成员简介
该成员提交的意见和建议涉及：
-
-
粮安委制定《粮食系统与营养自愿准则》的政策进程
磋商会--
Below are some considerations I would like to raise on behalf of IFAD on the draft Voluntary Guidelines.
Best regards,
David Suttie
1. On the current situation and underlying problems:
- In a context of divergent narratives and approaches to developing the types of food systems that may be thought to offer the best potential for promoting better nutrition, it is surprising that the guidelines have little to offer in terms of a broad macro-level vision of food systems – both prevailing and desired. For example, as detailed in the recently published HLPE report “Agroecological and other innovative approaches for sustainable agriculture and food systems”, it would be relevant to note that smallholder farming systems make important contributions to producing nutrients in the most populous and food insecure areas of the world, and that diversity of agricultural and nutrient production has been found to diminish as farm sizes increases (p.73). These phenomena are also noted in the background paper for the Decade on Family Farming, prepared by FAO and IFAD (see pp.6-7 at: http://www.fao.org/3/ca4778en/ca4778en.pdf). While not stating that large farms do not also have a role to play – clearly they do – it should be a concern that, given the importance of smallholder farms in maintaining diversity and nutrition in food systems, policy frameworks in many contexts are creating biases towards larger-scale farms and food companies – in terms of policies related to land acquisition, marketing, trade policies, and even food and safety regulations. While some important considerations are included in the draft in terms of supporting smallholders, there would be scope for acknowledging the macro-level situation and their present and potential role therein.
2. On the guiding principles and their focus:
- Given the above, the concern of these guidelines should not only be addressing policy fragmentation (para 12) and promoting policy coherence (para 16), but in promoting policies that lead to the most equitable and inclusive outcomes in terms of advancing food systems that provide healthy nutrition for all. In many contexts, we arguably have a degree of policy coherence towards supporting food systems where (especially large, multinational) actors are enabled to make significant profits providing cheap and poor quality food to consumers, in many cases at the expense of smallholders and rural people who lose their rights to land and who are often employed under poor conditions on large plantations. So the issue is not only one of coherence, but also one of policies that promote equity and inclusion.
3. On the guidelines and policy relevant areas:
- Topics to improve consumer awareness, education and choices rightly feature in the draft. At the same time, there seems to be relatively little recognition of the working of markets and prices and how this skews consumer behaviour towards food that is not the most nutritious. Without markets that better reflect the true cost of food – taking environmental and social, as well as environmental costs into account – it is doubtful that it will be possible to change consumer behaviour to a sufficient extent, especially in the case of relatively low-income consumers. In this context, the issue of true cost accounting and reflecting how fiscal and trade policies, as well as those related to land, create inequalities and biased food markets needs to be reflected upon; on this issue, the comments provided by the Honourable Ambassador of Hungary below on true cost accounting are important and need to be taken into account.
- With rising urbanization levels shaping food systems and food demand, as recognized on p.18 of the draft, significant opportunities emerge in terms of promoting rural-urban linkages – both hard (infrastructure) and soft (institutional) – to enable local rural smallholder producers to supply nutritious food to urban residents. The resulting short value chains could reasonably be expected not only to improve nutrition outcomes in rural and urban areas – and maintain traditional healthy dies as opposed to shifting to diets comprising much highly processed goods – but to generate income among rural communities, thereby improving the purchasing power and nutrition of rural and smallholder communities, who are often among those most likely to suffer from undernutrition.
- Finally, it is slightly surprising that there is virtually no consideration of the role of indigenous peoples and indigenous food systems. Advantages of these systems in terms of diversity, nutrition, and agrobiodiversity are well-documented and have been alluded to in the comments by McGill University who provide a range of good recommendations on this topic. In particular, the fostering of indigenous knowledge, partnering with indigenous peoples’ organizations, and respecting their intellectual property rights are important considerations.
-
-
-
Dear CFS colleagues,
The below contribution is based upon research conducted by IFAD's strategy and knowledge department, examining the role of smallholer farmers in rural transformation, structural transformation and urbanization.
David Suttie
Policy Analyst
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)Proponent
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
Main responsible entity
IFAD
Date/Timeframe
NA
Funding source
NA
Location
Focused on sub-Saharan Africa
Background/Context
While increased proportions of people living in larger towns and cities can be observed throughout much of the developing world, rates of urbanization in Africa, particularly SSA, are, in general, lower than in other regions. In Africa, 40 per cent of the population lives in urban areas compared with 48 per cent in Asia, which is the next least urbanized region of the world. The process of urbanization is expected to continue in the decades ahead, however, with the figures rising to 56 per cent and 64 per cent, respectively, by 2050, and with SSA frequently described as the latest and most rapidly urbanizing region. The urbanization process is bringing major changes in economic and social development processes, with significant implications for inclusive development, investment, markets, infrastructure and finance in both rural and urban areas.Though agglomeration in urban centres can offer certain development advantages – for example by enhancing access to services, generating economies of scale in the provision of education, health services, infrastructure, energy, water and sanitation, and business services – many people who live in rural areas, and particularly those in more remote areas, are often unable to access these services at reasonable cost in terms of time and resources. These people include social categories that typically constitute the majority of the poor and hungry: smallholders, particularly rural women and young people, the poorest people in rural areas, migrants and indigenous peoples.
To respond to these gaps in the discourse around urbanization, a series of papers, events and policy briefs were prepared:
1. Rural-urban Linkages and Food Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (research paper available at: https://www.ifad.org/documents/10180/b9021802-e3f7-4bd5-b0ea-760a8fbaab…)
2. Territorial Approaches, Rural-urban linkages and inclusive rural transformation (conference report available at: https://www.ifad.org/documents/10180/36a5e671-b321-4ba9-9d60-49b3cee1c0…)
3. Sustainable urbanization and inclusive rural transformation (policy brief available at: https://www.ifad.org/documents/10180/448611cc-71e9-441a-bee4-776f9cb922…)
4. Inclusive rural transformation and urbanization implementation (https://www.ifad.org/documents/10180/fa942a6d-d036-4b05-b2e9-08ecb637c9…)
Focus/Objectives
The initiative is a series of research papers and policy briefs which focus on advancing the interests and galvanize the role of smallholder farmers in promoting inclusive rural transformation and sustainable urbanization.
Key characteristics of the experience/process
The analysis and conclusions emphasize the role of smallholder farmers in driving agricultural and structural transformation processes which are central to ensuring positive food security and nutrition outcomes from urbanization processes. A systems-wide perspective, focusing on opportunities and challenges emerging for groups at risk of exclusion, is adopted with a primary entry point of focusing on the interests of smallholder farmers.
Key actors involved and their role
Smallholders are the key actors, with the role of governments central to ensure this group is given the opportunity to contribute to, and benefit from, key transformations in rural and urban areas.
Key changes observed with regards to food security and nutrition and sustainable agriculture and food systems
NAChallenges faced
Operating in the informal sector and being geographically and institutionally removed from political processes, there is a serious risk that debates surrounding urbanization exclude the interests of smallholders.
Lessons/Key messages
1. Smallholder access to urban markets, productivity-enhancing technologies and training opportunities are contingent upon greater connectivity and smoother flows of goods, services and information between rural and urban areas. In this respect, improving rural-urban connectivity will be critical for food systems and broader national development. Particular areas of priority include: facilitating linkages between rural and urban economies through better infrastructure for transportation and communication; sound institutions facilitating inclusive food systems, and leveraging the role of small and medium-sized towns as conduits between rural and urban economies; financial inclusion and migration flows spanning rural and urban areas; and sustainable management of ecosystems and natural resources shared by urban and rural areas.2. Developing stronger connections between the different segments in agricultural value chains can foster wider market opportunities for smallholders and can lead to inclusive outcomes for rural areas and cities that depend on this group for the majority of their food. In this regard, adopting a value chain approach and prioritizing strategic and complementary investments along the whole value chain will be needed. For instance, at the input supply stage, the training and employment of people as input vendors in distribution networks is an effective means of promoting inclusivity. Ensuring equal access by smallholders, particularly rural women and young people, to improved seeds, other agricultural inputs, rural finance and advisory services is critical to enabling them to honour contracts, and to meet expected production quotas and quality and safety standards. At the processing and marketing stages, upgrading storage facilities, using modern technology to distribute timely information, and addressing infrastructure challenges all help to foster inclusive and tightly linked value chains. The role of local traders in value chains is key and must be supported with inclusive market approaches and business models and establishing regulations that safeguard against monopsonic structures.
3. A systems perspective is vital to analysing and understanding the linkages from smallholder production, agricultural value chains and consumer demand – whether that be in urban or rural areas. In this context, a territorial perspective and city-region food system approaches create a critical lens for analysis, underpinning policy transformation and implementation.
4. Providing incentives and regulations, where appropriate, for supermarkets and agribusiness operators sourcing from rural areas and small towns to prioritize the creation of decent employment across value chains, from local producers, input suppliers, processors, transport workers and so on, will be central to ensuring that people working in food systems are themselves able to access sufficient, safe and nutritious food.
5. Urban-rural migration needs to be reflected in urban and food system planning processes. Effective planning and political commitment can lead to better and more integrated city region planning, leading to a reduction in slums in urban centres, better employment opportunities and improved living conditions. In addition, facilitating migrant remittances and the capacity of migrants to invest in and move back to rural areas as opportunities evolve, can – under the right conditions – enhance opportunities for inclusive development in both rural areas and urban centres.
-
Dear CFS colleagues,
Please find below an approach of territorial development from IFAD's Latin America and Caribbean Division's Peru portfolio.
David Suttie
Policy Analyst
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)Proponent
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) in partnership with the Republic of Peru.
Main responsible entity
The Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation is the main implementing agency in partnership with IFAD, with the latter responsible for providing implementation support, supervision and appraisal.
Date/Timeframe
Oct 2016- Dec 2022
Funding source
The bulk of the total project cost of just over US$70 million is made up as follows from an IFAD loan (US$28.5 million) and a contribution from the Government of Peru (US$38.8 million and US$7.2 from project beneficiaries). Total Project Cost: US$74.5 million.
Location
The project area encompasses 27 municipal districts of seven provinces in the Apurímac, Ene and Mantaro Rivers Valley (VRAEM), a geopolitical area in central Peru located in the regions of Cusco, Apurímac, Ayacucho, Huancavelica and Junín. The area is located between the interdependent depressions of the Central Cordillera and Eastern Andean Cordillera and in the Amazonian slope of the Andes; includes a high mountain range between 3000 and 4500 meters, Inter-Andean valleys between 1500 and 3000 meters, a pre-mountain or forest area between 300 and 1500 meters and part of the Amazonian plain or jungle to less than 300 meters.
Background/Context
The project areasuffers a high incidence of extreme poverty and have broadly been excluded from the country's development. This situation was exacerbated by the long-standing conflict that affected Peru in the 80s. Illicit drug trafficking is established in the Apurímac, Ene and Mantaro Rivers Valley (VRAEM) where there are remnants of the
Guerrilla group Sendero Luminoso, nowadays associated with drug trafficking. Within the project area, there is a split of approximately 75 per cent rural against 25 per cent urban, based on local definitions. 74 per cent of the population in the area lives below the monetary poverty line. Of these, 39 per cent are extremely poor and 33 poor– values that place these districts among the country's most vulnerable. Among those living in the project area, 73 per cent are under 29 years of age and 66 per cent are indigenous.
Focus/Objectives
The project is focused around three interrelated objectives:- Building institutional capacities in the territory, including in local and provincial governments, supporting initiatives to improve communal goods and properties.
- Developing a sustainable network of associations among potential project beneficiaries to promote and expand opportunities for economic development and social inclusion, providing support for economic activities by interest groups such as farmers organizations together with financial inclusion of families and associations.
- Enhancing connectivity within the territory, focusing in particular on facilitating market access, creating jobs with start-ups or contracting of communal or associational microenterprises for routine maintenance of roads, providing for irrigation infrastructure at community level, and promoting water harvesting and collection.
Key characteristics of the experience/process
The following complementary approaches are designed to ensure the project benefits the households most vulnerable to poverty and hunger, while facilitating territorial-wide transformations:- The territorial development approach combines two main elements: (i) institutional development to promote consultations among local and external agents and include poor people in production transformation processes and benefits; and (ii) production transformation to link the territory's economy with dynamic markets.
- Focus on participatory, community-driven development through delegation to community organisations to design and implement sub-projects which prioritize approaches to improve access of poor groups to social, human, financial and physical assets.
- Social inclusion is cross-cutting. Accordingly, working with poor groups' organizations – especially small-scale and indigenous farmers' groups – and recognizing, as well as securing rights to, tangible and intangible assets of these groups is a priority.
Key actors involved and their role
- The agency responsible for the project is the Peruvian Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, with close coordination and collaboration from municipal and provincial administrations.
- Project implementation will be the responsibility of a project coordination unit composed of a project coordinator and eight specialists in the following areas: (i) M&E; (ii) financial inclusion; (iii) entrepreneurship; (iv) infrastructure; (v) natural resource management and climate change; (vi) social inclusion; (vii) administration; and (viii) accounting and support staff. Each local agency will have a team made up of a coordinator, an administrative assistant and various specialists.
- In all cases, project implementation specialists will work with local groups on design and implementation, with the latter having primary responsibility for implementation of sub-projects.
Key changes observed with regards to food security and nutrition and sustainable agriculture and food systems
Foreseen benefits in terms of food security and nutrition include: increased physical assets for farming communities; improved agricultural productivity; more sustainable natural resource management; increased access to affordable food by poor consumers of targeted territories ; increased social capital to promote the start-up and development of economic associations of small-scale rural farmers to improve their access to value chains and promote their participation in the benefits of territorial development. Over the long-term, all this is expected to lead to improved food access and availability in the territory.
Challenges faced
The major challenges relate to: (i) institutional capacity; and (ii) possible trade-offs between targeted approaches to ensure benefits amongst food insecure groups (e.g. focusing on poor groups and areas) vs. holistic/multi-faceted approaches to achieve territorial-wide development.In the first instance, while some measures to develop decentralized governance systems are already in place, capacity among relevant institutions is often lacking. Similarly, the capacity among organizations for food insecure groups to contribute in the design and implementation of initiatives is generally weak. As such, providing training at both sub-national and local level is imperative in the short-term; the same applies to longer term approaches to ensuring access to relevant education and training in territorial development, with the latter implying the need to partner with local, national and international institutions with specific human capital and educational mandates.
In the second instance, achieving an appropriate mix between targeted and wider initiatives to develop territories is not straight-forward for relatively small-scale projects. Engagement with national and sub-national policy processes, focus on knowledge management for sharing of results with similar (complementary) territorial initiatives, as well as focus on learning and training systems are all measures that can facilitate transferring of relatively targeted local approaches to wider territories.
Lessons/Key messages- Individual projects need to find appropriate mix and complementarity between targeted and holistic approaches. Targeted approaches are required not only to have a pro-poor approach able to reach food insecure groups, but in a context of limited resources to focus on those thematic areas in which the project can bring an added value. However, territorial development itself, involves considering a holistic approach, that integrates the different conditioning elements that underpin the development of networks of communities.
- Individual projects need to be linked and coordinated to wider development actors, policies and approaches to address the multi-faceted constraints faced by local actors.
- Territorial development must be grounded in people-centred approaches which target and enable the participation of food insecure groups.
- Local actors –especially food insecure groups – must be placed at the centre of design and implementation of initiatives aimed at benefitting them and be represented in territorial governance systems. At the same time, capacity development among these groups, as well as among sub-national and local authorities will be required to ensure long-term improvements.
-
先生 David Suttie
Regarding the need for data on food security and nutrition from development agronomy advisor perspective concentrating on food production, I have two major concerns.
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/financially-suppressed-economy-2/
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/financially-stalled-governments/
This also impact nutrition as most smallholder farmers are seriously undernourished with access to only about half 4000 kcal, they need for a full day of agronomic field work needed to manual produce enough to food to meet family food security needs. The result is the need to concentrate on high calorie foods to optimize economic or production opportunities and preventing adopting a more diversified diet needed for good health.
There is an easily observable proxy for operational limitations. That is timing of field operations in which for manual agricultural communities’ basic crop establishment extends for some eight weeks, well beyond a time when innovations are valid. It is essentially we recognize that this delay in not discretionary but determined by limited operational resources to manage the land and needs to be addresses as such. Also, one needs to note the success of the green revolution in paddy lands of Asia was not only the result of improved rice yields developed by IRRI working with various national programs, but more important would be the concurrent shift from water buffalo to power tillers to establish the crop. This more than halved the crop establishment period. Thus, while technology substantially increased the paddy yield potential it did not assist the farmers establish their paddy in a timely manner. The farmers did this themselves and since the development community wasn’t involved the impact of the shift to power tillers is virtually overlooked by development and hinders the effort to advance the agriculture of Africa and other developing countries.
Thus, while I am skeptical about the financial resources available to collect quality data, I would like to see an effort to take a detailed look at the timing of agronomic operations and address the operational limits smallholder farmers face. I think this would lead to increased importance of mechanization allowing a major impact on crop management, production and ultimately quality of diet for smallholder farmers and their families. Please review the following webpages and links within each:
https://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/OperationalFeasibility.pdf
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/promoting-the-green-revolution-in-asia-as-solely-technology-driven-a-major-disservice-to-africa/
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/calorie-energy-balance-risk-averse-or-hunger-exhasution/
https://smallholderagriculture.agsci.colostate.edu/affordability-of-improved-nutrition-while-optimizing-economic-opportunities/
Thank you.