استكشاف الملاحظات الرسمية للحوار

This Dialogue explored innovating for positive impact in a polarized world, through the private sector perspective. In today’s VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous) world, new ways of thinking, (re-)acting, and communicating are urgently needed to deliver on the potential benefits of innovation. Behaviors such as openness, collaboration, entrepreneurial mindset, and community engagement are more necessary than ever before, but how do we get there? This Dialogue brought together global private sector stakeholders to discuss the role of innovation in revolutionizing our world’s ... قراءة المزيدfood systems, navigating ambiguity, building trust, and responding to the unprecedented challenges present in today’s world. Four discussion questions were proposed to structure the conversation: 1. What are the main topics that cause polarization when it comes to food systems? 2. How can we deliver science-based solutions in a polarized world? How should our approach to innovation adapt to this environment? 3. What is the role of communication in securing a social license to operate? With whom and where do we need to engage? 4. Who needs to be at the table and what are the ways to help (re)build trust and combat misinformation? قراءة القليل

• There are very different visions of the future of agriculture, from organic to conventional integrated pest management. • The current context of farming is a long way from the future trajectory outlined in EU and UK policy.

What needs to change? The dialogue identified the following actions to accelerate the shift to nature positive farming and adoption of biocontrol: Knowledge: • Build linkages between food companies, suppliers and growers, to understand the appetite for shifts in agricultural practices across the value chain • Increased farmer knowledge of the efficacy of biocontrol products, and how they can transition • Utilise decision support tools to enable farmers to understand how biocontrol efficacy could be optimised in their specific context • Increase awareness of what biocontrol products are... قراءة المزيد available, and how to use them: from advisors and suppliers to agricultural media • Research and development to prioritise biocontrol, demonstrate its efficacy and the business case for its use • Knowledge transfer and training in the use of biocontrol methods in the farm context • An understanding of farming operation implications such as work and labour Cost and risk: • Pricing structures (product cost and incentives for utilisation) that allow farmers to invest in the transition to, and adoption of, biocontrol • Contracts and partnerships with off-takers and food companies to share risk in the transition, rather than borne solely by the farmer • The shift to ecologically focused farming needs to be appropriately compensated, particularly for the additional benefits such as carbon storage and biodiversity and ecosystem services such as water quality The wider role of food companies: • Build stronger connections between farmers using biocontrol and actors further up the supply chain such as food retailers and manufacturers, to share knowledge, demonstrate practice and engage in partnership • Food companies need to understand the process of agricultural transition, and support farmers as they gradually transform practice, for example through longer term relationships, contracts, access to metrics to demonstrate outcomes, and sharing risk • Food companies can communicate to the public the use of biocontrol strategies and the wider benefits arising from its use • Collaboration across the sector and through the supply chain on advocacy for a better enabling environment for a shift to nature positive farming (such as the speed of decision-making and regulatory frameworks underpinning biocontrol) Policy To enable biocontrol to play its part in the shift to nature positive farming, a significant shift in policy is required. Agricultural policies need to align with the future ambitions of the EU Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy, looking forward rather than reflecting the agricultural practices of the past. The following represent the top five policy recommendations from the IEEP report. • Definition: Using a common EU definition on biocontrol would bring clarity of its technical aspects to the political discussion on pest control for sustainable agriculture. • Legal framework: Adapting the current EU legal framework to recognise the non-toxic implications of biocontrol, in comparison to chemical products, should be considered. • Alignment opportunities: By increasing the uptake of biocontrol use, as part of Integrated Pest Management, the Common Agricultural Policy can be better aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals and the Farm-to-Fork strategy in creating a pathway for achieving the 2030 targets on organic farming and chemical pesticide reduction. • Research needs: Extending research topics and investment beyond technical issues to biocontrol’s relation to climate change mitigation and farm economics will create a more holistic image of the impact of the use of biocontrol. • Field application: Pushing for larger scale and accelerated application, supported by available policy instruments in the Common Agricultural Policy, will show the potential that biocontrol demonstrates for controlling plant pests and diseases, in support of EU Green Deal targets. قراءة القليل

Barriers and opportunities While the opportunities are extensive, the shift to biocontrol will require a change in mindset, backed by clear evidence and data to prove the efficacy of biocontrol products. The notable barriers and opportunities raised through the dialogue are outlined here: Barriers: • The regulatory environment moves too slowly to bring in new products to replace those chemicals that are being phased out, potentially leaving major gaps in the portfolio of pest management options for farmers. Increased speed and adaptation of regulatory processes for biocontrol are urgently ne... قراءة المزيدeded. • A lack of knowledge of the potential role of biocontrol within food system actors further up the supply chain • Cost: Biocontrol products do not yet have the benefit of scale and thus may cost more • Specificity: Biocontrol products may be specific to a particular crop or species of pest, and to optimise their use may require use at a different time in the cropping cycle to chemical pesticides so having a greater operational cost implication for the farmer • Inertia: farmers are experienced in the use of pesticides and their effectiveness, and may not see the need to change and biocontrol is not usually a straight replacement of chemistry as to optimise its use other agronomic and environmental factors need to be considered and often adapted. • Cost of investment and length of time in bringing a product to market (for the biocontrol manufacturing industry) • Regulatory frameworks: these vary globally and are not designed for assessing biocontrol products • A lack of solutions in the market for particular crops • Perceived risk of lack of efficacy of biocontrol measures in outdoor farming setting such as arable, as opposed to horticulture • In horticulture, use of biocontrol is much more mainstream but this is less well developed in broad acre crops Opportunities: • Access to higher value premiums through environmental claims and assurance standards • Strong environmental credentials to production practices can be communicated • Alignment with new regulatory environments and financial support mechanisms that reward either shifts in practice away from pesticide use, or outcomes such as improved biodiversity • Shifts in business strategy (not just for food and fibre companies) toward nature positive farming and regenerative agricultural practices • Farmers can act as enablers of food companies’ environmental strategy • Potential for food companies to communicate the benefits and alignment of biocontrol to public and reflect societal demands on pesticide use and nature positive farming قراءة القليل

What is the relationship of biocontrol to strategy? The following key themes arose from the dialogue: There is increasing focus on regenerative agriculture from food companies – and major new commitments from companies. Therefore companies are looking into the technical solutions that will underpin the shift. Links can be drawn between healthy diets and the quality of food. Biocontrol needs to sit within the context of a food company’s sustainable nutrition strategy and healthy diets. Biocontrol is a long way from the consumer – so finding ways of linking biocontrol to consumer aspiratio... قراءة المزيدns is essential to get consumer pull through. Companies are also looking at landscape level solutions and whether, in changing their farming practices, they can work over the long term across rotations and other surrounding land owners, to optimise outcomes across the crop cycle. Biocontrol is an area with potential for innovation strategy of food companies, for example looking at introducing integrated pest management, peer to peer learning and utilising the capabilities of food companies to drive innovation at farm level. Least cost is a key consideration for business strategy – the UK and EU are already working to higher standards. So there is a risk that use of newer and more expensive products could price growers out of the market. Businesses are committing increasingly to net zero carbon strategies and will need to respond to the policy environment which is shifting toward nature positive farming and environmental restoration. Pioneering farmers are adopting strategies that do prioritise more sustainable farming methods; however this is not yet recognised in the marketplace. Farmers’ business models need to be financially viable and thus biocontrol needs to sit within an economic model that is sustainable and values their environmental performance. Biocontrol can form a bridge between organic practices and the shift in conventional farming. قراءة القليل

What can biocontrol deliver? In creating a sustainable and healthy food system, reducing the pressure on the environment is key. As a non-chemical and targeted input, biocontrol can offer a systemic and balanced solution for sustainable agriculture. The effect of plant protection methods on biodiversity and health are now at the centre of political and technical discussions. In face of the upcoming revision of the Sustainable Use Directive, a milestone within the implementation of the Green Deal objectives, it’s essential to explore sustainable alternatives. As a non-chemical and targeted in... قراءة المزيدput, biocontrol offers a systemic and balanced solution for sustainable agriculture. Biocontrol acts within the farm ecosystem of life cycles, insects’ behaviour and the influence of agronomic practices on plant health. It thereby becomes a key enabler of the European Green Deal, particularly for the Farm-to-Fork objectives. Evidence of the role that biocontrol can play in sustainable agriculture, particularly in terms of benefits for biodiversity, was presented to the dialogue, based on a report from the Institute for European Environmental Policy (link to report below). Their literature review examines definitions around biocontrol, the literature on benefits with regard to biodiversity, soil and human health, current efficacy levels and market position, and potential wider impacts on farm economics and climate considerations. The report states that “…biocontrol has an advantage in its overall long lasting effects, which in itself has a positive knock-on effect on biodiversity and crop resilience. Biocontrol opens a virtuous circle generating more biodiversity and more resilient agroecological systems.” The report notes key evidence in the following areas: • Biocontrol has recognised potential to support the protection and enhancement of biodiversity, particularly in the framework of Integrated Pest Management and in combination with organic production. Reducing the overall use of chemical pesticides has widely acknowledged benefits for biodiversity. • Biocontrol has evolved into being a targeted measure, with little adverse effects on non-targeted fauna and flora. • The positive interplay between biodiversity and soil health is an area where biocontrol can play a key role. The living organisms in the soil create a vital living ecosystem, which can, among other functions, filter potential pollutants and sustain healthy plant growth. The reviewed studies indicated benefits of biocontrol both in decreasing chemicals reaching the soil and creating favourable states for soil microbes. • The use of biocontrol can lower negative impacts on human health. From farmers and field workers to residues in food products, chemical pesticides pose a multitude of health issues. Biological approaches can deliver on the safety of both consumers and workers. Several key shifts in the food and agriculture system are needed to realise the potential of biocontrol in nature friendly farming. These are outlined in the ‘action’ section at the end of this dialogue report, but include an appropriate legislative framework, policy alignment opportunities, with the new EU Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy, research in to wider environmental implications of biocontrol, such as its role in agricultural systems for climate change mitigation; and field application studies. قراءة القليل

Why is biocontrol relevant for the future food system? Why are we having this conversation now? The world is shifting its focus toward forms of agricultural production that are healthier for both people and planet, and support the restoration of our environment. The 2020s have brought increasing shifts across policy, legislation and corporate strategies toward nature positive farming, with a focus on biodiversity restoration and regenerative and agroecological farming practices. Signposts include the EU Green Deal, its Farm to Fork Strategy and the UK 25 Year Environment Plan and Agriculture B... قراءة المزيدill. Government support payments for farmers will increasingly favour nature positive practices. Clear signals from business, for example from food service giant Compass, to the world’s largest retailer, Walmart, to major commodity producers such as Cargill, target regenerative agriculture as a key means to deliver their climate, net zero and sustainability strategies. Reductions in pesticide use are flagged in the legislative and policy frameworks above. Soil health is a key target for maintaining resilient productivity in the face of climate change impacts such as more extreme weather, so methods of pest management that protect the soil biome will play a significant part in future agricultural solutions. In short, agriculture will need to incorporate different practices to shift away from the needs of the 20th Century and meet the deepening challenges of the 21st Century. Biocontrol can contribute to agroecological practices and support resilient nature positive farming. It keeps biodiversity in the soil which contributes to plant health, and allows for reduced chemical inputs as part of integrated pest management programmes. Examples presented included the production of apple orchards, vineyards and arable crops such as wheat, barley, rapeseed and other crops such as corn and potatoes and beets. Opportunities identified in case studies presented included the improvement of biodiversity and reduction in chemical pest management. Adoption of decision-making tools allowed for optimisation of the use and timing of chemical products application, and the introduction of biocontrol, thus reducing the amount of chemical plant health management required for arable crops such as rapeseed and wheat. This has enabled the farmers to market their crops under High Environmental Value (HVE) labels which align with the strategies and preferred buying practices of many food companies. The farmers note that this shift in practices has also increased their reputation within the agriculture and food sector and many stakeholders want to see the on farm example of change. Financial benefits do not flow from a reduction in costs, as the biocontrol products costs more, but from the ability to access labels and standards such as GlobalGap and HVE premiums. This also aligns with the preferred buying standards of food companies and supports their strategic commitments to reduce pesticide use, and their ability to communicate their achievements to consumers. Other farmers identified the potential for biocontrol as an element of shifts in agricultural practices in response to new climate change challenges. Farmers shifting their practices noted that the shift comes at a cost, so to remain profitable produce needs to be marketed at a higher price, if not through an accreditation such as HVE in France, through higher purchase prices from food companies or traders or government support. قراءة القليل

‘Bioprotection’ includes biocontrol technologies in agriculture and has uses in agriculture, forestry and public health. It protects against unwanted organisms e.g. pests and pathogens and is found in nature/are nature identical if synthesised. Biocontrol could reshape agricultural practices to be nature positive, reduce pesticide use, supporting biodiversity and regenerative farming practices supporting soil health and carbon sequestration. Bioprotection aids integrated pest management and has benefits in nature based solutions for agriculture to reduce pesticide use, supporting ambitions... قراءة المزيد of legislation e.g. the EU Green Deal. What is biocontrol? Globally, terminology is unclear with lots of terms used. IBMA Product categories within the scope of “Bioprotection” include 4 categories which are the same as the French legally defined list for “biocontrôle”: • Semiochemicals are emitted by plants, animals and other organisms for intra-species and/or inter-species communication targeting specific and non-toxic mode of action, such as pheromones affecting behaviours of pests. • Microbials are based on microorganisms e.g. bacteria, fungi, protozoans, viruses, viroids, mycoplasmas and may include entire microorganisms, living and dead cells, associated microbial metabolites, fermentation materials and cell fragments. They outcompete pests within a crop. • Natural substances consist of >1 component from nature, e.g. plants, (micro) algae, animals, minerals, bacteria, fungi, protozoans, viruses, viroids and mycoplasmas. They’re found in nature/are nature identical if synthetised. This excludes semiochemicals and microbials. • Invertebrate Biocontrol Agents (IBCAs) (‘macrobials’) are natural enemies e.g. insect, mite and nematode species controlling pests through predation or parasitism. Currently IBMA doesn’t include, within the scope of “Bioprotection”, technology where there is no regulatory pathway or policy decision. Once policy decisions are published, technologies are considered for inclusion. Bioprotection may be a preferred pest management solution as it’s non-pathogenic to humans and doesn’t contribute to antimicrobial resistance development for human or veterinary pathogens. Bioprotectants are natural and minimally impact the environment. Natural substances and semiochemicals have degradation pathways or are inert; microbials have existing ecosystem mechanisms to balance populations; they’re usually specific to target organisms. They may cause minimal negative effects to non-target organisms, ecosystems and the environment because any negligible negative impact would be transient, resulting in no lasting reduction in biodiversity; indeed, bioprotectants often contribute to ecosystem services. Contextually, this work is timely as agriculture is shifting fast with the climate emergency, rising focus on soil health and biodiversity, and new EU and UK legislation where policy agenda is moving focus to ecosystem services and natural capital values. This means both food businesses and suppliers are actively building nature-friendly farming into strategies. Biocontrol could support food companies and growers to reach outcomes. However, it can be poorly understood outside of horticulture. It may face barriers to adoption from lack of knowledge, limited practical experience, European Common Agricultural Policy funding structure and inertia, with current profitable practices fitting with existing farming operations. The workshop addresses current biocontrol uses; opportunities/issues in emerging uses and identifies how to drive uptake of practices supporting biodiversity and soil health while being safe and productive. The audience included farmers, food businesses, policymakers, agricultural service providers. The geographical scope is Europe with a focus on arable farming. With ~ 80% of European farming under arable cropping and 20% in horticulture, upscaling nature positive solutions in arable farming is vital. Biocontrol is an existing solution and well-used in horticulture and speciality crops. Upscaling in arable requires adaption by in field learning and development. قراءة القليل

This Dialogue generated some areas of divergence as well as important questions that were either not resolved or not addressed in depth (eg due to time constraints) and therefore merit further exploration and discussion. These include: - Food system change vs broader economic system (and affordability vs incomes): To what extent can we tackle the issues within the food system, when so many of the issues stem from our wider economic system? How far can innovation go to be transformative when operating within the constraints of the dominant economic model? For example, many food workers’ incom... قراءة المزيدes are too low to afford healthy, sustainable diets. The corresponding solutions could be more about the wages that food businesses pay, than about the affordability of their products. - Increasing the emphasis on the need for a just transition: The question of just transition wasn’t explored in great depth, and was quite a new aspect of the conversation for many of our participants. How do we raise awareness of the need for just transitions in the food system across audiences and stakeholders, improve people’s understanding of what just transition means and could look like, and enable it to become part of more people’s remit to actively consider and support it, regardless of their role, organisation and sector? - But also… who has the right to talk about (food) justice, or benefit from driving it? To what extent should businesses play a role in delivering food equity and justice or in supporting vulnerable people for example? How much should businesses benefit from others’ ideas for improving access to healthy, sustainable diets (if at all), particularly when it is felt by some stakeholders that those businesses could be responsible in part for some of the challenges? This Dialogue surfaced divergence around different potential roles as well as the right to shape more equitable access to better diets. - Consumer choice vs other influences on diets: Is the question really about changing the healthy, sustainable options available to people, or about addressing the incentives for eating unhealthy, unsustainable options? - Aligning or combining different efforts in service of shared goals. To what extent can the shared goal of equal access to healthy sustainable diets enable different perspectives to be reconciled, build trust between different stakeholders and support co-operation? How to enable many different players to work together or support one another to all move towards transformative action? What would it look like if innovators with different perspectives and expertise were able to make their best contribution to the challenges in mutually complementary ways? What could enable this to happen? قراءة القليل

Reflections, personal actions, and questions to explore further: - Tipping current innovations towards their transformative potential: for example, meat alternatives have the potential to keep people eating badly, or to help drive a mainstream shift to more plant-based, healthier diets. How can we influence this? Whose responsibility is it? - Embedding innovation into strategies for greater food equity: The food industry has a big opportunity to improve many people’s ability to afford good food, by ensuring all its own workers earn living incomes. It’s difficult for any affordable innovati... قراءة المزيدon strategy to be credible if the organisation doesn’t pay living wages. Who’s doing this well and supporting this message, and what can be learnt or replicated from that? - Ensuring a collaborative “ecosystem” of innovators: Whose responsibility is it to lead the transformation we need? How do we best combine top-down and bottom-up approaches? How can innovators, with different audiences, areas of expertise, scales, perspectives and visions, work alongside one another, and support one another to all move towards more transformative action? Who or what can facilitate this? قراءة القليل

Enablers of more transformative kinds of innovation: - Breaking out of our “innovation bubbles” to develop better ideas more in line with what the world needs: more open innovation processes (eg bringing together young entrepreneurs, academia and civil society as well as business); more inclusive innovation to drive equality in who participates (eg less-heard voices and less catered-to communities). - Rethinking partnerships: to build in more ambition and make the best use of respective capabilities - working with those who can take our innovations to scale in different ways, help us share... قراءة المزيد knowledge and information more effectively, distribute our products/services, or help make them more affordable… - “Matchmaking” to drive impact, including innovating where it’s needed the most, or supporting those who already offer a solution to my problem (rather than competing or reinventing). - More collective voice and coordination across existing smaller-scale innovators, such as community-based initiatives and entrepreneurs (often overstretched and underfunded) to share skills and resources, and demonstrate collective impact and value. Perhaps starting with a national union of community initiatives? - Combining the best of the past and the present to go faster: drawing on existing/traditional foods, recipes, cooking techniques and knowledge together with today’s science, technologies and insights, to reach positive impact faster and without reinventing the wheel. - Supporting some innovations as bridges to a better place if not our ultimate, ideal solution (eg recipe kits as a stepping stone towards more scratch cooking). - Advocating for policies, subsidies, regulation etc that recognise the connections between health, nutrition, food and the environment. قراءة القليل

Interconnected considerations for approaches to plant-based innovation to help catalyse a just transition to better diets. To be more transformative, that innovation needs to: Address the challenges holistically, avoiding trading off one aspect against another (eg human health vs the environment) or ignoring some issues altogether (eg living wages for food workers). Design/test for - and commit to - scaling up, at speed, because the challenges are urgent, and we need rapid positive change at scale. Scale can happen in different ways: it might mean many similar innovations or activities joining... قراءة المزيد up more effectively, not just one innovation becoming “bigger”. Cater to more different individuals and communities and unmet needs. Successful innovations often leave people behind, who are considered too hard to reach, or are just less important or visible to those doing the innovating. For a just transition and equal access to good diets, innovation must cater to more parts of society and do more to address everyone’s unmet needs around healthy, sustainable eating. Look beyond the product level, considering how innovations sit within and affect the bigger picture of what’s needed. This includes: - Creating genuinely equitable business models, whether from the ground up or by transforming what we already have (eg looking beyond the usual funders/investors to new partners with an interest in similar outcomes); and, especially important, ensuring food workers earn enough to afford good food. - Changing eating behaviours for the better, and at scale, based on a solid understanding of where people are starting from. - Driving and supporting mindset and cultural shifts, including within specific target groups - recognising and working with the fact that this could take time. Decentralise access to good food making it more available out of hours, out of town, or for isolated/less mobile consumers, and easier to grow some fresh produce at home or nearby. Empower people through food skills and knowledge, enabling them to grow food and cook more from scratch, understand more about what they’re eating, and help others to do the same (eg skills sharing between chefs). This is not meant as a definitive, exhaustive list (or a completely novel one). The value lies in treating these considerations as an interconnected set to help ensure innovation is truly transformative, and/or in understanding which area we can be best at, while supporting others to act on the remaining areas (and certainly without undermining them). They can generate useful prompt questions/challenges: Does my approach to innovation truly live up to all of these considerations? Am I failing on any of them? Where might I be able to do more? قراءة القليل

Key solution areas for plant-based innovation to contribute to a just transition to healthy, sustainable diets in the US/Europe: 1. Innovations that enable us to mainstream the use of a greater diversity of healthy, sustainable, plant-based foods and ingredients as well as preparation methods and processes (eg fermentation) - providing the right enabling conditions and incentives on farms, in homes, on menus and on store shelves. (eg UK brand Hodmedods work with British farmers to build commercially viable supply chains for forgotten local pulses and grains) 2. Innovations that embed, democrat... قراءة المزيدise and improve how much we value skills, knowledge and awareness about healthy, sustainable plant-based foods - from home cooks to school curriculums, mainstream professional training and qualifications (in culinary arts, agriculture, food science and healthcare…), local and national government, and food businesses. (eg The University of West London’s Undergraduate degree in Food and Culinary Management integrates sustainability and nutrition throughout; Charlie Cart is a self-contained mobile mini-kitchen that enables cooking classes to take place anywhere, from schools to libraries) 3. Innovations that improve the short AND longer-term affordability of healthy and sustainable plant-based foods (and that reflect the true cost of unhealthy, unsustainable foods) in mainstream retail and food service, removing price barriers to longer-term behaviour change regardless of household income. (eg UK retailer The Co-op has reduced the price of its own-brand plant-based products to match animal-based alternatives; prescription programmes - such as Wholesome Wave and Rose Vouchers - enable low-income families to buy more fresh produce) 4. Innovations that bring people at all income levels closer to healthy and sustainable plant-based foods and without stigma, whether it’s growing, cooking or eating; and whether it’s about physical proximity/access or improved general visibility and transparency of the foods (this could be business models, community initiatives, communications or digital approaches). (eg Heru Urban Farming in St Louis in the US grows healthy, fresh produce for the local community, especially the most food insecure, while also providing education and training on growing, cooking and healthy living). 5. Innovations that increase the diversity of people, in the broadest sense, in the plant-based movement: products, meals, brands etc. that appeal to a broader range of people and communities 6. Business models that create and distribute value more evenly. Plant-based innovation alone can only achieve so much, however well-designed and well-intentioned. To push beyond the limits and failings of our current economic system (that drives so many of the inequalities related to food and diets), plant-based innovation needs to be part of broader strategies for reducing inequality and business models for sharing value more evenly. قراءة القليل

This Dialogue identified: 1. Six key solution areas for plant-based innovation to contribute to a just transition to healthy, sustainable diets in the US/Europe - innovations that: a. enable us to mainstream the use of a greater diversity of healthy, sustainable, plant-based foods and ingredients as well as preparation methods and processes b. embed, democratise and improve how much we value skills, knowledge and awareness about healthy, sustainable plant-based foods c. improve the short AND longer-term affordability of healthy and sustainable plant-based foods d. bring people at all income le... قراءة المزيدvels closer to healthy and sustainable plant-based foods and without stigma e. increase the diversity of people, in the broadest sense, in the plant-based movement f. generate business models that create and distribute value more evenly 2. An interconnected set of considerations for approaches to plant-based innovation, to address as a whole, in order to help catalyse a just transition to better diets: a. Address the challenges holistically, avoiding trading off one aspect against another b. Design/test for - and commit to - scaling up, at speed c. Cater to more different individuals and communities and unmet needs d. Look beyond the product level, towards: Creating genuinely equitable business models; Changing eating behaviours for the better; Driving and supporting mindset and cultural shifts e. Decentralise access to good food f. Empower people through food skills and knowledge 3. Enablers for more transformative kinds of innovation: a. Breaking out of our “innovation bubbles” to develop better ideas more in line with what the world needs b. Rethinking partnerships to build in more ambition and make the best use of respective capabilities c. “Matchmaking” to drive impact, including innovating where it’s needed the most and supporting those who already offer a solution d. More collective voice and coordination across existing smaller-scale innovators e. Combining the best of the past (eg recipes) and the present (eg science) to go faster f. Supporting some innovations as bridges to a better place if not our ultimate, ideal solution g. Advocating for policies, subsidies, regulation etc that recognise the connections between health, nutrition, food and the environment 4. Some areas for further exploration and discussion: a. Tipping current innovations beyond incremental and towards their transformative potential b. Embedding innovation into strategies for greater food equity c. Ensuring a collaborative “ecosystem” of innovators قراءة القليل

Increasing the proportion of plant-based food people eat is one of the crucial steps towards more sustainable, healthy diets and there is huge excitement, investment and momentum around plant-based innovation in Europe and the US. However, that innovation is not necessarily well-aligned with ensuring that nutritious, sustainable food is widely affordable, accessible and desirable to a wide range of people and communities. As it stands, plant-based innovation is not delivering sustainable nutrition for all. What if we could harness the energy around plant-based innovation to help catalyse the t... قراءة المزيدransformations in the food system that are urgently needed? What kinds of innovation, in the widest sense, do we need to deliver a healthier, more sustainable and, crucially, more equitable food system, from new approaches to innovation and new business models, to cultural and mindset shifts? How might plant-based innovation help drive that ‘just transition’ of diets in Europe and the US? قراءة القليل

Around the issue of food waste, there were several initiatives presented around the redistribution of unused or unwanted food. These typically involve re-purposing or redistributing charitably. On the one hand many see these initiatives as a win-win situation whereby food is not lost and it even creates economic and/or social benefits. Others, however, point out the need to look deeper at the question of why there is so much unwanted and unused food in the first place. Where along the value chain might these issues be addressed? For example in the processing and packaging, or marketing of food... قراءة المزيد. It was pointed out that in order to diagnose and fix the systemic problems of the global food value chain, it is imperative to have all relevant stakeholders at the table. These food value chain consultations, while participatory and inclusive, were lacking some voices such as smallholder producers and farmers associations. It is important to talk to and hear from them as well as those who are making the actual policy or business decisions. قراءة القليل

Consultative workshop on sustainable food value chain focusing on Food-related Policies and Policy Instruments – 6/5/2021 The analysis of the policies and policy instruments reported under 12.1.1 have allowed to conclude that there is a concentration of policy measures at the two ends of the food value chain. Nearly 60% of the measures proposed at either input/production phase or consumption phase. This highlights a gap in measures at the middle stages of the value chain, the stages that shape how we produce and how and what we consume. Through the discussion a number of enablers, challenges... قراءة المزيد and gaps that exist at these stages were identified: - Inclusive and participatory approach in policy making that is adapted to local circumstances is essential. Policies should take into account the needs and realities of all the actors to understand interdependencies and avoid tradeoffs in order to define adequate measures. Holistic lens can help deploy more integrated food policies - addressing interrelated issues across economic, social & environmental dimensions. Participatory governance mechanisms that bring together different food system actors and connect actors from different food agendas are key. - Most policies are sectoral, and there is an urgent need to move away from working in silos towards more integrated policies that deliver simultaneously on economic, environmental, health, climate mitigation adaptation, social and cultural objectives. - There is a need to work together towards transformational change of food systems. The current model is built on an industrial model of production based high-input use and economies of scale, which has led us to land degradation and pollution. The transformational change requires a food systems approach encompassing changes in production systems; changes in knowledge generation and transmission, with the emphasis on the co-creation of knowledge; shift in social and economic relations; changes in institutional frameworks and regulatory and financial instruments. - An agro-ecological approach has potential to transform food systems to be more sustainable as it enables us to rethink the food systems and go beyond trying to marginally increase the efficiency of the current food production model. - Value-chain approach is a science-based methodology that can be used to prioritise action within a broader systems approach. - There is an opportunity in merging climate and biodiversity policies and not to design them separately to optimize impact as well as ensure coherency across all actors in the food value chain. This would reinforce solutions targeting pressure points and accelerate the transition to sustainable food systems - Minimum price guarantee policies for socio-biodiversity products are important for countries with several biomes, since biodiversity products in these biomes are concentrated among smallholders with limited access to markets. - Sustainable food public procurement policies are key instruments for the shift to SCP patterns, both in developed and developing countries. It is important to highlight their capacity to achieve multiple benefits to tackle 3 pillars of sustainability: social, economic, environmental and ability to put forward issues of nutrition, health, and biodiversity preservation. - Food procurement programmes guaranteeing a certain percentage of purchases for smallholders in organic agriculture is another opportunity that has proved important to foster small-holder agriculture. This could also be aligned with various national programmes, such as school feeding programmes. - In terms of governance, it is important to foster dialogue between food value chain stakeholders, through, for example, technical committees implemented at state or city-level governments. It also important to delineate which actor should be responsible for the leadership of national and multi-stakeholders initiatives, and how to disseminate the practices across municipalities. The full list of opportunities and challenges identified during this workshop can be found in the workshop report attached as a Relevant Link. قراءة القليل

Consultative workshop on sustainable food value chain focusing on Individual Consumption of Food – 29/04/2021 Through the discussion a number of enablers, challenges and gaps that exist at these stages were identified: - While crucial, information dissemination and consumer awareness raising alone are not sufficient to lead the changes in practices and behaviors that are needed for sustainable consumption and production (SCP). They need to be accompanied by more structural changes at different levels including more equitable and inclusive long-term policies and regulations, to trigger this c... قراءة المزيدhange and shift in the underlying consumption preferences. - Furthermore, this needs to be complemented with science-based behavior change techniques. Particular opportunity for long-term behaviour change in consumption patterns lies in school feeding programmes (public procurement as an enabler) and education, ensured through government-led efforts. These provide a captive setting where changes in consumption practices can be triggered through the nurturing of core values related to sustainability of food from the young age. - Consumer voice, including that of the most vulnerable, needs to be properly included in research, policy discussions, solutions development and decision-making processes. Consumers can be empowered to manifest their demands in different ways – such as by advocating for consumer rights, and by helping shape regulation. - Key success factors of the most important food movements and trends today include a strong engraining into people’s core values (which are powerful triggers for action), strong leadership, cooperation with local government structures and, in many instances, robust engagement and buying from producers. On the other hand, there are important barriers for the impact size and duration of such movements, including having considerably less power than entities with political or economic interest to maintain the status quo, competing values and constraints within consumers, the wide range of possible issues to be addressed, availability of resources, and regular access to communication channels. - Opportunity for long-term behaviour change in consumption patterns lies in school feeding programmes (public procurement as an enabler) and education. These provide a captive setting where changes in consumption practices can be triggered through the nurturing of core values related to sustainability of food from the young age. - Implementation of science-based climate targets for food service providers as well as a consumer facing labels for meals that are more climate friendly is an interesting opportunity. - Practical co-operation through direct producer-consumer linkages, including the adoption of innovative technologies to connect producers/retailers and consumers is another way to trigger the shift to sustainable production and consumption (SCP). - Localised solutions, such as shorter food value-chains, the promotion of local food and introduction of participatory local-based labels, involving consumers, farmers, local authorities and sellers, show promising results and present an opportunity for the shift to SCP. - Working with the actors of the food value chain that are setting the norms and values, can be an enabler for the shift in consumer behaviour and shifts the supply and demand towards sustainably produced food products. A commitment approach from these actors, especially those in the middle stages, to supply sustainable products is an enabler to assure the raise in the demand for these products. The challenge remains that commitments are voluntary, and thus no institution has a mandate to deliver accountability. - Engaging with chefs in order to increase the availability of sustainable meals and raise awareness among the food service industry as well as consumers, has shown promising results. The full list of opportunities and challenges identified during this workshop can be found in the workshop report attached as a Relevant Link. قراءة القليل

Consultative workshop on sustainable food value chain focusing on food processing, manufacturing and retail - 22nd April 2021 Through the discussion a number of enablers, challenges and gaps that exist at these stages were identified. Opportunities and enablers - Support to regenerative farming techniques from the actors at processing and manufacturing stage of the food value chain presents an important opportunity to reduce the impact of resource use at the primary production. - Addressing food design through the decisions on what primary raw ingredients to use, how they are grown (e.g. regen... قراءة المزيدerative agriculture) and how to turn them into a nutritious food product with reduced environmental impact is an opportunity to explore for processing and manufacturing companies. - Diversified approach to addressing food loss and waste at the retail stage is an important opportunity. Improved ordering strategy, stock management, product range, optimization of product lines are important entry points for retail in avoiding and reducing food loss and waste. - Repurposing and donating surplus food is another way for the retail industry to reduce emissions of the food value chain (i.e. circular economy). - Retail is in a strategic position to educate consumers and raise awareness on such issues as food loos and waste; sustainable sourcing and deforestation. This opportunity is strengthened through collaboration and definition of the same goals with other companies in the industry, the suppliers and other actors along the food value chain. - Retail is a very important player in the value chain for its power and interactions with other value chain players. Some of the solutions to reduce food loss and waste have been through setting clear targets and making the economic case; contractual arrangements with suppliers and allowing for greater flexibility of contracts between suppliers and buyers; better collaboration between the different players; finding collaborative ways to prevent food loss and waste; repurposing crops that don’t meet cosmetic standards; connecting food banks with upstream and downstream players; and supporting the adaptation of new technologies. Challenges and gaps - Even though, the analysis has shown that the actors at the middle stages of the food value chain are consolidated and vertically integrated, 70% of the food trading, processing, manufacturing and retailing is comprised of Small-Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Most of these SMEs are not supported by the policy environment, especially in developing countries. - Credible certification is a challenge for the actors along the food value chain. This problem can be addressed through pre-competitive collaboration based on internationally acknowledged documents. - Affordability of sustainable food remains a challenge as it includes costs such as for certification that mainly falls burden on the primary producers. These costs have to be reflected by other actors in the supply chain but also other stakeholders like NGOs or financial institutions. All of them have to commit to similar actions so the burden is not just on the growers but all relevant stakeholder in the agricultural sector. - Policy environment that enables the retail and processing and manufacturing industry to source sustainable products that are not linked to deforestation is needed. - Fragmentation of initiatives and solutions makes it difficult to understand what works and where, which reflects on funding opportunities. Leveraging multi-stakeholder collaborations and platforms to identify solutions is one of the ways to address this issue. قراءة القليل

Consultative workshop on sustainable food value chain focusing on agricultural inputs, primary production & traders - 15th Apr Through the discussion a number of enablers, challenges & gaps that exist at these stages were identified: - There is a high degree of consolidation in the agricultural input industry, with a small number of companies controlling inputs on which farmers depend. - Farmers and fishers are fragmented and find themselves in a weak position where they are compelled to accept the prices, standards and contract terms offered to them by food companies, with limited cap... قراءة المزيدacity to negotiate. Many farmers in traditional food systems suffer from a lack of physical and institutional infrastructure to improve productivity and profitability. - Traders, an important player in the food value chain, are the closest link to farmers. Depending on the commodity agricultural traders can be either highly consolidated (e.g. grain) or fragmented (e.g. palm oil). Big import/export companies are increasingly involved in other stages of the food value chain including production, processing & distribution. - Effective mechanisms for participatory and inclusive processes for policy development need to be rethought and established. They should be based on the real needs and realities of the stakeholders, especially farmers, to manage tradeoffs. These can be elaborated at local and regional levels to define the vision supported by concrete outcomes. - Public procurement, as a strong enabler of sustainable farming practices, should be leveraged. Potential is identified within school feeding programmes that procure food from agroecological farm, improving nutrition, educating and raising awareness, and contributing to the reduction of resource use and environmental impact of the primary production. - Certifications, connecting production and consumption stages, present an opportunity for systems change. Certifications should be streamlined and measures to reduce their costs adopted. - Addressing food loss and waste presents an opportunity in reducing resource use and environmental impact at primary production. - Farmer organizations/cooperatives play an important role in strengthening the voice of farmers and their negotiating power. - Place-based agroecology initiatives present an interesting opportunity as it gives the farmers access to the market and directly connects them with local restaurants and retail. - School gardens is also a way to educate consumers from early age and create the understanding and demand for sustainably produced food. Engaging young generations in farming is conducive to better adoption of new technologies and practices. - Access to finance is a key enabler. Microfinance programmes can facilitate financial inclusion of farmers and help them to transform and incorporate best practices. This also links to the need to educate the financial sector and bring the understanding of the farmers needs to be addressed through adequate financial offer. - Peer-to-peer learning among farmers and farm to farm collaboration has shown to be effective when accessing finance and adopting sustainable practices. - Adopting innovative farming techniques (such as micro-biome applications) may not be very profitable, but beneficial in terms of planetary health. Diverse tools and incentives need to be developed by the governments to support the farmers in adopting these innovative practices. - Transportation within the food value chain presents a significant bottleneck as it comprises a broad variety of means to be considered, is quite consolidated in some countries, and is crucial in determining the distances the food can travel. More focus should be put on the sector. - It is important to consider the balance of power between exporting and importing countries, where government usually tends to play a major role as an exporter of food commodities and private companies are the importer. Policy interventions should therefore vary depending on the context. The full list of opportunities and challenges identified during this workshop can be found in the workshop report attached as a Relevant Link. قراءة القليل