Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum)

HORTICULTURE FOR NUTRITIONAL SECURITY is a recent compilation of essays authored by working scientists in the area of horticulture-fruits, vegetables, spices, tuber crops, plantation crops, mushrooms and edible bamboos.Professor M S Swaminathan Father of Green Revolution in India in his FORWORD to the book stated "There is a horticultural solution for every nutritional malady".A great Kashmiri saint stated "As long as forests exist, food will be available to humanity.The compilation is published by New India Publishing Agency New Delhi(www.nipabooks.com).Availability,access,absorption and sanitized habitat are a priori requirements of a healthy human nutrition.Nutrition garden/kitchen garden/ homestead garden/verical garden/hyroponics/aeroponics etc are methods of farming for self sufficiency in horticultural crops requirement.

English translation below

Уважаемые Модераторы!

Изучив проект Программы работы (ПЕРВАЯ РЕДАКЦИЯ, 27 января 2017 года) в рамках Десятилетия действий ООН по проблемам питания, 2016–2025 год, хочу предложить следующее.

Пункт № 16 подпункт №3) предлагаю изложить в следующей редакции: «социальная защита и просвещение по вопросам питания, здорового образа жизни, необходимости физического воспитания детей, взрослых и пожилых людей». Поскольку здоровый образ жизни, физическая культура способствуют привитию  рационального и качественного питания с детских лет до глубокой старости. Что в свою очередь способствует сохранению продовольственных ресурсов.  



Также предлагаю обратить внимание на выращивание продовольственной продукции на основе органических приемов.



Кроме того, при выращивании продовольственной продукции и, особенно на орошаемых землях, происходит истощение земель, что ведет к обеднению минерального состава выращиваемой продукции, а, значит, к неполноценному питанию, бедности. Необходимо обратить внимание на вопрос обогащения орошаемых земель.



С уважением, Екатерина Сахваева, Кыргызстан 

Dear Moderators,

Having examined the draft work programme (FIRST DRAFT, 27 January 2017) of the UN Decade of Action for Nutrition 2016-2025, I would like to propose the following:

Paragraph 16 (subparagraph 3) should be reworded as follows: “social protection and nutritional education and healthy lifestyles, the need for physical education of children, adults and older persons”. Because healthy lifestyles and physical education promote inculcation of a balanced diet and high-quality food since childhood to old age. This in turn helps to preserve food resources.

Also, I suggest to turn attention to organic cultivation of food products.

Besides, cultivation of food products, especially on irrigated lands, results in soil depletion, that leads to impoverishment of mineral composition of cultivated products, and thus to malnutrition and poverty.

Attention should be paid to the issue of enrichment of irrigated lands.

Best regards,

Ekaterina Sakhvaeva, Kyrgyzstan

UN Network/REACH Secretariat’s inputs

to the first draft work programme of the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition

• Paragraph 4: Paragraph 4 introduces the Nutrition Decade, however not clear what this is. An entity? A call for action? The UNGA proclaims the United Nations Decade of Action on Nutrition, within existing structures and available resources. So this appears to be more a call for action rather than an entity; a call for action whose implementation is to be led by FAO and WHO with support from WFP, IFAD and UNICEF. At times in the document, it appears that the Nutrition Decade sounds more like an entity doing something rather than a call for action that offers a forum embedded in existing structures that do the implementation. E.g. paragraph 55: the establishment of the Nutrition Decade. The Nutrition Decade is not established but it is proclaimed. Language may need to be adjusted.

• Paragraph 9 (Aims and Added Value section):

“Catalysing and facilitating alignment of on-going efforts of multiple actors from all sectors, including new and emerging actors, to foster a global movement to end all forms of malnutrition and leaving no one behind;”

• Is there scope to replace the text highlighted in yellow here with ‘the SUN Movement’ or to say “, leveraging the SUN Movement where it is in place’, understanding that the SUN is a global (and country level) movement that is seeking to end all forms of malnutrition. That would seem exemplify how the Nutrition Decade “works within existing structures”.  The sentence makes reference to ICN2 commitments and the 2030 Agenda, but the SUN Movement contributes to those two.

“Establishing, under Member States’ oversight, a global accountability framework and mechanism across sectors and constituencies building upon existing mechanisms, processes and tools.”

• There seems to be a risk of duplication here. Again, it seems odd that the country-led SUN Movement is not mentioned here with its accountability framework since the MEAL framework would capture this, particularly when the sentence states ‘building upon existing mechanisms”.

• Paragraph 11 (Aims and Added Value section):

• There seems to be duplication with the SUN Movement here. For instance, considering the following sentence: “Provide an unprecedented opportunity to propagate society-wide movements for national policy change to end of all forms of malnutrition, in all countries”. The SUN Movement has also been providing this opportunity, among others to support scaling up nutrition in a rather revolutionary manner, with the UN Network/REACH providing close support to such SUN processes at the country level. It would be great to rework this section and perhaps articulate that the Nutrition Decade is aligned to SUN and will thus help catalyse those efforts. It would be important to acknowledge here that the Nutrition Decade involves all countries irrespective of income status.

• The paragraph says that it ‘’establish a focused period to set, track and achieve an impact. This needs to acknowledge that it rather reiterates the emphasis of a period that has already been established by WHA (targets by 2025) and in SDG agenda 2030 that recognizes the WHA targets as a key transitory milestones to achieve the 2025. Instead of sounding new it should advocate for a milestones period (2025) already established by the member States.

• ‘’Provide an unprecedented opportunity to propagate society-wide movements’’. This needs to acknowledge the propagation already triggered by the SUN Movement, whose advocacy influence was praised in the ICE. It would be more accurate to say further expand the propagation of society-wide movements initiated by international initiatives such as the Zero hunger Challenge and Sun Movement.

• Paragraph 12: while it acknowledges that the Nutrition Decade builds on existing efforts, this does not come strongly enough in the rhetoric and planned means of implementation

• Paragraphs 14 &15 (Guiding Principles section):

• It is great to see explicit mention of the enabling environment here.

• Paragraph 16.3 (Action Areas section):

• It is important that the Action Areas are aligned to ICN2 Framework for Action recommendations/language and grouping
• It is noted that some of the recommendations included in the ICN2 Framework for Action (FFA) have not been included the work plan of the Decade of Action. For example no reference is made to the delivery of the direct nutrition interventions, wasting, stunting and so on. If the work programme has to be based on the Rome Declaration and its FFA there should be consistency across the document and areas of interventions
• Is it really needed to create additional action areas? Can a reference be made directly to the FFA?
• Why is social protection grouped with nutrition education?

• Paragraph 27 (Action Area 2 section):

“including the WHO Global Strategy on Infant and Young Child Feeding,”

• We understand that this global strategy was jointly developed by WHO and UNICEF (see http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/9241562218/en/) although the copyright is WHO. It might be worth exploring whether UNICEF should be added here.

• Paragraph 38  (Action Area 6 section):

• Again, it seems odd that there is no mention of the SUN Movement here. Perhaps consideration can be made to note the importance of developing or updating on national multi-sectoral nutrition plans based on robust multi-sectoral nutrition analyses. Similarly, it may be good to mention the inclusion of nutrition in nutrition-related sector plans, including sub-national development plans.

• Paragraph 39 (Action Area 6 section):

• There are a number of targets and indicators that the countries are being asked to measure and track (e.g. SUN self-assessments are another exercise). Is it feasible to introduce another tracking exercise?

• Paragraph 42 (Means of  Implementation, Commitments for action section):

• Member States have already committed to achieving all of the 6 WHA targets and seemingly to implementing the recommendations of the ICN2 FFA. Not clear why the paragraph presents the commitments as a future possibility for countries, also presenting the opportunity to pick and choose targets
• It could be great if the paragraph could be revisited. What are the nutrition targets States should commit to (e.g. ICN2/SDGs?). It could be good to specify it
• It could be good if the paragraph could rather focus on setting national SMART targets to achieve the global nutrition targets by 2025 and by 2030

• Paragraph 43: This sounds like a whole new planning process, called road map instead of plan. Not clear if this is a recommendation because it says ‘’could raise… and develop’’, but it does not acknowledge the fact that countries are/have been doing that already. Many countries have nutrition plans that include WHA and SDG targets. This should acknowledge that this process is/has happened in many countries.

• Paragraph 46 (Means of  Implementation, Commitments for action section):

• This is the first mention of the Nutrition Decade Secretariat. Paragraph 68 mentions the Secretariat structure being a joint WHO/FAO Secretariat and supported by SCN Secretariat as well as WFP, IFAD, UNICEF and others. Language may need to be consistent across the document as sometimes the document refers to a Nutrition Decade Secretariat sometimes to a joint FAO/Who Secretariat
• If the idea is to build upon existing efforts and structures, is there really a need to establish a Nutrition Decade Secretariat? Where would it be based?
• Shouldn’t the focus be on tracking progress on the achievement of the nutrition targets rather than tracking commitments?
• Consider avoiding the constitution of another Secretariat. Noting that there are already the following Secretariats: UNN/REACH Secretariat, UNSC Secretariat and SMS Secretariat

• Paragraph 47  (Means of  Implementation, Nutrition champions section):

• Perhaps the important thing is to have nutrition champions (not Nutrition Decade champions, SUN champions, etc. per se). These nutrition champs could support and catalyse efforts through various nutrition movements, platforms, etc. (e.g. the Nutrition Decade, SUN, etc.).

• Paragraph 48  (Means of  Implementation, Action networks section):

• Need to leverage existing platforms, where they are in place, instead of establishing Nutrition Decade Action Networks for avoiding duplication. It may also be helpful to qualify that the action networks may be created on thematic areas as indicated in paragraph 50 so as to discern then from other networks/groups (e.g. UN Network for SUN).
• The Action Networks may cause confusion and could be duplicating what the SUN Movement, SUN countries and its Networks are doing. It could be good to build on existing structures rather than duplicating them where possible

• Paragraph 51  (Means of  Implementation, Action networks section):

• It would be helpful if information about the Action Networks is shared as it becomes available with the UNN/REACH Secretariat to help foster UN coherence.
• The paragraph mentions the joint FAO/WHO secretariat, is that different from the Nutrition Decade Secretariat mentioned in paragraph 46? It is confusing. Need to adjust language.

• Paragraph 58  (Means of  Implementation, Technical support for implementation section):

• It would be good if this monitoring of quality and efficiency of policy and programme implementation leverages existing monitoring (e.g. SUN) efforts.

• Paragraph 60  (Means of  Implementation, Technical support for implementation section):

• Perhaps there would be scope to add the word ‘continue’ in the first sentence, as shown below, since this is already happening.

“All Nutrition Decade partners will continue to provide technical support to the implementation of policies and programmes by sharing good practices, knowledge and technologies, innovation and research outcomes”

• Paragraph 61 (Evidence-informed advocacy and communication section):

• It would be good if the Nutrition Decade launch events at regional and country levels can articulate how the Nutrition Decade relates to other existing platforms, movements, initiatives (e.g. SUN Movement, UN Network for SUN, etc.) so as avoid confusion.

• Paragraphs 62&63 (Evidence-informed advocacy and communication section):

• Perhaps, it could leverage the SUN CoP on communications and advocacy so as to minimize duplication.

• Paragraph 67 (Governance section):

“The Nutrition Decade will not seek to establish new structures but will facilitate broad consultation among stakeholders to seek alignment of priorities, policy instruments, and monitoring mechanisms.”

• This seems inconsistent with the information presented elsewhere in the work programme (e.g. establishment of Nutrition Decade Secretariat, Nutrition Decade action networks)

• Paragraph 68 (Governance section):

• It would seem good for the Nutrition Decade Secretariat, if it is finally established,  to also periodically convene with the UNN/REACH Secretariat to help foster UN coherence on nutrition and minimize duplication of efforts.

• Paragraph 70 (Accountability and Shared Learning section):

• Suggest to include the UNN Country Dashboards (public versions), which highlight UNN contributions towards SUN progresses, in the Nutrition Decade biennial reports.

• Paragraph 71

• Shouldn’t the focus be on tracking progress on the achievement of the nutrition targets rather than tracking commitments?

• Paragraph 74: Please consider mentioning the SUN Movement here

• Table 2: it could be good to reflect the technical support to the implementation under table 2

• It would be great if the document could articulate and detail the relationship with other existing nutrition initiatives/platforms (e.g. ZHC)

English translation below

Доброго времени суток!

Благодарю за возможность быть причастным к столь важному делу. Потихоньку отвечу на все поставленные вопросы.

Касательно первого вопроса:

Думаю концепция жизнеспособна, но вот проведение процессов по реализации в рамках существующих структур и имеющихся ресурсов вызывает сомнения. Всегда на работающего человека возлагали самые большие надежды, но, в реальности функциональная деятельность этого же человека с возложением на него новых обязательств падает. Тут тоже самое - каждый должен заниматься своим делом, но никак не совмещать исполняемое функционируемым.

По поводу второго вопроса:

Проблемы питания созрели не только из-за того, что надо питаться, но из-за того, что нет единого общепринятого подхода к самому понятию питание. По всему миру нельзя растить лишь сою или кукурузу, имеются огромное количество продукции как выращиваемой, так и перерабатываемой, которые в основном зависят от их мест выращивания. В связи с этим стоит вопрос унифкации всего питания на планете, и делать упор на возможность упрощения экспорт-импортных дел в области обеспечения продуктами питания. Если не будут сделаны эти шаги, то выходит из ситуации лишь на собственных силах мест проживания того или другой страны - обречены на провал. К примеру на Атакаме не получиться выращивать яблочные сады, а на территории Канады бананы. Так, что нужен универсальная классификация продуктов первой необходимости для поддержания сблансированного состояния организма.

Что касается третьего вопроса:

Я не только чувствую, но и твёрдо намерен быть полезным в реализации Десятилетия действий, так, как именно от таких действий будет строится платформа единого будущего человечества. Готов присоединится к программе как лично, так и своими компаниями, которых я создавал для обеспечения здоровья нации.

Относительно четвертого вопроса:

Упущены ряд особенностей оценки самого факта недоедания и проявления НИЗ. Особенность оценки возникновения такой проблемы должно опираться на многих факторах. И необходимо через реализацию программ добиться того, что образ здоровья - это счастливый и сбалансированный во всех отношениях человек, а не образ врача и оздоровительных препаратов, а также никак не фармокологические средства. Образ счастливого человека должно выстраиваться от сытого и функционально способного на деятельность человека.

И по поводу пятого вопроса:

У меня замечаний нет. Но, всё будет зависит от изменений вносимых в области образования новой структуры или всё же деятельность будет возложена на существующую.

С уважением и пожеланиями благополучия СаидАъзам.

Good whatever time of day it is where you are,

Thank you for the provided opportunity to be involved in such an important work. I will comment on all questions.

In regard to the first question:

In my opinion, the concept is viable, but realization of implementation processes within the existing structures and resources is doubtful. A working man has always been put high hopes on, but in reality functional activity of such a person when he/she is entrusted with new responsibilities decreases. We have the same situation here - everyone should fulfill commitments according to his/her responsibilities.

In regard to the second question:

Nutrition became a topical issue not only because we need to eat, but because there is no consistent and universally accepted approach to the definition of nutrition. It’s impossible to cultivate only soy and corn worldwide; there is a vast number of grown and processed products, that mostly depend on their cultivation areas. Due to this fact, there is a question of unification of nutrition in the world, and we need to focus on the possibility to simplify export and import procedures in regard to the provision of food. Unless these steps are taken, all attempts to solve the situation using resources of places of living are doomed to failure. For example, it’s impossible to grow apple orchards in the Atacama Desert or bananas in Canada. Therefore, there’s a need for a universal classification of essential commodities to maintain a balanced overall health.      

In regard to the third question:

Not only I feel, but I’m also determined to be useful for the implementation of the Decade of Actions, since the platform of one future of humanity will be built on such actions. I’m willing to join the programme both personally and with my companies, that I established for the sake of nation's health.

In regard to the fourth question:

A number of peculiarities of malnutrition and NDCs assessment have been missed. Assessment of causes of such problem should be based on many factors. Through implementation of the programme it is important to create an image of health which is associated with a happy and balanced in all respects human being, and not with doctors and medicines. The image of a happy person should be associated with a person, who has enough food and is capable to conduct activities.

And in regard to the fifth question:

I have no comments. But everything will depend on the changes in regard to the establishment of a new structure, or if the activities will be assigned to the existing one.

With best regards,

Saydagzam

The International Dairy Federation (IDF) is grateful for the opportunity to comment on the First Draft of the Work Programme of the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition, 2016-2025 (dated 27 January 2017). Since 1903, IDF is the pre-eminent source of scientific and technical expertise for all stakeholders of the dairy chain. IDF commits to help nourish the world with safe and sustainable dairy.

We congratulate the UN for drafting such an ambitious working program. As clearly addressed in the document, the solution to achieve this work program is by combined and coordinated efforts across all actors. International federations such as the IDF through the broad membership they represent can play an essential role in facilitating these partnerships. Industry can help through its expertise by knowledge sharing of social responsibility programmes, technical expertise for cost-effective product development, processing and distribution, as well as providing platforms for advocacy and education. We therefore strongly urge for that open and inclusive dialogue amongst all stakeholders.

We continue to advocate for a focus on foods and diets rather than single nutrients in any policy development and activities, other than where specific micronutrient deficiencies need to be addressed through targeted food fortification and/or supplements. Foods and diets are far more than the sum of their individual nutrients. Nutrients are not consumed in isolation and it is inaccurate to generalize about the effects of a single nutrient without considering the food matrix in which it is present. In some countries, dietary guidelines are shifting away from recommendations based on nutrients or foods in isolation and now focus primarily on healthy eating patterns. Overall, no single food or nutrient creates a healthy dietary pattern, but instead, it is the combination of nutrient-dense foods that is emphasized: “…dietary components of an eating pattern can have interactive, synergistic, and potentially cumulative relationships, such that the eating pattern may be more predictive of overall health status and disease risk than individual foods or nutrients[i]”.

Nutrition science has moved on from just focusing on nutrients in isolation – it also considers foods and dietary patterns that are associated with good health.  Nutrition policies need to take this into account[ii].  

We note that Point 21 suggests that a healthy diet is one that contains adequate macronutrients, fibre and essential micronutrients.  This is too reductionist a view as food is much more than this. 

• We suggest that the text is amended to reflect these points. 

Table 1 suggests establishing an action network focused on food reformulation.  The danger with this is that there is too much focus on single nutrients and too little on the overall impact of a food.   Focusing on reformulation can lead to the use of oversimplified paradigms which in turn may undermine minimally processed, naturally nutritious foods.  Nutrition policies that target the decrease or increase of the consumption of single nutrients will result in a modification of the effects of the food and even the diet itself. Food reformulation can be complex, and simply taking out a nutrient is often not feasible. Typically, the nutrient that is removed provides properties that are important for food safety and/or acceptability of a product. In products where fat is removed to produce a low fat or fat free product, carbohydrates (mostly refined) are often added to maintain an acceptable flavour or texture profile[iii]. This could be counterproductive to reducing levels of obesity and risk of non-communicable disease. As addressed in the FAO/WHO report replacing SFA largely with refined carbohydrate has no benefit on CHD and may even increase the risk of CHD and favour the development of metabolic syndrome [iv] [v].

Reformulation is also a way for highly processed unhealthy foods to be positioned as being healthy. 

• We suggest that all action networks should take a whole of food/dietary pattern approach rather than focusing on single nutrients in isolation.

It is essential that before implementing any new policies or activities there should be clear evidence for a positive impact and a risk based assessment should be considered to identify any potential negative consequences.

We also note that table 1 reference sustainable livestock production. While the concept of sustainable food systems is not new, much more research is needed to establish the scientific foundation on which informed recommendations for sustainable, healthy diets can be made.

A sustainable food system must meet the nutritional needs of the human population while not depleting or degrading the natural resources upon which life depends, as indicated in this definition by the United Nations Environmental Program:

“Sustainable food systems enable the production of sufficient, nutritious food, while conserving the resources that the food system depends on and lowering its environmental impacts. Such systems are based on the idea that all activities related to food (producing, processing, transporting, storing, marketing and consuming) are interconnected and interactive.[vi]”

The concept of sustainable diets contains additional aspects of sustainability related to the human population, as described in the Food and Agriculture Organization’s definition of sustainable diets:

“Sustainable diets are those diets with low environmental impacts which contribute to food and nutrition security and to healthy life for present and future generations. Sustainable diets are protective and respectful of biodiversity and ecosystems, culturally acceptable, accessible, economically fair and affordable, nutritionally adequate, safe and healthy; while optimizing natural and human resources.[vii]”

Whether framed as sustainable food systems, sustainable healthy diets, or nutrition security, the underlying systems - agricultural, environmental, social, and economic - are connected to one another in ways that are only recently being understood and appreciated by scientists and policymakers. A coordinated, interdisciplinary approach is needed to gain vital insights on interrelated dynamic and adaptive processes within and across these systems. Dietary guidance based on an incomplete research base could lead to unintended consequences for both human health and the long-term sustainability of the food system.

Finally, we continue to support policy development that acknowledges the important and valuable role that dairy plays in balanced and varied diets. Dairy products are nutrient-dense foods that can help reduce malnutrition throughout the world, with increasing evidence that diets containing dairy help reduce the risk of obesity and NCDs.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed to the conversation. It has been another week of solid input that will no doubt help to shape the breadth and depth of the Decade’s Work Programme.

Several themes are emerging strongly this week. One is the need for leadership, coordination and implementation, specifically at country level. Ending all forms of malnutrition requires bold, country-led leadership to shine a light on the pathways to coherent actions leading to results and impact. The coordination of these actions will help ensure that the final collective result is greater than the sum of the individual efforts. Through biannual reporting and course correction when necessary, the Work Programme’s strongest added value will be in its clear focus on consolidation and implementation.

The sense of urgency to act to prevent increases in overweight and obesity due to low quality diets was emphasized. Priority also needs to be given to data collection for effective evidence-based policy making, which would help us understand what people are eating and why. Concrete measures to make our food systems and our direct food environment work better for nutrition are called for. Taxation was suggested as a means to ensure that healthy diets are available on the market, but this was questioned by others. This again highlights the critical importance of better understanding both consumer behavior and the effects of market regulation. Monitoring and evaluation of interventions to ensure that they are cost-effective, sustainable and are reaching their end target is essential.

The number of commitments being expressed through this consultation shows the universality of the problem and identifies solutions moving forward. The Co-leadership team of the Sustainable Food Systems (SFS) Programme of the UN 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production (10YFP) gave concrete examples of the initiatives they are undertaking to enhance international cooperation across sectors to accelerate the shift towards sustainable consumption and production. It would be a missed opportunity if not all of the existing partnerships were encouraged to take part in the Decade because everyone has a role to play. The nutrition community also needs to systematically engage in all relevant fora to ensure that nutrition is mainstreamed.

Some participants asked for a calendar of events, and on that note, allow me to remind you of the upcoming ones specifically on the Decade’s draft Work Programme. A briefing will be held on 27 February 2017 as an opportunity to informally brief the Permanent Representatives of FAO and WHO Members and seek their views on the main elements of the draft Work Programme. The FAO and WHO will then produce a revised Work Programme to discuss with their Member States during the World Health Assembly (May 2017) and the FAO Conference (June 2017). This Work Programme will remain a living document, building upon and connecting the independent initiatives of governments and their many partners and will be adapted according to needs and lessons learned.

We very much look forward to the next round of comments in the coming few days. By working together, we can make this Decade a decade of impact for nutrition.

Kind regards,

Christine Campeau

Thank you for sharing the work programme. Please find below feedback from Save the Children.

Comments on the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition Work Plan

Feedback from: Save the Children

Question 1: Does the work programme present a compelling vision for enabling strategic interaction and mutual support across existing initiatives, platforms, forums and programmes, given the stipulation of Res 70/259 that the Decade should be organized with existing institutions and available resources?

There are some things to admire in the document. Amongst others, we particularly commend:

·         The emphasis on addressing all forms and cases of malnutrition

·         The emphasis of promoting coherence of national, regional and international policies

·         The idea of bringing all nutrition efforts under one umbrella to ensure alignment and common advocacy

·         The intention to develop a global accountability framework and mechanism, across sectors and constituencies

We do however hold concerns which we would like to see addressed; these are listed in some detail across the following questions.

Question 2: What are your general comments to help strengthen the presented elements of the first draft work programme of the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition?

A)     Resources: We welcome the Decade of Action’s efforts to provide clearly-defined time-bound operational frameworks to implement the commitments made at ICN 2 and the 2030 agenda.

We are concerned, however that there is not sufficient emphasis on need for increased resources for nutrition (especially DRM), nor the need to improve the use of existing resources via integrated multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder working. Save the Children’s research forecasts that even by 2030—the deadline world leaders have set themselves to end all forms of malnutrition—129 million children will still find their physical and mental development stunted by malnutrition.[1] In fact, children living in 53 countries will continue to be malnourished way into the next century.[2]

Increased resources from all stakeholders (national governments, donors and the private sector) are urgently required to speed up progress.  The World Bank estimates that reaching 4 of the 6 World Health Assembly nutrition targets by 2025 will require an additional average annual investment of $7 billion over the next 10 years, of which donors should contribute an additional $2.6 billion. The sooner that these resources are invested, the faster, better, and more sustained the economic and human gains.

Recommendation: Increased emphasis on the need for increased resources for nutrition with a focus on domestic resource mobilisation supported by donors, businesses and others, e.g. strengthen language used for ‘mobilizing financial commitments to achieve rapidly increase resources’

B)      Plans: We are also concerned that the work programme is not yet ‘time bound’ and appears to be more a set of intentions than a work programme. This is most clearly demonstrated by the lack of concrete actions. E.g. desire to “address the increasing amount of emergencies”, but with no clear plan as to how. This is particularly worrying given that the assumption of the DoA is that the WHA indicators will need to be met by 2025; yet there is no explicit indication in the document on how the DoA intends to meet these objectives.

Further, the document mentions a broad range of issues, but it does not go into a prioritisation, nor does it give an idea of which issue to start with or how to start with it. This might not necessarily be a diktat, but rather advice on how to go about prioritising at the country level, with examples of how other countries have had successes or failures to reinforce that.

Recommendation: Rapid development of clear, integrated, prioritised action plan, with timescales, to support activities outlined in the work programmes

C)      Country Specificity & Inclusion: The document does not mention any high-burden countries specifically, or reference how little commitment many of them have made to tackle malnutrition in their domestic spheres (which may threaten the DoA’s goal generally).

Perhaps even more importantly, the world is off-track against its goals because progress has not been inclusive enough. Millions of children miss out on adequate nutrition because of whom they are and where they live. These are the forgotten children who are discriminated against because of their gender, ethnicity, where they live, a disability, because they are forced from their home or on the move, or because of their family’s income. Inequalities in malnutrition are widening between different regions within countries, between the richest and the poorest, and between rural and urban areas. Discrimination and exclusion are helping to create and entrench these inequalities.

With this in mind, we applaud the aim and added value of this work programme to ‘leaving no one behind’, and the emphasis on reaching the most marginalised and most vulnerable in action areas including those on UHC and social protection. However, a  cross cutting set of activities is required in order to reach the furthest behind first, in order to leave no one behind.

Recommendation: Include an ‘action area’ to address inequalities, exclusion and discrimination to ensure no one is left behind. This should include recommendations for governments to:

·         Undertake a multi-sectoral contextual analysis to understand:

-       The national drivers of and trends in malnutrition

-       Which policies and practices will best address malnutrition

-       Which groups of people are most marginalised and vulnerable to malnutrition and the barriers they face to improving their situation

·         Translate global goals into national targets, with adequate resources and plans that lay out how each country will reach its goals for all groups of society,  based on the national context and trends

·         Lay down appropriate policies and plans to reach those targets, for all groups of society

·         Work with relevant sectors and stakeholders throughout

·         Ensure appropriate finances are in place

D)     Legal Frameworks: The right to food is a basic human right. Governments have an obligation to ensure all citizens have access to sufficient quantities of food, of sufficient quality and cultural acceptability to meet their needs. States also have a binding obligation, enshrined in international law, to respect, protect and realise children’s right to survival. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child obliges states to do everything they can to prevent children from dying. To meet this commitment, states need to tackle malnutrition. Yet, many countries lack a legal framework that promotes child survival, and those that do often fail to implement it.

Recommendation: Strengthen the emphasis on the legal frameworks for child survival; possibility of using framework from Save’s “Unequal Portions” report (see p.25) http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/Unequal_Portions.pdf]

E)      Language: The definition of terms in the work plan could be improved. For example, the word “resilience” is included without an attempt to define what is meant by the term (for we know resilience is used widely across the sector in a multitude of different contexts.

F)      Action Areas: The action areas are welcome in their ambition and structure, but we would propose some changes as per the below:

·         Action area 1: food systems focus is important but it fails to address the income challenge for those working in agriculture and the fact that not everyone works in or profits from agriculture. It is quite production focused, but we know most people will still need to purchase most food. Explicit reference to the need for agriculture to increase incomes on the one hand and enable availability of affordable nutritious foods on the other is needed. Leading on from this, there is not enough attention given to market failure, and its impact on private sector involvement in food systems. There is also little reference to livestock, the associated environmental challenges and the disease risk and its link to malnutrition

·         Action area 2. This area would benefit from being more specific about what nutrition actions it refers to. There is no reference for example to the detection, referral and treatment of acute malnutrition – referring to the compendium of action on nutrition would be a good start here.

·         Action area 3: There is minimal reference to evidence here. While we would be broadly supportive of what is proposed it could go further and reference the need for the size of transfers to enable households to afford nutritious foods and health and water services, the need to ensure households with children under 2 are covered. It could also go further to talk about the need for shock responsive social protection that can scale up and down in times of need to protect nutrition

·         Action Area 4: Trade and investment are indeed important, but given the gridlock at the WTO, and the recent endangering of TTP, TTIP and NAFTA, should we be linking trade so explicitly to food policy? We do not see many successful examples of this occurring.

·         Action area 5: Is there more that could be done to support exclusive breastfeeding in the informal sector?  How about in the agricultural sector itself - contract farming for example?  What should the private sector be accountable for/ what more could be done around maternity rights and support?

·         Action Area 6: We would like to see this area strengthened. A reporting structure to involve civil society would be welcome as a start here – at present the accountability framework is unclear.

Question 3: How could this draft work programme be improved to promote collective action to achieve the transformational change called for by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the ICN2 outcomes? What is missing?

·         We welcome the guiding principle to provide an inclusive umbrella for all relevant stakeholders to consolidate, align and reinforce nutrition actions, but we feel more detail is needed on how the actors listed on page 3 (SUN, Zero Hunger etc) will be engaged in practice.   For example, will joint activities be scoped? Will a joint work plan be developed, under the Decade of Action framework? How will the Decade of Action support the strides of these existing efforts?

·         We also welcome the guiding principle to engage with a wide range of stakeholders, including civil society organisations. Again, we would like to understand better how this will be carried out in practice, including key actors like the CSM of the CFS, the SUN CSN and CIVICUS?

·         We question the low level of ambition regarding member states to identify and commit to achieve ‘one of more’ nutrition targets… ‘one or more’ recommendation of the ICN2 framework , as this does not feel  ambitious enough for SDG2  to be met (para 42).

·         We welcome the development of a publically-accessible commitment repository and urge this to be made available as the soonest opportunity, as a vital mechanism for the DoA.

·         We would encourage the DoA secretariat to report all commitments, including those that are voluntary, through the repository.

·         We suggest more detail is added on the recruitment, remit and activities of nutrition champions, as vital actors in the DoA.

·         We would like to know how will the ‘smart commitments for action’ be compiled and shared?

·         We would like clarification regarding the suggested establishment of action networks, including logistical arrangements, and we urge confirmation that civil society will be included within them (para 49)? We strongly advise these are multi-sector action networks, that complement and engage existing mechanisms such as SUN movement.

·         We welcome the emphasis on evidence informed advocacy and communication (para 61-66), but we strongly advise against the development of new networks of advocates. Many active networks exist, namely the SUN movement, Every Woman and Every Child, …. Resources should be invested in these existing structures to enable them to support the DoA advocacy approach, rather than developing duplicative structures or efforts.

·         We recommend that the one shared visual identity developed uses SDG2 primary framing, whilst retaining linkages and accountability sharing with other related goals ( SDGs 3,5,6 for example)

·         We recommend that some mention at least is made of the various auxiliary issues that impact on nutrition, including climate change, water supplies, over population, urbanisation and food security

Question 4: Do you feel you can contribute to the success of the Nutrition Decade or align yourself with the proposed range of action areas?

We are looking forward to contributing to the DoA, but in order to identify concrete activities we need a clearer structure and timeline in order to constructively engage; there also needs to be a better governance system, including the involvement of civil society as reviewers of progress/accountability officers.

We will be happy to involve ourselves in the action areas, building upon our on-going work, particularly on social protection/nutrition education and the promotion of nutrition governance, and would see ourselves as active contributors to any additional action area that might be added on inclusion. We will also continue to be active in the advocacy networks, with efforts focused on:

·         Sufficient, appropriate and best use of existing funding for nutrition

·         Better coordination and understanding of policies to tackle malnutrition, with an inclusion lens

·         Increased accountability for action on nutrition

·         Improvements in new born and infant nutrition, including through the promotion of exclusive breast-feeding

·         Disaggregation of data and the requirement for a participatory approach to continuous data collection

Question 5: Do you have specific comments on the section on accountability and shared learning?

We recommend one database is used to capture all commitments submitted in the DoA, not just those from Member States.              

Inputs from Katherine Richards, Jo Grace, Natalie Roschnik, Christophe Belperron, Christopher Twiss, Hugh Bagnall-Oakeley, Claire Blanchard

Thanks for sharing this first draft work programme and congratulations for the progress to date. Considering where nutrition was ten years ago, the change is most appreciated!

I would however like to make a few comments for your consideration.

• Given the mandate of both FAO and WHO, the focus on national policies is logical. But unless we include explicitly the sub-national level we will not be in a position to address sustainably all forms of malnutrition. Promoting coherence of national, regional and international policies across multiple sectors is clearly very important, but coherence is most needed and can best be achieved at local level. One of the priorities of the Decade should therefore be the alignment and joint planning of local strategies for nutrition. Agriculture and health should be supported to jointly take the lead in supporting local governments.
• While bringing together nutrition actors is definitely urgently needed, it is equally urgent that nutrition actors systematically engage in relevant (and/or high profile) development fora and initiatives (e.g. climate change, right to food, urban development/territorial planning …) to add value to the debate and learn from other participants and mainstream nutrition. We need to get out from the ghetto we have contributed to build. Other actors need nutrition as a means to bring together a people-centred, integrated and pro-poor perspective but this awareness needs to be raised on both sides.
• There seems to be a confusion between food system and value chain - I quote A food system approach – from production to processing, storage, transportation, marketing, retailing and consumption –. Food systems should be analysed from the dietary entry point. The prevailing commodity-based approach cannot address complexity.
• Social protection is of course essential but needs to be seen in a broader perspective: why are people in need of social protection and what can be done about it? But also how can social protection measures seek win-win objectives and contribute to sustainable development? (Anecdotal evidence from the Andes mentions the erosion of local food and agriculture systems as beneficiaries switch to supermarket purchasing, while cash vouchers in NYC are linked to local farmers markets).
• Promoting healthy diets is good, but not sufficient. We need to ensure that they are the outcome of sustainable food systems which seek sustainable environmental management and social equity (implementing right to food. promoting youth employment and decent employment). We should therefore move beyond healthy dietary guidelines to sustainable dietary guidelines and from national to local (and when appropriate cross-border) education and communication strategies.
• While nobody can dispute the need for evidence-informed advocacy and communication, the focus on evidence-based nutrition interventions in the last decade has been on academic bio-medical research which neither intended nor is able to address sustainability. It is urgent to identify and review promising practices at local level to inform consumers and nutrition actors.
• Specific attention should be given to the legal and regulatory context:  the multiplication of often contradictory rules at local level eventually undermines diet quality, livelihoods, biodiversity and health. This needs to be better understood and rationalized.

Dear FSN moderator

The work programme is clearly written, below receive a few comments send on behalf of WFP RBJ

1. Background: paragraph one:

I propose that we spell out undernutrition to also include acute and chronic malnutrition.

2. Page 5: action area 1: consider including this: erratic climatic conditions has resulted in severe conditions such as the El Niño leading to severe drought. These conditions poses risks to sustainable food systems. Additionally, sustainable and resilient food systems should also build on indigenous knowledge system by creating awareness and increasing demand and production of indigenous food crops.

3. Page 8: Action area 5: in this area, consider addicting the following dimension: creation of supportive public food environment requires commitment and involvement of the food industry to ensure availability and affordability of healthy foods. Business should take the responsibility and held accountable through country legislative frameworks to ensure a safe and supportive food environment.

4. Page 12: Governance: on this section, expand on national government coordination in tackling commitments made. Lack of nationally led coordination and governance can play a role in non-attainment of nutrition actions by 2025.

 5. The work programme is not mentioning monitoring instruments to measure progress made towards attainment of nutrition commitments in the next decade.

Regards

Pontsho Sepoloane

WFP, RBJ.

Dear Moderator,

I am writing on behalf of the Grocery Manufacturers Association, based in Washington, D.C., to submit the attached comments on the draft work program for the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition.

GMA appreciates the opportunity to submit comments and respectfully requests you take these comments into consideration.

Sincerely,

Melissa A. San Miguel