全球粮食安全与营养论坛 (FSN论坛)

Jan Lundqvist

Stockholm International Water Institute
Sweden

Dear colleagues

a few reflections on HLPE Draft Report: V0 WATER AND FOOD SECURITY

related to suggestions for comments:

1. The scope of the topic of water and food security is very broad. Do you think that the V0 draft has adequately charted the diversity of the linkages between water and food security and nutrition? Is there important evidence or aspects that the present draft has failed to cover?

Agree, it is a very broad topic. Perhaps equally significant, the challenges look very different today and in the future as compared to recent and, of course, historical contexts. Generally, the draft includes a large number of issues and linkages. It is good that you point out the need to look at nutrition security, which implies something more and different than intake of energy (kcal). For this reason, it is important to add something on what nutritional security means. -- Basically, I miss a food system perspective and comments about the drivers in the system. As I read the draft, its focus is on production and partly on supply. Figure 1 on p. 11 may be seen as an attempt to widen the perspective, but it is a complicated Figure and does not highlight the dynamic trends on the demand side. -- You argue that access to water for the poor is restricted due to overpricing (12:40). It is, of course, true that the poor have severe difficulties to access not only water but also other goods and services. I would welcome more comments/arguments; water provision and most water services are heavily subsidized. -- Box 8 (p. 31) is interesting, but the story involves additional interesting details of the political economy. One consequence of the modernization was an increase in production and, as far as I am told, a substantial overproduction in relation to what the market could absorb at prices that farmers expected. That was not the intention. Government had to make costly intervention a second time – Alberto Garrido can tell you more.  

2. Has the report adequately covered the diversity of approaches and methodological issues, in particular concerning metrics and data for water and food security? Which metrics do you find particularly useful and which not?

A food system approach would require additional approaches and methodological issues. Metrics and methodologies about nutrition and overeating are missing. -- Your discussion about water scarcity follows conventional views, 23:22 ff. Could be relevant to discuss scarcity in relation to climate variability and as a function of the dynamics on the demand side. You talk about rainfall (page 9) but do not mention soil moisture and how it relates to rainfall, land use and soil properties,

3. Food security involves trade of agricultural produce, and a virtual trade of water. Agricultural trade interact with water and food security in various ways, and differently for food importing countries, food exporting countries, water scarce versus water rich countries. Do you think the V0 draft has appropriately covered the matter?

Trade in food means not only virtual water but also virtual land, virtual energy, etc. Export and import of food do not reflect water distribution very much as far as I know?

4. In this report, we considered the potential for an expansion of the right to water to also encompass productive uses. What kind of practical and policy challenges would this bring?

This is a tricky issue. Morally and ethically, there is no, or very little, objection to a rights based approach. The devil is in practice and execution both at macro level (legal provisions and policies, including financing schemes, definition of rights in terms of quantity and quality for whom, and similar) and at micro level (e.g. logistics). There is a need for examples on how the practical challenges can be dealt with. SOFI 2104 offers some interesting examples in this regard. Those examples are, however, not very detailed. Links to subsidies are, for instance, not dealt with. If access to water and food are to be guaranteed under a constitutional rights scheme, I guess it must include all individuals. What happens when some communities do not obtain access?  How do rights link to responsibilities, e.g. payments and ownership?  What is the quantity and type of food that should be included in the right to food? Where is the cut-off line above which people are supposed to take care of these needs through their own capacity/abilities?

5. Which systemic actions/solutions/approaches would be the most effective to enhance water governance, management and use for food security?

As you can imagine from comments above, I think that a food system approach is warranted, maybe especially if nutrition security is the ambition.

Overall impression: The draft raises a number of important and relevant issues (e.g. nutrition, food safety, water and energy linkages) but the ‘red thread’ is not clear. Focus is on production and supply side. Some statements are made without proper argumentation (e.g. that water is overpriced). Some concepts (e.g. water scarcity) are discussed in conventional terms whereas nutritional security is mentioned but not defined or discussed. Could be very relevant to link nutrition to water and perhaps GHG emissions – I realize it is a big task.