Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

Co-organized by International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Food Tank, and Global Alliance for the Future of Food, and in partnership with the UN Food System Summit (UNFSS) Champions Network, presented seven-panel discussions (running one event each month from January to June 2021) focusing on how to transform the world’s food systems. Each virtual series explored one of the Global Alliance’s seven Calls to Action and brought together more than 25+ UNFSS Champion speakers worldwide, including world-renowned activists, journalists, business leaders, farmers, policy and technical... Read more experts, and many others. Each conversation will help set the stage and identify critical pathways to create a better future of food and strengthen our global food systems for the upcoming UNFSS in September 2021. This third event in the virtual series highlighted the Global Alliance's call to action, Recognize and account for the positive and negative environmental, social, and health impacts and externalities of food and agricultural system policies and practices to inform decision-making. This discussion overlapped significantly with Food Tank’s Action Track #2: shift to sustainable consumption patterns. The panel brought together an international array of food systems leaders to issue calls for action on global food systems, elevate public discourse about reforming our food systems, and develop principles to guide stakeholders in leveraging food systems to support the SDGs. Speakers included were four UN FSS Champions Network members, who discussed the deep complexities of food and agricultural systems, and provided insights into pathways that can transform food systems to be renewable, healthy, inclusive, and equitable. The event is part of a series of panels with themes inspired by Global Alliance’s Seven Calls to Action to transform the food system. Moderated by Ruth Richardson, Executive Director of the Global Alliance and Danielle Nierenberg, President of Food Tank, each conversation features members of the United Nations Food Systems Champions Network. The panelists brought a range of perspectives to help understand food systems sustainability. Joao Campari of the Worldwide Fund for Nature put the environmental stress created by agriculture in focus and called on consumers to make conscious choices in order to have a profound collective impact. Sandrine Dixson-Declève, Co-President of the Club of Rome, urged consideration for those who have less choice in the products they consume and to involve young people, who will be most affected by the impacts of climate change. Naoko Ishii, Executive Vice-President of the Center for Global Commons, University of Tokyo emphasized the need for effective communication and accurate measurement to improve understanding of the impact of current unsustainable practices. Finally, Michael Taylor, Director of the Global Secretariat of the International Land Coalition, explained the need to support smallholder farmers, women, and Indigenous peoples who are crucial to the global food supply. Read less

Education on healthy and sustainable food is important and should be integrated into sustainable, healthy food procurement. It can be observed a lack of integration between procurement and education policy and departments. As outlined by the legal expert, it can also be a way to circumvent the difficulty to purchase local food by using a healthy food education strategy to ensure e.g. that school trips to (local) production sites are offered. Today it is challenging for children to eat healthy and to have a food education. They learn about food from Tik Tok: is it the right source of informatio... Read moren? Schools are not able to serve the function of giving any influence on that. There should be a better connection between production and consumption, especially for children to easily navigate the way we shop and make independent decisions on food. Possible solutions: - Make link to educational purpose of procurement. Can be a legal loophole, but it’s also a fundamentally important opportunity to improve children’s diets, and to teach them about the links between food choices and environment. - Implementing interesting idea to “circumvent” local procurement prohibition by integrating food education (e.g.farmers visits) in public food tenders. Worth expanding the idea! - Food education to be integrated in all school curricula (good food and good food knowledge are basic rights and skills are important Read less

The participants did not agree on if it was a good idea (sustainable and green) or not to open To open the tenders to SME because of the more transportation.

Food public procurement is the main topic of discussion. the Copenhagen food strategy sets new and ambitious goals and strategies on food and meals of high culinary quality, which can contribute to a healthier and more climate-responsible city for all Copenhageners. The strategy comprises initiatives that help to promote Copenhagen as a food city and contribute to develop the local food system around the city, The first part look at the opportunities for farm to fork procurement involving local and regional small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and farmers in compliance with applicable legal fra... Read moremeworks. Another focus is on linking school food procurement with education. The second part of the dialogue focuses on the domestic food market. Local and national stakeholders will discuss opportunities for upcoming tenders on the farm to fork procurement, focussing on potatoes (‘Copenhagen potato tender’). Read less

A very important point that came up in all the discussions was the need to talk to each other to gain an understanding of the different needs and their reasons to act the way they are. It also came up, that procurement can be a very powerful tool to reach the strategies (including the set) that a municipality has committed to. Besides, to ensure sustainable, healthy food environments, and in particular, farm to fork procurement, a multi-stakeholder market engagement and a proper assessment of what is consumed and produced in the peri-urban context. Possible solutions: - Change how we procure: ... Read more- Under threshold, direct purchasing i.e. buy a whole harvest from a farmer. Good for the producer, and results in good price for the buyer. - Dynamic food systems – using software solutions (increasingly widespread in UK) - Share farming i.e. as a municipality, agree in advance to buy a certain percentage of a farm’s harvest. - Follow good examples, and learn from leaders in your country i.e. Copenhagen and Milan. - Mapping is crucial and should be happening in every city around the world, based on: - What we consume (in the city) - What we have on offer (at local/regional/rural level) - We want the kitchens to be connected with the farmers, and also to bring this collaboration all the way to the teaching materials in the schools, but it needs to both involve the city officials so that not all have to know the procurement rules and how to do a food contract to do the cooking in the kitchens, this is what the project COACH can help with, by creating a teaching material of how to write public procurement that opens up for SME and farmers to give a direct bid to it. But it also has to involve the ministry level to have the right impact so that all the children in a country can have the benefit of the education material that is made. - Discussion on inter-sectorial working groups and how important is it that these are made to share knowledge – This is done within the Best ReMaP project. - Monitoring system is important (food waste, transportation miles, where crops are grooving, what we are using and so on) and by gaining this knowledge, we will be able to make better and more sustainable food procurement. We need to understand the food system, and the flaws to be able to help to fix it. Read less

Co-organized by International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Food Tank, and Global Alliance for the Future of Food, and in partnership with the UN Food System Summit (UNFSS) Champions Network, presented seven-panel discussions (running one event each month from January to June 2021) focusing on how to transform the world’s food systems. Each virtual series explored one of the Global Alliance’s seven Calls to Action and brought together more than 25+ UNFSS Champion speakers worldwide, including world-renowned activists, journalists, business leaders, farmers, policy and technical... Read more experts, and many others. Each conversation will help set the stage and identify critical pathways to create a better future of food and strengthen our global food systems for the upcoming UNFSS in September 2021. This second event in the series highlighted the Global Alliance's call to action, Increase public research for the public good supporting ambitious, trans-disciplinary, inclusive, and systems-based approaches with an emphasis on the indivisible ecological, health, social, and economic goals. The panel brought together an international array of food systems leaders to issue calls for action on global food systems, elevate public discourse about reforming our food systems, and develop principles to guide stakeholders in leveraging food systems to support the SDGs. Speakers included three UN FSS Champions Network members, who explored the integral role of research to transform food systems to be renewable, healthy, inclusive, interconnected, and equitable. Dr. Kanayo Nwanze, CGIAR Special Representative to the Food Systems Summit and immediate former president of IFAD, highlighted the influence of the CGIAR - IFAD partnership, which has allowed research and innovation to target the most vulnerable rural communities. He stated that research results will not be relevant without the participation of smallholder farmers and local solutions. Dr. Kanayo Nwanze further emphasized that end-to-end networks spanning from governments to CSOs to farmers will be critical in transforming the food system. João Bosco Monte, President of Brazil Africa Institute and General Coordinator of the Brazil Africa Forum, discussed the need for “real” research that understands people’s priorities and generates results that can be put into practice, rather than simply put in a book. He stressed the importance of investment in detailed and pragmatic research that can work to change lives. Claudia Martínez Zuleta, Co-chair of country programs of the Food and Land Use Coalition (FOLU) and E3, underlined the role of citizen knowledge and science. She stressed the need for better education and allocational systems that allow youth and citizens to develop their research and create solutions within their communities. The discussion concluded with the panelists highlighting the issues of communication and dissemination of research. These barriers must be overcome to allow research to have more impact on the ground. Finally, all panelists agreed that the 5 Action Tracks of the UN FSS serve as a compass for discovering game-changing solutions, and this is where researchers need to focus. Read less

Panelists believe that research must engage women, youth, Indigenous groups, and other communities that are most impacted by the food system in order for transformation to be possible. Findings must be communicated in accessible ways and research must be precise and pragmatic to effect real change. There is a lot of knowledge being held in different jurisdictions and communities. It is important to increase connections between top-down and bottom-up approaches - between universities/research bodies, governments, and communities to allow for the proper transfer of knowledge and learning from on... Read moree another. There needs to be collaboration between researchers and other stakeholders and increased funding to allow the research results to be implemented on the ground. Creating strategic alliances and networks will be critical to bridge the gap between different actors and research bodies involved in food systems, and connecting producers to consumers. This is necessary for better integration of research and food systems transformation. Read less

The greatest challenge in research today is integration. It is important to bring together different perspectives, methodologies, and issues while focusing on the needs of the people who are at the core of the research. A systems approach when researching food systems is necessary. This means there must be more emphasis on increasing participatory research with youth, smallholder farmers, and Indigenous communities. Rural communities are the most vulnerable to today’s challenges including climate change, hunger and the pandemic. Not only should these groups be the focus of research, they als... Read moreo must be involved in identifying research priorities and implementing results. Panellists believe that an urgent change needed is the dismantling of silos. For example, researchers are doing important work around agriculture, diet, and climate change, but not enough of this research takes a systems based approach. This integration will be essential. New, innovative technologies and research can be used to reach a wider audience and to help communicate research effectively. Most research is conducted in English and this limits dissemination. Two-way communication between researchers and communities is necessary to ensure the research provides practical solutions. National and independent regional dialogues will be key to supporting dialogues between partners in various countries, to identify knowledge gaps across various topics (such as gender equality in food systems). Read less

The panelists agree that education and communication have a large role to play in ensuring that research is accessible and pragmatic.

The main finding of this discussion focus on the first call to action: ensure participatory, integrated, rights-based approaches to governance at all levels in order to address the structural inequities in food systems. Build processes and policy platforms on principles of transparency, inclusive participation, and shared power. This will ensure policies are driven not only by evidence, but also ethics and public interest. This call to action is the overarching umbrella of the other 6 call to actions in this series. A sustainable and equitable food system cannot be achieved without this call t... Read moreo action. This call to action found that there is a need to create a narrative that is inclusive and allows for participation, especially of farmers, women, and indigenous peoples. There are high levels of expertise in these dialogues, but all people should feel empowered to contribute, we are all “experts” when it comes to food. Amongst the speakers there was agreement that there is a need for more spaces for dialogues between all stakeholders, (research institutions, private sector, agricultural companies, CSO’s, states, etc.) Farmers should be recognized as key stakeholders as they produce 70% of the world’s food. We cannot make any progress without their engagement. There is also a need for greater access to technology, access to internet, and language, which are currently the main barriers to inclusion. We need a way to ensure that a multitude of people with varying perspectives are able to have their voices and knowledge heard. Another crucial finding is the importance of political power, which is the first step to addressing power imbalances. Equality starts with who is included at the very top. Read less

Below are ten key discussion outcomes from this panel discussion: 1. It is essential for IP, youth, and women to have full and effective participation in the FSS processes, as they have a different but important lens to the food movement. 2. Major barriers to participation: technology, internet, and language. IP will need continuous consultations for technical support in order to be included throughout this process. Need to develop better mechanisms to transmit indigenous voices and knowledge. 3. For IFAD, it is critical that the voices of rural poor smallholders are heard throughout this proc... Read moreess leading up to the FSS and in the summit itself. 4. Throughout the FSS process, we need to continuously engage more people. As further specific solutions emerge, it is necessary to share those solutions, get feedback, and adjust accordingly. This will help ensure the success of the people who need it the most. 5. Action Track 4 is really focused on livelihoods in the food system. A rights-based approach is at the center to addressing power imbalances in the food system. 6. Good governance is critical. Smallholder farmers should be at the center of all conversations. They need tools to give their voices agency and to hold governments accountable (like CARE’s “Score Card” tool). 7. It is important to identify and speak about the problems in a language that common people can perceive and grasp - Power imbalances are usually brushed aside in a well articulated Call to Action. Farmers need to be included throughout the process - not just the outputs. 8. The food value chain system needs to be reorganized. 60-70% of the market is controlled by agriculture input companies, brand companies, and online retail/ecommerce companies, etc. This is a power imbalance. 9. Another issue is with defining success and reworking the matrix for measurement. Measurement is focused on increasing productivity, but what about losses of biodiversity due to monoculture - how do we measure that? 10. We need participatory and progressive research mechanisms that are more aligned with farmers' needs. Adaptive farming systems, that are also according to local practices. Read less

In this discussion the panelists seemed to hold supporting views and there weren’t any clear areas of divergence.

Co-organized by International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Food Tank, and Global Alliance for the Future of Food, and in partnership with the UN Food System Summit (UNFSS) Champions Network, presented seven-panel discussions (running one event each month from January to June 2021) focusing on how to transform the world’s food systems. Each virtual series explored one of the Global Alliance’s seven Calls to Action and brought together more than 25+ UNFSS Champion speakers worldwide, including world-renowned activists, journalists, business leaders, farmers, policy and technical... Read more experts, and many others. Each conversation will help set the stage and identify critical pathways to create a better future of food and strengthen our global food systems for the upcoming UNFSS in September 2021. This first event highlighted the Global Alliance's call to action: Ensuring integrated, participatory, rights-based approaches to governance and policy-making at all levels to address the structural inequities and power imbalances in food systems. The panel brought together an international array of food systems leaders to issue calls for action on global food systems, elevate public discourse about reforming our food systems, and develop principles to guide stakeholders in leveraging food systems to support the SDGs. During opening remarks, Ruth Richardson, Chair of UN FSS Champions Network and Executive Director of Global Alliance for the Future of Food, underlined UN FSS Champions Network's importance and its contributions to the UNFSS processes leading up to the Summit in September 2021. She stressed the network aims to co-create solutions, act as a sounding board for recommendations, and, lastly, engage in dialogue within their networks to ensure needs are met. Setting the stage for the discussion was indigenous youth leader Jessica Vega Ortega, who stressed the necessity for inclusion of indigenous peoples, women’s, and youths’ knowledge and perspectives in the UN FSS dialogue processes. She identified significant barriers these groups face when participating in the dialogues, such as lack of technology, language barriers, and access to the internet. Co-moderator Dani Nierenberg, President of Food Tank, and panelists agreed to this and stressed during the event these are common challenges across the globe and the need for better processes and mechanisms to include these groups more effectively. Christine Ciccone stated that for the UN FSS to be successful, it must engage more people in the dialogues, especially smallholder farmers, and receive feedback as solutions emerge in the dialogue processes. Christine also highlighted IFAD’s mandate and work with rural people and their communities, and as the UN agency for the UN FSS Action Track 4, along with CARE and other stakeholders. Michelle Nunn, President and CEO of CARE US, emphasized the role of women and gender equality in transforming food systems. She emphasized the need for providing tools to allow people to hold their governments accountable. Ajay Vir Jakhar, Farmers’ Forum India, insisted that farmers need an agency in agricultural policymaking and need to reorganize the food value chain. He stressed that changes in power relations and equality start from the top down and are represented in high-level decision processes. Mamadou Goita, Institute for Research and Promotion of Alternatives in Development (IRPAD), stressed the need for creating more spaces for multi-stakeholder dialogues, especially where farmers and IPs have a seat at the table. Many panelists concluded by sharing various success stories that offer hope for the future of our food system. Yet, all panelists underlined the intersectional issues regarding food; therefore, to solve the food problem, we must look beyond food. Their conversation addressed transformational changes needed within the food system in order to challenge deeply rooted power structures. Read less

The fourth and final theme focused on digitalisation of the value chain and how it could be used to build back better food systems. While this was only discussed in depth during the Assam FGD, feedback and recommendations related to ICT and digitalisation cut across the different FGDs and occupied a central point of discussion in the public forum. Digitalisation of the food chain is seen to benefit both end-users and policymakers. End-users include farmers and value chain actors who are able to access updated tools and resources that can help them make better decisions about which crops and pr... Read moreoducts to cultivate, and allow them to have a broader consumer reach. For policymakers, digitalising the value chain provides access to updated data (organized in relevant dashboards) that allows for foresighting, market analysis and development of evidence-based policies for a more inclusive agriculture sector. However, a number of challenges were identified at the local level. This includes limited resources and access at the household level and connectivity issues due to poor digital infrastructure. The digital divide also manifests itself in terms of poor digital literacy among the older generation and low confidence among end-users in accessing digital platforms—with the problem of information overload being identified. The language barrier was also identified as a factor, as apps and other digital tools are not always available in the local language. On the other hand, policymakers noted that availability of information and data pertaining to the agricultural value chain is still limited to a limited number of technologies and processes. There is limited availability of authentic data on other food value chain actors and available infrastructure at the regional level. This indicates that digitalisation is viewed as a lever of change, but on-ground implementation must be improved in order to meet its promise of providing more equitable pathways to participation in the food system. Some suggestions for the way forward include: addressing lack of household access by establishing common service centres and using traditional media to supplement access to the information available in digital tools; improving digital literacy through sensitization programs conducted by extension workers and the development of region-centric apps using the local language; and developing digital platforms on value chain actors and infrastructure to help inform policy decisions. Minimizing these barriers to digital uptake can help ensure that digital services and apps developed for marketing, advisory services, and financial mechanisms can be accessed by a greater number of their target end-users. Read less

What was remarkable was the convergence in thinking with respect to addressing food system transformation at the: a) local and regional level; and, at the b) value chain actor and expert/policy maker level. “Divergences” where they did emerge during the country FGDs and in the public forum were not indicative of differing priorities, but rather underscored: a) current gaps in implementation and expected outcome, as was the case in the conversation surrounding digitalisation and extension services; and b) how external stresses (e.g. the COVID-19 pandemic) can modulate the impact of social p... Read morehenomenon such as male out migration from rural areas. Digitalisation and extension services: Digitalisation as a lever for transformation emerged as a common theme in all discussion groups, but this requires—among others— infrastructure investment and social and behaviour change communication initiatives that would address the digital generation divide. Therefore, investing in human capital, particularly in extension and advisory services, that could contribute to community organisation, knowledge exchange, and improve access to formal mechanisms is required. This would address current challenges in improving uptake of digital services for end-users. In addition, digitalising the value chain can also provide easy access to relevant and real-time data that policymakers can use for food systems governance. Digitalisation and extension services can both be viewed as transformative actions for making the food system more resilient and inclusive. Impact of male out migration from rural areas: In pre-pandemic situations, insufficient local opportunities contributed to the phenomenon of male out migration, which in turn increased the vulnerability of female-headed households. With COVID-19, migrants who have lost employment in urban areas began to return back to their communities, which were not equipped to reintegrate them, and this phenomenon disrupted the social norms that had been developed to cope with male out migration. For both situations, rural job generation was viewed as a potential solution. Different perspectives (although these could be complementary) emerged with respect to addressing nutritional imbalances as part of the food systems transformation. This was most evident in the identification of research priorities, which were aligned to the needs of the states or countries where the discussions were held. One example was in the discussion on access to nutritious food. In Bangladesh, the FGD identified the development of biofortified staple crops as a priority, whereas in Odisha, the FGD advocated for the scaling of nutrient-rich and resilient traditional crops. The FGD in Nepal, on the other hand, focused on local food production as a means of improving nutrition while addressing rural reinvigoration. Discussions on value chain upgrading provided another example of different, but complementary, solutions. The disruption of value chains due to COVID-19 mobility restrictions have underscored the challenges of bringing produce to market. A number of short-term solutions were identified, including emergency transport interventions, but there was consensus that more sustainable solutions are needed to shorten the value chain and establish the necessary storage and processing facilities, coupled with marketing initiatives to promote local production and consumption. A parallel solution was also proposed: to further broaden market access, perhaps to capitalize on the new markets reached during the pandemic, through digital platforms. Market analysis and consumer research, along with stakeholder linkages, could help make production more profitable by focusing on demand-driven products that meet market needs and preferences. The urgency and complexity of food systems transformation underscores the need to consider multiple perspectives and pathways. Read less

The third discussion topic centred on reinvigorating rural communities in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mobility restrictions imposed to curb the spread of COVID-19 underscored the vulnerabilities of the agricultural value chain: reducing access to inputs, labor and markets, as well as reducing incomes and purchasing power. In some cases, unfair pricing made local produce unable to compete with the lower cost of imported produce. Other challenges such as deteriorating food quality caused by disrupted value chains, food and nutrition insecurity in less accessible communities and male ... Read moremigration and its attendant issues were also exacerbated by the pandemic. A broad range of strategies were proposed for the reinvigoration of rural communities, underpinned by the recognition that food systems activities provide “essential services” and are, therefore, unlike other sectors of the economy in South Asia. To address the disruption of value chains, interventions such as Nepal’s “agricultural ambulance” experiment that deliver fresh produce direct to households could be institutionalized as an emergency response, and interventions that shorten the value chain developed. These include ensuring local access to inputs, building community processing facilities, building rural infrastructure, establishing community seed banks, and promoting local production and consumption through ICT based extension and marketing. Strengthening social safety nets is also necessary. Proposed activities include providing COVID-19 vaccines; issuing official identification certificates that can help farmers and their households to access government support mechanisms; and establishing reintegration plans for migrants who have returned to rural communities. Social networks, both formal and informal, can help farmers access knowledge and resources. Farmers’ incomes can be safeguarded from food shocks through emergency funding, crop insurance, and the establishment of minimum support price/buy-back policies. To help local produce compete with imports, domestic production must be supported through favourable polices and strengthened customs regulation. Investment must be made in strengthening local, regional and national supply chains to ensure adequate food supply and reduce reliance on imports. Development of up-to-date data dashboards can help improve food systems governance and inform policy development. Building back rural communities in a much better way would require continued and sustained effort from R&D and extension platforms along with policy support to facilitate the expedition of proposed suggestions. Read less

The success of efforts to develop rural economies, ensure food and nutrition security, and eradicate rural poverty depend on building climate change resilient agricultural systems managed by smallholders and the widespread adoption of innovations at the technical, institutional, social and policy levels. However, although there are “islands” of climate-resilient agriculture practiced in the Global South, what has been lacking to date has been change at scale. The COVID-19 pandemic may present an opportunity to build back better if public and private investment is directed towards reinvigor... Read moreating rural communities by developing an inclusive, climate-resilient smallholder agriculture sector that meets the needs of people and the planet. The Independent Food Systems Dialogue that we organized aimed to bring together a range of stakeholders across the food system -- from producers to value chain actors, consumers and policymakers -- to respond to the challenge of nourishing South Asia in a post-COVID 19 context. Specifically, the dialogue addressed the following questions: 1)What are the main barriers to agricultural innovation for climate resilience in South Asia? Who should be involved in research for development, investment, and deployment decisions for building climate resilience at scale? 2) How do we ensure that food value chains in South Asia are inclusive? 3) What kind of investments in food system transformation in South Asia can help reinvigorate rural communities? For example, investments in cold chains, custom hiring centres and mechanization? 4) How should digitalisation of the food value chain be implemented in South Asia in a way which benefits smallholder farmers? Will this help to build back better after COVID-19? The dialogue consists of two parts: a) a series of in-country focus group discussions (Bangladesh; Assam and Odisha in India; Nepal) with farmers, value chain actors, and policy makers addressing these questions, and b) an online public forum with stakeholders and experts at the regional level. The Bangladesh FGD was held on 8 July, focusing primarily on the themes of climate- and COVID-19 resilience, inclusive value chains, and rural reinvigoration. The Nepal FGD was held on 12 July and focused on the themes of climate- and COVID-19 resilience and inclusive value chains. FGDs for Assam and Odisha were simultaneously conducted on 13 July; Assam focused on inclusive value chains and digitalization, while the Odisha discussion centred on climate- and COVID-19 resilience and rural reinvigoration. Key findings were reported in the online public forum on 14 July to high level ministry officials and a panel of experts from Bangladesh, India and Nepal, who provided feedback and their own insight on these themes. Read less

The agri-food system is undergoing profound and drastic changes: globalization, demographic shifts, and changing dietary preferences, amplified by transforming land-water systems, climate change and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Urgent and collective action is required of all stakeholders across the system to ensure that it is able to build resilience to these changes and provide access to safe, nutritious and sustainably produced food for all. The food systems approach calls for an integration of the food system with the social system and the environment, and a clear recognition that equitab... Read morele access to food is a human right. Climate change is a global phenomenon that has location-specific impacts. As such, some of the solutions that can help build climate resilience are necessarily local. For the countries included in this dialogue, rural and agricultural investment priorities include the development and dissemination of climate-smart crop varieties and technologies, pivoting to more resilient farming systems, nutrition-sensitive cropping systems, crop insurance, digitalisation of agriculture and real-time access to weather data, among others. Regional cooperation is also important for policy development, knowledge exchange and capacity building. It is now evident that climate change reduces productivity—and the lack of access to appropriate mechanized tools, machinery and other resources hinders the participation of women and youth. Making food systems more inclusive means that all actors—even vulnerable and underserved sectors—have equitable income earning potential. Social safety nets and incentives that allow access to financing, capacity building, and appropriate varieties, technologies and other resources are necessary to ensure that women and youth are able to meaningfully participate in the food system. Organizing and mobilizing constituencies play a key role in providing access. Discussions around nutrition-sensitive interventions also fall under the theme of inclusive value chains. Such interventions require that producers,value chain stakeholders and policy makers consider the nutritional needs and dietary preferences of consumers, while providing a compelling case for consumers to shift towards more nutritious diets. Rice will continue to play a key role in mediating the region’s food and nutrition security goals as a staple crop that billions of individuals rely on for sustenance and livelihoods. Improving agricultural value chains plays a critical role in rural reinvigoration: improving access to inputs, building storage and processing facilities, strengthening transportation systems and broadening market access through stakeholder linkages, digital platforms, and demand-driven production. Mitigating the impacts of male out migration through rural job generation, strengthening social safety nets, and safeguarding farmers’ incomes through the enforcement of minimum standard pricing and the promotion of domestic production can also contribute to rural reinvigoration. COVID-19 underscored the vulnerabilities of the food value chain that can be addressed through infrastructure investment, but opportunities were also identified in broadening markets, particularly in establishing digital platforms that can help producers, value chain actors, consumers, and policymakers make informed decisions. Digitalisation is perceived to be a lever of transformation, but current gaps in implementation must be addressed in order to reap its expected benefits. Human intervention remains necessary for technology adoption, and extension and advisory services can complement digital tools in strengthening the right to information. These outcomes are discussed in further detail in the following sections. While the goal of food systems transformation, in broad terms, can be envisioned as providing healthy, sustainably produced food on the plates of all people at all times, specific indicators for measuring the success of food system transformation have yet to be clearly articulated in detail. A proposed initial step in articulating these indicators would be through establishing multi-stakeholder participatory monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to enable vulnerable groups and underserved sectors to provide grassroots perspective that can inform research and development priorities and policy recommendations. All stakeholders across South Asia must have a say on where time, money, resources are invested to maximize impact. Read less

There were clear differences in perspectives on the complexity of climate change and its impacts on the agri-food system between the on-line public forum and the individual FGDs. From a top-down policy perspective represented by the on-line public forum, addressing climate change is viewed as a complex system with agriculture being both casualty and a driver of climate change. This viewpoint was less prominent in the FGDs, where local discourse on climate resilience was mostly centred on the impact of climatic hazards on the agro ecological landscapes and how this leads to significant losses i... Read moren productivity and income. Building resilience to these hazards also entailed interventions such as changing cropping systems, adopting productivity-enhancing technologies and infrastructure—which require financial investments that vulnerable smallholder farmers were unable to afford. Access to financial mechanisms and other necessary resources was particularly limited for women and youth, as well as those living in remote, less developed communities. Convergence and organization of key stakeholders at multiple levels were proposed as solutions. These include institutional mechanisms, such as merging government development schemes with agricultural plans, and expanding disaster risk, reduction and recovery plans to cover smallholder farmers. Organizing and clustering farmers is needed to improve their access to inputs, capacity building, and formal financial services. Mechanization and its associated increased productivity were also seen as pathways for increased participation of women and youth. Crop insurance and other safety nets can help smallholder farmers bounce back from climatic shocks. Identified priority areas for research and development are dependent on landscape and climatic conditions. These include the development of lower cost and scale-neutral stress tolerant rice varieties, improving rice-fish systems and polder farming, and the establishment of climate smart villages. It was also suggested that promising new technologies must be made readily available in the public domain. Read less

The transformation towards inclusive food value chains that improve the livelihoods of farmers and other involved stakeholders would have to seriously address the current gaps and inefficiencies of the value chain, such as poor farm-to-market infrastructure (lack of storage and processing facilities, underdeveloped transportation systems, among others) that lead to unfair disparities in farm gate and retail pricing; as well as lack of access to machinery, support services, financing mechanisms, and marketing channels that can help improve farmer income. Male out migration and the resulting agr... Read moreicultural labour shortages, household vulnerabilities and food insecurity were also identified as challenges for smallholder farming households. The fragmentation of farming holdings was again identified as a barrier to accessing resources and developing market linkages. Investments in infrastructure and research and development, possibly through public-private partnerships, are necessary to move forward. Research priorities varied by country and region. For example, in, Bangladesh the preferred focus was on the development of biofortified staple crops, whereas in Odisha, the FGD advocated for the scaling of nutrient-rich and resilient traditional crops. Behaviour change and communication programs are critical in enabling the participation of women and youth in the value chain. Increasing job creation in the agricultural sector can minimize the economic and social impact of male out migration. Digital tools for market linkages, advisory services and weather data can help in creating accessible pathways for underserved sectors. Aggregating farmers through formal organisations such as farmer producer companies (FPCs) can help develop linkages between farmers and other value chain/industry actors, including academia, for knowledge exchange and capacity building. Such linkages can increase their bargaining power as value chain actors and also help producers develop demand-based products that meet consumer needs and preferences. Multi-stakeholder cooperation and participatory monitoring and evaluation contribute to making value chains more inclusive. An important insight about the impact of increasing women’s participation in value chains is its impact on embedding nutrition as a key food value chain priority of agri-food systems—essentially scaling women’s nutrition-centred decision-making from the household to community. Improving community nutrition can help improve quality of life and productivity, leading to more opportunities for participation within the agri-food system. Read less