Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

Este primer Diálogo Nacional priorizó el Eje de Acción No. 1, denominado “Garantizar el acceso a alimentos sanos y nutritivos para todos” el cual se subdivide en tres temas específicos (1) Hambre Cero, (2) Alimentos nutritivos y (3) Seguridad Alimentaria. Este tuvo como objetivo diseñar e implementar un proceso que permita a las partes interesadas intervenir en el desarrollo de vías hacia unos Sistemas Alimentarios Nacionales Sostenibles en el marco de la Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios, acorde a la Agenda 2030, para el Desarrollo Sostenible. Para esta primera etapa se definieron los... Read more siguientes resultados: Resultado 1: Los líderes de los grupos y las partes interesadas nacionales analizan las opciones para que los sistemas alimentarios nacionales sean inclusivos, sostenibles y resilientes de aquí al 2030. Resultado 2: Se identifican aspectos o temas vinculados en asegurar sistemas alimentarios nacionales en donde existen consensos y en donde existen desacuerdos. Resultado 3: Se identifican las oportunidades, vulnerabilidades y retos de los sistemas alimentarios Resultado 4: Se propone una estructura de participación para trabajar en conjunto en pro del desarrollo de sistemas alimentarios sostenibles. De igual manera, se desarrollaron los siguientes temas y aspectos relacionados a la Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios y al proceso de diálogo en sí mismo: • El proceso de Dialogo parte de la Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios, 2021; • La construcción de una posición de país para presentar en la Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios, 2021; • El fortalecimiento de los procesos que ya se están impulsando en el país y; • La integración y búsqueda de las percepciones, posiciones, acciones, opiniones y pensamientos de los participantes. Para dirigir el diálogo durante el trabajo de grupo, se desarrollaron los siguientes temas: • Contexto de los sistemas alimentarios en Guatemala; • Presentación del objetivo de cada sub tema; • Presentación de las preguntas generadoras; • Desarrollo del diálogo intersectorial y; • El desarrollo del diálogo nacional. Read less

Considerando que el Primer Diálogo Nacional, metodológicamente estableció tres grupos de trabajo, se presentan las principales conclusiones de cada uno. 1) Hambre Cero: CAUSAS DEL HAMBRE: - Guatemala, por ser uno de los países con mayor índice de vulnerabilidad, está amenazado ante desastres naturales, vinculados a inundaciones y/o sequías. - Débil acceso equitativo a los servicios básicos, principalmente el agua, la vivienda y el alimento. - Falta de coordinación y sinergia entre iniciativas públicas y privadas en el nivel territorial. - Débil acceso de recurso agua para la produc... Read moreción y consumo. - Brecha importante en la aplicación de prácticas agrícolas entre pequeños y grandes productores. PROPÓSITO DE LOS SISTEMAS ALIMENTARIOS - Acceso al alimento de forma equitativa, de forma saludable, y culturalmente pertinente. - Incremento de la producción para el consumo y la comercialización de excedente. - Aplicación de tecnología para la producción y procesamiento de alimentos. - Fomentar el consumo de alimentos nutritivos. - La mejora de la vinculación del mercado con los pequeños productores. PROPUESTAS DE SOLUCIONES EXITOSAS Se propone fortalecer la coordinación institucional, el enfoque holístico de atención a la familia, mejoramiento de los encadenamientos productivos y de los programas de protección social, desarrollar resiliencia, y la reorientación del gasto público, y financiamiento internacional. 2) Alimentos nutritivos: ¿CÓMO LOGRAR LA SEGURIDAD ALIMENTARIA PARA GARANTIZAR EL ACCESO? - Generar alimentos sanos que se articulen con la inocuidad, la higiene, las buenas prácticas y el valor nutricional. - Fomentar una dieta saludable y de calidad. - Fortalecer la regulación generando un proceso de revisión y actualización. - Considerar incluir propuestas de políticas públicas que provengan desde los sectores sociales. ¿DÓNDE CENTRAMOS LOS ESFUERZOS? - Fomentar el acceso a la disponibilidad y variedad de alimentos nutritivos. - Fomentar la producción nacional de alimentos nutritivos. - Fortalecer los programas vinculados a la atención en los primeros 1000 días a la madre gestante, como al niño/a. - Asegurar el acceso de medios de vida para la salud. - Fortalecer la agricultura familiar. - Mejorarla atención integral de los programas del Estado, sobre todo a las transferencias condicionadas. 3) Seguridad alimentariaPRINCIPALES VULNERABILIDADES - La introducción de productos alimenticios vía el contrabando. - El inadecuado manejo de los recursos naturales: agua, suelo, bosque y desechos. - La recuperación de los conocimientos de las comunidades indígenas y campesinas en temas de producción. - El consumidor cuenta con poca información acerca de calidad e inocuidad de alimentos. - La existencia de riesgo de contaminación de alimentos en la venta al por menor a nivel local. OPORTUNIDADES - Generar estrategias de producción, almacenamiento y distribución de alimentos. - Fomentar la educación alimentaria - Promover la formalidad en los sistemas alimentarios y la propuesta del incentivo agrícola. - Reforzar las compras públicas responsables (El Estado como consumidor). - Mejorar el uso adecuado del manejo de agua, suelo y conservación de la diversidad biológica. POTENCIALIDADES - Vincular los sistemas productivos de comunidades indígenas y comunidades locales a la producción de alimentos saludables. - Fomentar las cadenas de comercialización de granos básicos. Read less

1) Hambre Cero CAUSAS DEL HAMBRE: - Guatemala, por ser uno de los países con mayor índice de vulnerabilidad, está amenazado ante desastres naturales, vinculados a inundaciones y/o sequías. - Débil acceso equitativo a los servicios básicos, principalmente el agua, la vivienda y el alimento. - Falta de coordinación y sinergia entre iniciativas públicas y privadas en el nivel territorial. - Débil acceso de recurso agua para la producción y consumo. - Brecha importante en la aplicación de prácticas agrícolas entre pequeños y grandes productores. PROPÓSITO DE LOS SISTEMAS ALIMENTARIO... Read moreS - Acceso al alimento de forma equitativa, de forma saludable, y culturalmente pertinente. - Incremento de la producción para el consumo y la comercialización de excedente. - Aplicación de tecnología para la producción y procesamiento de alimentos. - Fomentar el consumo de alimentos nutritivos. - La mejora de la vinculación del mercado con los pequeños productores. PROPUESTAS DE SOLUCIONES EXITOSAS Se propone fortalecer la coordinación institucional, el enfoque holístico de atención a la familia, mejoramiento de los encadenamientos productivos, mejoramiento de los programas de protección social, desarrollar resiliencia, y la reorientación del gasto público, y financiamiento internacional. 2) Alimentos nutritivos ¿CÓMO LOGRAR SEGURIDAD ALIMENTARIA PARA GARANTIZAR EL ACCESO? - Generar alimentos sanos, que se articule con la inocuidad, la higiene, las buenas prácticas y el valor nutricional. - Fomentar una dieta saludable y de calidad. - Fortalecer la regulación generando un proceso de revisión y actualización. - Considerar incluir propuestas de políticas públicas que vienen desde los sectores sociales. ¿DÓNDE CENTRAMOS LOS ESFUERZOS? - Fomentar el acceso a la disponibilidad y variedad de alimentos nutritivos. - Mejorar la producción nacional de alimentos nutritivos. - Fortalecer los programas vinculados a la atención en los primeros 1000 días a la madre gestante, como al niño/a. - Asegurar el acceso de medios de vida para la salud. - Fortalecer la agricultura familiar. - Mejorar la atención integral de los programas del Estado, sobre todo a las transferencias condicionadas. 3) SEGURIDAD ALIMENTARIA PRINCIPALES VULNERABILIDADES - La introducción de productos alimenticios vía el contrabando. - El inadecuado manejo de los recursos naturales: agua, suelo, bosque y desechos. - La recuperación de los conocimientos de las comunidades indígenas y campesinas en temas de producción. - El consumidor cuenta con poca información acerca de calidad e inocuidad de alimentos. - La existencia de riesgo de contaminación de alimentos a la venta al por menor o nivel local OPORTUNIDADES -Generar estrategias de producción, almacenamiento y distribución de alimentos. - Fomentar la educación alimentaria - Promover la formalidad en los sistemas alimentarios. - Promover la propuesta del incentivo agrícola. - Generar compras públicas responsables (El Estado como consumidor). - Promover el adecuado manejo del agua, suelo y conservación de la diversidad biológica. POTENCIALIDADES -Vincular los sistemas productivos de comunidades indígenas y comunidades locales a la producción de alimentos saludables. - Fomentar las cadenas de comercialización de granos básicos. Read less

Durante el Primer Diálogo Nacional, se identificaron las siguientes recomendaciones por sector: - Desde el Sector privado, se destacó la importancia de la actualización de la normativa nacional vinculada a los sistemas alimentarios y su sostenibilidad. De igual manera promover la producción y consumo de alimentos saludables, inocuos y nutritivos. - Desde el Sector público, se destacó el fortalecimiento de los micro y pequeños productores de alimentos, como de la agricultura familiar, el desarrollo de programas de asistencia social. De igual manera, un abordaje responsable de las propues... Read moretas presentadas, por parte de la institucionalidad pública. - Desde el Sector de las Organizaciones Indígenas, se destacó el rescate de los conocimientos tradicionales sobre consumo y producción de alimentos. - Desde el Sector de las Organizaciones Ambientales, se destacó la importancia de impulsar el manejo sostenible de los recursos naturales y la conservación de la diversidad biológica. Read less

TOPIC 5: ADAPTATION TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES, RESILIENCE AND FOOD SECURITY In this group, stakeholders discussed how the Swiss food system could become more adaptive to the consequences of global warming and to other environmental challenges, and more resilient to crises and shocks, while ensuring food security and nutrition for present and future generations. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) In the overall, the participants perceived Switzerland as comparatively better placed in terms of resilience. However, the COVID-19 crisis showed that we are part of an interconnected system. We need a POLITICAL V... Read moreISION, with a ROADMAP that foresees TRANSPARENT PARTNERSHIPS and the EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION, to allow for long-term planning. This supports FOOD SECURITY, which can be managed through domestic production and imports. (2) Regarding LOCAL PRODUCTION, we need to establish micro-diversified systems, and foster their INNOVATION. In addition, we need to further develop RURAL-URBAN systems. On-farm innovations must move towards standardised fair production. Exchanges between entrepreneurs and investors must be facilitated to encourage societal innovations. Exchange platforms would make possible to share information about sustainable food entrepreneurship. Improving productivity could allow for profitable soybean production in a small region like Switzerland, while improving the quality of the product with regard to climate shocks. (3) CARBON reduction and BIODIVERSITY must be considered within diversified micro-systems of local agriculture around cities. In this, we need to move forward with technological as well as practical and intellectual innovations (systems innovations). SOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATION could play a decisive role – this approach, already partly implemented in Switzerland, needs to be accompanied by research. Transparent exchanges between different actors (NGOs, producers, politicians, entrepreneurs, etc.) must be promoted. With regard to biodiversity, the participants highlighted the access to, and conservation of, GENETIC RESOURCES. Finally, Switzerland could better address FOOD LOSS AND WASTE. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) Analysing costs and opportunities to reduce waste implied KNOWLEDGE OF THE SYSTEM and the EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND DATA in a transparent way. Participants also stressed the need for a COMMON VISION, rather than working at micro level. If everyone aligned with the 2030 AGENDA, it would be a decisive step in the right direction. A vision should be worked on and a roadmap created based on an analysis of risks and opportunities, taking into account Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) aspects. Inconsistencies in policies need to be addressed. Finally, synergies between DIVERSITY and CARBON REDUCTION are areas where we need to work with research. In terms of GENETIC RESOURCES, some of the stakeholders underlined the obstacles they face in relation to patents and seed market rules, and argued that these issues should not be addressed at the Swiss national level, but at least at the European regional level. (2) Some QUESTIONS REMAINED OPEN: What synergies should be sought to support diversified and interconnected rural-urban systems? Is a Swiss 2030 Agenda linked to food systems, which are highly complex, feasible? How can we introduce follow-up measures? How can we achieve a virtuous circle that brings information from the Swiss rural-urban circuit? Is it necessary to define a framework for monitoring the activities of the different actors? Read less

TOPIC 6: FOOD WASTAGE (AVOIDABLE WASTE AND LOSSES) In this group, stakeholders discussed how to reduce avoidable food waste in Switzerland and avoidable food looses along the value chains of food consumed in Switzerland – ensuring that food produced in Switzerland and abroad reaches Swiss consumers. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) The participants welcomed the development of a NATIONAL ACTION PLAN against food wastage, and expressed their satisfaction that progress was being made in this regard. (2) There is still a great potential at retailing level, as well as in the processing and agricultural se... Read morectors, for FOOD DONATIONS. Food bank organisations have been working with retailers for a long time, but awareness raising amongst employees is still necessary. SURPLUSES and BY-PRODUCTS could be made more visible, and a related MARKET should be created, for instance via a publicly accessible PLATFORM to know where to pick up/save items. Innovation and research would allow to further develop existing platforms. In addition, the potential for FEEDING ANIMALS should be exploited (whey proteins instead of soy proteins). Finally, COORDINATION ALONG VALUE CHAINS could be improved, for instance through automatic IT systems ensuring that suppliers only deliver when stocks in the supermarket have decreased, and that factories only produce when the demand signals it. SURPLUSES could be PROCESSED (tomato sauce or broth), including for awareness-raising, by volunteers or schools. (3) The population can be reached through AWARENESS RAISING and INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS (best-before dates). Vocational/professional trainings and basic education could be good entry points. SYSTEMIC ANALYSES are needed to gain a better understanding of the causes of waste in households. TOOLS could also be developed to make it easier to assess whether products are still edible (packaging that changes colour when the product turns bad), and apps to help consumers recycle. (4) Finally, INCENTIVES should be used, such as through a "No Food Waste Neighbourhood" challenge and awards (POSITIVE) or food waste fees at households level (NEGATIVE). II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) Fighting food waste requires the BUY-IN OF THE POPULATION. As an example, a small restaurant can decide to reduce its reserves and stock up with leftover bread from a nearby bakery. But in doing so, it takes the risk to run out of some foods offered on the menu. To clarify, a direct contact with customers is important. (2) A lot of potential exists in FOOD RESCUE, especially on farms (vegetables that do not meet the quality standards of the retailers). However, one of the limiting factors for this in Switzerland are the buyers, and logistics are complex. Overall, flexibility is needed. If SURPLUSES – typically from the agricultural production – are sold through ALTERNATIVE CHANNELS, this can have an impact on the market, resulting in a reduced demand for food supplied through "usual" channels. Participants also recognized that local PROCESSING of surpluses currently proves to be not profitable, but can contribute to raise awareness. In order to process BY-PRODUCTS for human consumption, substantial INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT are needed, and market opportunities need to be created. (3) The participants recommended that the production of “unnecessary” products should be avoided, that the RIGHT QUANTITIES be produced, and that producers benefit from FAIR PRICES. In their view, FOOD IS CURRENTLY TOO CHEAP. There is a need for more cost TRANSPARENCY and the inclusion of negative externalities (TRUE COST OF FOOD). Read less

TOPIC 7: SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIMENSIONS OF THE AGRI-FOOD SECTOR In this group, stakeholders discussed how actors along the food value chains could benefit from a fair distribution of the value added and decent employment conditions, in Switzerland and abroad. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) TRANSPARENCY should be promoted along the value chains. Existing measures with regard to consumers could be further developed. This should include measures taken by the Federal Office for Agriculture. All costs – and thus the prices along the value chains – should be disclosed. The resulting AWARENESS could steer co... Read morensumption in a more sustainable direction. Measures included: DIGITALISATION (platforms for the dissemination of information); blockchain; “radical-local” or solidarity agriculture; or international partnerships. However, various participants considered these measures not sufficient, as (too) many consumers are not enough sensitised, or simply cannot afford it FINANCIALLY. (2) In setting the TRUE COST OF FOOD, we would take into account often neglected costs, such as the unpaid work in production. This could create INCENTIVES to optimise our impact. Adjusting pricing could lead to a REDISTRIBUTION of these costs and stimulate a more sustainable consumption. (3) The transformation of our food systems – though necessary – triggers fear among actors. So-called "EXPERIMENTAL LABORATORIES", through testing new economic models and promoting dialogue, could help alleviate it. These labs should be better supported financially, and their conclusions could be DISSEMINATED. (4) The stakeholders agreed that PRODUCERS play a central role in sustainable food systems, and that they should be further EMPOWERED. At national level, they could implement a “radical-local” approach to better network and act together, and cooperatives with their own brand that would improve their negotiating position vis-à-vis wholesalers and retailers. In addition, direct payments and subsidies could be re-oriented to support more sustainable food systems. At international level, the profitability of cultivation could be strengthened through a transfer of know-how and a larger access to market, and facilitated through innovation. Policy-makers should seek dialogue with governments and producers in the countries from which goods are imported. (5) Finally, the participants shared the view that Switzerland is well-positioned in SCIENCE in general, but could do still more in RESEARCH AND INNOVATION. The location of research is an important competitive advantage, which should be promoted. There are already well-established synergies between research and business. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) The RIGHT TO FOOD / ACCESS TO FOOD FOR ALL was confronted to PROFITABLE PRODUCTION. Direct payments to producers could be re-thought, to become more sustainable incentives, and COHERENCE BETWEEN POLICIES relating to food is needed. The participants also criticised the effect on prices induced by intermediaries and retailers (food, inputs and means of production). (2) In terms of DIETS, the group was under the impression that the criterion of HEALTH was often set against that of SUSTAINABILITY, while it should not be the case. In addition, they noted that subsidies are given to foods such as sugar and meat, which can be seen as bad incentives. (3) Finally, a trade-off was pointed out between RAPID TOP-DOWN transformation, FREE MARKET and decision-making within the SOCIETY. Major change must be supported by the population at large. Read less

TOPIC 8: ENTREPRENEURSHIP, INNOVATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY This group discussed how to make the agri-food sector more sustainable, entrepreneurial and innovative, while considering its know-how and the quality of its products, applying results from scientific research and development, using the latest technologies, benefitting from digitalisation, being future-oriented and ensuring food security and nutrition. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) THERE IS A NEED FOR REACHING EVERYONE, also those not already sensitised. This can be done through AWARENESS RAISING and CHANGES IN THE FOOD ENVIRONMENT. No lo... Read morenger offering non-sustainable products, labelling products in terms of sustainability and true cost accounting, organising exhibitions/informative events, creating campaigns to support the consumption of locally produced food and educating people about the recommendations of the Swiss Food Pyramid can be crucial steps. (2) Often, farmers do not perceive actions and measures as opportunities but as a threat to their livelihoods. In order to achieve transformation in agriculture and trade, we need SOCIAL INNOVATION, INCENTIVES AND DIRECT CONTACT WITH FARMERS. (3) BETTER FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS ARE NEEDED at all political levels. Although there are many good initiatives at grassroots level, the political framework often has its limits (for instance: in the area of spatial planning, availability of subsidies). So that a transformation is enabled also from a financial perspective, investments from banks are pivotal, and new markets and value chains need to be generated. (4) A lot is happening at the COMMUNAL LEVEL. This shows that the transformation of food systems is a cross-sectoral challenge, not just an agricultural one. URBAN AND RURAL views need to be included equally. There is a lack of structure for exchange between cities. The federal government could promote such an exchange. (5) CREATING DIALOGUE FOR AN OVERALL POLICY ABOUT FOOD SYSTEMS: there is the need for a bundle of actions across the food system, where science and civil society are included and in exchange with practice. Participants mentioned the importance of the results of the Swiss National Research Programme "Healthy Nutrition and Sustainable Food Production" (NRP 69). The second stage of the National Food Systems Summit Dialogue (FSSD) of Switzerland, the so-called “City Dialogues”, which will allow for an increased exchange between cities, and the national campaign against food waste will highly contribute to this. (6) There is a need for a STANDARDISED MONITORING & EVALUATION AND REPORTING SYSTEM for food and biodiversity, which allows the financial sector to analyse potential beneficiaries, similar to what is being done for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This would help banks assess which companies to support. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) There is a lack of structure for EXCHANGE BETWEEN CITIES. (2) BETTER FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS ARE NEEDED at all levels (federal, cantonal, communal) to enable transformation, in particular for responsibility and financial reasons. (3) Participants were of the opinion that lately, POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS concerning food systems, agriculture and environment had been frustrating. There is a need for a change towards a holistic food systems approach in order to actually generate solutions. (4) A large part of food is IMPORTED. How can you influence production in the countries of origin? That is much more difficult than changing domestic production. (5) The AFFORDABILITY of healthy and sustainably produced food is a challenge. Read less

The GROUP DISCUSSIONS of the workshop gathered more than 130 representatives, who affirmed their will to contribute to the transformation of our food systems, without denying nor shifting responsibilities to other stakeholders. Although participants tended to agree on the issues at stake, several challenges and trade-offs were identified: (1) DIFFERENT VISIONS FOR AGRICULTURE, sometimes conflicting, were expressed by the participants (an agriculture oriented towards producing food for people VS towards profits and remuneration, an agriculture based on human labour VS on technologies, the polit... Read moreical power of major agribusinesses VS of the civil society, or the fulfilment of the right to food VS profitable production). Participants recommended an alignment on the 2030 AGENDA. Finally, given that a substantial part of our food is IMPORTED, they agreed that we can have a say on our domestic production, but wondered how we can influence foreign production methods. (2) A greater COHERENCE between policies and a HOLISTIC FOOD SYSTEMS APPROACH are sought, with clear targets and long-term objectives. Direct payments to producers could be re-thought, to provide more sustainable incentives. Better FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS are needed at all levels (federal, cantonal, communal) in order to enable transformation. (3) In the same line, the participants discussed the sustainability of ANIMAL PRODUCTION in Switzerland, considering arguments such as the importance of grasslands in the country, the suitability of our mountainous and hilly topography for animal rather than plan production, the impact of livestock on the environment and of meat consumption on health, the necessity of a locally adapted and site-appropriated agriculture, and the cultural meaning of dairy products and meat. Several groups observed that, by advertising and subsidising foods such as MEAT and SUGAR, the State could be viewed as supporting unhealthy diets. (4) The complex RELATION BETWEEN ACTORS, in particular PRODUCERS, CONSUMERS AND RETAILERS was noted. The power within our food systems should be better shared and the value added better distributed – the participants pointed out the effect on prices induced by intermediaries and retailers – but COLLABORATION should also be sought. Changes must be supported by the population at large. (5) In particular, CONSUMERS should be involved. However, in terms of DIETS, some participants were under the impression that HEALTH and SUSTAINABILITY were often set against each other, while this should not be the case. The labelling and packaging of products can influence – positively or negatively – the choice of the consumers, but is not sufficient to (re-)orientate our consumption patterns. On the contrary, some participants believed that the consumers were often overwhelmed by the wide choice on supplied products, and that retailers were in a stronger position to bring about change than consumers. It seemed to participants that INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY was not sufficient. How much are citizens concerned with these issues? Without any economic incentives, are we ready to modify our consumption patterns and habits? Finally, the (UN)AFFORDABILITY of healthy and sustainable food was identified as a challenge in transforming our dietary patterns. (6) For FARMERS, the transition to more sustainable practices is difficult, and they should be accompanied in this process, which might take place gradually. As one example, the participants argued that the measures for promoting and rewarding BIODIVERSITY services often could not achieve their goals, as farmers need to be better informed in this regard. (7) Generally, food was considered TOO CHEAP in Switzerland. Measures aiming at setting the TRUE COST OF FOOD, such as a CARBON TAX, should be introduced. However, the participants warned that it should be accompanied by a compensation mechanism for low-income citizens. In addition, some participants pointed out that this tax will not have the expected effect on citizens who can pay for it. They also debated if such measures should apply only to Swiss products, or as well to importations, and how the UN could play a role. Overall, the actors along the value chains should have a fair remuneration. (8) In several groups, DATA were considered insufficient, or uneasily available, and TRANSPARENCY lacking. As a consequence, participants stressed the need for more informed and evidence-based decisions and actions. (9) A limiting factor for FOOD RESCUE are the buyers and the complex logistics. If SURPLUSES are sold through alternative channels, this can result in a reduced demand on the "usual" market. Finally, even though the PROCESSING of surpluses is currently not profitable, it can contribute to raise awareness. Read less

In preparation for the Food Systems Summit (FSS) in September 2021, Switzerland decided to implement a MULTI-STAKEHOLDER FOOD SYSTEMS SUMMIT DIALOGUE (FSSD) AT NATIONAL LEVEL. This Dialogue will take place in THREE STAGES, from March to June 2021. Through this innovative approach, interested actors will have the opportunity to contribute to the FSS by discussing their roles within their food systems, reflecting on new forms of joint action, and getting involved in building the food systems of the future. The first workshop of this Swiss National FSSD was held virtually on 23 March 2021. Under ... Read morethe title "From Challenges to Actions", it brought together more than 130 REPRESENTATIVES FROM MANY SECTORS ALONG THE FOOD VALUE CHAINS, with the aim to address the challenges, potential and vulnerabilities of our food systems through a holistic approach, and to discuss concrete actions to support the transformation of food systems in Switzerland. For this purpose, the participants were invited to engage in BREAK-OUT GROUP DISCUSSIONS on a specific topic of importance for the transformation of our food systems. These discussions constituted the core of the event. The EIGHT TOPICS proposed for this first workshop were: 1) Sustainable food environment; 2) Sustainable food demand and sustainable diets; 3) Sustainable production; 4) Climate change mitigation; 5) Adaptation to environmental changes, resilience and food security; 6) Food wastage (avoidable waste and losses); 7) Socio-economic dimensions of the agri-food sector; and 8) Entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology. These topics were formulated in the form of short statements, describing an ambitious situation to be realised within ten years and serving as a common goal for the discussion group. In their exchange, the participants were asked to think of CONCRETE ACTIONS to be undertaken by themselves IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS in order to achieve the statement assigned to their group by 2030, bearing in mind the synergies and trade-offs inherent to this transformation. The eight statements – discussed in ten groups – were developed on the basis of the FIVE ACTION TRACKS (ATs) OF THE FSS, and of the food systems approach of the 2030 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY put out for public consultation by the Swiss Federal Council, the executive branch of the federal government, until 4 February 2021, as well as of other strategies of the Federal Council. In this way, the dialogue also contributes to the discussion in Switzerland on the development and implementation of various policy instruments. This workshop was the first step in the process of the multi-stakeholder National FSSD of Switzerland, which provides us with a unique opportunity to support the discussion on food and agriculture in the country. In a second stage, in May 2021, a series of “City Dialogues” will be organised in three linguistic regions of the country to address possible solutions at local level. In a third and last stage, on 8 June 2021, a final workshop will aim at identifying pathways towards sustainable food systems by 2030 and discussing possible commitments from the different stakeholders. The group discussions in the workshop held on 23 March brought together a wide range of stakeholders and allowed for a constructive and fruitful exchange. The results and conclusions reached in these discussions will be addressed in more depth in the next stages of the FSSD. Read less

The GROUP DISCUSSIONS of the workshop allowed for a constructive and fruitful exchange, in a pleasant atmosphere, and reached the following main results and conclusions: (1) One major point that came out of the discussion was the necessity of a greater COHERENCE BETWEEN FOOD RELATED POLICIES, or even of ONE FOOD SYSTEMS POLICY encompassing agriculture, environment, nutrition and public health. The participants welcomed the development of the ACTION PLAN AGAINST FOOD WASTAGE. Addressing resilience, they supported a POLITICAL VISION with a ROADMAP for transparent partnerships and exchange of inf... Read moreormation. In general, they were in favour of a BROADER CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ON SUSTAINABILITY, a PARADIGM SHIFT TOWARDS MORE HOLISTIC APPROACHES and CIRCULAR ECONOMY. An independent office to assess sustainability along the value chains was proposed. (2) POLICY FRAMEWORKS, such as the Swiss Agricultural Policy, are key in shaping our food systems. THE GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC AUTHORITIES should make INFORMATION available to citizens, and set up POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE INCENTIVES (re-orientation of agricultural subsidies, support to catering establishments for sustainable meals, or carbon tax). PUBLIC PROCUREMENT could be a powerful lever. MINIMUM/MAXIMUM REQUIREMENTS and BANS could complement these measures. Finally, the government could provide STEWARDSHIP in launching a long-term DIALOGUE amongst actors. At INTERNATIONAL level, policy-makers should further seek dialogue with countries from which goods are imported. (3) Assuming that INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY is crucial to bring about change, in a bottom-up and inclusive approach, AWARENESS RAISING, EDUCATION, POSITIVE EXAMPLES and TRANSPARENT INFORMATION AND DATA can be decisive. CHILDREN and YOUNG PEOPLE should acquire good habits (limitation of marketing targeting them, promotion of comparatively more sustainable foods in canteens, or learning journeys to farms) as well as ADULTS (labelling, bonus points card for sustainable products, or direct sales from local agriculture). TOOLS could be developed to better assess the edibility of products and help recycle. In addition, participants recognised that the FOOD ENVIRONMENT AND SUPPLY influence our consumption. The PSYCHOLOGY and BEHAVIOUR of consumers must be taken into account to better understand potential resistances. One limiting factor in this transformation is the FINANCIAL MEANS, especially for lower-income citizens. (4) Currently, FOOD IS TOO CHEAP. The participants called for the TRUE COST OF FOOD, for instance through a CARBON TAX, and for more TRANSPARENCY along the value chains. They debated if such measures should apply to Swiss products, or to importations as well. The DISTRIBUTION OF THE VALUE ADDED along the value chains should be more equitable. In particular, FARMERS play a central role in sustainable food systems, and they should be further EMPOWERED, through different approaches (cooperatives, “radical-local” agriculture, solidarity agriculture, rural-urban systems, or micro-diversified systems). From an ECONOMIC perspective, investments and market opportunities are necessary for transforming our food systems. (5) Regarding FOOD WASTAGE, a great potential exists in the retailing, processing and agricultural sectors (FOOD DONATIONS, processing and marketing SURPLUSES, BY-PRODUCTS and “UNAESTHETIC” ITEMS, exchange PLATFORMS, use as ANIMAL FEEDS, or increased COORDINATION ALONG VALUE CHAINS). Bringing unsold food on the market at reduced prices offers multiple wins. To fight food waste, positive INCENTIVES (challenges and awards) and negative ones (fees) could be implemented. (6) SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND INNOVATION – including practical and intellectual (systems) innovations – should be promoted, and their results better DISSEMINATED. The use of NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND DIGITALISATION should be considered as opportunities. A modification of the STANDARDS in the processing industry could lead to technical improvements on farms. Exchange between entrepreneurs and investors must be facilitated, and a MONITORING & EVALUATION AND REPORTING SYSTEM would help the financial sector carry out analyses. EXPERIMENTAL LABORATORIES could participate in alleviating negative anticipations from actors. (7) To conclude, the participants called for a closer COLLABORATIONS BETWEEN ACTORS. Through their proximity with local populations, CITIES can (re-)build the link between URBAN CONSUMERS and RURAL PRODUCERS. The CATERING sector could team up with FARMERS committed to sustainable production. In addition, one of the groups proposed the creation of a NATIONAL FOOD DAY, which could be broadcasted and serve as a showcase for food systems transformation. Read less

TOPIC 1: SUSTAINABLE FOOD ENVIRONMENT In this group, stakeholders discussed how the food environment in Switzerland could become more sustainable, involving stakeholders in the processing, retail and catering industries, and enabling consumers to eat according to the recommendations of the Swiss Food Pyramid. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) The participants declared that COLLABORATION is paramount for the transformation of our food systems, and that a PARADIGM SHIFT is needed to scale up existing solutions. (2) The stakeholders stated that currently FOOD IS TOO CHEAP. We should determine the TRUE COST... Read more OF FOOD and enhance TRANSPARENCY about the effects of food consumption. The DISTRIBUTION OF THE VALUE ADDED along the value chains should become more equitable. (3) INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND BEHAVIOUR are key to bring about changes. AWARENESS RAISING, EDUCATION and the communication of POSITIVE EXAMPLES are important activities. Citizens should have their say in the definition of sustainable products, including young people. However, we should not transfer the whole responsibility on younger generations. (4) Consumers must be able to take INFORMED DECISIONS. Transparent DATA AND INFORMATION, as well as the results of RESEARCH and INNOVATION, must be made available to them, for instance through “traffic light system” and labels on products. Amongst other measures: direct marketing by producers, including in urban areas; implementation of a solidarity agriculture; a better orientation of the local agricultural production on the market; or creation of an independent office for assessing sustainability along the value chains. (5) The GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC AUTHORITIES should be responsible to require that the necessary INFORMATION is provided to consumers, to make UNSUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS MORE EXPENSIVE than sustainable ones, and if necessary to BAN the former. A positive INCENTIVE could be the support to public catering establishments that provide sustainable meals. POLICY FRAMEWORKS, such as the Swiss agricultural policy, can play a key role. (6) Finally, several SYNERGIES and COLLABORATIVE ACTIONS, such as: increased exchange between actors, including at political level; or communicating that healthy diets tend to also be more sustainable. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) Several TRADE-OFFS and TENSIONS were mentioned. Through advertising and subsidising foods such as sugar and meat, the State is viewed by some as an indirect supporter of unhealthy diets. Other such examples: an agriculture oriented towards production of food for people VS towards profits and remuneration; an agriculture based on human labour VS on technologies; or the political power of major agribusinesses VS of the civil society. The labelling and packaging of products can influence – positively or negatively – the choice of the consumers, but is not enough to (re-)orientate our consumption patterns. (2) The participants came up with several RESPONSES. Agriculture needs both human labour and technologies. Data availability and the application of information technologies are crucial. The power within our food systems should be better shared and the value added better distributed. (3) Finally, the participants also formulated QUESTIONS that remained OPEN. Who are the main drivers in today's food systems? Is it the marketing-driven processing industry, the technologies or the power relations? In addition, how much public intervention, in terms of policy framework, is needed for the market to re-orient itself? Read less

TOPIC 2: SUSTAINABLE FOOD DEMAND AND SUSTAINABLE DIETS In this group, stakeholders discussed how to make people better aware of the importance of sustainable diets – in their environmental, socio-cultural, healthy and nutritional dimensions – and how to encourage them to better observe the recommendations of the Swiss Food Pyramid. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) The participants underlined the necessity to ensure COHERENCE BETWEEN THE VARIOUS POLICIES RELATED TO FOOD. They specifically proposed that Switzerland develop a 2050 FOOD POLICY, encompassing aspects of agriculture, nutrition, environmen... Read moret and public health, and therefore exploiting SYNERGIES between them. (2) EDUCATION AND AWARENESS RAISING are key. The participants expressed their preference to teach good habits to CHILDREN and YOUNG PEOPLE from the outset, rather than to strive to get new ones later in life. Such measures include: promotion of comparatively more sustainable foods (fresh fruits/vegetable VS animal proteins in the canteens or “apple automats”); food & nutrition courses and “taste education”; learning journeys to farms; or limitation of marketing targeted at children. ADULTS, as well, should realise how their diet impacts both themselves and the planet, in a holistic manner. INFORMATION enabling comparison of food items should be available and easily understandable – as many labels co-exist, such comparison is still difficult. Consumers should be sensitised about the added value of local agriculture – in terms of environmental impact, animal welfare and job creation – and made aware of the resulting production costs. (3) CITIES, through their proximity with LOCAL POPULATIONS, as signatories of the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact, are major players to bring about changes in practice and to re-build the link between urban consumers and rural producers. (4) Finally, participants addressed FOOD DEMAND, but also brought up issues related to FOOD SUPPLY, such as: responsibility of the retailers in offering more sustainable alternatives; collaborations between the catering sector and farmers committed to sustainable production; or innovative start-ups guaranteeing multiple wins for multiple actors when they simultaneously bring on the market unsold food at reduced prices, fight food waste, and raise awareness. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) In terms of FOOD RELATED POLICIES, there is a need for clear targets and long-term objectives, which integrate the different interests and perspectives at stake, and which take into account the specificities of the Swiss context – for instance, we need to deal with the fact that an important part of the Swiss territory is not arable. On a related note, the TEMPORAL ASPECT of the transformation must be fully recognised – changes need to take place gradually. (2) The VALUE OF FOOD and its MARKET PRICE should be re-thought. There is a need to ensure a fair and equitable remuneration of all actors – knowing that the expenditure by Swiss households on food are low in international comparison. (3) COLLABORATION SHOULD BE SOUGHT ALL ALONG THE VALUE CHAINS, including to promote a better understanding BETWEEN PRODUCERS AND CONSUMERS. Consumers should be actively involved in the transformation of our food systems. Two examples of trade-offs: the desire to have a diversity of products in winter VS our climate impact and seasonality; or the need to reduce our consumption of meat and sugar for environmental and health reasons VS the necessity to find alternatives and ensure that affected farmers are adequately accompanied in the transition. Read less

TOPIC 3: SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION Two groups discussed how plant and animal productions, as well as the processing, retailing and catering sectors, could promote a more sustainable agriculture, with regard to local conditions, biodiversity, animal welfare, nutrients, natural resources, as well as circularity. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) The CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF SUSTAINABILITY should be broadened. Four areas of sustainability are needed: environment, social, health and animal welfare. (2) It is necessary to strengthen the application of INNOVATIVE IDEAS, to support the use of NEW TECHNOLOGIES and ... Read moreto promote DIGITALISATION. Science must be prepared to develop new approaches without fear of not being able to come up with ready/complete solutions right from the beginning. (3) PUBLIC PROCUREMENT is key to enhance this process by supporting innovative projects in order to enable transformation in education, collective catering, public canteens and raising awareness among the youth. (4) A democratically developed COMMON FOOD AND AGRICULTURE POLICY is required, involving all actors of the food systems while building on critical thinking and independent research. Merging agricultural and health policies could be a crucial step. (5) INCENTIVES in terms of policy measures on the information level are crucial. The focus must not lie on production only, but enhance dialogue with consumers as well as thinking in terms of VALUE CHAINS. Bringing all actors together can create solutions that reach across the value chain. The concept of STEWARDSHIP was mentioned, meaning that the government could create a system for long-term dialogue and knowledge exchange among all stakeholders. (6) In order to consume differently, a pilot project on TRUE COST OF FOOD AND TRANSPARENCY must be launched. In addition, in order to enhance market power of farmers, their margins should be increased, and retailers should create a market for food that, because of its appearance, would not normally be consumed by people. To support the change towards more sustainable production, food production must have an adequate prize. (7) MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTIONS need to be reduced, as well as locally adapted and site-appropriate. 8) Some participants pointed out that sustainable production could be promoted if access to land and farms were made easier for WOMEN. Several studies show that a higher proportion of women in agriculture can lead to more sustainability. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) The groups identified TRADE-OFFS between production, environmental protection, climate and animal welfare. In addition, society demands more organic farming. The first step requires to admit that such trade-offs exist and to name them. They need to be discussed and prioritized with all stakeholders. (2) Although large parts of the agricultural land in Switzerland is grassland, MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTIONS are not locally adapted and site-appropriate. The transition for farmers to sustainable production is difficult. In addition, meat consumption is still culturally very desirable and the share from sustainable production is too small. (3) Concerning BIODIVERSITY promotion, it was discussed that the measures taken are often not sufficient to achieve the goals set. Farmers need to be provided with information on how to promote species. There is a need for an increased cooperation with farmers and consideration by the agricultural policy, so that biodiversity services are rewarded. When designing concrete measures, we also need measurable figures (DATA) and COMMITMENTS from the stakeholders. Read less

TOPIC 4: CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION In two groups, stakeholders discussed how to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of the domestic final food demand along the whole value chain in Switzerland and abroad, as well as the GHG emissions of the domestic agricultural production, acknowledging that this transformative process should ensure fair socio-economic conditions to affected actors. I. PRIORITY ACTIONS (1) Actors along the value chains should engage their INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, in a bottom-up approach. We need to CHANGE OUR CONSUMPTION PATTERNS, rather than our agricultural practice... Read mores – the participants regretted that the impact of food consumption often remains unclear. In their view, EDUCATION, KNOWLEDGE and AWARENESS RAISING are the most appropriate means, including: sustainability labelling of products; promotion of cheaper and/or weekly vegetarian menus in canteens; sensitisation to seasonality; or cooking course for children. However, individual responsibility, though important, is not sufficient. Minimal requirements, or even bans, should be envisaged. The psychological mechanisms of consumers must be considered to understand potential resistances. (2) One major activities proposed by one of the groups is the creation of a NATIONAL FOOD DAY, which would highlight good practices – communicating on WHAT WE MAY AND CAN DO. This event could: take place in schools, canteens and restaurants, and be BROADCASTED; constitute an annual stocktaking on food systems transformation; help exchange about sustainable products; or provide tips against food waste. (3) The participants identified additional actions, such as: OPTIMISATION of existing processes (circular economy); INCENTIVES (bonus points card for sustainable products); DIRECT MARKETING; a modification of the STANDARDS in the processing industry, which could lead to TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS ON FARMS; or increased TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH. (4) At economic level, a CARBON TAX and other measures aiming at setting the TRUE COST OF FOOD should be implemented. The participants debated if such measures should apply only to Swiss products, or also to importations, and how the UN could play a role. To be successful, these efforts require the endorsement of the whole society and the establishment of adequate framework conditions by PUBLIC AUTHORITIES. Public procurements could act as levers, and offer a safe market for producers. II. POTENTIAL CHALLENGES (1) A COMMON UNDERSTANDING and WELL-DEFINED OBJECTIVES are necessary. The setting of system boundaries is particularly challenging. Actions must be informed by SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. (2) INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY is important, but not sufficient. How much are citizens concerned with these issues? Without any economic incentives, are we ready to modify our consumption patterns and habits? The SOCIAL DIMENSION of sustainability is essential. For instance, meat consumption can have a negative environmental and health impact, but also bears a cultural signification for many. (3) The CARBON TAX must be implemented in a fair manner and prove effective. A compensation mechanism should be put in place for low-income citizens. On the other hand, some participants pointed out that citizens who can afford to pay for it will continue to burden the environment. (4) Finally, in terms of production, SPECIFICITIES of each country must be fully acknowledged. An important part of Switzerland is made of mountain and hill areas, which are not or hardly suitable for crop production. Animal production makes possible to exploit these areas. Read less

The expression of views of the stakeholders on challenges and opportunities for sustainable food systems associated with the new strategy, “MeaDRI”.

The main remarks of the participants are as follows. (1) As the population grows, it is necessary to secure animal protein. However, as seafood has less environmental impact than livestock products, there is relatively more room for increasing seafood production. (2) Offshore aquaculture has a high tolerance for absorbing environmental loads and is a proper direction from the viewpoint of sustainability and reduction of environmental loads. (3) In addition to CO2 fixation, the conservation of seagrass beds is an indispensable for water purification, egg production and growth of aquatic organis... Read morems. It is important to respond appropriately to changing environment and to carry out activities in cooperation with fishermen and local residents. (4) As I have been involved in the aquaculture industry for many years, I really feel the rise in seawater temperature associated with global warming. In fact, there are reports of the damage. Reduction of CO2 is a major challenge that we have faced. (5) As blue carbon is an unavoidable issue, the government should move ahead the activities to tackle the issue. In Norway, efforts are under way to use seaweed not only as a CO2 sink but also as a nutrient. Read less

The expression of views of the stakeholders on challenges and opportunities for sustainable food systems associated with the new strategy, “MeaDRI”.

The main remarks of the participants are as follows. (1) Although "Electrification and conversion to fuel cell for fishing boats " has many issues to be tackled, it is an innovation that will definitely be needed in the future. This cannot be helped by fishermen alone and requires support by national government. At the same time, it is necessary to raise awareness of the needs among fishermen. (2) Transforming fishing boats to high-performance and environment-friendly ones will contribute to increasing the employment of young people who will lead the fishing industry in the future. (3)It is in... Read moredispensable for realizing carbon neutral to promote creating seagrass bets and algae and shellfish cultivation as these will promote CO2 fixation through utilizing blue carbon ecosystems and thereby contribute to reduction of environmental loads. (4) It is necessary to develop technology for biodegradable plastic fishing gear and packaging materials without using plastic in the areas of processing, distribution and consumption. (5) Raising consumer awareness on the importance of environmental consideration through the spread of ecolabels will contribute to the sustaining development of Japan's fisheries and fish food culture. (6) For producers and distribution processors, in particular, those who operate small businesses, costs of acquisition and maintenance of ecolabel certification are particularly burdensome. Supports for the development of ecolabel products is also needed. (7) Ensuring a stable food supply through aquaculture is extremely important. For that reason, the raw materials for the feed of farmed fish should be able to be circulated locally. Read less

The expression of views of the stakeholders on challenges and opportunities for sustainable food systems associated with the new strategy, “MeaDRI”.