in a way that maintains the long-term productive capacity of our land and water resources and promotes biodiversity and ecological health.
P2: Protect food from loss in the value chain. The second P highlights the need to protect food from loss in the value chain. This is an often-overlooked aspect of food security, as significant amounts of food are lost or wasted during storage, transportation, and processing. The concept of zero tolerance to food waste is particularly important, as it not only reduces hunger but also minimizes environmental pollution. This P highlights the need to protect food from loss or waste during storage, transportation, and processing. It involves developing supply chain infrastructure and post-harvest treatments that increase the storage life of food, maintain food quality, and prevent pest infestations. It also involves promoting a zero-tolerance approach to food waste, where unused food energy is repurposed for better purposes, such as animal feed and bio-fertilizer. The goal is to minimize food waste and ensure that the food produced is utilized efficiently and effectively.
P3: Provide bio-secure and safe food. The third P addresses the need to provide bio-secure and safe food. Ensuring that food trade and distribution do not expose importing regions and communities to unacceptable biosecurity risks is critical to prevent the introduction and spread of pests and diseases. The emphasis on promoting 'glocalisation' and community engagement is also important for creating a more resilient and sustainable food system that is responsive to local needs and preferences. It involves ensuring that food is clean, green, and free from pests and diseases, and that food safety standards are met throughout the entire value chain. It also involves promoting 'glocalisation' - localisation at a global scale - which reduces energy consumption and biosecurity threats. Finally, community engagement is key to enhancing awareness of food security, biosecurity, and food safety issues, as well as promoting a sustainable food system that is responsive to local needs and preferences.
Overall, the 3Ps provide a comprehensive framework and a holistic approach to addressing the complex and interconnected challenges of sustainably feeding the human population, which requires the cooperation and coordination of all stakeholders. It also highlights the need for innovation and diversification in food production and provides a useful framework for policymakers, food system stakeholders, and individuals to think about and address the complex and pressing issues related to global food security with a ‘vision infinity for food security’ - one that prioritizes food security for all forever - we can ensure that the future is bright and secure for everyone. (See link for Vision Infinity for Food Security https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-23249-2).
Best regards,
Shashi Sharma PhD
Adjunct Professor, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, WA, Australia
Many thanks for your invitation to take part in the online consultation. I have added some comments and suggestions under your questions below.
Janice Cox, MBA, Policy Adviser, World Federation for Animals
Theory of Change:
|
1 |
Do the barriers identified reflect your experience as Community Based Organizations (CBOs) / Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), private sector and local communities (women, men, youth, indigenous peoples)? Are there key barriers that are missing in TOC? |
|
2 |
Do the first level Outcomes appropriate and adequate for transformation of food systems’ impacts on the environment? |
Barriers
Some important barriers are missing, for example:
*As well as lack of policy coherence, there is entrenched silo-thinking (for example, seeking to increase food security through industrial methods which have detrimental impacts on the environment, animal welfare, human health and equity, and longer-term sustainability).
*As well as inadequate legal frameworks, ineffective enforcement.
*As well as incentives for unsustainable FS, there is lack of costs for external impacts (absence of internalising externalities). Also, lack of incentives for positive change.
*Lack of knowledge/expertise on how to bring about dietary change (social sciences).
*Lack of wider understanding of full impacts of food systems – including environmental, animal welfare, and human health, livelihoods and equity; plus longer-term sustainability. Plus inability to factor all these concerns into decision-making.
*As well as focus of rural advisory services on unsustainable approaches, there is same focus for many governments and international financial institutions and development banks.
First Order Outcomes
*As well as national and international governance frameworks, there needs to be agreed compliance mechanisms, reporting, and feedback (to gauge effective enforcement).
*This does not specifically point to necessary regulatory changes to favour FS transformation (i.e. making plant-based and cellular alternatives more attractive, facilitating product acceptance channels (e.g., FDA etc.), instead of over-regulation of acceptance, restrictive product names etc.).
*Pathways for public and private investment: need full impact assessments, not selective. Including animal welfare, as well as environment and socio-economic impacts.
*One Health framework needs to be applied – preventatively and proactively. Including aligning dietary guidance, food labelling etc. with broader sustainability and animal welfare objectives.
*Best practice to be captured, kept in accessible databases, and promulgated.
Also, other points noted on this Theory of Change model:
*Drivers: As well as policies and leadership, there are unfavourable regulatory environments for transformation and ineffective enforcement; economic systems i.e., economic growth as primary development model; free market policies, including lack of private sector regulation and control; treatment of animals as machines, instead of sentient beings.
*Impacts: Include animal welfare impacts; as well as health risks, human and animal health risks.
Draft Results Framework:
|
3 |
Are the Outcomes planned appropriate and adequate for food systems transformation? |
|
4 |
What could be examples of types of intervention and outputs that could ensure stronger engagement and ensure capacities of CBOs/ NGOs, the private sector, and communities (including women, men, and youth, indigenous peoples) to continue food systems transformation? |
|
5 |
What might be specific contributions of each stakeholder group to the achievement of the components? |
3. No. These need to be amended to take account of above comments.
These outcomes do not adequately reflect the existential nature of environmental crises, or the immense suffering of animals in industrial farming systems. There should, indeed, be targets to phase out industrial animal agriculture.
These outcomes seems to focus more on the means than the content and direction of FS transformation, which needs to be specifically included for real impact.
There is nothing about dietary change, which is probably the most important component of FS transformation – change from animal products to plant-based and cellular, and addressing over-consumption.
On land use change, suggest no further land use change for unsustainable FS.
No further deforestation for unsustainable FS.
4. Types of interventions and outputs
Public procurement is a vital area for change.
Education and awareness campaigns – Veganuary, plant-based days, meat-free Mondays etc. Social media campaigns. Advertising campaigns.
Labelling in support of sustainability and animal welfare criteria.
Good practice database development.
Reducing fertiliser and pesticide usage.
Many more – as indicated by all comments above.
5. Stakeholder contributions
Joint education and awareness campaigns, with NGOs
NGO awards for good practices
Contributions of best practice databases
In addition, the Program development team seeks inputs on your experiences and advice on:
|
Examples of scaling up approaches, including policies, for more sustainable/ regenerative food systems practices. Successful examples of multi-stakeholder processes at national level that brings local communities (including indigenous peoples, youth, women and men), the private sector, the civil society and academia and the government to develop policies related to food systems. Successful examples of public-private partnerships for food systems transformation. Research gaps or innovations on food systems transformation for global environmental and climate benefits. |
There are many research gaps on both the full impacts of existing food systems, and prospective alternatives – particularly multi-disciplinary research (as this is usually carried out in specialist silos). See, for example, this recent paper on aquaculture in Africa, which examines the range of impacts, and potential alternatives:
https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/aw_farm_aqua/1/
Pour un système alimentaire durable et résilient il faut :
- Accroître la productivité;
- Promouvoir des régimes alimentaires sains;
- Former en nutrition;
- développer des filières et chaînes de valeur prometteuses;
- Introduire des modules de nutrition sensible et spécifique à la nutrition dans les curricula au niveau des secteurs de l'éducation et de l'enseignement supérieur;
- Assurer la maîtrise de l'eau;
- Faire la promotion de l'autonomisation des femmes et des jeunes;
- Appuyer en équipements et intrants;
- Former des masses critiques en nutrition (Agriculture, élevage, Hydraulique, sages femmes, médecins, pharmaciens etc.);
- Améliorer la productivité et valoriser les produits locaux;
- Elaborer et vulgariser des recommandations alimentaires nationales;
- Créer des fonds spéciaux pour la nutrition;
- Développer des activités génératrices de revenus;
- Prévenir les maladies métaboliques et les maladies d'origine alimentaire;
- Renforcer la résilience des ménages;
- etc.
Esta actividad ya ha concluido. Por favor, póngase en contacto con [email protected] para mayor información.