Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

Grassroots Women And Youth's Inclusion During Covid-19 and Beyond on Building Food Resilience and How to Avoid Food Wastage in Nigeria The program will focus on grassroot women Food Resilience and how to mitigate waste. It will include the following issues and highlights, but others. 1. How strong is the food tank and food production at the grassroot by women and youth girls? Their challenges, awareness, finances, rate of inclusion, challenges faced by women grassroot’ smallholder farmers, the extent to which their voices are heard and how can it be heard. Hardship faced from herdsmen destru... Read morection etc. 2. Food Wastage in Nigeria generally and cases of food waste in other countries e.g. America. The causes of food waste, the effects, the vulnerable groups. How to mitigate it, importance, the resultant positive impact, and outcomes of the solutions. 3. How Covid-19 had lay bare or exacerbated the suffering of grassroot women, youths and women smallholder farmers at the rural communities and other areas. 4. Gender Equality and its priority in the tackling of women issues both at the grassroots and the urban environments. Read less

A few concerns were flagged during the discussions including: - Some discussion on the role of businesses in One Health and how to use corporate power and influence for good than commercial interests, which prioritize profits over health and nutrition or those in businesses that weaken regulation for foods with high animal welfare/ environmental standards. - How broad should One Health be? There was general agreement on the need to expand to include dimensions of planetary health and to place animal welfare at the heart of the One Health agenda, but some concerns that if it is made too broad i... Read moret could make it a bit meaningless and that planetary health should provide the umbrella. Read less

Topic #3 Systemic Food Systems Interventions for One Health One Welfare There is a significant opportunity to ensure a One Health approach and principles are embedded within the Food System Summit process and beyond. Food lies at the heart of human, ecosystem, and animal health and well-being. Participants agreed that our health and well-being are being impacted by our food systems - the way we grow, harvest, process, transport, market, consume, and dispose of food, through multiple and inter-related pathways. Today our industrial food systems are making us ill, are driving climate change and ... Read moreundermining the health and wellbeing of animals and of ecosystems and the essential services on which our own health and well-being depends. Two-thirds of farmed animals are reared in industrial systems that deprive them of the opportunity of a good quality of life and that do not respect them as sentient beings. This requires changes to our food production systems – from systems focussed on a producitvist, ‘feed the world’ minfdset which favours the production of homogenous nutrient rich foods to ones that produce a diversity of nutrient rich crops, using nature positive solutions such as those provided by regenerative or agroecological forms of agriculture. It also requires us to change our consumption habits, ensuring healthy, sustainable and culturally appropriate diets remain the norm. The issue of meat consumption and what we eat was also highlighted during the discussions – the need to eat less but better meats with significant reductions in meat consumption required in counties particularly in the global North/West. There was also lots of feedback on the need to focus on more plant-based proteins within diets with a focus on nutrient rich rather than energy dense foods. The need to transition from industrial farming systems to more regenerative and agroecological systems were considered to be key to transforming food systems. There was general agreement that 2021 offers a unique opportunity to build forward a more compassionate, resilient, fairer, healthier, and sustainable food systems, that will also engender and promote better animal welfare outcomes- with better human, ecological and animal health outcomes central to economic stimulus packages and policies that governments put in place to support post Covid economic recovery. A source of both past and future pandemics is industrial animal agriculture or factory farming. Keeping thousands of animals crammed and confined creates the perfect breeding ground for disease. Industrial agriculture is also a major driver of deforestation, biodiversity loss, a consumer of more than two-thirds of the world’s antibiotics, and the biggest source of food waste. Participants agreed on the need for a new food systems paradigm and a shift of narrative putting the health of animals, people and the planet and the heart of food systems transformation. Read less

Topic #2 - What are the main Governance Challenges to One Health One Welfare? - A siloed approach to One health is still commonplace, particularly within governments, meaning One Health is often focussed on AMR/Zoonosis with the responsibility of health ministries rather than as a cross departmental issue. - Whilst more governments are looking at One health approach not all governments are – there is a need for greater civil society mobilisation around the One Health agenda. - There is not always much unity of approach at national and national levels when exploring One Health interventions. ... Read more- There is a need for leadership from politicians and governments and businesses to ensure human, animal and ecosystem health are at the heart of policy. - As more One Health initiatives emerge, we need to be careful that systemic interventions are really being identified and therefore due diligence is required to ensure a systems diagnosis remains at the heart of a One Health approach. - Engaging people and organisations from the human health side (dealing with triple burden of malnutrition for example) is often weak within governance structures. - Many people working on One Health are experts in disease and health and do not necessarily include professionals covering wellbeing. - Scope of One Health – Many governance systems at national and international levels often define One Health around AMR and Zoonosis and therefore programmes can be limited in scope. - Governance mechanisms do not always focus on systemic drivers and shy away from sensitive issues – e.g., dealing with industrial farming systems and excessive meat consumption that drives antibiotic use. - There is often a disconnect between the theory and frameworks provided at international levels and the tools needed by local and/or national practitioners. - There is a need to bring the science on One Health together with participatory processes that identify the needs and challenges of local populations. The risks and benefits of One Health need to be defined by culture and geography and cant be mediated at an international level. - There is a need to understand local power dynamics when assessing local One Health dimensions and careful consideration needs to be given to the process of local engagement, so it is participatory and is based on the views and values of local actors. - There is need to engage actors beyond the clinical field (doctors and vets) engaging indigenous groups and citizen science, complimenting quantitative data with more qualitative data from the field. - There is a need to focus on a bottom-up approach and ensure any tools developed internationally are to be relevant locally to national and local level decision makers. One Health needs to be framed by practitioners themselves. - Sovereignty of national governments is paramount and there needs to be an effective formulation for governance structures across international and national scales. Read less

Topic #1 - What are the main Barriers and Limitations to One Health, One Welfare Approach? - There is not an agreed and commonly used definition of One Health. - One health does not address take a holistic approach and make the links between improved animal welfare standards/better husbandry and the links between AMR/Zoonosis/environmental contamination. - Insufficient attention is paid to the One Welfare concept that enhances One Health - One Health is commonly perceived as addressing human health (achieving human health outcomes or managing disease) through the lens of animal and ecosystem h... Read moreealth rather than as an opportunity to address the upstream determinants of human, animal, and ecological health together, exploring the interdependencies. Climate change for example is a threat to human health and this needs to be considered through the lens on One Health. - The need to broaden a One Health approach to include the triple burden of malnutrition and food security. - Plant Health is often missing from the One Health story but needs inclusion. - One health does not always recognise the connections between animal and human abuse and neglect. - Gaps in national public health surveillance systems pose a significant threat to health. Gaps in monitoring ecosystems, ecosystems services and wildlife/wildlife diseases were all highlighted (including the use of indigenous knowledge and social sciences). - Accessing national level data, across many dimensions (animal, ecological and human health) and across different farming systems can often be challenging. - Awareness and engagement of veterinary authorities in the field is often very low and needs to take place in many countries. There is still a weak connection between veterinary and human public health institutions. - The siloed approach between different government departments/ministries e.g. between health, agriculture, trade and environment. - A Siloed approach between One Health and One welfare – often it is either “health” or “welfare,” but these silos need to be broken down to work collaboratively and more impactfully. - One health research can be very theoretical – it needs to be done in a more practical way involving farmers, indigenous groups and local communities ( those with ‘Lived experiences’) so that it can be scaled up locally - Businesses can view One Health agenda as a threat rather then as an opportunity to align their own strategies to health, sustainability, nutrition, branding and marketing etc. Need to move from short term profit to long term value creation. - There is a need for more collaboration between NGOs, governments and projects on the agenda as there is a lot of reinventing the wheel. Multi-disciplinary projects are harder to implement but produce better results and hence the importance of getting the One Health framework right from the start. - There is a perceived false categorisation of humans as distinct from other animals. Ideally there should be addressing this binary classification. - It was felt that there was a lack of transparency on the realities of intensive livestock production systems in society with a rosy-view being perpetuated in marketing and education settings Read less

The following is a list of the main findings with regards to the opportunities for taking forward a One Health One Welfare Approach: - Many participants welcomed a focus on and highlight significant opportunities and advantages to a One Health One Welfare approach - as governments invest in new solutions to build post Covid-19 economies, there is an opportunity to focus and build narratives around the interlinkages between animal welfare (health), ecosystem health and human health. Some fear governments may squander the opportunity. - In some countries there is increasing political will. E.g.,... Read more the French Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation and the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs launched PREZODE (PREventing ZOonotic Diseases Emergence), a new initiative to prevent future pandemics. - There is a need/opportunity to move One Health beyond a theoretical concept into something that is practical and tangible. There are lots of frameworks particularly at an international level, but these are often disconnected from the needs and realities of practitioners on the ground. - An opportunity to adapt One Health approach depending on the very different political contexts and priorities of a country. That it is important to develop tools for competent authorities to work together and that it is important to take the one health and one welfare idea to a broader public and to create a public pressure on industry and decision makers to influence the political agenda - There is an opportunity for a universally agreed definition of One Health, the principles that underpin it, and a framework, which can be adapted to meet the needs according to geography and culture. - Leveraging research and developing One Health strategies based on practical experience is key - There is a need for a One Health Systems approach that identifies those systemic interventions which address the root causes and underlying determinants which lead to better animal, human and ecosystem health outcomes. - There is a need to broaden the application of the One Health approach and encompass a broader range of ecologically mediated diseases, such as encompassing the agendas of AMR, malnutrition, epidemic preparedness, integrated surveillance systems, environmental health, food systems and food safety – which are all driven by and dependent on healthy ecosystems and both animal health and welfare. - Working in a multidisciplinary way will build bridges between individuals/organizations working on related issues and enable more impactful work - One Health presents an opportunity to understand how people value food, nature and a sense of place and avoid potentially damaging and polarising debates. There is often more that unites people across sectors, cultures etc. than divides them. - There is a need to incorporate environmental determinants in One Health policy and the links between One Health, Climate Change, and nature-based solutions. (Agroecological and regenerative forms of agricultural practice) - The need to strengthen national surveillance systems so they provide an early warning system for a range of human and animal diseases, including the underlying ecological conditions that drive disease emergence. - There is a need to invest in higher health systems with good animal welfare ensuring farmed animals enjoy a good quality of life. Some systems should be outlawed. We asked participants to highlight the main opportunities for ensuring a One Health One Welfare approach is taken forward within the Food Systems summit: - There is a need for policies that prevent and reduce antibiotic use in animal production. - Countries should commit to country level One Health action plans and collaborate internally on the implementation. - Farmers/producers/indigenous groups must be part of the story and we need greater levels of participation within the One health agenda. - The summit needs to focus on solutions that are more locally, culturally and geographically relevant - a one size fits all approach will not work. - To mainstream One Health, One welfare we need to reflect the true cost of food – out pricing systems and systems of agricultural needs to change to ensure high animal welfare standards subsidies supported by production systems that are regenerative - Online training is growing, it has the potential to support institutional training and education programmes to covering the one health one welfare concept. - There is a need to place more emphasis on trade and its importance in creating One health One welfare outcomes linked to trade standards and issues of fairness. - There needs to be better dissemination of science and ensure this is linked to meet the needs of different cultural contexts. One Health science is often driven by the Global North with little relevance to practitioners. - Putting animal welfare more central to the FSS is key to human health prevention and will be cost effective in the long term. - The need to link One health one welfare with the need to reduce meat consumption, particularly of animal-source foods from industrial/intensive livestock systems. - The need for greater recognition of one health- one welfare as guiding framework across all action tracks of the summit. - Food systems should consider all animals as sentient and critical to healthy and sustainable food systems. - One Health should be underpinned by a respect for life both human and animal, ideally through the UN and an animal welfare SDG. It was felt the post-pandemic era was fertile ground for this approach. Read less

Alongside a human and ecological health crisis we confront an animal health crisis: Approximately 70 billion animals are farmed for food worldwide every year (60% of all mammals on Earth), the majority of which are produced under intensive livestock production systems with little, if any, animal welfare standards. These systems drive the increased use of antibiotics and are connected to the emergence of a range of zoonotic diseases, diminishing animal health, exacerbating the human health crisis, and contributing to the ecological health crisis. According to a 2021 Chatham House report, launch... Read moreed in partnership with the United Nations Environment Programme and CIWF, the production of food is the primary cause of biodiversity loss globally – driven by the conversion of land for agriculture and the intensification of agriculture reducing the quality and quantity of available wildlife habitats. 'One Health' is often defined as ‘an approach to designing and implementing programmes, policies, legislation and research in which multiple sectors communicate and work together to achieve better public health outcomes.’ Traditionally areas of work in which a One Health approach is relevant includes the control of Zoonotic diseases (Diseases and infections that are naturally transmitted between vertebrate animals and humans. A zoonotic agent may be a bacterium, a virus, a fungus and includes flu, rabies, rift valley fever, Ebola etc) and combatting antibiotic resistance (when bacteria change after being exposed to antibiotics and become more difficult to treat). One Health as a concept has gained significant traction in national and international settings and many actors highlight the opportunity it offers to strengthen interdisciplinary collaboration and action. One Welfare extends the approach of (and partially overlaps) the One Health theme used for human and animal health. A One Welfare approach promotes the direct and indirect links of animal welfare to human welfare and environmentally friendly animal-keeping systems. It fosters interdisciplinary collaboration to improve human and animal welfare internationally. It helps to promote key global objectives such as supporting food security, sustainability, reducing human suffering and improving productivity within the farming sector through a better understanding of the value of high welfare standards. In this Dialogue, participants focussed on addressing a number of key questions: 1) What are the opportunities to drive forward and operationalise a ‘one health, one welfare’ agenda, linking animal, human and ecosystem health in a post pandemic world? 2) What are the main barriers to a One Health and One Welfare approach and how can they be overcome? 3) What would be your food system summit call to action? Dialogue Objectives: 1) Ensure better animal health and wellbeing outcomes are at the heart of the Food Systems Summit highlighting how animal health and welfare are intrinsically interlinked human and ecological health 2) Create support for an integrated, holistic approach to policy reform and coordinated action across food sectors, identifying food systems opportunities for better human, ecological and animal health 3) Using a couple of case studies from around the world, to demonstrate what ‘one health’ practice/policy reform is being practiced (would be good to identify a couple of case studies from the Global South for example). 4) Highlight opportunities presented by a ‘One Health, One Welfare approach and what this would look like in practice. Read less

There areas of divergence during the Dialogue was noted in during the discussion of 'sustainable value chains in food systems' which are as follows: Exploring income avenues apart from rural tourism: The village of Mawlynnong, being Asia’s Cleanest Village is a great tourist attraction of the region. The COVID-19 pandemic affected revenue from the tourism sector in the Mawlynnong village and people of the village who excessively depend on tourism have shifted their occupation to growing cash crops like broom, betel nut and leaves and bay leaves. - Bee-keeping intervention: Bee-keeping (or ap... Read moreiculture) is a source of employment for some of the village youths of Mawlynnong. Some participants engaged in bee-keeping shared the need for a marketing framework in support of bee culture. This would encourage more village residents to take up bee-keeping as a source of income and thereby promote the honey product of the village. - Mushroom cultivation intervention: Mushroom cultivation was attempted by some village youths after undertaking training at a government training centre, it was found that the mushrooms did not grow well in the village soil perhaps due to the soil type or the climatic conditions. Some of the dialogue participants who attempted mushroom cultivation shared the requirement of soil testing and expert advice to find suitable interventions for mushroom cultivation in the village soil. - Confectionery intervention: The village of Mawlynnong, being Asia’s Cleanest Village has a big tourist footfall, in view of this the youth of the village have collectively decided to capture the business and develop a confectionery with local baked items. This would serve a means of income and employment for the residents of the village. Read less

Outcomes for each discussion topic were: "Sustainable value chains in food systems" - The Need to develop a marketing framework in support of bee culture, mushroom, etc. - Technical support of soil testing and cultivation knowledge for edible mushroom growing. - The need for bakery training for some village members using locally baked items. "Rural entrepreneurship" - Self-employment through rural entrepreneurship was supported by the participants since Tourism revenue was impacted by COVID-19. - Training and guidance support for interested entrepreneurs. - Identifying the type of local busine... Read moress suitable for local village residents. - Technical knowledge to improve product value of locally derived products. Read less

"Overall findings" - Absence of technical know-how and guidance on the available new technology and assistance provided by various governmental agencies in the form of schemes, projects, assistance etc. - There is huge potential within this region for agrarian and allied activities and if promoted can pay dividends towards bringing stability in the communities livelihood and sustainable diversified food system. - The area had some cash crops (like broom plantation, betel nut and leaves, bay leaves, pepper and pineapple) which if promoted can also be a geographical indication to that particular... Read more region which will in turn promote the products and the local farmers can get a good value for their produce. "Subjective findings" - Mr Henry Kharrymba, a member of the youth in Mawlynnong village has expressed his interest and experience in developing bio-compost and solid waste management in the village by enabling collection, transport and proper dumping. - Mushroom cultivation has already been initiated by Ms Trinity Kshiar, Ms. Alice Larisakhonglam and Ms. Crosbina Khongthiem in the village however further interventions and support systems for soil testing and preservation of the produce needs to be addressed. - Bee-keeping has been one of the primary occupations of the villagers. To further promote the business, Ms. Dapshisha Dkhar sought to develop a marketing framework in support of this bee culture. - A food garden with all the locally cultivable crops and fruits and a mini-digital library was discussed to be developed possibly with CSR funding. - Mawlynnong, being regarded as the Cleanest Village in Asia, has one of the highest footfalls in tourism and entertainment. In view of this, the youth of the village have collectively decided to capture the business and develop a confectionery with local baked items. Read less

Major Focus of the dialogue were: "Sustainable value chains in food systems" - Inquiring and understanding the rural economic activities with food and cultivation - Exploring pathways to improve the cultivation scenario in the rural area, - Exploring allied farming options like piggery, poultry, bee-keeping, etc. "Rural entrepreneurship" - Discussed the connection between rural entrepreneurship and food systems in the rural context. - Self-employment through rural entrepreneurship. - Local products promotion "Biodiversity conservation" - Underlying the importance of biodiversity conservation -... Read more Stressing the need for community development while keeping in mind biodiversity conservation Read less

There were relatively few areas of divergence between participants in this Dialogue. In many instances, these resolved themselves as participants evolved their opinions over the course of the discussion.

Topic 3: Digital innovation for agriculture, rural areas, and farmers In the Session of digital innovation for agriculture, rural areas, and farmers, Mr. Wang Xiaobing, Director of Information Center, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Areas, Dr. Chai Xiujuan, Professor of Agricultural Information Institute, CAAS, and Mr. Zhang Xiaoqiang, General Manager of Strategy & Development Department of MAP & Digital Division, Syngenta Group China delivered keynote speeches. The topics of speeches covered experience of China’s digital agriculture in developing agriculture, rural areas and farme... Read morers, Innovation and application of Digital Agricultural Technology driven by AI, and Digital driving the future and reconstructing China's agricultural industry chain, respectively. Dr. Nie Fengying, Deputy Director General of Agricultural Information Institute and Center for International Agricultural Research, CAAS, and Member of the Advisory Committee of the United Nations Food System Summit moderated the session. Ms. Fu Rong, Project Officer of FAO, Dr. Yin Changbin, Chief Scientist of the Team of Agricultural Resource Utilization and Regional Planning, Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, CAAS, Mr. Mao Feng, Chief Brand Officer of MAP, General manager of China Green Food Corporation, CEO of Panda Guide, and Mr. Jiang Feng, Founder and Director of Longmijia contributed in the Panel discussion. The participants agreed that China has invested a lot in promoting agricultural digital transformation and has made great achievement. The main practices include: 1) Implementing the “Broadband Village” project. Benefited by the project, the basic support capacity of rural network has been significantly enhanced. By June 2021, the Internet penetration rate in rural areas had reached 59.2%, and the gap between urban and rural areas had been narrowed. 2) Promoting e-commerce in rural areas. A comprehensive demonstration of e-commerce in rural areas was implemented in 1258 counties across the country. At present, the e-commerce service stations have covered over 75% administrative villages in China. E-commerce, as a leader way and key in the development of e-agriculture, has become an important channel for the sales of agricultural products. 3) Setting smart agriculture experimental areas. The e-agriculture pilot project had been launched since 2017, focusing on field planting, protected horticulture, livestock and poultry breeding, aquaculture and big data construction along the whole industry chain of 15 key agricultural products. 4) Upgrading rural information service. Information service stations building in administrative villages provide farmers with public beneficial services such as law, policy, market and technology, as well as socialized services such as agricultural product sales and financial loans. At present, 454,000 village level information service stations have been built in China, covering more than 80% of the administrative villages. The participants also proposed some recommendations for digital development in rural areas in the future. First, fully apply the policy creation and planning guidance, such as national cyber development strategy, intelligent strategy and society national big data strategy. Second, improve internet infrastructure construction. It is crucial to continue to support for universal telecommunications services so that farmers can afford and take fully advantage of information services. Third, improving e-commerce development. Actions such as investing in the construction of cold chain and e-commerce industrial center, supporting entrepreneurs return to the countryside need to be incentivized. Fourth, promote innovation and application of big data. The government and enterprises should actively explore the application scenarios of smart agriculture and digital village, timely released and promoted new technologies, new products and new models of digital agriculture. Last, pilot demonstration and training is essential for the improvement of farmers’ digital literacy. Read less

Topic 2: Food losses and wastes The Session of Food Losses and Waste was jointly developed by Dr. Jia Xiangping from CAAS and Dr. Felicitas Schneider from Thünen Institute, Germany. At the Session, Dr. Rosa Rolle (FAO), Dr. Felicitas Schneider (Thünen Institute) and Dr. Cheng Shengkui (CAS) delivered keynote speech regarding food loss and waste monitoring from Global, Germany, and Chinese perspectives respectively. Ms. Jia Yan, Project Policy Officer, WFP China Office moderated the session. At the global level, FAO has developed a food loss and waste analysis methodology, which can be applie... Read mored across different regions of the globe. The objectives of the methodology is to identify and assess the main causes of food losses and to identify the solutions to reduce food losses with respect to the technical and economic visibility, but also looking at food quality and safety requirements, social acceptability, as well as the impact on the potential of impacting and the environmental sustainability. Essentially, the methodology includes six series of four major activities as the screening process, which involves desk work and a number of fields investigations. FAO has done applied this methodology across different regions of the globe in more than 88 different supply chains. A majority of these have been also focused in in the African context. Dr. Felicitas Schneider, who coordinates the Global Initiative Food Loss and Food Waste, presented the political, legislative and structural framework for monitoring food loss and food waste in Germany. As a member country of the United Nations and the European Union, Germany is obliged to collect and regularly report on its food loss and food waste. Voluntary cooperation with companies along the value chain is intended to create a better database for this purpose. The influence of concrete reduction measures on social, monetary and ecological aspects must be observed, emphasized Dr. Schneider, in order to obtain a basis for evidence-based policy recommendations. Dr. Shengkui Cheng shared the lasted estimates of Food Loss and Waste in China. The estimation shows annually a total of 349±4 Mt food produced for human consumption (27%) was lost or wasted in China. The largest amount of FLW in China is found at the postharvest handling and storage stage both for the total (159±3 Mt, 45%). The consumption stage also contributes substantially to the total FLW (17%, 59±1 Mt). Out-of-home food waste accounts for 13% of the total FLW, far exceeding household food waste (4%). He emphasized that food losses mainly caused by poor infrastructures and technology, while food wastes mainly due to people’s awareness and behavior. China has implemented a series of actions to reduce food losses and wastes. First, legislation. Anti-food Waste Law of the People’s Republic of China was enacted on April 29, 2021. The Law mainly regulate the responsibilities of catering service providers, catering takeaway platforms, tour operators, supermarkets and shopping malls, education administrative authorities and news media. Second, local & nongovernmental actions such as “empty plate” campaign, “N-1, N-2” ordering and Green Food Bank. Third, consumer education and advocacy by schools and media. Fourth, Science and technology actions such as building storage infrastructures for smallholders. In the following panel discussions, Jiaqi Huang (CAAS) identified the complex interrelationships in quantity measurement as well as the current gaps and methodological weaknesses in the Chinese data situation and advocated further international research cooperation in this direction. Ms. Tian Xiyan, the General Manager of Cooperation and Development from Alibaba Local Services Company, reported on the possibilities and the willingness of her company to motivate consumers and companies in the out-of-home sector to implement avoidance measures and thus contribute to a significant reduction of food waste. Mr. Bian Jiang, the Vice Chairman of China Cuisine Association highlighted the cultural impacts on food wastes in catering industry, and called for more actions in catering service and in public education. Read less