Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

Common threads across the region on the state of wild foods and factors affecting them: 1. There is much knowledge about wild foods among indigenous and rural peoples. Most of them use wild foods to supplement their diets; many foods as well as their methods of preparation, storage or harvesting techniques are a part of their identity and culture. 2. Alongside, there is an overall decline in the knowledge regarding wild foods. The reasons can be traced to national policies that affect foods grown and their harvest (mainly due to import policies and subsidies), as well as an official oversight ... Read moreabout the role of wild and traditional foods in rural diets; the expansion of monocultures and other changes in land uses . 3. Mainstream agriculture has delinked food from nutrition and culture/identity. Both of the latter are important components of indigenous food ways. 4. Across the region there is a need to establish and publicize the links between food and health. While statistics on health may be easily available within government/intergovernmental agencies and international organizations, what needs to be examined are the correlations between wild food, access and consumption. 5. It is important to include all food ways prevalent in the region, including rotational farming, gathering, fishing, trapping, food gardens and cultivation. Even some of these traditional systems focus on non-mainstream crops. Their strengths and vibrancy should be known better in the local contexts, as also the threats that they face 6. The work on wild foods requires continuous updating, with new foods and the knowledge/status around them documented; this also includes the gaps in knowledge observed within communities during workshops and the appropriate interventions to be designed to fill them; and also to make clear the traditional uses and the link between wild foods and their nutritional values. 7. Field work and observations are encouraged to be explored in relation to various other predominating issues such as biodiversity, climate change, food security and tenure rights. 8. Indigenous knowledge do not have to be validated by science particularly when they stand on a position of strength through demonstrated practice. Challenges and Threats to Wild Foods: 1) Sustaining community practice - The sustainable consumption of wild foods necessitates the passing on of traditional knowledge, mainly through actual practice. However, due to economic constraints, sustaining wild foods extraction and consumption is challenged by livelihood shifts, changes in cultural preferences, and the decreased willingness of people to spend time to collect or hunt wild food. 2) Environmental destruction - Wild foods are significantly found in forests and other natural environments. Thus, activities that cause destruction of natural environments or limit people’s access to their natural resources negatively impact the availability and consumption of wild foods. Such activities include deforestation, mining, monocropping, chemical inputs, and infrastructure projects. 3) Tenure issues - Tenure ensures food security, especially for indigenous peoples. It ensures people’s access to wild foods and in making community-based management plans for their forests. Tenure related problems, such as lack of recognition of ancestral lands and commons, land grabbing and encroachment endanger food security 4) Market-driven economy - A market-driven economy can cause over-exploitation of wild foods for selling or abandonment of wild foods in favor of cash crops or commercial species. 5) Unfavorable laws and policies - The lack of policies that enable the tenure of indigenous peoples and local communities to their lands poses challenges to the sustainability of wild foods. Supportive policies can empower people to manage their lands and capitalize on their resources for food security. Recommendations and Ideas to Sustain Wild Foods: 1) Awareness-building and knowledge transfers - Build awareness about the benefits of wild foods; hold activities that will facilitate knowledge and skills transfer 2) Sustainable trade - Impose trade restrictions that ensure sustainability; remove barriers to market access due to limited market information, inhibitive taxes, lack of transportation, etc. 3) Sustainable farming, aquaculture, and wild foods conservation - Support community seed banking, rotational farming, observance of fallow periods, and guided fallows have the potential to improve forest quality; establish community-managed fish hatcheries and forest gardens; pursue multiple-use strategies and community-based management plans that are environmentally-sound and food-focused 4) Advocacy and protest actions - Dialogue, workshops, research, legal actions; advocate for tenurial and management rights of indigenous peoples for their lands; hold protest actions Read less

This virtual Independent Dialogue was convened by the Wild Foods, Biodiversity and Livelihoods SIANI Expert Group (EG) led by the Non-Timber Forest Products - Exchange Programme (NTFP-EP) Asia. It built on the outputs of an online discussion series held from June-September 2020 which explored wild foods and its links to customary tenure rights and traditional knowledge, biodiversity, and sustainable livelihoods, and an EG discussion of an emerging regional outlook on inclusive systems in Asia to 2030 held in January 2021. The objectives of the virtual dialogue / forum on March 8-12, 2021 were ... Read moreto: 1) Provide a platform to reflect on policy inputs, recommendations and insights from the expert group members, dialogue partners and contributors towards an indigenous peoples and local communities’ (IPLC) agenda on wild foods in the South and Southeast Asia region 2) Provide a venue for IPLCs and civil society to engage policy actors and donor institutions and stakeholders to support wild foods initiatives 3) Increase awareness, support and recognition on the role of IPLCs and wild foods for food security and community resilience towards an enabling policy environment for food security, biodiversity conservation and sustainable development, and enlivening a community of conscious practice. It was envisaged that the dialogue process that culminated with the virtual forum, will be able to provide a vital contribution to ongoing regional to global processes including the FSS. Collectively the dialogues surfaced the perspectives of multi-sector experts (including indigenous and local communities) about wild foods and traditional food systems, explored their current status and practice among thriving indigenous and local communities, and their future in the face of present day barriers and challenges. Our major focus was to convene and facilitate a: - sharing of experiences, cases and best practices in relation to wild foods work - a discussion on the challenges and threats to wild foods - recommendations on ways forward - an outlook on wild foods, biodiversity, livelihoods, and inclusive food systems - documentation and communication of key messages, insights, and lessons about transforming local to global food systems to be more inclusive; and - visioning of the future role of a wild foods, biodiversity and livelihood network towards a transformative and inclusive food systems to 2030. We had three (3) main sessions during the forum: (1) Opening Session: A synthesis of the key messages captured in the 2020 dialogue series that helps to frame the Virtual Forum, an outlook on wild foods and inclusive food systems in Asia towards 2030; (2) Country perspectives on the situation of wild foods in South and Southeast Asia; and a (3) Regional dialogue on wild foods, biodiversity and livelihoods: Enabling and enriching policy and practice. Side events on women and youth engagement and wild food stories in the region, including recipes and innovations on local ingredients, were also featured, and their distinct perspectives were also captured. The dialogue was directed towards an outlook of a more inclusive food system in Asia - covering the diversity of populations that will govern, manage and benefit from it, to the knowledge, culture and science combined that drive it and the biocultural resources that have been neglected or taken for granted that contribute to its vitality, resilience or sustainability. The group was able to identify the important issues that intersect with wild foods that are critical to be addressed in policy and practice. The dialogue produced holistic recommendations of collective and participatory future actions. Read less

Areas of divergence were as follows and to be discussed at future meetings. - A belief that money will solve the issues of food security. Not fully seeing the systems perspective. - Some individual wariness of the few individuals who may take advantage of sharing/free food, and therefore "ruin" it for others - A faction of the group would like to focus on short term/emergency aid, others look at the drivers and want to tackle more longer-term, systemic issues.

Governance/Policy: Food Partnership accesses network support bodies eg. sustainable food places, Feeding Britain. The importance of food systems work is fully recognised within local authority (how best to achieve this) Eastbourne Borough Council is integral in development of and adoption of town-wide food strategy either as stand alone document or becomes built in to other working strategies.

Primary prevention Access to cookery skills and nutrition classes for every resident Model whole-school food scheme in Eastbourne school and roll-out, including nutrition review, TastEd/similar in curriculum, food growing spaces, cooking skills, after-school clubs. Support network for private home growing, including skills workshops, seed swaps, knowledge sharing, land share etc - links to workshops and ‘master gardener’ network above. Making town more resilient by strengthening links with local producers - eg, ‘food festival’ event, local produce market, link surplus to distribution h... Read moreub, website and social media promotion, online sales platform to raise awareness. Integrate regenerative local food producers/processors/distributors/retailers into a local monetary system with built-in rewards for regenerative practices. Read less

Secondary prevention Establish comparable ‘intermediate’ food support services in every ward, so that every resident has access to a community fridge/pantry or similar. Establish central food redistribution hub where surplus/donated food can be effectively distributed to other organisations/fridges review council-owned community buildings and establish full collaboration and integration of community centres to offer comparable provision across the town including community cafe or similar, and community growing space if possible. Ensure all schools are aware of local support available and i... Read moredeally set up fridges and growing spaces within easy access to local schools Establish network of community allotments/ growing spaces to enable access for every resident, along with growing workshops/skills development (including composting) - a ‘master gardener’ network in each ward Pilot a Social Supermarket, ideally in town centre location. Read less

Emergency response / tertiary prevention - eg foodbank, homeless support Establish central point(s) where the public can access up to date, comprehensive food support provision information, and staff hours are available to keep this tracked. Council website/Food partnership? Affordable Food Network mapping. Comprehensive signposting support across network including local services and eligibility for support eg. healthy start vouchers Establish a platform for the network to communicate & collaborate Focus group to establish acute emergency response plan Food bank (already in 8 most deprived... Read more LSOA’s) - what collaborative support/action would help the most? Action on cooking facilities in temporary accommodation Town-wide collaboration to coordinate winter night shelters Read less

Potential drivers to being unable to access sufficient amounts of safe and nutritious food Poverty and the drivers of this Lack of cooking skills Lack of time to cook Lack of equipment Lack of nutritional knowledge Lack of access to land to grow food Lack of knowledge as to how to grow food Local shops do not provide fresh healthy produce No local market Isolation Promotion of unhealthy ultra-processed foods Proliferation of fast food outlets near schools Lack of economic & financial incentives for regenerative food growing/processing/distribution schemes/projects/activities

a) There are opportunities and a desire across the network of organisations and institutions to collaborate on action towards strengthening acute emergency/response to need b) There are opportunities and a desire across the network of organisations and institutions to collaborate on a shared vision and action plan, towards what can be done locally to increase community resilience and tackle the drivers of food insecurity in the longer-term. c) There are shared experiences and challenges, within the organisations on the ground assisting the food insecure, as well as areas of divergence. d) Ther... Read moree are gaps in practical support and areas of challenge with regard to who holds the funding and who makes the decisions in the area of food insecurity. e) A considerable amount of collaboration already exists across organisations, created organically between them according to need, but there is space for more according to a wider vision, and by extending the network of connections across the town. f) There is a shift happening within organisations from dealing with the emergency response, to a more holistic approach which aims to consider the drivers and looking on an individual basis at how to bring people into a state of food security. g)There is a need for shared action on uniform signposting across the town h) There is a desire to create equivalent intermediate provision across every ward in the town, for example a community fridge, community cafe offering affordable meals, and a community garden so that every resident has comparable access. i) There is a lack of collated local data on provision across the town and the detail of hours, volunteer hours, residents helped, funding allocated k) It was agreed that the network will collaborate on a list of goals and refine that to provide a set of smart goals with top priorities, from which a set of objectives can be drawn up. Read less

The main focus of the dialogue was the issue of food security in the town of Eastbourne and the surrounding areas, in the context of other food partnership initiatives, like health and education. Exploring current provision of support from different organisations across the town, their areas of collaboration and shared experiences. Discussion of challenges and barriers. Looking at ways in which the town can build resilience in the response to food insecurity, what longer-term solutions might be, and how to approach longer-term solutions as a network rather than in silo.

While this entire group firmly believes in the power of organic as the best option, there are points of divergence in the spectrum of organic. Some push for more pure, strict standards for animal, social, environmental impacts while others are more focused on making organic bigger, broader, and more accessible across the globe. The purity of organic vs large scale accessibility and economic viability/growth is a friction within the organic community. The organic community is a passionate group and highly accountable to ourselves in aiming to be the best, most transparent and trustworthy we can... Read more be. Points of divergence within the organic community really just point to the fact that we are all trying to remain highly accountable to our goals and we are critical of ourselves while striving for continuous improvement. The organic sector acknowledges there is a need to grow and improve the public/private partnership that defines the U.S. organic system. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program has been continuously evolving since 1997 when the first proposed rules to establish national organic standards were published. The organic sector in the United States has expanded greatly in the last two decades, and that expansion has made it critical that the government fulfill its role in its partnership. Recognizing that need, the Organic Trade Association has been the chief advocate for the recently introduced Continuous Improvement and Accountability in Organic Standards legislation which lays out a path forward for the USDA to advance organic. With that background on this area of divergence in the organic community at large, it is noted that there were no stark debates or harshly opposing viewpoints present in our dialogue, likely because our stakeholders were mostly likeminded organic advocates. We recognize the need to bring more viewpoints into the conversation, and will now aim to identify what the barriers are to bringing others into these conversations. Our participants recognized that this conversation needs to bring new people into the conversation, especially farmers and BIPOC, so that points of divergence can be identified and compromises and solutions can be achieved. Participants agreed that we need to move past conversations of agreeance with our peers and purposefully give opposing stakeholders a seat at the same table in order to get to the next level of growth and development towards the UN sustainable development goals. The question is – how does the organic community achieve this so we can start to push barriers and extend our reach and impact? How does the global agricultural community get to a point where we can articulate the fundamental divergences holding us back and identify a collective path forward? Conversations need to include diverse stakeholder perspectives, but although this fact is recognized it is not achieved in reality. This conversation, the organic industry, and organic consumers need to be more diverse but identifying immediate actions and long-term solutions are both challenging. Lending practices and land access have been designed to be intentionally discriminatory, but tangible solutions towards reconciling that are debated. Identity politics and income inequality results in deeply polarized communities. Organic needs to be an affordable and accessible option for farmers and consumers and a complex and comprehensive approach is needed to create and sustain systematic change. Read less

Innovation: Years and years of advancements shaped innovations to create what is now the baseline for organic. Continuous improvement is about learning from the past and initiating new developments. Issues include hurdles to obtain improved seeds and genetic ownership as well access to land and more markets. The organic sector must collaborate and adhere to the three pillars of innovation: fairness, soil health, and biodiversity. “Are you meeting people where they are?” this group advised stakeholders to ask themselves.

Climate Action: Organic is already proven as a climate solution. We are past the stage of exploring the viability of organic as a solution; we are ready to scale it up to achieve greater impact across the globe. Participants discussed the successes of organic to provide substantial benefits for food systems and textiles contributing to biodiversity, soil health, water quality and benefits for farmers. Organic farms sequester 26% more carbon than conventional farms; emit 18% less global warming potential and use around 50% less new reactive nitrogen; they also reduce human exposure to toxic che... Read moremicals, provide more income in rural areas, and more resilience because of diversity and soil health. Misinformation about organic has been a barrier, showing the need for more consumer education and transparency. Organic farmers in general have not been leading voices on climate change so they need to play catch-up to bring attention to organic’s important role. There is a need for more data collection, as well as technical support to help continuously improve standards. Read less

International Trade: International trade of organic products is growing. Initially, trade primarily consisted of finished products. Now, mostly ingredients are crossing borders to fuel the processing industry. Some companies are experiencing growth but there are not enough organic ingredients in the supply chain to meet demand. With the right government support and incentives, this could change. Concerns center on transparency and fraud. Agronomic scientists encourage small farmers to lead the conversation on what would help them thrive using organic practices. We need to be more emphatic, lis... Read moreten, and learn from farmers, not burden them with being the solution. Farmers often export their organic agriculture for the economic incentive, and they are left with little or no access to the products for themselves. We need to help farmers support themselves and allow them access to the same organic products they are working so hard to provide to others outside of their own communities. Read less

Feeding the World Participants noted that while it is easy to define what the organic sector is doing well right now, it may not be good enough for the future. More education is needed on what organic is, and what it means in grocery stores and on labels. Would it be possible to communicate nutrition in terms of food per acre? It is important to address the overall inconsistency of supplies of organic food and organic growing conditions for people of color. Organic is proven to work and be scalable, but governments needs to support that development. If all farmers adopt organic practices, we c... Read morean increase food production and lower yield gap (organic yields are just 8-9% lower than conventional). More policies and investment are needed to support this goal. Read less

Socially Responsible Economic Growth: This group recognized that it came up with more questions than answers. Participants were predominantly white and lacked diversity. There are limitations on land access and inclusion for diverse farmers. “Broken food systems are a broken capital system,” they pointed out. Representation needs to be diverse and inclusive. Farmers face barriers to transitioning, and some conventional farmers are still skeptical of organic. The more we can understand and account for social and economic externalities the more obvious it is that organic is the most valuable... Read more way to scale our global food systems Read less

Human Health and Wellbeing: This group defined human health and wellbeing as providing access to nutritious food that can be trusted and contribute to mental health, job security, living wages, and decreases chemical exposure. Organic helps eliminate direct exposure to over 700 toxic chemicals and pesticides while also providing nourishment. Accessibility is a challenge. Accountability and transparency need to be maintained in the standards. Inclusivity should allow growers, farmers, and knowledge-based cultures to have a voice and equal access to the organic marketplace in order to be fully e... Read morengaged in progressive solutions. Read less

Organic offers a host of benefits for the environment and for overall human wellbeing and longevity. Organic farms sequester 26% more carbon than conventional farms and increase biodiversity by some 30%. Organic agricultural practices also build and foster healthy soil, mitigate climate change, conserve water use, reduce pesticide consumption/exposure, boost pollinator populations, allow for long-term self-sustaining farming viability to meet the growing needs of our planet and are ultimately more resilient to extreme weather conditions. Our Dialogue participants identified a handful of key st... Read morerategies necessary to take advantage of the host of benefits that organic offers, to expand on this model and make organic part of the solution to achieving a global sustainable food system. Federal policies: There are many federal policies that could be improved to promote the development of equitable organic food systems. Subsidy reform is needed; there should be long-term incentives for sustainable farming, rather than subsidies for conventional farmers not using sustainable practices. Crop insurance reform is needed to provide an adequate safety net for organic farmers. Increased support and funding to help farmers through the organic transition process is needed. Increased capital and technical assistance is needed, and more research on organic agriculture needs to be underway. Extension support will help us understand on-farm challenges and solutions, and science-based information and tools need to be more accessible. Innovative solutions to biodiversity, seed development, and decentralized ways of measuring soil carbon should be explored. We need to better manage externalities, and create a fair playing field so that organic can grow and create a larger impact. Inclusion and empowerment: Organic agriculture has been shown to improve rural and local economies by offering a profitable farming option and by creating more farming community jobs. The hotspots study by the Organic Trade Association shows that organic agriculture boosts household incomes and reduces poverty levels. Being an organic hotspot increases median household income by over $2,000, and lowers a county’s poverty rate by as much as 1.35%. It offers a way for farmers to work in safe conditions and be paid a living wage. But the opportunity of organic farming is still out of reach for many farmers, especially marginalized farmers, and too often people of color and marginalized communities are left out of the conversation entirely. It is important to include support of organizations that represent people of color, and support the growth and development of underrepresented communities. Farmers, farmworkers, indigenous cultures, and non-white people are missing from these conversations, and need to be included to identify viable solutions. Financial and technical assistance is especially critical in communities of color and indigenous communities. Technology advancements can help with affordability and accessibility. Investment in the development of local food hubs, enabling schools to have better access to organic options, and empowering communities with the tools they need to feed and nourish themselves is critical. Consumer education: Consumers around the world have significant leverage in influencing the direction of agricultural and food policy. If consumers demand a clean, environmentally-friendly and sustainable food system through their purchasing decisions, businesses and governments will take heed and adopt policies to encourage such a system. But consumers need to be educated on the benefits of organic. Education to consumers should focus on the benefits of organic to environmental health and human health. The more we can connect organic as a climate solution, the more compelling it is for the younger generation. We need to elevate the multi-spectrum story of organic regulation and oversight, and use that story to educate consumers about the trust and integrity behind the organic seal. While there is confusion over competing label claims, this is an opportunity to educate consumers on all the benefits of supporting organic. Consumers want accountability and transparency in their food, and being honest and accountable are the main objectives of everyone under the organic umbrella. Global accountability and connectiveness: It is important to be engaged with international communities and trade partners. We need to create an environment that can help ensure the viability of organic farming practices and sustain growth and expansion; that involves getting our global partners to sign onto organic practices. It is important to make decisions on transportation, packaging, and water use that continuously move towards the sustainable development goals. There is a need for a national and international organic integrity database which can encourage transparency and fair trade, and an international distribution system that can ensure integrity and transparency throughout supply chains and among organic certifiers. We need global information sharing so all farmers around the word may have consistent sufficient yields without the use of GMO seeds. Organic can be used to empower and create better outcomes in disadvantaged parts of the world as well as help keep local traditional farming systems viable. Leaning into global organic is about helping to create accessibility to small scale disadvantaged farmers. Focusing on the UN Sustainable Development Goals begins to move us globally in the right direction for global agriculture and production Read less

Organic agriculture is a pathway to a sustainable food system. It needs to be a part of the solution in finding ways to meet increasing demands from consumers and global markets, address environmental pressures, and achieve the UN’s 17 sustainable development goals. This dialogue explored ways policy makers can use organic to help address global challenges. How does organic achieve Sustainable Development Goal #2 of zero hunger and Goal #3 of ensuring good health and wellbeing? Twenty-six percent of the world is food insecure, and a staggering 21% of children under 5 have stunted growth due ... Read moreto malnutrition. In the US, 35 million are food insecure. Organic agriculture practices can help to turn that around. Studies of 60 different crops across 6 continents have shown that organic and conventional yields are almost equal (organic yields are just 8-9% lower than conventional) when organic is done well and certain organic practices like crop diversification and crop rotations are applied. Using organic practices can be a significant part of the solution in achieving zero hunger, and because it doesn’t use synthetic chemicals and other inputs that conventional does, it also achieves the goal of ensuring good health and wellbeing. In addition to yield returns, organic also provides financial and ecological returns. How does organic meet Sustainable Development Goal #8 of decent work and economic growth, Goal #1 of eliminating poverty, and Goal #10 of reducing inequalities? We know farming and rural communities struggle more than most with half of farms in the US losing money in 2019. Family farms are often being hit the hardest. Organic can address these challenges. A National Academy of Sciences study in 2020 found 50% higher profitability for organic agriculture, and research by the Organic Trade Association has shown that counties with a large organic agriculture presence (organic “hotspots”) have a median income that is $2,000 higher than in non-organic counties. How does organic make meaningful steps towards Goal #13 of climate action? Science has shown that organic farms sequester 26% more carbon than conventional farms; emit 18% less global warming potential, and use around 50% less new reactive nitrogen. How does organic achieve Goals #14 and #15 of protecting life below water and life on land? Organic farming has a proven ability to increase biodiversity by some 30%. Organic farms have been shown to have higher levels of beneficial insects such as pollinators, lady bugs, and parasitoid wasps, and worms. Organic also avoids over 700 toxic chemicals and pesticides because regulations require farmers to use non-chemical techniques such as crop rotation, selecting resistant varieties, using nutrient and water management, and providing habitats for the natural enemies of pests. This is a stark difference from highly toxic conventional practices and inputs. Three guiding questions were explored in our dialogue: In what ways is organic today meeting our needs for sustainable growth and development? What are the tensions getting in the way of progress? What solutions can be pursued and who needs to be included in the conversation so that we can continue to grow in an equitable, healthy and sustainable way? The virtual event was attended by 60 people. The Dialogue included six break-out sessions for stakeholders to consider: (1) Human health and wellbeing, (2) Socially responsible economic growth, (3) Feeding the world, (4) International trade, (5) Climate action, and (6) Innovation. Each breakout group was facilitated by a member of the SFTAC, and roughly 10 diverse stakeholders participated in each discussion group. Paul Schiefer of Amy’s Kitchen, an Organic Trade Association Board member who chairs the SFTAC, was the Curator of this Independent Dialogue. He encouraged participants to talk about the role of agroecology--in the form of organic agriculture--as a paradigm for transforming the food system to safeguard human rights, equity and food sovereignty so that no one is hungry, poor, or left behind. He and others pointed out that basically, the health of our food affects the health of people and our planet. Read less

The areas of divergence usually originated from cultural differences. For example, there was a question about “ethical purchasing” and how people should be taught to be aware of it in the Food Education group—however, most people that had a solely Chinese background were not aware of the term “ethical purchasing”. They also discussed the differences between food education in China and food education in America. One of the major points that came up was that in China, there’s no formal food education; since food is so ingrained into Chinese culture, there’s no formal way that citiz... Read moreens are taught about food. A lot of the education they get comes from their family or their peers, and there isn’t much attention focused on the corporations or government when it comes to food. The Agrodiversity group was not convinced about the possibility of erasing meat completely from our diet. They were uncertain about the environmental impact of a vegan diet, citing the social-economic hurdle to be a vegan for the poor. The Consumer group disagreed on how people make food choices based on their economic and cultural background. They noted the discrepancies in some scientific research supported by large corporations to sell certain products, such as organic food, sugar, etc. The conflicting but shared responsibility between consumers and corporations was also observed by the Food Waster group. Though most of the group members blamed the food producers for food waste, some participants reminded that consumers, such as college students in a buffet-style dining hall, contribute to food waste. The Fake Meat group disagreed on whether the government should subsidize the fake meat industry. Currently, fake meats just take 1% of the world market share, without help from the government, and it cannot be the mainstream of the food system only if accepting help from the government. Read less