استكشاف الملاحظات الرسمية للحوار

Major Focus “Please detail the focus of your Dialogue. For example, it could be (i) a comprehensive exploration of food systems, (ii) an exploration of one of the five Action Tracks or levers of change of the Summit, (iii) examination of links between one or more of the Action Tracks and levers of change, (iv) or another specific theme.“ This Inter-faith dialogue is designed to engage global faith and indigenous communities with the Food Systems Summit processes via co-convened dialogues through shared experience and learning underlining shared values and principles, spirituality and/or be... قراءة المزيدliefs that propel solidarity and mutual accountability with local communities, stewardship of the environment and sustainability of food systems. The objectives of the dialogue are as follows: Share and discuss different faith traditions around food and food systems; Discuss how the above shape the different initiatives of different faith communities and faith-based organizations; Articulate common values around food and raise awareness on the importance of mutual accountability to transform food systems towards sustainability; and Promote engagement and partnerships between faith-based organizations, indigenous peoples and other actors working on food systems. The dialogue was divided into three parts; Part 1 - Faith traditions and shared values in sustainable food systems; Part 2 - Parallel Breakout Sessions: Deep dive on values around food as well as on accountability; Part 3 - Feedback and reflections قراءة القليل

How can countries identify and prioritize solutions that could be most catalytic for positive food system transformation, informed by evidence? Research capacity building was the most frequently discussed topic under this discussion point, with a strong desire for expertise to be prioritised in areas such as evidence synthesis, research innovation and leadership. Each of these would give country governments greater insights into the solutions needed their specific contexts, which in turn would reduce the need to revert to global or regional policy fixes. Mentorship emerged as an important comm... قراءة المزيدon idea among the participants, with partnerships between researchers, alumni and their institutions as one important strategy to increase expertise within countries. Multisectoral approaches to identifying and solving problems through multi-level governance involving food system actors on all levels, as well as community beneficiaries was a theme that arose in several groups. Opening channels of communication and collaboration with policymakers and government was seen as an important step broadening the ‘expertise’ considered valid for agenda setting and policymaking. Participants agreed that funding is the elephant in the room, and would need to be diversified from multiple sources, so it’s not entirely externally driven. Establishing a national, regional and/or continental system of case studies and lessons learnt could provide Finance Ministries with greater evidence for what works and what doesn’t (example: using youth ambassadors for food systems awareness in the community, or introducing a new cross-cutting ag-nutrition-health curriculum module). Alongside this, was the idea of linking government frameworks and research priorities, and to prioritise the synthesis of existing evidence so as not to reinvent the wheel with unnecessary policies, or programmes that have been shown not to be effective. There was a broad consensus around the need for locally-driven frameworks and research agendas that respond to the needs of each country and/or region. Agenda that are driven by African researchers, traditional and indigenous knowledge systems, but that also draw upon, and weigh against the global body of scientific evidence, so that priority setting is locally-driven but evidence-informed. Following this, monitoring and evaluation systems should be developed to track progress, highlight gaps/challenges and indicate whether transformation in food systems research capacity is actually happening over time. قراءة القليل

What type of capacities are needed to prioritise policies in an evidence-informed way? ? I.e. what works/does not, how to improve, who wins/who loses, trade-offs and co-benefits, cost-effectiveness and financing Several major themes emerged under this discussion. Firstly, that strong linkages should be prioritised between research and policy. Research questions should more often be formulated by African institutions and academics, but this requires significant and urgent investment into R&D in order to bring more people into research. Building on the discussions in question 1, there was a ... قراءة المزيدconsistent feeling that policymakers themselves require a minimum comprehension of intersectoral solutions to food and nutrition challenges, and that the next generation of these decision-makers would therefore benefit from A) more cross-cutting curriculums and B) being incorporated into research processes from the beginning of their policy roles. Alongside this were debates around how build capacity in stakeholder engagement and scientific communications, including expertise to liaise effectively and ethically with the private sector and political leaders. All groups agreed that collaboration is critical for ensuring the best use of resources and information, and that linking researchers with implementing organisations is critical. Secondly, a priority is to make better use of data and technology in identifying and addressing capacity gaps in food systems research and the scientific expertise needed to undertake this. Implementing more robust data collection systems across universities, agricultural extension services, government departments and municipalities would provide more granular information about capacity shortages on the horizon. Alongside this, Africa’s growth in digital technologies should be better harnessed for food systems transformation, not only for improving resilience of farmers and markets, but for increasing access to education and training for the next generation of scientists who will drive technological innovation in agriculture-food systems across the continent. Thirdly, overarching both above is the need to develop research capacity, urgently, equitably and holistically. Participants consistently highlighted the need for interdisciplinarity to be embraced, not only for governments to place a greater emphasis on anthropology, humanities, social sciences and law as valid food system disciplines, but to incorporate traditional and indigenous knowledge which is rich and still an untapped reservoir of expertise across the continent. The groups discussed the role of ‘research informed learning’; for instance how community and local engagement, people-centred and actionable research could be championed and showcased in curriculums. These changes cannot be implemented at the individual level, they require institutional reforms alongside the strengthening of partnerships and consistent funding mechanisms. Certainty around long-term funding would give universities and research institutions the confidence to invests in their own systems that support high-quality teaching, learning and research. Only through longer term investment will a new generation of researchers and leaders emerge to generate and disseminate evidence. The fourth theme arising was the utility and importance of networks and platforms, to promote collaboration among researchers, not just across the continent but around the world. Such platforms expose researchers, teachers and students to cutting-edge ideas and technologies, while providing opportunities for sharing best practices and lessons learnt in food systems sciences. Furthermore, platforms facilitate communication which can avoid duplication of effort and ensure that knowledge is not lost as trends in research and funding changes. Some outlying themes emerged from separate groups. These included greater emphasis on communicating economic benefits of increasing research capacity; funding of long term feasibility studies at specific universities; and the importance of building expertise around navigating the private sector ethically to avoid and conflicts of interest. قراءة القليل

Both food systems and research will have to coevolve, one informed by the other in an ongoing fashion. How can we plan and invest in long-term research capacities needed to support this? There was strong consensus around the need for collaboration between institutions to ensure joined-up thinking and scalable approaches to increasing research capacity. Ideas included the creation of platforms to collaborate at national, regional and global levels, as well as multi-institutional grants that could foster intra and inter country collaboration, knowledge and expertise sharing. This approach was se... قراءة المزيدen as a ‘multiplier’ for the continent that could add value to country investments and combat ‘brain drain’. Another area of agreement concerned processes by which research capacity gaps could be identified and filled. Identifying gaps requires well-planned approaches that apply the right designs and tools, since errors could result in the misdirection of resources at the cost of other priorities. Participants suggested that robust monitoring, evaluation and feedback systems should be developed to identify research gaps, direct planning and funding. Locating gaps in capacity for food systems research is only useful if it is effectively communication to decision makers. Therefore, a high value was placed on developing the expertise to communicate research to the right stakeholders, beyond publications and conferences, so as to promote research uptake into action. The idea of ‘multisectoral approaches’ emerged among the breakout groups. This term is often used but participants questioned whether it is authentically pursued across the continent, and if not – what are the barriers? Collecting multisectoral data is an important starting point, as is the need to build and/or strengthen the capacity of national institutions to work together (example: Ministry of Health and Ministry of Agriculture) in order to improve collaborative capacity. Upstream work is urgently needed to ensure that curriculums and research agendas at African universities are interdisciplinary and intersectoral. A debate around terminologies took place in plenary, and participants agreed on the need for coherence around the phrases: multidisciplinary; interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary. Communicating and collaborating with policymakers and funders was deemed of utmost importance among all, with a strong emphasis on the need to articulate the value added of research and research capacity investment in each subnational/national/regional context. Linked to this was a common call to identify the relevant decision-making stakeholders and structures (i.e. donors/governments/processes) and target these with refined advocacy asks. There was broad consensus that implementation evidence is powerful in helping policymakers make decisions to change the system. Therefore, fostering research-based policies through long-term relationships between researchers and policymakers is crucial. Involvement of researchers from myriad disciplines in designing education policy and interventions is paramount. However, Dialogue participants agreed highlighted barriers to engaging with policymakers and funders, including other sectoral priorities and bureaucracy. Bringing policymakers into the process of identifying capacity gaps early on would give them a better understanding of the research process and the significance of these shortfalls for the wider economy. Also, a wider range of stakeholders into policy dialogue processes -i.e. students, educators, beneficiaries/users– will further demonstrate how research impacts on people’s lives, and thus the importance of directing resources into the pipeline of expertise. Some outlying ideas emerged from separate groups. These included sending postgraduate students abroad to build capacity and foster ideas exchange; to place greater emphasis on indigenous knowledge and traditional systems in curriculums and policy forums; and to establish institutional sharing systems for costly equipment and resources. While these topics were not necessarily proposed by every group, they are none-the-less invaluable ideas that stimulated discussion. قراءة القليل

• Expertise cannot be fostered overnight. Policymakers themselves require a minimum comprehension of intersectoral solutions to food, nutrition and environmental challenges. Developing the next generation of researchers and practitioners requires multi-disciplinary investment well in advance. • Funding is central. It should be well-planned and diversified, so it’s not entirely externally driven. This will allow research agendas to be formulated by African institutions and academics. Certainty around long-term funding would give universities and research institutions the confidence to inv... قراءة المزيدests in their own systems that support high-quality teaching, learning and research • It is critical to develop systems for forecasting and proactively planning to fill gaps in research expertise and scientific systems. This means investing in data collection and cross-institutional information sharing (between and within governments and universities). • Communicating with policymakers and funders is of utmost importance for the future of evidence-based food system actions. Building capacity in stakeholder engagement and scientific communications, including expertise to liaise effectively and ethically with the private sector and political leaders should be a priority. • Linkages between research and policy should be prioritised. Involvement of researchers from myriad disciplines in designing education policy and interventions is paramount. But barriers exist in engaging with policymakers and funders. Policymaker involvement in processes of identifying capacity would instil a firmer understanding of the research process and the significance of these shortfalls for the wider economy and society. • The significant depth of indigenous and traditional knowledge systems across Africa should be more purposely brought inside curriculums. • Regional and international networks and platforms for teaching, learning and research are pivotal to promoting collaboration and sharing the latest evidence, technologies, lessons learnt and best practices. قراءة القليل

The UN Food System Summit promises to “launch bold new actions to transform the way the world produces and consumes food, delivering progress on all 17 Sustainable Development Goals.” An ambitious aim that reflects the urgency needed to address the profound global and local problems linked to existing food systems – from poor diets driving malnutrition and chronic disease, to the climate crisis, environmental degradation and widening inequities eroding the safety and sustainability of livelihoods. Many of these are shared global challenges, yet significant variations exist across regions... قراءة المزيد and within diverse country contexts, where levels of food and nutrition security and safety are hugely divergent. While high level rhetoric around food system transformation is positive, it is critical to understand how the evidence-base needed to underpin, guide and re-evaluate such priorities and policies in different settings will be generated and sustained. Ambitious ideas and goals emerging from the Summit must be supported by robust types of information. The expertise to generate contextually appropriate and scientifically robust evidence (cutting across disciplines) in a timely way is arguably as important as the policies themselves. In other words… “A game changer!” But unlike statements drafted for the Summit, they cannot be produced in a matter of weeks or months. Generating evidence that spans disciplines and sectors is inherently complex, but not insurmountable. However, bottlenecks may exist in the pipeline of expertise, particularly in countries where existing capacity may not yet be sufficient. In light of, this, investing in systems of research, learning and sharing – within and among affected regions, particularly low- and middle income settings – will be paramount to steering context-specific interventions, informed by robust evidence-bases as food systems evolve. The political and financial commitments expected to flow from the Summit should extend to these systems, to ensure that support is provided ‘upstream’ to interdisciplinary curriculums and training, alongside mechanisms for cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder research and learning collaboration. But before this can happen, a range of important questions must be better addressed, which this Dialogue sought to respond. These include, but are not limited to: • Both food systems and research will have to coevolve, one informed by the other in an ongoing fashion. How can we plan and invest in long-term research capacities needed to support this? • What type of capacities are needed to prioritise policies in an evidence-informed way? I.e. to generate evidence to understand what works, what does not, how to improve, who wins, who loses, trade-offs and co-benefits across diverse outcomes of interest, as well as cost-effectiveness and financing • How can countries identify and prioritize solutions that could be most catalytic for positive food system transformation, informed by evidence? • Multi-disciplinary expertise is needed in all regions to help address these questions and to underpin key recommendations from the Summit and beyond. By convening stakeholders across communities of research, education and policy, with a specific focus on the African context, this Independent Dialogue will provide a space for these important questions to be discussed, and for new concerns and considerations to be shared. قراءة القليل

In the seventh question of this dialogue, "how do young people participate in food transformation and the concept of" good food "go deep into society? There are some differences: Some participants believed that: ”I feel familiar and distant. This kind of personal practice problem is mentioned almost every time. Everyone deeply realizes that these social problems need to be internalized and externalized in practice, but they often feel helpless because there are too many system departments involved and it is difficult to implement and promote. As a youth, I hope to participate in the grain tr... قراءة المزيدansformation as much as I can, but I feel I can't start. قراءة القليل

This opinion only represents the views of the participants in this dialogue, not the views of the government: Participants' views are: Food security can be divided into ① quantity (❶ country: the quantity occupied can be self-sufficient to meet the needs of Chinese people❵world perspective: on the premise of meeting the domestic demand, we can also appropriately promote the improvement of product rate and contribute to solving the problem of food and clothing in the world. Food security is not only related to the national economic and political security, The deeper thinking is also relat... قراءة المزيدed to whether human beings can really get rid of hunger, survive and adapt to nature) ② quality: the food problem from production to use (such as preservation, excessive additives, harmful to human body), and whether the substances contained in it are worth using Indicators: indicators can also be divided into ① quantity: (❶ quantity of species ❶ product rate of grain) ② quality (❶ nutritious ❶ food that will not cause human disease or death) 4. The emergence of food security problems can be divided into three points + 5. Measures ① environment: food production will also be restricted by the environment. We need to reduce the dependence of food on the environment and form a sustainable food supply chain ② management methods of management: waste is also the key to food security (quantitative security), The management class can properly formulate some rules (for example, what punishment will be given to the number of grams left after eating). ③ in terms of concept, it is also an important issue of food security (for example, superstition, some people use animal protection as medicine to lead to violations and crimes - "ideal shines on China"). I think people should improve their understanding of food in terms of spiritual education. قراءة القليل

The purpose of this dialogue is to summarize the views of participants' youth groups, not the views of the government The dialogue summarized the following systemic perspectives on food security: 1. National and international level 2, social and global level 3, personal behavior level. As young people, they can mainly participate in the latter two levels. Of course, it is better to formulate relevant laws and regulations in the first level. Young people can learn from it and publicize it. You can also actively participate in relevant theme activities held by society and campus. From the perspe... قراءة المزيدctive of individual participants, you can strictly require yourself not to waste food, not to eat expired and deteriorated food, not to eat three no products, etc قراءة القليل

This independent dialogue is centered on the theme of "world food security". It is not only in response to the United Nations Food System Summit (unfss), but also hopes to explore social views, thoughts and suggestions under the theme of "world food security". We hope to invite outstanding young people from all walks of life to combine critical thinking, all-round perspective and multi fields, Jointly focus on "food security" and make suggestions for the convening of the summit! The dialogue adopted: 1. Briefly introduce yourself and talk about your understanding of "good food"? 2. Talk about ... قراءة المزيدthe food security problems or experiences in your life? 3. What is food security and what are the main indicators to measure food security? 4. How did the problem of food security arise? 5. Brief introduction to the world food problem and its solutions? 6. What are the specific aspects of the weakening of food security awareness? 7. As young people, how should we participate in the transformation of food security? How to deepen the concept of "good food" into society? 8. What are the main solutions to the consensus reached by you? 9. If the discussants have different opinions, discuss and supplement the questions. 10. The collaborator summarizes the results of the group discussion And other issues were discussed in depth. قراءة القليل

Bioprotection / biocontrol and biobased inputs in general are not strongly enough in the radar of public policies nor in the reports and recommendations of key institutions related to Food Systems. EU policy, like the Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy could be very relevant tools to create space and incentives for the bio-based solutions sector to innovate and develop. Generally, creating a system conducive to life is desirable and needed to accelerate the transition from the old eradication mindset that started around World War II in the EU. It is important to consider bioprotection and it... قراءة المزيدs efficacy and benefits within the context of the whole agricultural system considering positive and negative externalities for farmers, nature and society when comparing its performance to conventional / chemical pesticides. Distribution channels in some countries are structured under a rebate system where chemicals are rebated more than biologicals as system is set up for chemicals and are supplied by large companies while biocontrol is mostly supplied by SMEs and they tend not to operate within the rebate system. This varies by country but is a systemic block to biocontrol. قراءة القليل