1. V0 draft is structured around a conceptual framework that proposes to focus on six dimensions of FSN. Along with the four established pillars of FSN (availability, access, stability, utilization), the V0 draft also discusses two additional dimensions: agency and sustainability, which have become increasingly important and recognized dimensions to achieving sustainable food systems. Do you think that this framework addresses the key issues of FSN?
No, not enough.
Access: This is heavy on financial access but misses the physical and social issues.
Utilization: This misses the crucial social function food plays in cultural identity and ceremony, religious function, feeling of ‘self’, …
Stability: I have long argued stability is really an attribute of the 3 first components rather than separate as it begs the question stability of what? Answer: stability of availability, access and utilisation. And stability is not not good if the system is not delivering satisfactorily: it needs to change. Also, the words “Having the ability to ensure food security in the event of sudden shocks (e.g. an economic, conflict, or climatic crisis) or cyclical events (e.g. seasonal food insecurity)” are better related to resilience, not stability.
Agency: This is a good addition but need to be clearly differentiated from social access.
Sustainability: The text is only about environmental sustainability but the food system needs to also be socially and economically sustainable, ie the myriad enterprises that constitute the food system, and the billions of livelihoods they support have to sustainable.
Fig 1: needs to better reflect my points above and the 9 elements stemming from the FAO definition (after Ericksen 2006; Ingram 2011):
Access: Affordability, Allocation & Preference
Availability: Production, Distribution & Exchange
Utilisation: Nutritional value, Social value & Food Safety
Fig 2: This suggests one dimension (yes, better word than pillar) leads to another, when it is more complex than that; they all interact.
2. The V0 draft analyses in what ways thinking on FSN has shifted in recent years as articulated in past HLPE reports; and how these insights can feed into a global narrative on how best to meet SDG2 targets. Do you think that the analysis of the evolution of conceptual approaches and thinking on FSN clearly addresses its current adequacy to meet the SDG2 targets?
Up to a point. The shift to “food security and nutrition” is better than the older “food and nutrition security” as the latter suggested they were different concepts. But there is still the need to emphasize food production is only part of food security (see Ingram, JSI. Look beyond production. 2017. Nature 544 S27. doi: 10.1038/544S17a) and food security is only part of achieving good nutrition (see Ingram, J. (2020). Nutrition security is more than food security. Nature Food 1, 2.)
The key thing about food systems ‘thinking’ is that is addresses many (and arguably all) SDGs in an integrated way. Ie, Table 1, point iii needs emphasizing.
3. The V0 drafts identifies main trends that have complex implications for all dimensions of food security. While some of these trends have widespread agreement with respect to their implications for food security and nutrition, others have less agreement and as such require more research. Do you think that trends identified are the key ones in affecting FSN outcomes today that might help explain stalled progress on meeting SDG2 targets?
Yes, good coverage. But more needs to be said in 3.10 about the role of corporations in shaping the food environment, esp in urban situations. Advertising empty calories, and the shift to convenience foods (often cheaper than fresh foods) are both major factors in driving all aspects of malnutrition.
Do you have additional data or information that could help refine the analysis of the interplay between these trends and FSN outcomes?
Yes, see Westhoek, H, JSI Ingram, S Van Berkum, L Özay and M Hajer. 2016. Food Systems and Natural Resources. A Report of the Working Group on Food Systems of the International Resource Panel. 164 p. UNEP Nairobi.
Also, some key issues that warrant stronger statements:
Increasing realisation a food systems approach is needed, and this needs to be start with constraints to eating patterns/diet choice rather than primary production. It will thereby reinforce this as a way to address the ‘Square Peg’ problem.
The crucial role of the private sector in transforming food systems – they are the agents of change.
That we need healthy diets from food systems which are environmentally and socially and economically sustainable.
The need to build capability in food systems analysis and management.
1. V0 draft is structured around a conceptual framework that proposes to focus on six dimensions of FSN. Along with the four established pillars of FSN (availability, access, stability, utilization), the V0 draft also discusses two additional dimensions: agency and sustainability, which have become increasingly important and recognized dimensions to achieving sustainable food systems. Do you think that this framework addresses the key issues of FSN?
No, not enough.
Access: This is heavy on financial access but misses the physical and social issues.
Utilization: This misses the crucial social function food plays in cultural identity and ceremony, religious function, feeling of ‘self’, …
Stability: I have long argued stability is really an attribute of the 3 first components rather than separate as it begs the question stability of what? Answer: stability of availability, access and utilisation. And stability is not not good if the system is not delivering satisfactorily: it needs to change. Also, the words “Having the ability to ensure food security in the event of sudden shocks (e.g. an economic, conflict, or climatic crisis) or cyclical events (e.g. seasonal food insecurity)” are better related to resilience, not stability.
Agency: This is a good addition but need to be clearly differentiated from social access.
Sustainability: The text is only about environmental sustainability but the food system needs to also be socially and economically sustainable, ie the myriad enterprises that constitute the food system, and the billions of livelihoods they support have to sustainable.
Fig 1: needs to better reflect my points above and the 9 elements stemming from the FAO definition (after Ericksen 2006; Ingram 2011):
Access: Affordability, Allocation & Preference
Availability: Production, Distribution & Exchange
Utilisation: Nutritional value, Social value & Food Safety
Fig 2: This suggests one dimension (yes, better word than pillar) leads to another, when it is more complex than that; they all interact.
2. The V0 draft analyses in what ways thinking on FSN has shifted in recent years as articulated in past HLPE reports; and how these insights can feed into a global narrative on how best to meet SDG2 targets. Do you think that the analysis of the evolution of conceptual approaches and thinking on FSN clearly addresses its current adequacy to meet the SDG2 targets?
Up to a point. The shift to “food security and nutrition” is better than the older “food and nutrition security” as the latter suggested they were different concepts. But there is still the need to emphasize food production is only part of food security (see Ingram, JSI. Look beyond production. 2017. Nature 544 S27. doi: 10.1038/544S17a) and food security is only part of achieving good nutrition (see Ingram, J. (2020). Nutrition security is more than food security. Nature Food 1, 2.)
The key thing about food systems ‘thinking’ is that is addresses many (and arguably all) SDGs in an integrated way. Ie, Table 1, point iii needs emphasizing.
3. The V0 drafts identifies main trends that have complex implications for all dimensions of food security. While some of these trends have widespread agreement with respect to their implications for food security and nutrition, others have less agreement and as such require more research. Do you think that trends identified are the key ones in affecting FSN outcomes today that might help explain stalled progress on meeting SDG2 targets?
Yes, good coverage. But more needs to be said in 3.10 about the role of corporations in shaping the food environment, esp in urban situations. Advertising empty calories, and the shift to convenience foods (often cheaper than fresh foods) are both major factors in driving all aspects of malnutrition.
Do you have additional data or information that could help refine the analysis of the interplay between these trends and FSN outcomes?
Yes, see Westhoek, H, JSI Ingram, S Van Berkum, L Özay and M Hajer. 2016. Food Systems and Natural Resources. A Report of the Working Group on Food Systems of the International Resource Panel. 164 p. UNEP Nairobi.
Also, some key issues that warrant stronger statements:
Increasing realisation a food systems approach is needed, and this needs to be start with constraints to eating patterns/diet choice rather than primary production. It will thereby reinforce this as a way to address the ‘Square Peg’ problem.
The crucial role of the private sector in transforming food systems – they are the agents of change.
That we need healthy diets from food systems which are environmentally and socially and economically sustainable.
The need to build capability in food systems analysis and management.