Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

Topic 5: By 2030, Canada is a leader in supporting inclusive markets for and consumption of nutritious neglected, indigenous and underutilised crops and livestock in developing countries. Participants’ views on actions that are urgently needed: • Additional investments in research on production, innovation, and use of nutritious neglected, indigenous and underutilised crops and livestock. • Increasing knowledge and demand for these products, through support for inclusive markets and national procurement policies, such as school food programs and educational campaigns to promote the nutri... Read moretional and environmental value of these crops and livestock. • Engaging with local stakeholder groups such as local farmers, Indigenous groups and women farmer groups to establish context-specific needs. • Eliminating agricultural dumping which can threaten and disrupt local diversity. • Rethinking the value of agricultural products beyond an economic perspective to include nutritional, food security, social, cultural and environmental benefits. • Considering the consequences on the local food systems when trading internationally. • Offering technical support to local food systems to better mitigate the negative impacts of climate change. • Offering technical support to local food systems to help with the digitalization of agriculture. • Inter-institutional coordination in development and research, ensuring that agriculture-for-nutrition programs focus on local priorities. Who should take these actions? • The Government of Canada through ODA • Research institutions like the International Development Research Centre • Civil Society Organizations and food security networks, women and women’s organizations, Indigenous communities and groups need to be central in these conversations Ways in which progress could be assessed? • Progress should be based off the needs expressed by the local communities and stakeholder groups. • Progress should be context-specific. • Conversations should be brought to the Committee on World Food Security Challenges that might be anticipated as actions are implemented: • Canada’s domestic and international policies regarding Indigenous food systems and support for traditional crops are sometimes contradictory. • The current solution statement seems to place value on commercialisation which does not account for many social and environmental benefits of these crops and importance for food security and nutrition. Read less

• Some participants placed western science as the basis of developing regulations, standards and trade-rules. Concerns were raised that emotion or philosophy is driving changes in the regulatory environment. Others suggested that scientific knowledge only takes us so far (e.g., we know that chips are unhealthy but we don’t tax them). Further comments contested the centrality of western science in defining these rules, highlighting other forms of evidence and knowledge. • Open trade promoted as the key solution to SDG2 by some actors, for others it is only one of the answers and for other... Read mores it was seen as having more negative consequences than positive, particularly in how global trade can disrupt local markets in developing countries. • Participants disagreed on the extent of the role that trade can play in effectively addressing nutritious neglected, indigenous and underutilised crops and livestock. Some believed that the inclusion of trade and markets diluted the conversation away from key issues such as food security. Others argued that exports are critical in some contexts and that there is room for both local and global supply chains. Read less

• Greater coherence is needed between Canada’s domestic and international agendas, including in relation to agriculture, climate, trade, Indigenous food systems, and ODA. This was brought up in multiple discussion groups. • Improved access to financing and control over resources (land, labour) by women smallholder farmers is key to increased production and ensuring a greater value is retained for agri-food products. This will also contribute to women’s empowerment and improved nutrition. • Solutions, including investments, research and programming support, should be context-specific ... Read moreand developed in coordination with local communities, especially women and Indigenous Peoples who are often left out of decision-making processes. The idea of using a participatory approach was also raised in discussions of developing standards (voluntary or not) so as to include all supply chain actors in the design of standards, including those at the farm level, and to share resourcing and benefits along the supply chain as well. • Participants across multiple discussion groups agreed on the need to redefine value across food systems to encompass social and environmental dimensions which are often overshadowed by economic ones. • Social and environmental sustainability in international agri-food value chains should be supported by dedicated provisions in trade agreements. These agreements should seek to be relevant in local contexts as well as global, though this is difficult in practice, and be supported by evidence-based international standard setting. • Supply chain traceability and due diligence is necessary to capture sustainable food systems impacts and outcomes, especially at the farm level. However, these types of initiatives are not simple to implement. • There were divergent views surrounding how and to what extent global food systems/supply chains positively or negatively impact local food systems through effects on things like farmer livelihoods, food security or environmental outcomes. Read less

Topic 1: By 2030, Canadian actors will better support smallholder farmers, especially women, in developing countries to retain a greater value for agri-food products in local and global value chains, while also promoting women’s rights, empowerment and nutrition. Participants’ views on actions that are urgently needed: • Power dynamics must shift from international civil society organisations to empowering local organizations, as they are better positioned to implement programs. • Access to financing would be a game changing solution for small-scale (female) farmers and organizations s... Read moreuch as women led cooperatives. This would require the mobilization of significant international financing (for instance through a global investment matching fund). • Identification of the root causes of gender inequality in each area is needed prior to investing. • Women’s access and control over resources and infrastructure, including land tenure, water access, labour (some people won’t work for women run businesses) and access to affordable finance and financial literacy programs. • Better supply chain traceability that reaches to farm level and measures social as well as productive performance. • Research on the value women bring to their communities, especially Indigenous women that do not participate in long value chains yet feed their communities. • Shift towards shortening of the supply chain to more regional and national needs, promoting the role of women. Not all farmers want to be a part of a global agenda. Who should take these actions? • Systems approach: a value chain analysis can identify the correct actors and areas to maximize effectiveness of interventions. Information, communication, and governance issues are crucial in selecting appropriate, rather than just flashy, investments such as products and technology. • Women: Women around the world know what approach is right for their own communities. Development projects should allow them to lead and develop programs themselves. They hold the techniques to transform food systems and their knowledge is crucial to changing the nature of the game. • Farmers: In a food systems approach, farmers should be first and have the decision-making power. All food systems interventions should start with supply side issues to value and incentivize indigenous knowledge and practices and localize food systems as much as possible. • Governments: Historically they have adopted a top-down approach assuming that farmers need direction. Governments must walk beside local communities and ask what policies are needed to provide context-specific support for infrastructure and investment. Once goals have been identified, collaboration and iterative programming across industries is key • Private Sector: Businesses need to understand why women’s participation is important. Often they do want to involve women but are not always sure how to do so. • Male champions: Some programs run the risk of a push back from men and all precautions must be taken to mitigate potential for violence. It is important to actively engage men and pay attention to drivers of violence within food systems. Ways in which progress could be assessed? • Three pillars toward equitable food systems: agency, control of resources and opportunity structures (institutions and policies). • Gender is a cross cutting issue: it runs through many of the other SDGs. It can be a means to achieve other objectives such as climate adaptation or deforestation issues, as well as an end in itself. • Value is not only monetary. There is an enormous social return on investments in gender equality – societal and economic value are both important. • Quantitative and qualitative data are needed to understand barriers to women’s participation, including discrimination. Read less

[Topic 1 continued...] Challenges that might be anticipated as actions are implemented: • Must take care not to shoehorn women into economic systems that are biased against them. Beyond support to smallholder farmers, other rights can help such as right to food and right to work. • Scientific evidence should be more contextualized. Most research is of no use for smallholder farmers, as it adheres to a Eurocentric farming model. • There are no one size fits all solutions for investments in gender equity. • Women farmers know what is needed and have the expertise to increase production a... Read morend retain greater value but they often lack the required financial resources. Mentorships can help. Read less

Topic 2: By 2030, import market for agri-food products into Canada are responsive to concerns about tropical deforestation and biodiversity loss and are consistent with Canada’s priorities to advance gender equality. Participants’ views on actions that are urgently needed: • Build environment into trade agreements (e.g., Mercosur) which should have legally binding environmental clauses. • Provide incentives to farmers in developing countries to adopt more sustainable production practices. This can include funding through ODA or payments for ecosystem services. • Support education or ... Read moresubsidies for consumers to shift demand for food commodities domestically. • Align domestic and international agendas, including ODA, trade. • Monitor along the value chain including through traceability and due diligence. • Investments in new digital technologies can help make step-wise changes to traceability and structuring of the food supply chain. • Explore national standards/legislation. Effort to develop national sustainability index going on now in Canada. This could be leveraged to go out and inform. Start at home to get our story and evidence in line, and then globally promote. Who should take these actions? • Government of Canada with greater coherence of actions across government departments. • Agri-food private sector, including Canadian companies involved in food import or food transformation. Challenges that might be anticipated as actions are implemented: • Trade offs are very difficult – food, forest, biodiversity, income, governance. It is a challenge to balance these, but all interconnected. • On traceability and enforcement – agreement on importance, but very difficult to do. Available technology is lacking in order to enable and invest in traceability as much as we can. • Locally developed and implemented solutions are needed. Developing countries should not be forced into positions by developed countries when they cannot or do not want to comply. Incentives are needed. Read less

Topic 3: By 2030, more agri-food imports from developing countries into Canada are certified under voluntary sustainability initiatives that consider environmental, social and economic sustainability. Participants’ views on actions that are urgently needed: • A more participatory approach to standards development: development and use of voluntary standards must include all supply chain actors, including at the farm level. • Sharing of benefits and costs: Benefits of standards (price premiums) and costs of adherence/implementation must be shared along the supply chain. Too often, costs ar... Read moree borne by farmers and benefits are seen at retail level. • Tools to facilitate adherence: A digital solution that would enable a farmer to demonstrate adherence to multiple standards and reduce paperwork would be a major help. • Alignment: Coherence between Canada’s trade policy, domestic agricultural and climate policy and ODA is required, as is alignment between commodities and across the supply chain. • There are currently multiple sustainability standards in play, as well as some existing efforts to harmonize standards, which could be aligned to share capacity and reduce burden on farmers. Who should take these actions? • The Government of Canada, donors and other investment actors, supply chain participants Ways in which progress could be assessed? • Government policy changes and ODA spending • Import statistics • Creation of new tools to support use of standards and verification Challenges that might be anticipated as actions are implemented: • Projects may fail when new obligations are placed on farmers without adequate compensation. • Standards could continue to be imposed on farmers, rather than co-developed. • Costs of implementation might continue to be a major barrier, and/or keep the most marginalized farmers out of the system. • When brands undertake a process to improve sustainability of supply chain, they may worry about being guilty by association (or guilty by omission). A culture of transparency must be built. • Can be difficult to avoid “gatekeepers” and be able to access the farm level. • Lack of public trust stemming from redundancy/proliferation of standards that do not become harmonized or equivalent. • “Green-washing” or “block-chain washing”. Read less

Topic 4: By 2030, transparent agri-food trade, based on science and international rules, has contributed to the achievement of SDG2 and promotes positive social and environmental outcomes. Participants’ views on actions that are urgently needed: • Must work to break down silos between trade, environment, food security and health, including in relation to discussions of international trade rules. • Trade policy needs to be able to be discussed outside of the WTO and the WTO needs to allow other voices to be heard to ensure that discussions are not solely focused on economic point of view.... Read more This recommendation links to calls for WTO reform. • Need to look at expanding avenues of solutions through novel provisions in trade agreements like health and environment chapters. • Regulatory environments should be streamlined in order to improve economic efficiency and ensure that regulations can keep up with the pace of innovations related to improving food security (e.g., precision agriculture, sustainable intensification). • Global standards development is important to support coherent approaches to ensuring the economic, social and environmental sustainability of agri-food products. Who should take these actions? • Government of Canada to set domestic regulations. • Government of Canada, other UN member states, International Standard-Setting Bodies to agree on evidence-based international standards to guide regulatory frameworks. Challenges that might be anticipated as actions are implemented: • Difficult for global trade rules or international standards to be sensitive to local context while still being globally relevant. • Domestic and international markets can be complementary, but it’s not easy to address the trade-offs. • Difficult to have trade conversations outside of the WTO. • Must acknowledge the role that investment and finance play in creating certain outcomes, especially in trade flows between developed and developing countries, which can contradict environmental sustainability initiatives and create negative consequences for food security outcomes in developing countries. Read less

This dialogue engaged Canadian actors on actions to improve how Canadian involvement in global agri-food value chains can drive positive change in the food systems of developing countries, especially for women. The discussions were framed by the Sustainable Development Goals to consider the environment, social and economic implications of Canadian actions. The focus of the Dialogue was on links to developing country food systems through agri-food imports into Canada from developing countries, Official Development Assistance (ODA) and international trade rules. The discussion topics were: 1. By... Read more 2030, Canadian actors will better support smallholder farmers, especially women, in developing countries to retain a greater value for agri-food products in local and global value chains, while also promoting women’s rights, empowerment and nutrition. 2. By 2030, import market for agri-food products into Canada are responsive to concerns about tropical deforestation and biodiversity loss and are consistent with Canada’s priorities to advance gender equality. 3. By 2030, more agri-food imports from developing countries into Canada are certified under voluntary sustainability initiatives that consider environmental, social and economic sustainability. 4. By 2030, transparent agri-food trade, based on science and international rules, has contributed to the achievement of SDG2 and promotes positive social and environmental outcomes. 5. By 2030, Canada is a leader in supporting inclusive markets for and consumption of nutritious neglected, indigenous and underutilised crops and livestock in developing countries. Read less

Areas of divergence, gaps, and challenges with specific ideas are noted throughout the Discussion Topic Outcomes above.

Food loss and waste is a complex, dynamic challenge and all food system actors have a role to play. While many are taking action, stakeholders have identified the need for a more coordinated, cohesive approach in Canada. There are a multitude of reasons that food loss and waste is generated throughout the food system, including lack of awareness and quantification, operational inefficiencies, relationships between supply chain partners, quality standards, inadequate transportation and storage, inaccurate forecasting and inventory management. A collaborative approach is needed to disrupt the ac... Read moreceptance of food loss and waste and to prevent it at the source wherever possible while avoiding unintended consequences of shifting the problem up- or down-stream in the supply chain. Where prevention is not feasible, there are missed economic and social opportunities when food is discarded, as well as environmental consequences (e.g. landfill methane emissions). While the development of innovative solutions to recapture the lost value of food loss and waste are being stimulated through the Government of Canada’s Food Waste Reduction Challenge, collaborations and partnerships are needed to connect innovators with food supply chain stakeholders to increase awareness and adoption of these solutions. The objective of this Dialogue was to bring together diverse stakeholders and perspectives to identify specific mechanisms that can foster collaboration on reducing food loss and waste across Canada’s food system. Read less

Participants representing diverse perspective and roles in Canada’s food system agreed that food loss and waste is an important food system issue to be addressed. In recognizing the truly systemic nature of the issue, participants reflected that all stakeholders and consumers have a role to play and that collaborative, cross-sectoral approaches are required to effect meaningful change. It was also noted that there is a complex set of interrelated factors that result in the generation and disposal of food loss and waste. Therefore, multifactorial solutions are required that can be tailored to... Read more each stage of the food system – there is no silver bullet solution. In tackling food loss and waste, participants noted the need for a culture change, from farm to fork, that no longer accepts food loss and waste. Another common theme to emerge is the need to prioritize source reduction efforts to help prevent the generation of food loss and waste. Nevertheless, noting the magnitude of the problem and the inevitability of some forms of food loss and waste, participants noted the opportunity to deploy innovative technologies and processes to utilize food loss and waste as a resource. Engaging discussions amongst the enthusiastic set of Dialogue participants yielded a number of note-worthy ideas to advance collaboration on food loss and waste reduction, including the development of national reduction targets, a collective strategy/roadmap, a common understanding and measurement framework, public-private partnerships, incentives for the adoption of innovative solutions, and hubs or networks that consolidate efforts around communications, research/data, innovation, and best practices. Their ideas are detailed in the following section under discussion topics/themes. Read less

In discussion groups of up to 10 individuals representing diverse aspects of Canada’s food system, participants discussed their perspectives and brainstormed ways to foster collaboration on food loss and waste under four themes: Building Awareness and Motivating Change; Mobilizing Commitment and Collective Action; Empowering Action with Evidence; and Stimulating Innovation and Adoption. Building Awareness and Motivating Change Participants reflected the need for a “culture change” from the current acceptance of food loss and waste, both among food supply chain actors as well as household... Read mores. It was noted that while consumers are often the focus of education campaigns, there is a need to communicate to/empower all stages of supply chain and connect with cross-sectoral partners who can use the “waste”. Participants raised a number of important considerations as well as tactics for more effectively communicating about food loss and waste: • The importance of transparency for consumers and the opportunity to capitalize on food loss and waste reduction can help food businesses build consumer trust. On the other hand, it was noted that consumers deal with a lot of misinformation and marketing claims, and cautioned against food loss and waste reduction becoming “another misleading marketing claim.” The opportunity to use digital mobile technologies, e.g. QR code, could be used to communicate with consumers could be explored. • Beyond awareness of food loss and waste, there is a need to shift consumer perception and increase acceptance of upcycled food products as healthy and acceptable options. There is a negative perception that surplus edible food is only for “poor people”. • Best Before Date labelling is misunderstood. Consumers and organizations are concerned about food safety concerns and liability, even though these dates are not “a safety mark” but rather a “quality mark”. Foods can safely be consumed after the best before date. • Social media campaigns can raise awareness as well as profile results of food loss and waste reduction efforts. However, using the example of a recent municipal-level household awareness initiative, campaigns can effect short-lived behavioural change, and there is a need to identify means to achieve sustained behavioural change. • Guidance for households to reduce food waste should be convenient and easy to digest. Positive and funny tips can be an effective tool, as can tailored messaging for youth (e.g. at school). • Improving consumer food literacy can help consumers use more parts of a plant or animal that are edible and can be delicious. For example, 30 years ago few people in North America ate chicken wings but they are now an accepted/popular food item. • Improving consumer food skills on how to use their “food waste” can help them avoid waste. For example, using carrot tops in soup. • Making food waste visible can be an effective tactic, e.g. showing pictures of the volumes of ham, cheese, turkey that are discarded. • When communicating with food processors, manufacturers and distributers, who are facing small margins, messaging should clearly indicate potential financial and other benefits of reducing food loss (i.e. business case). • Reframe food loss and waste as a valuable commodity to promoting ways to use it effectively at its highest value rather than lowest. Don’t call edible surplus food “food waste.” Participants also discussed the need for mechanisms to better coordinate food loss and waste awareness activities across Canada by organizing the information and communication “universe”, and the importance of repeating the same message to address the issue nationally. The development of a centralized hub or ‘node’ of communication to share information was raised as a potential mechanism to advance collaboration, coordination, and consistency in messaging. Read less

Mobilizing Collective Commitment and Action Participants reflected that collaborative relationships across the food system and whole-of-chain approaches are needed to align common interests of maximizing value, drive shared responsibility, and address the challenges and barriers to reducing food loss and waste. An example that was shared is a Canadian whole-of-chain collaboration between Value Chain Management International, farmers, Vineland Growers Cooperative, Vineland Research Innovation Centre, and Loblaws. The project led to reduced waste in the stone fruit supply chain from farm to reta... Read moreil. The case study shows that addressing inefficiencies and improving processes naturally lead to reduced food loss and waste. It was also noted that increasing collaborative relationships can help ensure that food products get circulated to more areas in Canada. Supporting food banks by redistributing surplus food due to the closure of restaurants and foodservices during the COVID-19 pandemic was raised as a recent successful example. However, it was also noted that the volume of surplus food can quickly overwhelm the infrastructure and resource capacity of community food organizations. Ideas raised by participants that could foster collaboration on this aspect of food loss and waste reduction include: • Setting national targets. A (set of) collective reduction target(s) can spur meaningful collaborations to reduce food loss and waste system-wide, rather than shift the problem around within the system. An example raised was the National Zero Waste Council (NZWC)’s strategic goal to reduce food waste by 50% by 2030, noting that some industry groups have adopted this goal. Participants reflected that national reduction targets should align with international targets. • Developing a national roadmap. This could be informed by conducting a study to look at the existing research, analyze the challenges, and then develop a national roadmap that inclusive to all aspects of the food systems. • Establishing forum(s) or platform(s) to bring food industry actors together within multi-stakeholder groups to collaborate across various dimension of food loss and waste. Participants raised the convening role of government to this effect, and identified Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s value chain roundtables as an existing platform that could be leveraged. • Developing an inventory of best practices. It was noted that success stories and key learnings, both domestically and globally, could spur broader uptake and action. • Establishing an intergovernmental mechanism for food issues in general, that transcend diverse levels and breadth of government, such as agricultural, waste management, environment, social services, and regional/local government components. Read less

Empowering Action Through Evidence Participants generally agreed that measurement and data on food loss and waste is fundamental to scoping the problem and supporting effective, evidence-based actions to address it. Important gaps and challenges that were raised in the Canadian context include: • Lack of standard definitions • Lack of baseline data due to the high cost to collect data • Inconsistent methodology, with no standardized approaches and/or guidance on methodologies • Lack of transparency in data and cooperation across the value chain • Lack of data on volume of food being ... Read morepurchased or consumed by consumers Ideas raised by participants that could foster collaboration on this aspect of food loss and waste reduction include: • Developing a common understanding of the problem, including standard definitions and baseline estimates. • Developing standardized methodology and common tools to improve consistency of approaches used across the value chain. This could incorporate the use of a variety of indicators such as mass and nutrient content. • Developing a national data strategy or roadmap. To this end, participants raised the example of Provision Coalition’s Food Loss and Waste dashboard that could serve as a good model to build on. • Establishing a national non-profit or a national government unit that could assemble data and knowledge about food waste in Canada, including existing food waste reduction initiatives in Canada, reasons for their success and opportunities for scaling up such efforts. An independent organization could be supported using a public-private partnership (PPP) model. • Developing a network, hub or other resource that is accessible to everyone to share the research on food loss and waste across the country. • Partnering with a research council (e.g. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council) to offer a knowledge synthesis competition on food loss and waste. • Enhancing consistency of municipal waste audits. Common food waste audit guide/templates can support comparative analysis across municipalities or provinces. The Ontario Food Collaborative (OFC)’s municipal waste audit guide was shared as an example that is transferable to other audiences as well. • Exploring a mandatory reporting requirement on food loss and waste to provide more momentum for audit uptake across the country. • Allocating resources to support municipalities, restaurants, grocery stores, hospitals, schools and other organizations to conduct food waste audits. A national funding program could provide financial and other resources (e.g. consultants/expertise, staff members to run waste audits) for this type of initiative. • Exploring a “true-cost accounting” approach for food that incorporates externalities, which can reflect the true value of things we currently consider to be “waste” and incentivize prevention or recovery of food as a resource. However, it was noted that this could result in food being more expensive, which could impact risk factors for food insecurity. Read less

Stimulating Innovation and Adoption Participants reflected on the importance of stimulating innovative solutions, such as through the Government of Canada’s Food Waste Reduction Challenge, and the need to create more incentives to support broader adoption of technologies that facilitate reduction of food loss and waste. It was noted that this could be supported by structuring programs to have smaller, faster projects, to emphasize the speed of learning, enable quicker testing of ideas to find solutions that work and get them implemented faster. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) were raised ... Read moreas a potential model to facilitate this approach. Participants also highlighted innovation with respect to specific food system areas or issue, including: • Food rescue technologies – Innovative food rescue (and other) technologies can help ensure broader distribution of edible food. Participants also raised the connection between innovation and infrastructure, noting that cities and regions are working on redistributing surplus food, but the sheer volume of food exceeds the capacity of existing infrastructure to address. Examples includes infrastructure to store frozen meals and mobile infrastructure to redistribute surplus food. Technology can help address gaps, for example by localizing waste processing on site; however, participants also noted the need for additional investment in municipal infrastructure. • Digitalization in Supply Chain – There is an opportunity to increase the use of digital technology in the food supply chain. Examples raised included the use of blockchain for tracking the life-cycle of food items/elements of foods, and developing and adopting better predictive demand/supply models for agriculture. This could be built on platforms that are currently used by many supply chain actors (e.g. GS1 standards) to enhance and align tracking from farm to fork. Digital technology can also help to better organize the sourcing of foods for many retailers that want to work directly with farmers. • Supporting Farmers - Innovation that better identifies the nutritional content of food processing by-products that can be used as animal feed could increase acceptance and use by farmers. There may also be opportunities to connect surplus products at the retail/grocery stage back to farmers to be used as animal feed or other on-farm uses. • Preventing Spoilage – There is still the need to develop and adopt the best technologies that can keep foods fresh and/or extend their shelf life, which currently include plastic packaging. It was noted that while current policy efforts are aimed at banning single-use plastics, there could be the unintended consequence of increasing food loss and waste in certain commodities where appropriate and viable alternatives do not currently exist. • Renewable energy - Exploring opportunities to have the technology to support the generation of renewable energy to underpin the food system could increase energy autonomy and reduce reliance on fossil fuels and carbon footprint food system actors. Read less

Other Topics Participants also raised some other issues and considerations related to food loss and waste that go beyond the four themes above, that include the following: • Regulations play an important role in the food system and should be considered when pursuing solutions to food loss and waste. Examples raised include consumer trust in certification processes and the implementation of innovative solutions (e.g. regulatory barriers). • Promoting local food production in order to shorten supply chains, especially for perishable items, and to make fresh food more accessible to consumers.... Read more • Increasing the cost associated with generating waste can incentivize prevention and recovery. One approach could be for the federal government to encourage more extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs so that the costs are incurred by those responsible for them. • It was noted that the current valuation approach to food is part of the reason Canada exports raw goods/commodities and imports finished food products, and a more holistic valuation approach (e.g. true-cost accounting) could help change these dynamics and stimulate the growth of Canada’s food processing capacity. • Diversifying commodities/products could serve as a risk management tool for farmers and food businesses. This can help farmers hang on during difficult times, e.g. sudden changes in demand, and potentially avoid unexpected surplus/waste. • Weather is a big driver of food loss on farms and there are limitations for the food industry because of the perishable nature of the goods produced and their susceptibility to inclement weather. This is a unique feature of food industry that needs to be recognized as a factor driving food loss and waste. Read less

Fortalecimiento de los programas de protección social • Un tema que demanda agilidad en territorios remotos, por ello es necesario incluir el acompañamiento de las personas que reciben la protección social para que no sea solo de forma vertical. Se requieren programas de comunicación. • El seguimiento a temas de protección social es un factor clave para la trazabilidad de los usuarios. • Protección social puede quedarse corto, es un concepto más amplio y demanda acciones sostenidas para ser efectivo. • Ante la falta de un sistema de protección social en el país es necesario re... Read moreforzar la coordinación y la gestión de información para evaluar y tener un monitoreo de los cambios de patrones y conducta. • La alimentación de la niñez debe ser un elemento para diferenciar en materia de protección social. • Es necesario conocer la situación del adulto mayor dentro de los programas sociales. Fortalecimiento de la producción local de alimentos saludables • Considerar el factor de innovación para la producción local y para establecer competencias a nivel económico. Guatemala tiene productos ricos en valores nutricionales que deben abrirse a nuevos mercados internacionales Fomentar la educación sobre consumo de alimentos saludables • Lo cultural es esencial: territorio, beneficiario y el rol de la madre, son piezas clave para hacer efectiva una educación en alimentos saludables. • Fomentar espacios de diálogo a nivel comunitario para la toma de decisión de los mismos miembros de la comunidad y esto garantice la sostenibilidad de los sistemas alimentarios, así como fomentar la educación y nutrición. • Es un planteamiento muy vertical, se requiere trabajar con las personas, formar espacios de diálogo a nivel comunitario para la comprensión e internalización, y de allí tomar sus propias decisiones, esto le dará sostenibilidad a largo plazo. • La Gran Cruzada Nacional por la Nutrición tiene los principios enfocados en cambio de comportamiento, es necesario reforzarlos para que la estrategia sea a largo plazo. • La documentación y el sistema de información sobre el cambio de comportamiento es clave para poder medir si hay impacto en las acciones de las personas. • El enfoque preventivo es necesario reforzarlo en el pénsum de estudios para fomentar el cambio de comportamiento de la niñez en crecimiento. • Acciones afirmativas para bajar el nivel de azúcar de los productos que se venden en las tiendas y que son de fácil acceso para la población. Se requiere seguir la tendencia mundial de aplicar una legislación al respecto para las empresas productoras Vincular la producción local con consumidores nacionales • Promover programas sociales para las poblaciones más vulnerables a través de los cuales su producción pueda fortalecer su presencia en el mercado local. • Enfatizar la trazabilidad para garantizar que las acciones en los territorios sean accesibles Trabajo multisectorial por el desarrollo de los sistemas alimentarios • Incluir como sexto punto el fortalecimiento institucional para poder conocer la viabilidad de respuesta de las instituciones del Estado ante las necesidades que surjan de los sistemas alimentarios. • Mejorar la articulación entre institucionalidad pública y de diversos sectores. • Promover la participación efectiva de todos los sectores. • La investigación sobre sistemas alimentarios es importante, cómo involucrar a la academia. • Integrar a nivel de gobernanza y todos los niveles la SINASAN, CONASAN para poder tener una colaboración efectiva. • Revisión de los presupuestos, planes y metas a nivel nacional para poder conocer de mejor forma la planificación a corto, mediano y largo plazo, así como los resultados esperados. Read less

Durante el desarrollo del Tercer Diálogo Nacional, se identificaron las siguientes recomendaciones por parte de los grupos de trabajo. Desde el Grupo 1, se destacó entre una de las mayores áreas de divergencia con la implementación de los programas sociales y su sostenibilidad a mediano y largo plazo. Estos programas de protección social deben de ser temporales y lo que se debe buscar es la graduación de las familias beneficiarias de estos programas a partir de hacer sostenibles los sistemas de seguridad. Se consideró la fusión y replanteamiento de algunas de las temáticas priorizadas... Read more, al considerar que se complementaban entre sí. Desde el Grupo 2, se consideró que los aspectos propuestos para la estructura de posición de país deben considerarse y agregar algunas otras más que están en este diálogo y las cuales se deben incluir dentro de los documentos que se entreguen al finalizar el proceso. Entre ellos destacaron, la revisión de los programas sociales con aportes sustantivos hacia los sistemas alimentarios y también tomar en cuenta la identificación de la doble carga de la malnutrición y no solamente hablar de uno de los aspectos Desde el Grupo 3, se planteó que, al momento de diseñar planes de protección social para la población con mayor vulnerabilidad, se consideren las transferencias condicionadas para que éstas puedan incluir un financiamiento pero que vaya dirigido a la producción de alimentos. Esto en aras de cambiar el enfoque y que estas intervenciones no sean asistencialistas, sino que se conviertan intervenciones que tengan un abordaje más integral. Además, se propuso ampliar a un mayor tipo de alimentos la cosecha y almacenamiento. Desde el Grupo 4, se destacó la gestión de información y monitoreo. Esto debido a la importancia de darle seguimiento y poder evaluar el enfoque de protección social según el ciclo de vida y poder verificar los impactos positivos y resultados de los programas que forman parte de las políticas públicas. Se considera importante incluir un sexto componente relacionado al fortalecimiento institucional dado que la viabilidad debe ser tomada en cuenta en lo que concierne a la capacidad de respuesta desde la institucionalidad del Estado. Read less

En este Tercer Diálogo Nacional en seguimiento a los diálogos anteriores, se priorizó el Eje de Acción No. 1, denominado “Garantizar el acceso a alimentos sanos y nutritivos para todos” el cual se basó en los insumos desarrollados previamente en los diálogos para encontrar las propuestas, prioridades y soluciones para los sistemas alimentarios del país e integrar estos insumos en la posición de país que Guatemala presentará en la Pre-Cumbre y Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios. Este tuvo como objetivo diseñar e implementar un proceso que permita a las partes interesadas intervenir ... Read moreen 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 tercera etapa se definieron los siguientes resultados: Resultado 1: Socializar los resultados consolidados de los diálogos de la Fase 1 y de la Fase 2. Resultado 2: Identificar las intenciones y los compromisos de los sectores y partes interesadas que pueden aportar a la sostenibilidad de los Sistemas Alimentarios en Guatemala. Resultado 3: Retroalimentar la propuesta de posición de país para presentar en la Pre-Cumbre y la Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios. • 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. Inicialmente la Cumbre de Sistemas Alimentarios presenta los siguientes lineamientos para el desarrollo de posiciones de país: • Valorar los propósitos de los sistemas alimentarios actuales. • Clarificar y acordar las expectativas sobre los sistemas alimentarios en los próximos diez años. • Identificar los cambios que deben producirse y las decisiones que deben trabajarse en los tres próximos años • Definir la forma en que las partes interesadas pueden trabajar bien conjuntamente • Resaltar y reforzar la conexión entre la hoja de ruta y otros documentos de planificación nacional • Indicar los principales hitos a lo largo del calendario de la hoja de ruta. Los participantes fueron distribuidos de manera mixta en 4 grupos de trabajo, en donde se generó el proceso de retroalimentación de la Posición de País a partir de los siguientes temas: 1) Programas Sociales; 2) Producción local de alimentos saludables y nutritivos; 3) Educación para el consumo de alimentos saludables; 4) Vinculación de producción local con consumidores; 5) Trabajo multisectorial por el desarrollo de los sistemas alimentarios. Read less