We wish to thank for the opportunity to comment on the Nutrition and food systems V0-draft. The draft is well planned and covers the food system as well as diet and health as well as diet and NCD. As a response to the specific important questions 1-12 we would like to give the following input:
- The purpose of this report is to analyse the ways in which food systems influence dietary patterns and hence nutritional outcomes. The objective is to focus on consumers and consider sustainability issues. The report aims to be solution oriented and to highlight efficient policies and programs. Are those major objective(s) clearly reflected in the V0 draft?
Solution oriented approach is very welcome. It is important to state clearly the different stakeholders in the food system and the interests. Consumer focus is important, as food price is a big driver of consumption. It is equally important is to clearly state how profit drives trade. Political decision makers have an obligation and responsibility to act. Very important message on p.10 paragraph starting on line 14: Acting to change systems is never easy. Vested interests, technical difficulties and human and financial resource constraints all have to be overcome. Effort and focus need to be sustained. But key decision- makers in the public and private sectors have an obligation and a responsibility to act, and they should feel empowered to do so. Right now the political momentum is with those who aim to shape their food system towards improved nutrition. The SDGs – the world’s main accountability tool for sustainable development over the next 15 years – have a lot to say about food security, nutrition, climate and sustainable consumption.
- Do you think that the overall structure of the draft is comprehensive enough, and adequately considered and articulated? Does the draft strike the right balance of coverage across the various chapters? Are there important aspects that are missing? Does the report correctly focus on the links between nutrition and food systems without straying beyond that?
The draft is well balanced. However, the role of trade and agricultural subsidies could be more clearly stated. We have evidence on their role in shaping the consumption (increase sugar consumption, replace healthier plant oils with palm oil). This should be stated clearly as policy instruments and the decision makers using them are directly steering consumption, sometimes towards unhealthy diets contributing to NCDs, expenses and deaths.
- Does the conceptual framework need to be edited? Simplified? Should “the food environment” as defined in the draft be central to the framework?
The draft states clearly there are many stakeholders and players in the food system, all contributing to the food environment.
- Are production systems and their role in shaping diets and nutritional outcomes adequately addressed?
The role of economic drivers in the food system can be clearly (and briefly) stated. There is profit in the food system, unfortunately not always for the primary producer, nor equally distributed. Food system is complex as food is a necessity as well as a commodity - it is up to the food system stakeholders to act responsibly. As stated at the end of the draft (p. 105) “Nutrition is not a sector but cross-cutting development problem that needs to be integrated into the activities and policies of…. such as ministries of finance…”. It is clear not all the stakeholders act responsibly.
- Does this draft cover adequately the main controversies in the field of Nutrition and food systems? Are there any remaining gaps?
- The project team is working on a categorization of food systems. Are you aware of specific approaches of use in that perspective, and particularly of quantitative indicators that could be used?
- Does this draft adequately show the multiplicity and complexity of diets and nutrition issues across different food systems and specific contexts with a good regional balance?
- What areas of the document are in need of strengthening or shortening?
- Chapter 4, Section 4.1 contains case studies/examples of effective policies and actions in different contexts/countries across the food system for diets and nutrition. Could you offer other practical, well-documented and significant examples to enrich the report and provide better balance to the variety of cases and the lessons learned, including the trade-offs or win-win outcomes in terms of addressing the different dimensions of diets for FSN?
- Section 4.2.2 on “Institutional Changes and Governance Across the Food System Movements for Nutrition” requires more work, and more inclusion of evidence and of the various players. Any inputs on this section are most welcome.
Section 4.2.4 on future research and data needs. It would be valuable to mention here the need for nutrient content data, as it is the basis of all calculations. The nutrient content differs due to climate, soil, fertilizers, storage, cooking, etc.
- Is the report too technical or too simplistic? Are all the concepts clearly defined?
- Are there any major omissions or gaps in the report? Are topics under-or over-represented in relation to their importance?
Minna Huttunen