استكشاف الملاحظات الرسمية للحوار

While there was general agreement among dialogue participants on the roles of the livestock and sustainable development, there was an observation made that the livestock sector is reluctant to tackle the hard issues when livestock is part of the problem – both production and consumption. All stakeholders are thus challenged to do a better job addressing the hard trade-offs in livestock issues—and to figure out who pays, how and how much. Many groups did not diverge but recognised the importance of seeking out and initiating conversations with those who do – to find better solutions. Part... قراءة المزيدicipants acknowledged that there are many areas where views are divergent, partly related to the diversity of livestock systems going forward – contrasting for example, pastoralists, smallholders, intensive farming as well as divergence on the consumption of livestock-derived foods. There are also contrasting views in relation to environmental and human health externalities (e.g. AMR) as well as towards efficiency vs resilience (do these complement or antagonize one another?). Most of these divergent views arise because of differences between objectives for different regions (and wealth categories) in different parts of the world. For example, at present, in LMICs livestock play multiple roles, whereas in HICs the focus is much more on only the provision of food products. Recognizing this diversity of views of the roles of the livestock sector in future food systems, participants noted that it is necessary to share positive messages without being 'defensive' of livestock or failing to acknowledge where livestock sector harms must be addressed and mitigated. A critical area of divergence revolved around to what extent synthetic protein can be an alternative to reduce the pressure of livestock systems on resources. On the one hand, some consider that a broader offer of plant-based alternatives may be essential to be able to deal with the increase in demand. Others consider that there are factors that might make this inappropriate in certain contexts including cultural factors, access and knock-on impacts on livelihoods, environment, human health and so on. In general more and more nuanced information on plant-based alternatives in relation to multiple sustainability dimensions would help decision making and targeted solutions. قراءة القليل

Discussion topic 5: Building resilience to overcome food system vulnerabilities, shocks and stresses: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems help us prepare for, withstand, and recover from natural disasters, conflicts or disease threats – without unintentionally increasing the risks that livestock contribute to these? The consensus position was that the global livestock narrative misses the nuance that reflects the diversity and heterogeneity in both production systems and agro-ecological regions. Therefore, any analysis must account for these differences. The narrative a... قراءة المزيدbout consumption of livestock-derived foods needs to take account of the millions who do not have access to quality livestock-derived foods and for whom equitable, affordable access to healthy, quality livestock-derived foods should be promoted. Population and incomes are rising, which translates into an increase in the demand for animal protein which has important nutritional roles. This increase in demand can have effects on deforestation and generation of emissions. Solutions include sustainable production underpinned by appropriate financing to promote the adoption of suitable technologies. Resilience, risks and the role of livestock in circular systems were highlighted. Resilience: - Healthier animals reduce zoonotic risks, disease spread and contribute to healthy diets. Three billion people don't have access to healthy diets and good nutrition is key to people's resilience. In some cases, healthy sustainable diets means more plants and less animals - Small livestock (goats, sheep and chicken) can be used to build up resilience especially in natural disasters because of their quick multiplication. Livestock keeping plays an important role for those who can’t afford healthy nutrition. - To build resilience, we need nature friendly farming, use of robust breeds and diverse farming systems. Risks: - Need to value the benefits of livestock production and minimise climate change effects so that food production is not adversely impacted by climate change. - Some industrial level production systems rely on very limited livestock biodiversity. - Approaches for biosecurity measures and prudent, responsible use of antibiotics vary considerably across the world. - Risks, such as climate shocks and market volatility can impact differently on livestock production systems. All require tools to improve resilience capacity such as agricultural insurance. - The effect of shocks on the food system impacts on household resilience, whose incomes are affected by price changes. Circularity: - Across much of the world, livestock are essential elements to ensure the bio-circularity of different food production systems. - In some cases, regenerative livestock systems means fewer productive animals. Actions to impact this topic include: - Multi-stakeholder approaches, noting that time and effort are required to reach consensus. - Central leadership to bring different stakeholders together. Creation of a world body that moves the world towards a sustainable food production system. - Avoiding top down approaches that don't allow for local solutions. - Involve more farmers and work with farmers that are trailblazing regenerative food systems. - Improving sustainability and efficiency of the sector through new technologies which also requires adequate investment for the transition processes. - A more resilient, more productive, fairer livestock sector from the social point of view underpinned by the research and technology transfer processes. - Develop improved intensified livestock systems that focus on using existing resources more efficiently and do not require considerable external inputs but use natural ecosystems more efficiently. This includes balancing the use of new technologies with the best use of traditional technologies. The success of such actions could be indicated through: - Reductions in animal waste. - Reduced emissions from livestock farms. - Greater application of regenerative mixed farm systems. قراءة القليل

Discussion topic 4: Growing economic opportunities without compromising our sustainability goals: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock keeping, livestock ownership or livestock as a business help advance equitable livelihoods and achieve healthier diets – without damaging our natural resources or leaving anyone behind? The consensus position was that livestock is extremely important in several parts of the world and especially so in some parts where it is the main source of livelihoods. - Nutritious diets and sustainable livelihoods in Africa (and some parts of Asia) cannot be a... قراءة المزيدchieved without livestock which are often a cornerstone of economies and rural livelihoods. There are clear regional differences in the way livestock are raised, produced and consumed. - Generalities do not help, rather nuances are required and livestock issues should not be siloed. - Improving the health and welfare of animals improves their economic value and reduces environment footprint. - Fairness throughout value-chains is needed, including incomes and costs. For some economies this means citizens being willing (and able) to pay more for quality livestock-derived foods. Consumer decision-making needs to be linked to its influence on food systems. - There are positive things happening across the livestock sector – genetics, precision-feeding, climate-smart agriculture; private sector engagement – methane management, all underpinned by sound science that needs to be contextually applied for solutions, policy and investment decisions. - In rural areas economic indicators can inform what is possible, leverage additional funding and government regulations to improve the value of livestock production and enhance local resilience – simple economic analysis doesn’t always bring this out. - Growing livelihoods and economic opportunities from livestock for individuals (men, women, youth) through to nations can look quite different in different settings. In LMICs, this may mean livestock production, elsewhere, waged employment is plentiful at the processing stage. Trade-offs must be considered, and incentives adjusted to take account of environmental as well as economic gains. Actions to impact this topic include: - Several other industries including tourism depend on livestock and agriculture and need to be considered. Don’t silo sectors, components of the value-chain or countries. - Livestock has received a lot of negative attention in the past but with the right investments can be transformed to be both economically viable and environmentally sustainable. - In some cases, it should be possible to take advantage of regional integration and diverse eco-systems, through a move to specialisation tailored to specific agro-zones (e.g. production of cattle in arid areas). - Focus on nature-positive solutions that do not require further conversion of lands. - Support is also needed across the value chain as this can help create jobs. All actors in the value chain must get their fair share Farmers need support for quality produce and access to markets. - Do a better job thinking through the hard trade-offs in livestock issues—figure out who pays, how and how much. Do not underestimate the challenges the sector needs to face. - Incorporate One Health approach into solutions, which may include guidelines for field agents, capacity building, creation of local or regional “One Health” associations, using an evaluation system adopted by everyone with common, multiple criteria. قراءة القليل

Discussion topic 3: Staying inside planetary natural and environmental boundaries and tackling the climate emergency: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems benefit nature and ecosystems and help us adapt to or mitigate climate change – while also sustaining people’s livelihoods and their nutrition and health? The consensus position was that there are no simple solutions, but not all food systems are ‘broken’, in many cases positive changes are underway and should be highlighted. Changes in livestock systems can best be achieved by mobilizing diverse groups of stakeh... قراءة المزيدolders to a more positive common narrative, recognizing that incremental transitions, innovation, and continuous learning are needed. This includes: - Recognize the diversity of livestock systems and different roles they play in societies (e.g. the importance of ASF especially in LMICs compared to overconsumption in the Global North) and longer-term sustainability. Discourses that are polarised about livestock are not helpful because they miss the importance of diversity and the many emerging solutions. - The critical roles of farmers as part of the solution for changes requires addressing incentives (including transparency of reporting) for farmers to do things differently. This does not negate the importance of all actors, and the need for better partnerships between private and public sector, multi-stakeholder platforms, etc. - The right balance between livestock and nature will be found in different ways in different places - there’s no single global approach that works. The most striking difference is between global north and global south where, for example, per capita ASF consumption should generally decrease in the north and increase for many target populations in the south. There are also significant divisions between land-use types with some - rangelands particularly - better matching livestock production than any other agricultural product. While livestock production can have negative effects on nature and the environment, properly managed, it offers many benefits and advantages to land, soils and landscapes. These are in addition to its other nutrition, livelihoods and economic benefits. - Another area is livestock’s contribution to greenhouse gasses. There is a need to better understand its role in methane and the need for science-based evidence to inform policies and new approaches to support methane mitigation (e.g. feed additives, vaccines). Actions to impact this topic include: - Communication and knowledge sharing actions, such as peer-to-peer learning experience among farmers, knowledge sharing, exchange and transfer of best practices through global platforms. Communication with public, youth, schools using social media and other means. Better communication is also supported by more consistent terminology and metrics and by telling the livestock ‘story’ and the many vital ways it contributes to people’s lives and livelihoods and ecosystems. - Bridging diverging regional realities - need to view global issues - convergence of views and building understanding across different livestock systems. This can include matching animals to landscapes and land use as well as markets and consumers, promoting mixed crop-livestock systems that offer multiple benefits, enrich other assets such as soils, and contribute to circularity (thus minimising waste) in production systems and promoting carbon neural livestock production. قراءة القليل

Discussion topic 2: Achieving just and balanced consumption of diverse food sources: To what extent, and how, can changes to the consumption of livestock-derived foods help the transition to healthy diets for all – without increasing obesity or the incidence of non-communicable disease? The consensus position was that overall, there is a need to rebalance policies and discussions about consumption of livestock-derived foods related to local needs/context; to follow dietary recommendations on nutrition & health (avoid ultra-processed food), and ensure livestock is produced sustainably. Co... قراءة المزيدnsumers need to make informed choices through more information, understanding, metrics, policies and incentives. Rebalance consumption: Ambitions should focus on rebalancing consumption and recognise that polarisation of the debate about consumption of livestock-derived foods is not helpful. - A better understanding of the relationship between livestock derived foods and balanced, diverse, holistic diets with consumption better aligned to dietary requirements and life stage (e.g. increase in women and children in first 1000 days; decrease in highly developed economies). - Context matters: Vulnerable communities will require more livestock-derived foods. In many resource-poor settings, availability, affordability and accessibility of safe, quality livestock-derived foods are challenges to be addressed. Procurement and social platforms promoting diverse diets and targeting both producers and consumers may be one vehicle. - Sourcing: Optimise sustainability & accounting for local resources & traditions - Explore, develop and encourage alternatives to livestock-derived foods in areas where they are not well-tolerated or produced. Actions to impact this topic include: - More robust information on nutrition and health outputs from the consumption of animal-sourced food and incentives to use this information for decisions, policy changes and education throughout societies. - Invest in improving understanding of the imbalances to better target solutions and actions. - Create greater awareness of the need for balance (in diets & sustainability), informing debates, and raising awareness of context in relation to livestock-derived foods. Better education/awareness to children who are in school now that will promote behaviour change from a younger age and can also include school food programs/meals that could impact both producers and consumers. - Better evidence can inform action by governments, retail, procurers (eg schools, hospitals), processers, livestock keepers. This should include research on the role of animal sourced foods in improving nutrition and its contribution to obesity (distinguishing between correlation vs causation). - Better metrics to help consumers make more balanced, sustainable, nutritious, healthy choices - Investigate better incentives to rebalance consumption, nutrition, health, sustainability, and welfare. Informing government policies related to subsidy programs. The success of such actions could be indicated through: - Debates will be more balanced and consensus on how balanced, diverse diets include sustainable and healthy animal-sourced foods will emerge. - Metrics: Report(s) from FAO on post-UNFSS specific actions will include those related to balanced, healthy consumption of livestock-derived foods. WHO targets related to nutrition, obesity, non-communicable diseases) will be accelerated through appropriate inclusion of livestock-derived foods. - Consumer-facing tools (e.g. Nutri-Score) and WHO recommendations will be used. - Research results and case studies provide critical information regarding obesity and livestock-derived foods; identifying solutions that result in positive outcomes for food, nutrition and biodiversity. قراءة القليل

Discussion topic 1: Providing equitable access by all to diverse as well as safe and nutritious foods: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock systems benefit everyone, including the most vulnerable and poorest people, overcome food poverty and help end hunger and malnutrition in cities and rural areas – without compromising other goals in areas like health, environment or animal welfare? The consensus position was to scale out game-changing policies, technologies and business models that equip existing small-holders, pastoralist communities and agripreneurs. The outputs from these... قراءة المزيد systems will be of high quality, environmentally sustainable and maximise human health. Making this work in a balanced way includes: - Championing smallholders and pastoralists. - Sustainable intensification adapted to local conditions, scaled by robust business models and producing high quality food. - Improved animal husbandry that reduces the need for antibiotics along with other social and environmental benefits. - Shift the focus of production, processing and marketing of livestock commodities more towards quality. - Recognize the essential role of diversity to ensure resilience. - Phase out or penalize current practices that result in environmental and public health externalities (and/or incentivize sustainable, healthy options). Actions to impact this topic include: - Policy changes that secure land rights, prevent ‘dumping’ of low-cost livestock commodities in developing countries and that champion small/medium farms and pastoralists. - Study and replicate successful business models (e.g. Ethio-chicken). - Identify new feed options. The success of such actions could be indicated through: - Public sector investment will support and facilitate such policy changes - Commercial viability. Not increasing livestock numbers but quality and yield. - Transparency – reporting, metrics, incentives to mitigate environmental impact قراءة القليل

Embracing change: new connections Although the majority of participants were in some way connected with the livestock sector, there was consensus that further engagement is needed with those beyond the sector, whether in health, nutrition, food security, equity, environment, etc., or those who believe that animal agriculture and the consumption of livestock products should stop. Facilitating such engagement will require deliberate efforts from livestock stakeholders, including multi-stakeholder processes within and beyond the sector. The UN FSS provides a forum to expand and continue these con... قراءة المزيدversations. Participants recognized that discussions about livestock often focus on the production aspects of the sector, and that these discourses need to expand, especially to include communications across the sector and especially with consumers. Harnessing diversity and nuancing communication Participants recognized that the global discussion about livestock usually lacks the nuance that reflects the diversity of the sector and thus the solutions required to ensure its contributions to future food systems. It was emphasized that a polarized debate that has extremes of ‘livestock all bad’ or ‘livestock all good’ is unhelpful and does not reflect the diversity of livestock roles across the world, or the need for multiple, different changes and solutions throughout the sector towards better food systems in future. The most-cited examples of global discourse that does not account for livestock sector diversity concerned the consumption of livestock-derived foods and the impacts on the environment. For the former it was noted that for wealthier countries and segments of the population across the world, the message about reducing consumption of livestock-derived foods or making dietary choices (such as veganism or vegetarianism) facilitated by easy access to diverse nutrients may be appropriate. For less-wealthy countries and populations, improving access, availability and affordability of quality, safe, livestock-derived foods could make a significant, positive difference to nutritional wellbeing (and its wider ramifications for stunting, cognitive development etc), especially for the most vulnerable (pregnant and lactating mothers, children in the first 1000 or even 3000 days, elderly). Regarding livestock and the environment, participants again highlighted contrasting narratives, between the damage livestock production inflicts on the environment and the positive benefits that must be harnessed. These range from emissions of greenhouse gases from ruminant animals where improving production efficiencies (emissions per unit of product) is paramount in most LMICs, to opportunities for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation across the world’s vast rangelands, to opportunities for regenerative agriculture approaches based on livestock management. Both of these (and other, such as One Health) areas will benefit from stronger, credible, well-communicated scientific evidence to inform all stakeholders, from policy makers to farmers to consumers and schoolchildren on the choices and implications as well as appropriate incentives. Presently, this is hampered by multiple very different global statistics which are often inappropriately extrapolated. Communication also needs to better incorporate very diverse, often essential roles of livestock for livelihoods, women and youth. Embracing change: action within the livestock sector The diverse livestock sector actors who joined the dialogue all acknowledge that, as with all sectors, change towards better future food systems must be embraced. What that change looks like is incredibly diverse because of the diversity of ways that animals and their products are raised, managed and consumed as well as their multiple roles. Key areas for change that were recognized include tackling those hard areas where livestock are indeed problematic – where environmental impacts, consumption patterns and production strategies are harming the planet and its people. Change also means grasping opportunities where incentives, information and policy can better support livestock’s positive contributions to environmental, health and livelihood outcomes. All livestock sector stakeholders must engage and commit to diverse and significant change. Such change needs to be informed by robust evidence and must include engagement well beyond the livestock sector itself. The livestock sector’s commitment to change must however go well beyond changing conversations and nuancing debates. It requires collective action, potentially facilitated through multisectoral and multi-stakeholder dialogues. Importantly, it is incumbent upon the sector to provide and embrace practical solutions to mitigate the challenges and harness the opportunities for livestock to fully play a role in sustainable future food systems. Among the 2030 outcomes for the sector were: healthier, more productive, and well cared for animals; reducing carbon emissions from livestock; quality over quantity; improve productivity, efficiency, sustainability, and resilience of the livestock sector; moving to regenerative farming; change the negative image of the sector; and to acknowledge and secure the contributions livestock for a healthy planet, its people and their diets. قراءة القليل

The dialogue focused on engaging and harnessing the diversity of both livestock sector stakeholders (taking advantage of the global spread and multi-stakeholder nature of the Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock, GASL) and those who are not directly engaged with livestock – from development agencies and practitioners to food sector actors and beyond. It included participants from all over the world, from pastoralists and farmers of all capacities who produce food to those who process, market and research food and wider food system dimensions. It aimed to facilitate new conversations to id... قراءة المزيدentify the pathways of change and diverse solutions that are needed to ensure that livestock contributes across all action tracks and levers of change to future food systems. Prior to the dialogue, participants received a diverse set of resource materials about the roles of livestock and sustainable development. Each discussion group focused on one of the five action tracks, asking the question ‘…to what extent and how can changes in livestock systems…’ followed by a statement describing some contrasts in possible roles…’. Discussion group topics were: 1. Providing equitable access by all to diverse as well as safe and nutritious foods: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock systems benefit everyone, including the most vulnerable and poorest people, overcome food poverty and help end hunger and malnutrition in cities and rural areas – without compromising other goals in areas like health, environment or animal welfare? 2. Achieving just and balanced consumption of diverse food sources: To what extent, and how, can changes to the consumption of livestock-derived foods help the transition to healthy diets for all – without increasing obesity or the incidence of non-communicable disease? 3. Staying inside planetary natural and environmental boundaries and tackling the climate emergency: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems benefit nature and ecosystems and help us adapt to or mitigate climate change – while also sustaining people’s livelihoods and their nutrition and health? 4. Growing economic opportunities without compromising our sustainability goals: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock keeping, livestock ownership or livestock as a business help advance equitable livelihoods and achieve healthier diets – without damaging our natural resources or leaving anyone behind? 5. Building resilience to overcome food system vulnerabilities, shocks and stresses: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems help us prepare for, withstand, and recover from natural disasters, conflicts or disease threats – without unintentionally increasing the risks that livestock contribute to these? Discussion groups used the following questions to guide their conversations and structure feedback: • What is our consensus position – as a group - on this question? Where do we want to be in 2030? • What actions in the next 3 years will have greatest impact on the Discussion Topic and the outcomes we identified? • How will we measure or tell if these actions are successful? • What critical divergences in opinion among group participants are revealed, what are their effects, and how might we manage them? قراءة القليل

The following statements had opposing views from participants: -The discussion can become too focused on farmers and agriculture and not enough connection to food processing and consumer behaviour. -Small farmers, SMEs and consumers are often missing from the discussion (we all talk on their behalf, but they are not ‘in the system’ to join these sorts of discussions. They also do not have time!) -We strive for circularity in the economy and yet we do not recognize circularity in existing systems. An example is the pork industry, which - according to one of our participants - is fully circu... قراءة المزيدlar. Abandoning pork production may cause input shortages in other sectors of the economy. -Consumer preferences and actions are contradicting each other: Two examples would be wanting to eat only local food, but have it available all year round, as well as asking for the highest quality food, but not willing to pay a premium for it. قراءة القليل

Potential solutions & main drivers We must: -Invest in education and better communicate innovation to the public. The role of schools is particularly important. -Support start-up incubators. -Involve all players and stakeholders. -Open mindsets to new solutions. -Digitalise consumer information (including positive and negative consumer labelling (e.g. tobacco ads!) and connect consumers with local producers. -Empower consumers as a force for change. -Engage consumers at the EU-level. -Enable knowledge sharing and open-source solutions. -Connect academia and industry (e.g., the European Tec... قراءة المزيدhnology Platform innovation Strategic Research Innovation Agenda, built between academia and the food industry: -Bring political incentives. -Ensure financial support. -Give a greater voice to small players (such as small farmer communities and SMEs). -Learn to connect R&D with farmers and other implementers (knowledge transfer). -Develop a EU food policy that connects the food systems challenges (all solutions are interrelated). -Harness the ideas of young people. -Find the true cost of food so that consumers can choose which product to buy not only in terms of price but also on how it was produced. -Ensure trade agreements guarantee sustainability requirements. قراءة القليل

Inhibitors to innovation: Who: Policymakers/regulators; passive consumers; multinationals that own intellectual property (to detriment of others); cartels and monopolies. What: Price competitiveness, environmental costs not built into consumer prices; political cycles are too short-term; polarized debates; hunt for profit over purpose; bargaining power; lack of connection between science and entrepreneurs; a low risk attitude in the EU which can stifle innovation and lead to a brain drain.

Enablers to innovation: Who: Entrepreneurs and innovators; farmers; agile players; consumers; private companies; regulators/policymakers; scientists/academics; NGOs; young people; retailers. What: Technologies; transparent frameworks; multi-stakeholder approaches; co-creation; an open-mind; funding (public and private); decentralized autonomous organisations; open-source solutions; public procurement processes; multinational agreements impact framed, education; openness to change.

How we expect the future to be Participants broadly agreed that: -The Green Deal will be successful in making the EU climate-neutral by 2050 (with a few notable exceptions). -Algae will be a substantial part of our diets very soon. -It is unlikely that the world will be entirely plant-based but certainly more of an up-take of alternative proteins (including insects) will be widespread. -Micro-farming for consumers will be more widespread. -There will be higher consciousness of the food system, a larger systemic understanding of food and biodiversity. -Personalised nutrition and digital apps wi... قراءة المزيدll help consumers tackle the burden of NCDs. -More foods will be medicinal as well: Nutraceuticals. -There will be a closer collaboration of stakeholders (consumers + regulators + operators + others) through a strong dialogue. -Consumers are able to make informed choices, they need to be well-educated, starting at school. Quality of the information should be transparent and science based. Access to information (my carbon footprint, my nutritional needs) will be easy and digital. -There will be a regulatory environment that is pragmatic and allows consumers to have access to innovation. -Food production should be as organic as possible. In developing countries this might come at a slower pace. قراءة القليل

Main challenges to bring forward innovation: 2.1. Several main players were identified: consumers, regulators, producers (manufacturers, primary production, packaging) and media: oConsumer awareness is important. The role of the consumer is fundamental to understand that a seasonal product is seasonal, innovation while duly regulated is good, regenerative agriculture is the future, monoculture is damaging ett. oManufacturers need to deliver according to what the regulatory environment allows, ensuring less packaging, regenerative agriculture, UN SDG goals oRegulators need to continue helping e... قراءة المزيدnabling operators to act, but innovation runs very fast. oThe media (traditional press or social media) has an important role as it will portray an innovation as good or bad, regardless of the science. 2.2 Bringing scale: oThere is a challenge to take an innovation from niche to mass market – for that, regulatory support is needed. 2.3 Making it pay: oIt costs a lot to bring innovation to market – innovators need regulatory certainty to give them confidence to invest. oIf farmers are to try new methods or diversify their crops, they need certainty that they will make a profit. 2.4 Intellectual property rights: oStart-ups need access to IP, and large MNCs should not guard IP when they are slowing down new innovation. قراءة القليل

Main problems in the food system 1.1 Food Production, Farming and Manufacturing: -Climate change – emissions are still too high. -Biodiversity – our use of resources (soil and water) is harming the environment. -Big business – large-scale globalised monoculture production is still dominant, and it is hard for small and diverse businesses to cut through. -Food waste and loss – we still lose a third of food produced (whether loss at farm level or wasted after the farm gate). -Scale – it is easier for big companies to make the leap to more sustainable practices and gain a competitive ed... قراءة المزيدge, but smaller companies are left behind and need support. -Food chain length – there are too many steps in a complex food chain. Food Transports, Storage and Packaging: -Energy – transport and packaging are still too reliant on non-renewable energies. -Excessive packaging – there is a need for sustainable packaging. -Circular economy – we need to improve resource efficiency (not only for production, but for every part of the chain) and avoid food waste. Keep ‘waste’ in the cycle and don’t let it go to waste. 1.2 Food Consumption, Nutrition and Waste: -Food information – there is a lack of information on food and general awareness on food, malnutrition, and over-nutrition. -Obesity – there are too many people eating a poor diet -Education – there is a lack on education on issues related to food (e.g., food safety, here food is coming from, how food is produced) 1.3 Policy: -Slow policy – the policy environment is not fast enough and can slow down innovation. The classical system will not work anymore, we need a different approach. -Siloed thinking – there has been a lack of a holistic food policy. The F2F strategy can be the answer but it will be a challenge to implement all the ambitions. We need to start thinking about the food system as a whole. -Scale – innovation can be difficult to scale up, due to costs but also behaviour. It is hard to make people change their behaviour because of culture and habits. For this we need communication, data. قراءة القليل

1. There are several challenges that require urgent action in the food systems, such as climate change, unsustainable farming practices (impacting soil, water quality, and biodiversity), access to quality food and the complexity of food value chains, where sustainability issues are predominant. There is a feeling of urgency that will require R&I to foster transitions to a more sustainable and equitable world. 2. Small actors in the food system need a greater voice, that goes from the small farmer to the individual consumer and includes SMEs which are the majority of the food systems actors... قراءة المزيد (99%) and are often not accessing the innovation being produced by researchers and innovation providers. It is key also to understand the sectoral and regional/cultural aspects of food systems, thus a multistakeholder approach is needed at different levels (global, European, national, regional), and shall be facilitated by policy makers. It was noted that multinationals (e.g. seed companies) are relevant in the discussion, but must not be allowed to ‘abuse’ their power. 3. Behaviour and attitude is as important as technology. Many solutions discussed were less technical, and more behavioural: Communication and cooperation between science providers and implementation actors, policy and financial support to the food systems R&I ecosystem, more design systemic solutions that connects the food system challenges, the role of young entrepreneurs and start-ups in the food systems R&I, or multi stakeholder commitments to achieve greater goals using R&I. 4. Empower consumers through education which can impact acceptance of innovation. Science-based education on food and how it is produced is key, particularly targeting consumers (and policymakers), and starting from schools. Empowering consumers from being ‘passive’ to ‘active’, includes better product information. The concept and understanding of food systems is not well understood, and the role of all actors in a value chain (producers, processors, distributors, consumers etc.) needs to be better explained, and a holistic solution sought. 5. We need to more prominently include startups and next-generation innovators in food systems transformation. Innovation comes faster than regulation, and the next-generation has the tools and skillset to enable this shift towards more sustainable food systems for all. As digital natives, the next-generation inherently understands the importance of digitalization and data-driven decision-making. The next-generation also embodies the key attitudes needed to facilitate this food systems change - openness, willingness to adopt alternative business models (circular economy, cradle to cradle), and nimbleness to adapt quickly to changes and navigate through ambiguity (especially in the times of COVID-19). Young entrepreneurs embody all of these behaviors to create innovative and new products and services using (and even re-using) existing resources with a greater focus on sustainability. The regulatory framework (transparent, science-based, pragmatic) needs to allow innovations into the market. 6. Money is important. Farmers need an income, food businesses need to make a profit, and consumers need affordable food. No farmer has a problem with having fewer cattle if he/she has the same income, but they also need legal clarity and stability. Farmers will also be more willing to grow a wider variety of crops – if the market is there. 7. But profit must not be the only consideration. Business must be supported by governments to pursue sustainable practices and to do ‘what is right for the world’ not just what will make the most money. Business should be rewarded for doing good and called out for failing. 8. Solutions must be multi-stakeholder. Solutions must be tailored, policies must be inclusive and multi-stakeholder approaches and listening must underpin all approaches. Everyone must contribute as much as they can, we need to foster a dialogue among everyone involved. 9. Solutions must not come in isolation. That is to say there must be a supply chain approach where the complexities and needs of different actors – from farm to fork – are taken on board. 10. There must be political will. EU policymakers must forget about re-election and short-termism and fear of failure and act now to send a clear signal to farmers, food business and consumers that business as usual is not an option. For true change to happen, politics need to make the first step by putting supporting regulations in place, and it needs to happen NOW. قراءة القليل

The European Union aims to be at the forefront of global food sustainability, including initiatives such as the European Green New Deal, as well as working towards achieving the aims of the 17 SDGs. This Dialogue explored the role of innovation in meeting food sustainability challenges, and how to create an enabling environment that will allow next-gen entrepreneurs, start-ups and business to bring forward the game-changing solutions needed. This Dialogue brought together and heard perspectives from diverse stakeholders based in the EU, looking to include next-generation innovators, farmers, s... قراءة المزيدcientists, public and private sector representatives, civil society representatives, activists, as well as stakeholders in other areas of the food and agriculture industry. In alignment with the goals of the Action Tracks and the United Nations Food Systems Summit 2021, this Dialogue aimed to explore the opportunities for innovation in the EU to transform food systems. قراءة القليل

None

Participants highlighted some major food system stakeholders and their requirements to ensure sustainability of Kisumu’s food system. These are: Farmers: They are important and critical because they produce the food consumed by residents of Kisumu. Requirements for them are markets, capacity building. This has been missing for some time as there are not enough extension officers. There is a need for specialised institutions of higher learning where agricultural production is taught. Researchers: Whereas the farmers may be visualising what is needed, sometimes they need researchers to articul... قراءة المزيدate this in order to drive innovation. Funding is critical in order for impactful research to be undertaken. This can be facilitated by government and donor agencies. Technical experts: Many people are shying away from studying agriculture related subjects which is dangerous for the county and country. Efforts must therefore be geared towards incentivising people to study agriculture and food-related subject. Donors: Donors are important. However, they require good policies and systems to be put in place by the government so that they can be encouraged to come in and to ensure that their efforts are impactful. Government should do more to put better policies and systems in place to facilitate the work of donors. Civil Society: CSOs should take a leading role in advocating for the rights of the farmers, the plights of farmers, and things that affect stakeholders within the food system. Documentaries can be used to articulate the plight of the farmers. They also need to emphasise the challenge of food prices. Food-related CSOs need enabling policy environment to function effectively. Other key points and suggestions include the following: • Technology and innovation: Strengthen co-production of knowledge for innovation and technology. • Infrastructure: Investment in water, transport and storage infrastructure should be prioritised. Policies on water harvesting, flood water control should be initiated. • Capacity development: Capacity of technical officers needs to be improved. The County government should give priority to bringing technical people on board to the county • Access to market: Access to both input and output market is important for farmers, hence this needs to be improved. • Social networks: Enhance social networks including collective community, fishing community • Agricultural Extension: There is need to recruit, retain, train and empower extension officers in order to build the capacity of farmers and improve their productivity. قراءة القليل

The discussions stressed the need for enabling policy frameworks that will allow all food system actors in Kisumu to thrive and this was emphasized all across the Action Tracks. Creating this enabling environment for the transformation of Kisumu’s food system, the discussants noted, starts from contextualizing the regional and national food and nutrition policies such as the Food and Nutrition Security Policy (2012), and scaling them down to the local level. Policies that can guide growth across the food value chain should be put in place particularly in production (embracing aspects such as... قراءة المزيد urban agriculture, fishing support and regulations as well as agroecology which relates to nature-positive production (Action Track 3). It was concluded that there is need to develop and implement a comprehensive food policy for the city region. Given that Kisumu is presently dependent on external regions and actors for its food needs, participants noted the need to enable the growth of the logistics and transportation sector which delivers safe and efficient transportation of food across and within the county. Discussants also reflected on how consumption can be regulated and improved locally. They noted the need for better consumption of nutritious foods through investment in feeding programmes in schools, public hospitals and other government institutions including correctional centres. In terms of trade and marketing, the discussions explored how best farmers can be supported in facilitating their access to both input and output markets. Participants argued that government needs to partner with both private and international development institutions to enhance market access for farmers. Initiatives should not only consider formal market channels but must also embrace the informal sector. Development partners were urged to play more active roles in providing training and services including trainings on how nature-based solutions can be incorporated in agriculture. There is the need to establish a farmers resource center where farmers can learn and be shown how to farm crops in the right way. The center should be in a position to educate and help farmers with soil management, crop production, and crop protection challenges. It should also be a demonstration area for urban agriculture and should have a list of alternative crops that can grow in the area. The center should also be able to network farmers so that they can learn from each other through networking. It is also important, according to the participants, that enabling policies for the growth of the circular economy are put in place. This would include the introduction of a comprehensive waste management strategy that encompasses waste across the entire food value chain. They argued that waste must also be considered as resource to produce energy, fertilizers etc. Participants emphasized that initiatives to incentivize and empower participation of vulnerable groups particularly youth and women are needed. These should include access to land and other resources that can facilitate their participation in food production. Opportunities for moving towards a more inclusive and food sensitive urban planning strategy, that recognizes the role of both formal and informal actors across the food value chain needs to be explored, participants noted. Urban planning has a critical role to play in strengthening urban food systems, and this should incorporate emergency food planning in light of the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on food and nutrition security. Participants also highlighted the need to improve access to finance to small-scale food actors such as smallholders. This financing opportunities could be in form of revolving loans or other loan-provisioning mechanisms. It should also explore public-private and donor partnerships in loan provisioning. Participants argued that ten percent of the county’s budget should be dedicated to agriculture. Investment in infrastructure was emphasized by participants as crucial to the transformation of Kisumu’s food system. This should include investment in water infrastructure, transport infrastructure, market infrastructure and storage facilities for farmers and traders. Market information system infrastructure was also highlighted as important to ensure the sustainability of Kisumu’s food system. There is need for awareness creation among households in the county, especially on the consumption of nutritious diets. Consumption patterns are mainly affected by income levels, perceptions and creating awareness through sensitisation campaigns can contribute towards shaping the right perceptions on nutrition. For farmers, sensitisation campaigns can also drive transformation towards a more sustainable agricultural production. Finally, participants noted that most sectors and actors still operate in silos with little appreciation of the linkages and benefits of synergistic relationships. The need for a more collaborative governance approach of the Kisumu’s food system was therefore emphasised. This should be done by building networks and stakeholder groups, as well as creating spaces for dialogues, cooperation, sharing, co-learning and co-creation in a bid to transform Kisumu’s food system. قراءة القليل