Member profile
This member contributed to:
-
-
-
Dear Colleagues,
I agree with your activities for the 20th anniversary of the Right to Food Guidelines.
Guidelines are very important, but I think, that we have strongly to consider the global population growth (from about 8 billion now up to about 10 billion people in 2050 or later) and the dramatic climate change all over the world.
I think that we need some rules for more moderate population growth and a more efficient food production all over the world under consideration of the climate change. Plant breeding (incl. new methods) and cultivation of new varieties to farmers around the world should be
an objective of our work.
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
Braunschweig, Germany
-
-
-
Dear Colleagues,
This is a very good question, but I am afraid that you wouldn`t get many answers/comments from people in European countries, because of some specific restrictions/conditions in the European Union (EU), such as:
Some restrictions in agriculture (low fertilizer, restrictive plant protection etc.)
- High technological level of sustainable agrifood systems of many EU members
- No cultivation (except Portugal and Spain) of GM-plants, because of some politcal and public opinions
I think, that these and further specific conditions may be reasons for European scientists to be restrictive in information and recommendations outside.
By the way, I am also not quite clear, what do you expect by scientists and other knowledge holders, if you asked such questions.
We have to expext various conditions in various regions of the world concerning:
- Climate (temperature, rain etc.)
- Vegetation periods
- Soil quality (fertility)
- Plant varieties
- Qualifications/scientific level of farmers and differences in farm management etc. etc.
All these specific conditions and some more may be barriers for a more efficient and sustainable agrifood system in various regions.
Therefore, it seems to me to be difficult or impossible to give constructive comments/remarks to more efficient and sustainable agrifood systems from outside.
I consider my comments more as remarks to the factiilators of this consultation in order to show the breadth of this field and therefore also to show the difficulties to solve the problems. There are so many questions and specific open points to contribute to the topics or solve any problems.
Some years ago, we tried to contribute to solve similar problems, but we could not solve the problems (see attachment).
Best regards and have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
Gerhard Flachowsky
Animal Nutritionist, Braunschweig/Germany
-
-
-
Dear Colleagues,
Attached, I will make some comments to your VO Draft to the V0 draft of the report „Reducing inequalities for food security and nutrition“:
- I miss the term food safety in the title of the draft (e.g.: „Reducing inequalities for food security, food safety and nutrition“)
- There is no sense of enough food, if the food is not safe (e.g. it contains some toxic or undesirable substances, e.g. contaminants etc.). Food safety needs a certain attention in your paper.
- The term „Human edible Fraction“ of all animal feeds should be also mentioned or considered in the adequate text or in tables; see some selected references, such as:
CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, 1999) Animal agricultural and global food supply. Talk Force Report No 135; July 1999, CAST, Ames. IA, USA
Ertle, P., Klocker, H., Hörtenhuber, S., Knaus, W., Zöllitsch, W. (2015) The net contribution of dairy production to human food supply: The case of Austrian dairy farms. Agricultural Systems 137, 119 - 125
Wilkinson, J.M. (2011) Re-defining deficiency of feed use by livestock. Animal 5, 1014 – 1022
- In general, the food/feed competition between men and animals should be mentioned and if possible, the feed/food competition between men and animals should be avoided.
- Did we show/mention enough activities to improve/increase the food production (such as plant production incl. plant breeding etc.).
Best regards
Prof. Dr. G. Flachowsky
Institute of Animal Nutrition, Germany
-
-
-
„Protein of Animal Origin: Are there Alternatives for Human Nutrition?“
Considering limited natutal resources, such as land, water, fuel, some minerals and increased emissions as well as rapid population growth, food security is one of the largest challenges of the current century. Apart from sufficient food, the supply with essential nutrients, such as amino acids, minerals and vitamins have top priority in human nutrition. In consequence of the high need of limited resources and some emissions ( e.g. methane, laughing gas) farm animal husbandry is questionable from various views and many people – mainly from the cities in high developed contries – ask for alternatives.
In our study, we analysed potentials for improvement of traditional ways of plant and animal production as well as new possibilities of protein manufacturing. Such alternatives are:
- Avoid food competition between human and animals
- Reduction of land, feed and food losses along the whole food chain
- Changes in the consumption behaviour of men
- Avoidance of overconsumption and overweight of people
- Dogs, cats and other meat consumer can be considered as food competitor
- Improvement of aquaculture
- Imitated food based on plant products (mainly legumes)
- Using of single cell protein and algea in human nutrition
- Insects as feed and food
- So-called „Lab grown (in vitro, cultured or artificially) meat“.
More food for more people with lower resources need and less emissions can be considered as one of the largest challenge for all those, working along the food chain.
(More details can be found in a paper by Flachowsky et al. (2019) in the journal „Zuechtungskunde“ 91, (3); 178-213; 2019; unfortunately in German)
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
Institute of Animal Nutrition
Federal Research Institute of Animal Health
Bundesallee 37
38116 Braunschweig
Germany
-
-
Towards a common understanding of Sustainable Food Systems
Consultation--
Dear FSN Forum Moderators,
Many thanks for this interesting discussion paper of the SFS Programme.
You asked for comments/remarks and I allow me to make some comments/questions/remarks to your Draft V1.0:
- What is the objective of the present paper (only a summary/report about the present situation or also to show some ways out of the present situation and to show challenges for the future, some alternatives etc.?
- The objective of the report should be clearly defined at the end of your introduction.
- Sustainable food systems (SFS) should include all the important elements of sustainability, such as Land Use (incl. Land Foot Prints; LFP), Plant and Animal Breeding, Plant and Animal Health; Alternatives to present ways of food production etc.;
- The availability of arable land decreased from about 0.38 (1970) to 0.24 (2000) and will decrease to about 0.15 ha per inhabitant in 2050 (FAO 2012; Smith 2018). These developments can be considered as the largest challenge for population, but I could not find this problem in your Draft. Therefore, a more efficient use of arable land (including Land Footprints) should be one of the most important topic, if we discuss about sustainability.
- Comments to Figure 1: Resource efficiency should be more specified: e.g. in soil, water, fuel, some minerals etc.; Food safety should be added under Food security and nutrition. Furthermore, I miss the significance of sciences (soil, plants, animals etc.) as important drivers of the Food Systems.
- p. 12 and other places: Food security should be replaced by food security and safety. Secure, but unsafe food (e.g. contaminated with mycotoxins, heavy metals, dioxins etc.) cannot be any solution for the future.
- Figure 2: Land footprint should be added into the Environmental Impacts. Animal and plants health are mentioned, but plant and animal breeding should be added under Environmental impacts. For my understanding, the plant breeding is one of the most important starting points (see added paper 4) of the whole food chain. Such new aspects should be also discussed in the following text.
- To 2.2.; you started your SFS Programme with Sustainable diets etc. From my view, this is a very conservative view. I would start with the fundamentals of the food chain, such as Plant and Animal Breeding and coming step by step to sustainable diets about nutrient flow, emissions, sustainability, reduction of losses etc.
- p. 29: Sustainable intensification should be defined. Later (p. 30), you mentioned specific agronomic techniques, which are associated with sustainable intensification, but I miss the plant breeding as the starting point of the food chain (see above and paper 4 of the added reprints).
- p. 39; Table 1: I miss the term „Food Safety“ in this Table, at least in the last column (Public health approaches)
- p. 41: Research and innovation: Only some general statements. I miss some specific examples along the food chain.
- P. 44: I am a little bit surprised about the definition of „agriculture“. There are some other (better) definitions like: „Agriculture is the science and production of plants and animals, including fresh water and marine species for food, fuel, fiber and medicine“.
- I come back to my initial question (see above): What is the objective of the present report/paper? On chapter 4 (p. 44 ff.), you defined many terms of the SFS. What is new or innovative in these definitions?
- p. 53: I miss the definitions of „Food safety“(may be below „Food security“) and „Land footprint“(LFP in addition to W-FP and C-FP). Ecological FP is possible, but L-FP is more specific concerning the limited resource land (see above).
Some minor comments:
- You used many abbreviations. (It is one of the typical disease of FAO people/FAO-reports). Therefore, it is hard to read and to understand the paper for people from outside (like me). Either you reduced the number of abbreviations or you introduced a list of abbreviations at the beginning or at the end of your discussion paper. I think that such a Draft and also the final document should be understandable for people from outside and should be the base for a lively discussion.
- For readers and comments from outside, the numbering of the lines would be extremely helpful.
- p. 56: „Sustainable consumption and production“? I think that we have to produce first, before we can consume
- Annex 1 is very impressive, but it is extremely hard to follow all connections?
Finally, I would like to summarize/characterize/define a sustainable food system as: „More safe food for more people with limited natural resources (such as land, water, fuel) and low emissions (e.g. CF). This statement should/could be the most important objective for global food security and nutrition.
In addition, I allow me tol add some more recent reprints from our group dealing with „Carbon Footprints of protein of animal origin“ (paper 1); Land use for food of animal origin“ (paper 2); “Resource inputs and outputs of food of animal origin as well alternatives to traditional food of animal origin (such as insects, lab grown meat, simulated food, single cell protein, changes of eating patterns, reduction of food losses“ (paper 3); Challenges for plant breeders from the view of animal nutrition“ (paper 4).
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
-
-
-
Dear Colleagues,
I agree with you that eggs are very important sources of amino acids, energy and also some essential trace elements and vitamins.
Recently, we finished some dose : response studies with various Iodine supply in laying hens and found interesting results, which may be also very helpful to contribute to overcome Iodine-deficiency in many countries.
Attached, you will find a review of these studies. E.g. Table 7 demonstrates that one egg of hens fed with adequate I-supply may cover about 50% of the human Iodine-requirements.
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
Prof. Dr. G. Flachowsky
Senior Visiting Scientist
Institute of Animal Nutrition
Federal Research Institute of Animal Health
Bundesallee 37
38116 Braunschweig
Germany
-
-
-
Dear Colleagues,
I agree that water is in many regions one of the most important limiting factors for plant growth and human being. I agree also with the FSN activities to find out, how can indigenous or traditional practices may help to overcome water scarcity in agriculture.
But personal, I think that we also need a long term programme to overcome water scarcity. I think that we need more research activities and political willingness for a sustainable utilization of naturally limited and non-renewable resources such as water, fuel, arable land etc.
In the case of water, we need plants:
- with a more efficient use of water
- which are able to use salt water
- which are more resistant against abiotic and biotic stressors such as drought-tolerant plants
Therefore, we need a long term programme of plant breeding by public supported research institutes to deal with such substantial questions. The private plant breeding would not be interested in such scientific questions. We have to understand the physiological, biochemical, and molecular processes of these important traits in order to develop such plants (see above).
Gerhard Flachowsky
-
-
Rural migration, agriculture and rural development
Consultation--
Dear Colleagues,
Some comments to „Rural migration, agriculture and rural development“
Sustainability of food production is one of the most important challenge for all those working in or dealing wirh agriculture. I have some doubts, if the present social-economic system „to make Profit on the costs of Population and Planet“ (incl. ressources and environment; so-called 3 P- concept) is able to solve the global problems according your topic.
For more details and some ideas to this topic see attached contribution.
With best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky (Braunschweig, Germany)
-
-
-
Dear Moderator,
Attached you will find a paper on the challenges for plant breeders from the view of a sustainable animal production.
Personally, I think that the plant breeding should be considered as a (the) starting point for an effective (sustainable) ecological intensification in agriculture (see attachment).
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
Institute of Animal Nutrition
Federal Reasearch Institute of Animal Health
Braunschweig
Germany
-
-
Nutrition-enhancing agriculture and food systems
Consultation--
Dear Colleagues,
Your discussion about "Nutrition-enhanced agriculture and food systems" is very lively and the moderators should be happy about such a resonance and interesting inputs. On the other side, it is nearly impossible to follow all discussion and to read all background papers for the online discussion. I agree that the problems of smallholders, the situation of women/children and to overcome hunger, malnutrition and deficiencies in amino acids, minerals and vitamins and consequently health and education have the highest priority presently.
But for my impression, some clear strategy for a long term and sustainable overcoming of the present situation is missing. For example, I miss some important subjects/topics (also political actions) with possible consequences for a sustainable nutrition in developing countries, such as:
- Balance between People (Nutrition; Sociology etc) – Planet (Resources, Environment etc) and Profit (so-called 3P-concept) for global food security. At the moment, the system seems to be globally (not only in developing countries) imbalanced in the direction to make Profit at the costs of People and the Planet. It seems to be difficult to guarantee a sustainable food security under such conditions.
- What are the consequences of so-called “Free Trade Regions” for local food producer in developing countries and global food security under consideration of the 3P-concept?
- How do you assess the so-called land grabbing (pieces of sirloin are taken by other countries or foreign companies for a certain time or for ever) and its long-term consequences for sustainable food security in some developing countries (also under consideration of the 3P-concept)?
- Plant breeding, also under consideration of present situation (e.g. growing population; limited non-renewable resources such as arable land, water, fuel, some minerals; possible climate changes) is the starting point for the whole food chain (base for animal and human nutrition). Therefore, we need a long term programme of plant breeding for a sustainable food and feed production to meet the increased demand for growing population. The programme should be supported by public organisation, possibly by public-private partnerships. Maybe the FAO could take the leadership for such a programme, supported by other organisations (incl. NGOs).
In consequence, a strategy with short, middle and long term objectives for “Nutrition-enhanced agriculture and food systems” should be developed. I allow me to mention some objectives of such a programme:
- Short term (5 – 10 years):
Development of a sustainable agriculture (education, support of smallholders etc.)
Overcome of water and food energy/nutrient deficiencies in developing countries
Improvement of situation of smallholders and women/children in developing countries
Stop of land grabbing
Minimize of possible disadvantages of global trade and “Free Trade Regions” for development of agriculture in developing countries
Improvement of the balance between People-Planet and Profit
- Middle term (10 – 20 years):
Further conversion of short term objectives
Improvement of sustainability and efficiency of food production
- Long term (20 – 50 years):
Conversion of concepts of plant breeding (plants with high and stable yields, resistant against biotic and abiotic stressors, low need for non renewable resources - water, arable land, fuel etc. -, better utilization of unlimited resources - such as sunlight/energy, N2; CO2, genetic pool etc.- )
Stabilisation of the short and middle term objectives
Best regards and much success in improving of nutrition
Gerhard Flachowsky
Prof. Dr. G. Flachowsky
Visiting Senior Scientist
Institute of Animal Nutrition
Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute (FLI)
Federal Research Institute for Animal Health
Bundesallee 50
38116 BraunschweigGermany
-
-
-
Dear FSN-moderator,
Congratulation to your interesting and very informative V0 Draft on “Biofuels and Food Security”.
The authors summarized in a short time up to date information, which should be presented to policy and an interested public audience.
But nevertheless, I allow me some comments to this valuable document:
- Co-poducts of biofuel production (they are called by-products in your paper; why? This are valuable products/animal feeds which are available after taking out starch and/or fat from cereals, oilseeds etc.) are underestimated/neglected in your paper. Their importance for your calculations is mentioned on p. 28 for the first time!
I would like to go more in detail: Grains/cereals contain between 65 and 80% carbohydrates (mainly starch) in the dry matter. If we consider a complete fermentation of carbohydrates into alcohol; about 20-35% are residue (mainly consisting of protein, fat, fibre and ash) and are available as valuable feed for animals. The fat content of oilseeds varied between about 20 (soybeans) and 50% of DM (canola, rapeseed; also jatropha); that means, the amount of co-products varies between 50 and 80% of the rough material used for biodiesel production.
Recently (2012) the FAO published an excellent Review-book “Biofuel co-products as livestock feed – Opportunities and Challenges. Edited by H.P.S. Makkar, Rome; 533 pp.) In this book, you may find many information about co-products, their nutritive value and significance in animal nutrition. You will also find some information about biology and botanical origin of some plants, also with potential for the second generation for biofuel (e.g. algae, p. 423-446). It seems to me that some information in your draft concerning jatropha (e.g. p. 20; origin of jatropha etc; see p. 351-378 of FAO 2012) need corrections or improvements.
Furthermore co-products should be also considered in your financial calculation (e.g. see p. 23 ff.), in your land use aspects (p. 38 ff.) and also in your calculation of energy balance (p. 16-18).
- The interesting and important calculations to bioenergy (p. 41 ff.) should be demonstrated/deduced more in detail. It is difficult to follow/believe in all the figures. A detailed information/explanation under consideration of the scientific origin (show and mention references) for all the data in an appendix may be helpful. Furthermore, the replacement potential of co-products for other feeds for animal nutrition should be also considered in such calculations.
- I miss some consequences of expected climate changes on land and water use as recently described and discussed in many books and papers (e.g. Reynolds et al.2010; Whitford et al. 2010).
Furthermore consequences of all the future developments discussed in the Draft for plant breeders are also missing. Plant breeding (and cultivation) is the starting point of the food chain (and also the fuel chain). Therefore this aspect should be also mentioned and discussed in your policy recommendations (p. 1-3).
- Your Draft Policy Recommendations are informative, but relatively long, descriptive and conservative for my understanding. I think that we need some new ways of thinking. In addition or instead of long recommendations I would prefer some (short) conclusions (for policymakers) to show important challenges for future research such as:
- Promotion of public research in the field of plant breeding under consideration of limited resources (e.g. such as water, arable land, fuel etc.) and better adaptation of plants to greater extremes in climate conditions and higher temperatures.
- Research to develop methods of biofuel production from non food products such as lingo-cellulose and wastes.
- Development of new strategies for mobility without or with low amounts of fossil fuel and biofuel (individual mobility with electricity, replacement of individual mobility by other systems etc.)
- Calculation of emissions (Carbon Footprints) for various systems under consideration of all inputs and outputs.
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
Prof. Dr. G. Flachowsky
Institute of Animal Nutrition
Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute (FLI)
Federal Research Institute for Animal Health
Bundesallee 50
38116 Braunschweig
Germany
-
Dr. Gerhard Flachowsky
Dear Colleagues,
Congratulation to your idea for „a better support of countries in addressing governance of agrifood systems“. I think, it may be very helpful to develop simple methods for practical training of the most successful methods. This may possible by simple teaching materials and to demonstrate simple, but successful methods under typical farm conditions.
I will add some ideas/examples:
Best regards
Gerhard Flachowsky
Prof. Dr. G. Flachowsky
Germany