Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

The overall conclusion of the dialogue and that the necessary activities Include the overarching message all the breastfeeding Bonuses addressing WICKED problems Of the Food System and a demand that breastfeeding is recognised as a whole system of nutrition, as well as nurturing and care that cannot be substituted by a commercial ultra-processed food product. Transform system values to recognise the importance of women’s contribution and the environment, and address the time poverty of women 1. Firstly, we need to change the underlying values of the food system as well as on other systems, S... Read moreuch as health and employment, which have failed to value women and out of date patriarchal systems, which deplete women and the environment and exploit animals, and fail to value women’s work, and ensure all have sufficient time budgets to enjoy free time Hold governments, health professionals and systems, and companies accountable for failure to protect the breastfeeding food system. 2. Secondly, we need to find new ways to hold governments, health professionals and Health Systems, and companies accountable for failing to protect, promote and support breastfeeding or even recognise its value; we must do this through insisting by investing in and resourcing baby-friendly hospital initiative code compliance and enforcement, Code compliance should be like tobacco advertising, and we should remove obstacles in the Health System during COVID 19 and take urgent action to end breaches of the WHO Code through digital marketing. We need to organise and align our groups with no conflict of interest to make strong demands on duty bearers 3. There need to be stronger demands made and wider sharing in society responsibility for breastfeeding to a more extensive range of groups whilst also an invigorating and resourcing, renew grassroots action and sharing knowledge, and identify and create political champions for change such as for baby-friendly hospitals, code implementation, maternity entitlements, whilst using economic research to identify and raise awareness of the dollars given to industry against breastfeeding, as well as the costs of not breastfeeding. Women to be resourced adequately for their productive roles in the Food System. 4. Women are resilient but need to be resourced to have real ‘choices’ as consumers, workers, and citizens. They are not a ‘free or cheap resource and are depleted. This means that there need to be a universal basic income and maternity entitlements and adequate resourcing of their needs as producers of care and food for infants and young children Get industry out of government 5. The power of industry in international and government policymaking must be ended, especially in breastfeeding, because the companies want to shape the tastes of young consumers from birth towards junk food, making them a consumer for life. Nowhere is this more evident than in Codex Alimentarius, and the use of Codex standards to make unnecessary products (like follow up and growing milks) marketable must stop. Governments are for citizens but have become agents of corporations trying to hold down prices/wages of small producers and women workers to increase profits rather than improve People’s nutrition and food security and the environment in which they live their lives. Baby food marketing to policymakers is part of industry influence that must end, including via UN agencies partnering with food and pharma companies. Level the marketing playing field for breastfeeding by stopping baby food marketing at every level Stop the marketing power of industry by enforcing compliance with strong regulation of baby food marketing and by fully funding citizens groups to deliver comprehensive grassroots marketing and promotion of breastfeeding as the first food system to develop, restore and protect breastfeeding cultures and enabling environments. The industry has immense power to shape social culture and undermine breastfeeding, and there is an urgent need to stop their influence of messaging in harmful ways to breastfeeding. Also, we need to reclaim the language and stop the marketing through regulation and through Read less

Breastfeeding is the foundation of sustainable food systems. Yet, it is virtually ignored in food systems discourse. Consequently, infants and young children are effectively excluded from food systems thinking and action. This UNFSSD aimed to explore how to ensure the acknowledgement of breastfeeding as the original and universal first food system. It aimed to increase awareness and understanding of the role of breastfeeding as the most sustainable, localised and normative food system for delivering food security and nutrition to infants and young children. The Dialogue convened diverse groups... Read more to share transformative ideas, build alliances and align efforts to protect, promote and support breastfeeding across the 5 UNFSS Action Tracks, and to identify the most promising levers for generating systems-wide change. The guiding principle was the right to breastfeed for infants and young children and breastfeeding women. The first speaker, Dr Phil Baker, described the mother-child breastfeeding dyad as a sustainable on-demand food production system and the world's shortest food supply chain, which delivers unparalleled nutrition, safety and food security for children globally. Yet today's 'first-food systems' –that provide food for infants and children aged 0-36 months – are unhealthy and unsustainable because breastfeeding is often displaced by formula and commercial foods that are harmful to health and the environment. First-food environments, including health systems, retail environments, digital media, and governance, are subject to the baby food industry's predatory marketing and aggressive influence. A systems approach can identify leverage points for transforming first-food systems for health and sustainability. This will require policy actions to universalise maternity protection, regulate the marketing of commercial baby foods, and protect, promote and support breastfeeding. It will also demand re-thinking the core values and priorities of the system to prioritise the rights of mothers, children and the environment over the commercial freedoms of industry. Dr Arun Gupta discussed the silence on the risks of formula feeding, both for infants and women's health and for the environment. Measured in terms of fuel, water and resources used and the waste products created through production, transport and use, the formula is a disaster, not only for human health but for the environment too. By contrast, breastfeeding protects the health and the environment. Dr Gupta looked at policies and programmes that support breastfeeding and made recommendations for research, policy and advocacy. Dr Julie Smith discussed breastfeeding economics and how they should be used to make breastfeeding visible and valued. She described how the international rules for measuring GDP include the production of all food commodities, except breastmilk and home-produced foods. Yet, the rules allow for the inclusion of these products, which make sizeable contributions to food systems. Breastmilk is a valuable food commodity and should be counted in food statistics and the calculation of GDP. Conversely, the value of breastmilk not produced ("lost milk") should also be calculated. The current practice of excluding breastmilk means the substantial importance of breastfeeding is invisible and biases economic decisions and policymaking against women and children. Read less

Consumer responsibility: Although there was agreement on the need to change consumer behaviour, there was some extent of disagreement on the share of responsibility that should be borne by consumers. Some guests insisted that responsibility should not only be put on their shoulders but also on governments’ → can have a role to play in constraining food choices/big companies and in informing them, notably through regulating food marketing (e.g. banning greenwashing). Others highlighted that too little responsibilisation hinders change. Vertical farming: An asset or not? 1) Benefits: Accordi... Read moreng to one of our guests personally involved in a vertical farming initiative - Can tackle restricted access to land - Enables land use savings and water savings - Control of the environment that happens in indoor farms seems especially promising In the face of climate change - According to a study from Wageningen University and Delft University technology (both in the Netherlands), production in vertical farms could reduce CO2 use by 67% (UAE) to 92% (NLD) compared with greenhouses. This figure is even higher for open field farming - Will become less expensive with economies of scale → finance should be unlocked to incentivise investments (costs of entry are high) 2) Critiques (put forward by other guests) - Which criteria was this study based on? - Remains expensive and energy-intensive. Economies of scale could occur in the next 5-10 years, making it affordable and less energy-intensive. - What about poorer countries that cannot invest in the technologies, etc. Relevance of discussing this at European level given geographic discrepancies questioned: Engagement of consumers varies, support of government too. Ambiguity between the need to raise the value of food to e.g. decrease food waste, and social equity. Read less

Does not apply to us as we did not have any breakout rooms, the whole discussion was conducted with the whole group.

1) Environmental and economic sustainability Need to involve all stakeholders, including civil society and consumers to achieve systemic changes. There is sometimes a trade-off between supplying local and sustainable goods: for a given cooperative, there is a dilemma between their desire to sell local and sustainable products only (while being aware that their customers will buy non-local, unsustainable products in supermarkets anyways), or propose sustainable products that are not local (also because sometimes a specific good is not produced locally following sustainable practices). Focus on ... Read moreconsumers to change the supply chain. - As they currently lack knowledge about hidden costs of the supply chains, their empowerment is needed by informing them, notably through clear labelling of the products’ economic and environmental quality. - Re-giving food the importance it should have in our lives, enhancing public consciousness of its value → could reduce food waste and increase time/efforts/share of income dedicated to it. - A problem is that buying power remains the most important criterion (food security) for consumers. Financial tools could help internalise externalities in food production and guide citizens towards more sustainably produced food - Idea of differentiated VAT depending on product (e.g. taxing fruits/vegetables at 0%, meat at highest level) - Carbon pricing of food - Withdrawal/reduction of subsidies for ‘unsustainable agriculture’ (e.g. beef) -“Social security of food”: e.g. give an allocation to families that wouldn’t have enough resources to purchase sustainable food. - But: issue of the weight of lobbies Question of socio-economic fairness along the chain: a few retailers capture a lot of economic value at the expense of the many farmers 2) Upscaling local solutions More participatory democracy can mobilize actors around the transition towards more sustainable food systems, to get them thinking about it and engage them. - Foster the idea of a food policy, which already exists at local level, at European level. → Idea of a European food policy committee as a discussion platform involving all stakeholders: policy-makers, scientists, etc. - At a more local level, rural parliaments could be established as platforms/a space where rural people could express their opinions, to enhance cooperation between rural and urban areas. - Creations of hubs where farmers and consumers could meet. Cities: - Role of medium-size cities in connecting rural and urban areas - Role of eurocities to be the intermediate between smaller cities and European institutions Urban agriculture (e.g. viverein, Rome): Way to educate people about what it involves to grow food, the work it represents, and so the value of food more broadly. Moreover, it can also be a catalyser for change as it shows citizens how the system can be changed. We identified problematics resulting from the EU policy framework: - it can prevent sustainable public procurement (public school canteens) under competition law. There is no possibility to discriminate for local and sustainable food. - Also, European subsidies favour unsustainable agriculture (eg. for beef farming and milk, creating a huge food surplus due to subsidies). These subsidies for unsustainable agriculture should be discontinued or at least decreased. There is a need instead for Institutional support of cooperatives that are growing local and sustainable food. 3) Youth engagement in short supply chains We underlined the importance of sensibilisation of the work of farmers to young people: give new signals, that farmers have actually a social utility, to enhance interest in their work. Supporting connections between young farmers and more experienced farmers so that they can learn from each other. Creating new job opportunities to bring back people to rural areas is important. Educative projects needed from a young age to popularise projects like CSA and food coops among youth. Underlining the obstacles from conservative governments preventing young people to voice their interests. More generally, seeing youth not as protesters but as stakeholders would be a first step. Following the example of some European institutions and the local authorities of different cities, youth could be given an institutionalised way to bring its opinion to politicians. Read less

The dialogue tackled the ways to and problems identified to shorten Food Systems supply chains in Europe. This can be related to every Action Tracks, but more specifically with the first, second and fifth ones (Shift to sustainable consumption patterns and Build resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks and stress). Our three main focuses during the dialogue were: 1° The environmental and economic sustainability of SFSC. The following sub- topics were discussed in detail here: a) Challenges faced when trying to grow local food in ways that limit harm to the environment while trying to be economic... Read moreally sustainable at the same time. b) Food affordability challenges and potential ways to ensure food remains affordable to everyone, including low-income citizen groups and vulnerable groups of people. 2° Upscaling local solutions of SFSC. The following sub-topics were discussed in detail here: a) Barriers to scaling up to achieve systemic change, and ways to improve upscaling. b) Types of policies (i.e. EU/regional/city level etc.) needed to support upscaling. c) Local solutions as a way to build resilience to vulnerabilities and shocks. 3° Encouraging youth engagement in SFSC. The following sub-topics were discussed in detail here: a) The role of youth and how to include youth in food supply chains. b) Ways youth can support in realising the benefits of short supply chains. Read less

Strengths and vulnerabilities within food systems Many were of the view that the vulnerabilities in food systems is due to bad governance whereas others also stated otherwise it is due to non-existent policies of what actually a food systems is Areas that need further exploration More participants had the notion that Food Systems was all about food. With experts in the dialogue, they were able to grasp few understanding of the general scope of food systems. This means more explorations and capacity building needs to be done to further educate and highlight the importance of a robust food syste... Read morems to productivity and efficiency Practices that are needed for food systems sustainability. Some of the submitted different answers were good governance, youth inclusion, realistic policies, technology and education. Stakeholders whose interests should be prioritized According to some participants, Youth must be the first prioritized whiles others made cases for Farmers as the first to be considered as without farmers, no food production. Read less

Topic 1: Networking and digital engagement Below are some of the key issues highlighted by the farmers and proposed solutions, priority action areas, and policy recommendations. Challenges highlighted: a) Capacity gap among farmers runing agribusiness b) Young people scattered in several digital platforms instead of a one-stop-shop. c) Gender digital gap and information asymmetry d) Farmers face difficulties in getting organized to have access to information about agricultural policies, funding sources, and legal regulations. Identified priority action areas for farmers inclusion in networking... Read more and digital engagement: a) Peer-to-peer learning is a key solution to close the capacity gap among the farmers. Digital platforms that encourage such activities are central to ensuring more farmers have access to information that directly contributes to the growth of their businesses. Also, a well-encompassing platform that builds alliances among many organizations that work with farmers people to initiate collective action was found necessary. b) Encourage platforms to act as a broker between the fermers and finance service providers will address the need for farmers tailored financial support. c) Create stronger farmer associations to be able to keep governments accountable, become aware of current legislation to influence policies and regulations. Read less

There is a big capacity gap when getting into agriculture, especially across different value chain touchpoints and more importantly knowledge on policy. One of the actions stakeholders will take together is to deepen their engagement efforts with the farmers to ensure access to information about agricultural policies financial agencies and legal regulations is further deepened. The importance of forming new alliances among many organizations that work with farmers people to raise farmers voices and initiate collective action was further stressed. Below are key priority action areas we identifi... Read moreed: a) Set up networking opportunities that accommodate farmer’s needs (e.g., the timing of meetings) and be accessible in networks and rural settings their existing social networks, Create stronger farmer associations to be able to keep governments accountable, become aware of current legislation to be able to influence policies and regulations. c) Organizations running Agripreneurship programs have dedicated calls for farmers. This perspective boosts farmer's participation in project calls/applications, therefore, giving priority to them. d) Increase knowledge access of existing policies, the art of policymaking, and advocacy through translation to local languages. Read less

The focus of the Dialogue was on: (i) environmental and economic shocks on African Food Systems caused by global pandemic (ii) examining gaps and functionalities of African Food Systems. (iii) access to funding for farmers and innovative ideas. (iiii) opportunities in the food industry. The focus of the dialogue was to create dedicated venues for farmers, particularly rural people have their say, collectively set their agenda, and suggest their pathway towards more equitable and farmers-friendly food systems. The dialogue adopted a gender and inclusivity lens to address the specific needs and ... Read morepriorities of rural farmers. The dialogue achieved the following outcomes: 1. Community: Young Agrienterpreneurs, rural farmers networks, and farmers-serving organizations across Ghana were meaningfully engaged to share experiences, lessons learned, and solutions for youth farmers inclusion in agri-food systems. 2. Advocacy: Voices of farmers rural women and men raised, and visibility given to their transformative role in agri-food systems. 3 farmers-led policy agenda: Recommendations and priority actions identified to strengthen farmers agency as changemakers and builders of resilient and sustainable agri-food systems, with a focus on inclusivity and gender equality. The identified promising solutions/priority action areas and policy recommendations were on the following topics: 1. Networking and digital engagement 2. Access to finance and business support services 3. Gender equality and inclusivity 4. Accountability and political participation. Read less

There were no major areas of divergence among participants.

Regulatory and Administrative (Policy): Through the group discussion in the regulators group, the engagement of government has been identified in 4 specific areas – 1. Field level engagement of the government by involving the sanitary inspectors 2. If government can facilitate some investment on the infrastructure facilities 3. The school meals that are present in the government schools can include these smart snacks item in the existing menu 4. The traditional snacks can be prepared in a better, healthier way with local government support. In the policy level, the regulations on the adolesc... Read moreent’s snacks must ensure that those processed/unprocessed foods are with less sugar and less salt. Dr. Rudaba Khondker, Country Director, Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), pointed out about “How can we bring this in the policy makers’ platform to make sure that there is a standard solution to reduce the sugar and salt from the contents of the food that the adolescents are consuming, whereas they are processed or homemade.” It is also mentioned that the target group should include adolescents from both urban and rural area of Bangladesh. The smart snacks examples can be set in the government school level, and then to spread in the private schools too. Not alone government, but together with adolescents themselves, parents, school management and private sector to work together and establish this smart snack program. On regard to this Ms. Saiqa Siraj, Country Director, Nutrition International summarized as, “In participation of parents, school management, government subsidies and private sector, it will be a sustainable program, otherwise only through government funding, providing midday meals to this huge number of schools will not be possible.” Read less

Food Entrepreneurs: As per the summary of the entrepreneurs’ discussion, a platform can be proposed where the nutritious snacks items can be listed ensuring good volume of customers, for better production and lesser cost. Ensuring good volume of customer of these smart snacks would lessen the cost and make it more affordable to everyone. One of the food entrepreneurs named Ms. Mehnaz Rahman Lira said, “Now all the parents and adolescents are very concerned about the nutritional value of the food.” According to their discussion, delivery system and food nutrition value assessment organiza... Read moretions should be connected with the platform to solve the delivery and nutrition value measurement challenges. Read less

Adolescents & Youth Representatives: The ideal snack item that came up after the group discussion of the adolescents was contained of these four must attributes – 1. Tasty 2. Eye-catchy 3. Affordable and 4. Nutritious. They also mentioned how the individual behavior change is needed to choose the nutritious snacks. They want more nutritious snacks options to be available in the market. Also, they think the traditional snacks like shingara, fuchka, can be made in a better and healthier way. For example, using good oil, maintaining hygiene, etc. Regarding this an adolescent named Meher Afr... Read moreoz Tisha from Viqarunnisa Noon School & College said, “For our dream snacks like Shingara, fuchka, if we can tell the shopkeepers or who are making these, to use good oil and vegetable in making these, then it should be healthier for us.” Read less

Primary objective of the dialogue was to build a strategic framework and hear from the key stakeholders to stimulate and support “Smart Snacks” as an inclusive business model. The secondary objective was to understand the adolescent perspectives (demand), also, challenges, scopes of regulatory support & incentivise, private sector engagement (supply) perspectives. The adolescent population in Bangladesh is almost one third of total population which is around 33 million, and a large portion of these adolescents are school going who used to avail street foods on regular basis. In recent ... Read moredays, adolescents are tending to avail more street foods (Open and packaged) to meet their regular appetite when they need to eat something which are very much unhygienic, poor food quality (nutrition value) as well as unhealthy. These street foods are tasty and less expensive which lure adolescents to aim for those. Adolescents nutrition status is very critical in Bangladesh and need proper attention from all relevant stakeholders. An inclusive and sustainable business model engaging private sector to invest in adolescent friendly snacks may be introduced to offer as a commercial product. The government can facilitate support in the value chain to ensure the product is cost affordable for all the adolescents through different incentives & supports. These snack items will be manufactured under a standard guideline, quality and nutrient enriched for adolescents. As commercial product, these also has to be tasty, attractive in package and most importantly extensive communication i.e. advertisements. Read less

The dialogue started with the opening remarks by Dr. Rudaba Khondker, Country Director, GAIN. Mr. Mostafa Banna, Ministry of Food, shared his valuable remarks followed by Dr. Bulbul Islam, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. After the briefing and opening remarks, three categories of stakeholders were divided into three different breakout rooms as per below: Adolescents & Youth Representatives: This group of participants represented the demand side of the smart snacks. In this room the overall discussion took place focusing on the experience and expectation of the adolescents. The adole... Read morescents talked about their daily snack intake practices, what is available out there, what they are attracted to, the amount they prefer to spend on snacks, etc. The discussion ended with individual description of their dream snack item. Food Entrepreneurs: The group of the food entrepreneurs represented the supply side of the smart snacks. Present scenario of the healthy snacks’ availability, demand of it from the adolescents have been discussed in detail in this room. Also, the challenges they are facing in order to produce it, and required necessary support needed for producing nutritious food for adolescents have been discussed thoroughly by them. Regulatory and Administrative (Policy): The participants at the room of regulatory and administrative discussed on what supportive and regulatory measures are to be taken to promote safe and nutritious food for adolescents. Also, the different ways to engage government from local levels. Read less

Indeed, diners constantly seek for variety of options. All-you-can-eat buffets drives volume and footfall into the F&B establishment. While operators in buffet establishments are now offering cook-to-order buffet, we do not expect all the F&B establishments to transit to cook-to-order buffet as it requires high amount of manpower. Nevertheless, buffets that are served ala minute reduces the amount of food waste produced. However, there are still countries which offers the traditional buffet, where diners pick the food they want over the serving tray. It is difficult to remove the buffe... Read moret concept as there are sentimental value and consumers pays the price with an expectation. Operators can educate consumers not to overfill their plate and orders beyond what they can consume. For small operators, they can consider adopting the Food Waste Hierarchy, where reducing at source can help to resolve the bulk of the food waste issue. Read less

Panelists agree that partnership is the way moving forward. Both manufacturers and operators can work with charitable organizations, to utilize products that have a shorter shelf life and “moves” slower. In addition, Manufacturers should closely with operators and end consumer to study their actual product usage (servings) so that products can be of an “optimal” size to ensure the entire content can be depleted before it reaches its shelf life. Partnerships can also happen between competitors, where businesses work as a community to resolve the problem collectively. Organizations can a... Read morelso work with universities through internships to reach out the younger generations to learn about innovations that may resolve the issue on food loss and waste. Read less

Through the discussion, we better understand the difficulty of reducing food loss and waste from different perspectives, namely the operators, manufacturer, and solution provider. 1. Hospitality Industry (Operators): From the hospitality point of view, food loss and waste is not effectively measured and studied. Singapore government has provided several initiatives to promote the reduction of food loss and waste, in the form of grants for businesses to adopt sustainable practices. Even though Singapore has seen a reduction of food waste by about 10%, but recycling rate are comparative lower th... Read morean other countries. There are several factors that may have contribute to this problem. Firstly, there are generally a lack of awareness on the importance of reducing food loss and waste, and the detrimental effects if not well-managed. Secondly, it is a challenge to perform demand forecasting, especially in current times, where the pandemic causes government to execute restrictions within the country. This results to inaccurate procurement and production which is a contributor to food waste. Meanwhile, operators also have difficulties in capturing food loss and waste data, which is essential for businesses to react and adjust to the market situation. Measuring food waste is difficult to execute as there are different types of food waste. In a typical kitchen, there are about 8 different food categories, which may be compostable, recyclable, repurpose, etc. Hospitality industry is enforcing the reduction of food loss and waste through technology and employee training. One can choose to adopt the Food waste hierarchy (Reduce at source. Separate and measure. Donate to others. Other divergence of food waste. Landfill) to make better decisions when the business is expecting food waste. 2. Manufacturing Industry: Similarly, manufacturers face a volatility of demand of food products from downstream channels, especially during the pandemic where some countries are going on lockdowns. This makes forecasting a challenge. In addition, the supply of food products is also affected due to shortage of containers and the change in shipping routes during the pandemic. Moreover, the manufacturing process may have food waste such as dosing inaccuracy, leftovers in the piping, etc. As much as manufacturers wish to extend the shelf life of products to counter the unpredictability of demand and supply, they are faced with the challenge from the end consumers, who steer towards consuming “natural” products with low or no preservatives. There are several ways to reduce food loss and waste in the upstream channels. For instance, manufacturers can consider product giveaway on the line, increasing production line efficiency and reducing the complexity of each product. As for the downstream channels, manufacturers can consider reducing their aging inventory through product repurposing, channeling across borders, co-developing new recipe with operators and charity. 3. Solution provider: There are two different types of food waste, namely, post-consumer waste and pre-consumer waste. Post-consumer waste is within control, where businesses can use enzymes or biodigester to convert the food waste into compose or water. Alternatively, compressor can help to extract the water beneath the food waste so that the remaining materials contributes less to the landfill. However, pre-consumer waste can be generated between the manufacturer and the operator in the supply chain. This is often more difficult to control due to the constraints in demand and supply of food products. Read less

Food loss and waste happens throughout the entire food supply chain, both in upstream and downstream channels. 14% of the food were loss between harvest to retail while 17% of the global food production is wasted. In 2019 alone, there were a total of 931 million tons of food waste. Meanwhile, 2.73 billion people are facing moderate to severe food insecurity. There are lots of investments that goes into producing food and when food is loss or wasted, these resources such as water, land, energy, land and capital goes to waste. In addition, the disposal of food waste to landfills generates 8-10% ... Read moregreenhouse gases. If the condition continues to persist, we’re expecting the consumers to pay an increased price. The focus of this independent dialogue seeks to understand why food loss and waste happens and the challenges in reducing them. The dialogue attempts to also find out on the technologies available and the possible partnerships to resolve this issue. The discussion also seek to uncover the possibility of sustainable production while producing the reuse and recycling of food sources (Action track 2). Read less