Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

Action Points: Ensure affordability and accessibility Educate consumers and companies Make changes in the regulation and policy to unlock the evolution of new food technology

N/A

Some participants disagreed that innovation and technology is the best way to improve irrigation practices. They felt instead that we should look back to traditional forms of farming, where farmers were able to use resources efficiently without having to rely on high-tech solutions. Others believed that even traditional techniques would need modernisation to work on a large scale. There was also some divergence on the importance of certifications like “organic” or “bio”, because these agricultural practices can be more sustainable, but they are not affordable if farmers have to pay lar... Read morege amounts to get the certification. Some participants identified industry and farmers as being most responsible for causing and having to solve the issue whereas many participants thought politicians and institutions have the biggest responsibility as policy drives consumers’ and producers’ behaviour. The participants were however unanimous in considering that all actors, including consumers, have a share of responsibility and power to change the situation. Some participants agreed that economic growth needs to still be a priority. Others think that economic priorities and national self-interest are intrinsically at odds with the protection of the environment and communities. Some policy officers think that talking about the greater good does not work in practice, and it is important to change the narrative to show to stakeholders why it is in their economic interest to manage water more efficiently. Read less

Discussion Group 3: Political Responsibility The group recognised that policies have an impact on industry practices, consumer behaviour, and farmers’ livelihoods. These are the main solutions identified by the participants: - Funding international schemes. Innovation helps better manage water, but there is a need to fund innovation also in poorer countries. One of the obstacles to this solution is to find ways to convince wealthier countries to act internationally even in a situation where the emergency could be still hard to grasp within their own national borders. - Policies for restricti... Read moreng wasteful water use. Policies should be introduced to reduce the amount of water wasted by farmers and industry. - Policies preventing criminal acts. Criminal groups exploit the problem of water scarcity and infrastructure, as already seen in Turkey. There is a need for policies that prevent these crimes from taking place. - Establishing connecting bodies. There seems to be a lack of understanding and communication between different government bodies (e.g. local/regional municipalities and national governments). As different regions need to deal with different realities, they tend to have different approaches to water management. There could be space for the role of “ambassadors” who help connect these different groups. Read less

Discussion Group 4: Financial Responsibility With this group, there was a strong sense that what really needs to change is the perceived value of water, across all stakeholders. Here are some specific solutions found at the financial level: - Penalising bad use of water. Taxes and fines could penalise inefficient use of water. For example, water intensive products would be paid more, there could be caps to the amount of water farmers and industries can use, there could be different taxations for different types of water (e.g. producers using treated wastewater would need to pay less than produ... Read morecers using freshwater). There could be fines for releasing untreated water in the environment. - Rewarding efficiency in water use. Incentives and subsidies could support the implementation of new technologies, water monitoring, and change in production systems (for example hydroponic cultures). - Public water banking. This practice was mentioned as a useful tool to reallocate water according to criteria of equity, efficiency, and sustainability. Read less

The Dialogue on "Why we need water ethics" revolved around water scarcity in the Mediterranean. Water scarcity is an increasing problem in our world, with around 4 billion people already living under conditions of severe water scarcity for at least 1 month a year. With an ever-increasing global population and rising temperatures, water scarcity is predicted to increase across all continents. The Mediterranean basin is one area of the world that will suffer heavy consequences of climate change. Besides temperature increase, most models consistently predict rainfall decreases throughout all seas... Read moreons in the Mediterranean. This will have a significant impact on water availability for food production and water consumption in the region – in just two decades, an additional 250 million people will suffer from water scarcity due to droughts in the Mediterranean alone. In this dialogue, to which we invited mainly millennial participants from different countries and backgrounds, we reflected on which ethical frameworks we need to adopt in order to change our future water management and consumption so that everyone can get access to this resource. A big question was about how we can move beyond our exploitative mindset when thinking about our relationship to water. We mainly focused on solutions related to the actions of four different stakeholder groups: 1. Farmers’ and industry’s responsibility; 2. Consumers’ responsibility; 3. Political responsibility; 4. Financial responsibility. Farmers and industry’s responsibility. This group focused on the practices that farmers and industry should adopt over the next few years in order to decrease their water footprint. Consumers’ responsibility. This group focused on the ways consumers can already reduce their water footprint related to food consumption. Political responsibility. This group focused on the policies that could help accelerate the adoption of more sustainable agricultural practices and consumer behavioural change. Financial responsibility. The group focused on the importance of financial incentives to improve efficiency in water use. The group discussed the use of fines, limits to consumption, taxes, subsidies, tax reductions, and prizes. Read less

While technological innovations are in theory already available for farmers to grow food more efficiently, in reality farmers often can’t access these innovations as they do not have the financial means to implement them. The issue is that farmers, especially small and medium, are usually too focused on breaking even to have the headspace to think about how to be more sustainable. Participants discussed the hypothesis of shortening supply chains and connecting consumers and farmers more directly, allowing farmers to make more profit. On the consumer side, the main obstacle most commonly face... Read mored when trying to reduce one’s water footprint is the inability to find reliable, easily accessible, and not contradictory information to guide decisions. Financial incentives for consumers are also currently lacking – it seems that the products which require more water to be produced are also the cheapest and most subsidised. For these reasons, most participants identified policy makers and governmental bodies as the most powerful actors to drive change – besides also agreeing on the fact that there is a shared responsibility and we all have to play our part to mitigate the issue. The groups discussed the importance of policies and financial support that promote more sustainable practices, such as nature-based solutions, regenerative agriculture, and vertical farming, as well as incentives for better managing waste. On the other hand, participants agreed that we would also need “restrictive” policies, to penalise bad management of water and to prevent criminal acts in water scarce areas. There was a strong sense that governments need to think beyond their national borders to be able to solve this issue. Everyone agreed that water, as a basic human right, should remain a public resource and should not be privatised. At the end of the Dialogue, all participants voted on the solutions that they thought should be the ones to take priority. These are: 1. Working off long term economic models, which help to share costs and benefits across generations and ensure inter-generational equity. 2. Giving economic incentives to reward sustainable practices, and penalisation for bad water use. 3. Creating programmes that successfully raise awareness of these issues and lead consumers to revaluing water by education. 4. Moving beyond nationalism, funding innovations in different countries. Read less

Discussion Group 1: Farmers’ and Industry’s Responsibility Participants acknowledged that innovations for more sustainable production are in theory already available to farmers. However, the small and medium scale farmers who took part in the dialogue said that farmers are often unwilling or financially unable to take up these innovations, it seems important to create incentives for farmers to actually adopt these technologies. One way could be through financial support and incentives from governments, another would be through the purchasing power of more aware consumers. According to part... Read moreicipants, there are four possible solutions that farmers and industry could adopt directly. - Shortening supply chains and connecting directly with consumers. By removing some intermediaries who take a big cut of farmers’ profit, farmers would make more profit and would be able to focus more on employing sustainable practices rather than only having the headspace to focus on staying afloat. - Recovering old ways of farming. Implementing regenerative agriculture methods, such as composting or crop cycling. - Better managing waste. Not just waste water, but waste in general, so that all the input that goes into producing food is creating output that’s consumed and does not end up in landfills. - Vertical farming as a new frontier. Shifting away from conventional horizontal farming to maximise efficiency of food production for the global population. Read less

Discussion Group 2: Consumers’ Responsibility In this discussion group, consumers conveyed the difficulty of accessing information about water usage in food production. There was a widespread consensus that good, reliable, and unbiased information is hard to find. The top three solutions consumers could adopt are: - Educating themselves more about water footprint. Revaluing water by becoming more aware of how precious a resource it is. - Reducing food waste, in order to not waste the resources that were used to produce their food. - Reducing footprint through dietary choices, choosing foods ... Read morethat involve lower water usage. Read less

Localization is the new globalization. Bottom up approach considering community needs. Globalize when it is absolutely necessary, not as a luxury.

Localization of food system is nature positive and shall build back better and sustainable. However this requires the active handholding of the globalized market with reduced marketing and misinfodemic. We could create a planet with localized hubs to optimized production and scale without compromising inequality. However, one needs transparency when it comes to policy and food systems.

As much as localization was a welcome spree and a possible solution to the food system, it was quite a complex problem for global citizens who are used to high end products and the luxury that come with it. The notion that good food cant be cheap was a diverging point. Framers claim it could be if done right and within the community. The lack of education , the market conditions and the demand of eating fast food as promoted by influencers was also discussed.

2. For States/Governments to formally recognize the rights of indigenous peoples to their lands, territories, natural resources including customary rights, traditional knowledge and cultures including practices. In countries where there is formal recognition to i) fully, effective and immediate implementation of the laws (i.e. Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act, 1997 in the Philippines; Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord, 1997 in Bangladesh); and ii) amend existing laws that do not fully recognize these rights (i.e. Forest Act 1927 as amended, Bangladesh). Where formal recognition is absent, to... Read more enact laws respecting these rights (i.e. A law based on a Ministry of Culture’s Cabinet Resolution of 3 August 2010 providing guidance for the restoration of traditional livelihoods in conjunction with Articles 43 and 70 of the 2019 Constitution (Kingdom of Thailand). Specifically, such recognition should translate, but not limited to :  State investment on the provision of infrastructure, financial and technical /expert support for IPs to innovate and increase production, improve food processing and marketing. o To establish community seed banks to be managed in partnership with IPs and provide relevant trainings to enhance their knowledge and practices on indigenous seed preservation, regeneration and seed exchange/sharing among and between IPs to increase varieties and volume of stocks. o Construct and maintain appropriate irrigation systems, farm to market roads, post-harvest facilities such as but not limited to cold storages and warehouses in IPs’ farms. o Provide relevant extension services and experts related to post harvest management, processing and marketing, and trainings on indigenous resource management and social enterprise development for IPs.  States should also invest on the strengthening of the roles and contributions of indigenous women, youth, elders and persons with disabilities and their agencies. States should provide an enabling environment for them to fully contribute to end hunger and malnutrition through capacity building activities to leverage informed and effective decision making; financial support and other logistics for their participation at village, local, national and international processes; recognize women's right to own property, including land and find ways to fulfill these without prejudice to the collective right to land and territories.  State as Models in Food Governance - For government agencies to integrate the promotion of healthy and safe indigenous food in their programs/projects and daily activities i.e. : o indigenous foods in the meal/feeding components; and o discussions on the nutrient/safe properties of indigenous foods in the education components in conditional cash transfers to poor families to improve health, nutrition and education of children; o to require school canteen operators to serve/sell indigenous foods and totally ban unhealthy (junk/fast food and sugar-laden drinks) food including in government functions and activities; o develop and include in their school curriculum, subjects/lessons on indigenous foods, food systems, and nutrition and responsible consumption from pre-school to universities/colleges, including tapping into IP knowledge holders and experts as teachers/lecturers.. o refrain from processed commodities and instead prioritize procurement of locally available resources, including indigenous food in disaster/emergency/humanitarian response; promote and support self-help initiatives such as those that emerged from the COVID – 19 pandemic i.e. community pantries, food exchange and collective gardens, among others. Read less

3. For all other stakeholders including governments and the private, donors and financial sectors to refrain from commodifying everything from land, natural resources, knowledge, labor, culture, values, etc. and discriminating indigenous food systems as backward and problematic. These contribute tremendously to the erosion of indigenous food systems, specifically, and ultimately, IPs’ identities and rights. Moreover, changing mindsets entails commitments to collaborative actions from all stakeholders to address the divergences above.  Ensure that programs/projects to be implemented partly... Read more or entirely in indigenous peoples’ lands/territories or those that will impact on indigenous peoples’ lives o undertake full and effective consultations with IPs to be affected consistent to the rights of Indigenous Peoples to free, prior and informed consent; o respect community protocols; o institutionalize/require the following as programs/projects standard components in all initiatives : define, with IPs i) a benefit-sharing scheme and mechanisms for implementation in partnership with IPs themselves and/or organizations/institutions endorsed by IPs; ii) accessible grievance mechanism; and iii) waste segregation and recycling policies ensuring allotment of resources for implementation, monitoring and exit strategies; o take into account gender disparities and other factors of marginalization of other members of IP communities in the above processes;  To fund and/or include the above recommendations in their programs/projects as appropriate.  Support the strengthening of indigenous food systems by supporting community initiatives and linking them to various experts for capacity building towards social enterprise development, support/organize meaningful food festivals in schools/colleges, urban centers and in communities where they operate including creating champions for indigenous food and food systems. Indigenous community social enterprise can influence the reversion of migration for income purposes, especially among the youth; women and youth collectives and initiatives should also be encouraged to facilitate knowledge transfer noting also the roles and capacities of the youth to influence transformation towards gender equality.  Instill the value of proper waste management as consumers and participants in the food systems. Include proper waste management such as but not limited to composting (i.e. establishing community composting facilities in support of community gardens); stop the use of plastics in packaging and give rewards to communities/institutions/organizations that reach zero-plastic use; and develop and support waste to energy initiatives. Read less

Based on the IP perspective of food and food systems, there were not much divergence of views among participants. The divergence, however, as stressed by participants, results from the ‘other’ ( i.e. government/policy, science and academe) perspective as observed in practice. Addressing these divergences is the only way to food security, at least for some 370-500 million of the world’s population and the protection of the last remaining biodiversity frontiers critical to sustain the people and the planet. IP Perspective vs. "other" 1) Food and health are basic rights vs. Food and health ... Read moreare becoming commodities and a privilege which IPs, generally, cannot afford. 2) IPs maintain a sacred relationship with nature because it supports their lives and wellbeing. IP territories are the primary factors in food production. This includes not only the land but all the resources and the services they provide that supports food production and regeneration vs. Land and resources are economic commodities that can be procured for profit-oriented development and/or best interest of the state/majority like extractive industries and monocrop palm oil plantations, etc. in the name of addressing local employment and poverty among others. 3) Land is a community property for the common good vs. Land is an individual/private property. 4) IP food and food systems are safe, nutritious and sustainable vs. Indigenous food systems are backward, are against resource conservation and negligible in the context of mass production/ commercial scale therefore promotion of hybrid/HYVs, fast growing agricultural stocks and technology closely related to heavy use of chemical inputs for large-scale production which is considered the ‘best option’ to address hunger; 5) IP traditional agriculture ( i.e. Jhum/rotational) respect resource regeneration, biodiversity conservation and the rights to food and livelihoods of the future generation vs Prohibited or criminalized in state forest, protected area and conservation policies; 6) IP food systems developed from collective indigenous knowledge and practice based on principles of reciprocity and equitability vs Knowledge can be isolated and patented for individual profit. 7) Respect IPs who want to preserve and develop their food systems or prefer not to engage/link with the broader food systems ( i.e. hunters-gatherers/IPs in voluntary isolation) vs. Communities are target markets Read less

The dialogue's major focus was on the integrity of Indigenous Peoples of rights to their food systems and its links to the broader aspects of their lives, identities, culture and environment within and outside their communities. Speakers and participants through the workgroups reiterated the primacy of the recognition of their collective rights to their territories as a lever for change that the UNFSS should advance. How this is intricately linked to resource and biodiversity conservation and the sustained well-being of people and planet cannot be overemphasized. The workgroups revolved around... Read more the major factors in agricultural production, production method and inputs (Action Track 3); variety, quantity and quality of produce (Action Track 1); and coping with climatic changes in indigenous food systems (Action Track 5). Participants also described how food processing is done, how their products fared in the market (Action Track 4) and consumers’ feedback on the processed foods and on indigenous foods in general (Action Track 2). These surfaced the divergence between IP food systems and the broader food system and the recommendations advanced herewith. Read less

Transforming the current food systems to reach the SDGs requires an approach that responds to the fulfillment of the basic human right to safe and nutritious food. For IPs, this translates to the formal recognition of their rights to their lands, territories, resources and the practice of their culture, traditional knowledge and to determine their development, including food systems . The recognition of these rights is an indispensable instrument for evolving equitable and sustainable food systems. The discussions were underpinned by Indigenous Peoples' right to food and food systems and revol... Read moreved around elements such as production, processing, distribution and consumption and cross cutting issues like waste management and the roles and contributions of women, youth, elders, government, the private sector, NGOs/Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations (IPOs) and donors/financial institutions. It included status, risks, challenges and opportunities along the food systems and proposals to ensure protection and resilience. Based on the Poll results, participants regard land (83%) and water (58%) as most important factors of production. In rotational farming, inputs include seeds, traditional knowledge and practices, values and stable climate conditions. The main challenge in sustaining indigenous food production is the absence of formal recognition by countries of IPs’ rights to their lands, territories, resources and the practice of their culture, traditional knowledge and to determine their development, including food systems. Other challenges are diminishing labor supply, loss of seeds, erratic climate and disintegrating traditional knowledge, values and practices; and discrimination of rotational farming as backward, problematic, illegal and even criminalized in some Asian countries. Fish, wild edibles and other non-timber forest products are disappearing due to the entry of extractive industries and monocrop plantations, among others. Such progressive disruption of Indigenous Peoples' food systems and livelihoods are resulting to insecurity and vulnerability to shocks especially in times of emergency like the impacts of climate change ( la nina, el nino) and the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, challenges in food processing and marketing,in general, such as lack of post-harvest infrastructure, processing facilities, processing technologies, product development and problems related to marketing and transportation affect IP initiatives and innovations. There is also a general lack of basic social services in most IP communities to enable their access to information, services and support to their agencies. Food preference have changed in favor of convenience/fast foods especially among the young generation. The high regard traditionally held for food is deteriorating due to unsustainable production and consumption patterns resulting from influences of migration, media and other external factors. This also includes discrimination where indigenous children and youth refrain from traditional food lest be despised and bullied by their non-IP peer group. Women possess and apply important indigenous knowledge, systems and practices in the food systems including on wild edible plants, seeds, etc. but they have limited access to the other means of production, processing and distribution. There is an increasing feminization of indigenous food systems due to migration of males in search of paid labor/jobs coupled by the declining interest of the youth in the food systems. Their roles and contributions in the food systems are not recognized and are not included in decision-making processes. Sadly, they continue to be sexually harassed. Elders continue to perform traditional rituals related to food production and IPs’ relationship with lands/forests and nature/environment but there are cases of censorship by government affecting its vitality and could lead to disintegration. With the progressive impact of the broader system and other factors, however, IPs cannot do this alone. It requires partnership among women, men, youth, elders and persons with disabilities and appropriate financial, technical and technological support of governments, the private sector, NGOs/Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations (IPOs) and donors/financial institutions. The recommendations advanced from this dialogue are proposals by Indigenous Peoples to enable effective response not only to the goal of ending hunger but also of sustaining the planet for the next generation. The UNFSS should clearly repudiate the marginalization of indigenous food systems. Consitent to its principles of engagement, it should champion the promotion and advancement of indigenous food systems as an equitable and sustainable solution while creating opportunities to strengthen these not only for food security but also because of its intersecting function in biodiversity and resource conservation, and ,climate change mitigation and resilience. Read less

1. Indigenous Peoples commit to continue and/or revive their food systems and transfer associated traditional knowledge and practices to the next generation and broader society if conditions allow. These enabling conditions are enumerated in the following recommendations below. Further, at the community level, the dialogue recommends that Indigenous Peoples :  Develop, disseminate and implement community protocols to ensure that their food systems are protected and sustained; this includes documentation and establishing mechanisms to prevent theft and patenting of indigenous food materials ... Read moreand knowledge/intellectual property but without prejudice to IPs who are inclined to such, provided, they are fully and effectively informed and their consent provided;  In cooperation with NGOs/IPOs, establish strong partnerships and networks with all stakeholders in the food systems such as but not limited to other IPs, governments/relevant agencies and institutions (health, trade, education/trainings), the private sector, academe/science.  In partnerships with IPOs, colleges/universities, governments and donors, (i) undertake research and documentation of indigenous foods, including wild/uncultivated, and food systems (production, processing, distribution and consumption) and associated knowledge and practices; (ii) conduct nutrition analysis; and (iii) prepare educational materials in popular forms. Read less

- Raise awareness, provide information completely and timely for farmers on environmental protection, clean agricultural production, enhance the nutritional value of products. - Promote value chain, collective models, solve ideological problems of a part of farmers; support farmers to produce according to standards related to food hygiene and safety, designs, packaging, product certification, and traceability; promote “linking 6 houses” (farmers, government, scientists, enterprises, banks, journalists), link farmer-farmer to share experience in production, consumption; coordinate between F... Read morearmers’ Union and enterprises, banks to help farmers access loans to expand productions, extend loan term and reduce the interest rate. - Build policies and mechanisms related to population planning, production areas, invest in key models, build agricultural policies to support the family through cooperatives, promote agricultural transformation towards ecological sustainability. - Develop agricultural insurance system to help farmers reduce the risks of natural disasters. - Strengthen capacity for farmers in management, application of science and technology in production, processing and consumption through training courses. - Promote the process of digital transformation in agriculture - Strengthen the mobilization of resources, programs and projects to support farmers in developing sustainable agriculture, ensuring nutrition and food safety. Read less

Government: The State should have special preferential policies to attract investment in processing industry, strengthen the state management of inputs in agricultural productivity (fertilizers, animal feeds, veterinary drugs, plant protection drugs, etc.); support for farmers participating in agricultural insurance; strengthen cooperation with other countries, especially China in the consumption of agricultural products, invest funds to support farmers produce agricultural products that meet VietGAP, GlobalGAP standards and traceability, invest in building large-scale animal feed material are... Read moreas to reduce import dependence, build policies and mechanisms related to population planning, production areas, develop agricultural insurance system. Vietnam Farmers’ Union at all levels should strengthen propaganda and mobilization to raise awareness and participation of farmers in eco-friendly production and nutrition improvement through agriculture, promote the development of collective economy, establish cooperatives, promote supporting services to help farmers to associate in production and consumption, promote “linking 6 houses” (farmers, government, scientists, enterprises, banks, journalists), organize and coordinate with relevant ministries, sectors to provide training courses, training workshops on capacity-building for farmers, mobilize domestic and external resources to develop agriculture, farmers and rural areas. Enterprises should associate with other parties to support farmers in production, distribution and consumption, provide technical support and technology transfer. International organizations, non-governmental organizations should develop projects to support farmers to apply new technologies in production, design capacity-building program for farmers, send experts to provide technical assistance. Read less