Explore Official Dialogue Feedback

In discussion groups of up to 12 individuals representing diverse aspects of Canada’s food system, participants discussed their perspectives and brainstormed ways to increase the sustainability of production within Canada’s food system. Groups discussed two topics: Maintaining economic resilience while increasing carbon sequestration and reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs); and increasing participation in sustainability initiatives. Theme 1: What actions need to be taken to ensure Canada’s agriculture and food sector remains economically resilient while increasing carbon sequestration and r... Read moreeducing GHG emission contributing towards achieving a net-zero future? Three key ideas emerged from the discussion of this theme: • A national soil health strategy is needed in order to focus attention on the health of soils and develop policies to increase soil carbon. It would also include measurement of carbon in a consistent and credible way, as there are currently too many proxies for defining soil health. To do so, there is a need to enhance and support research and knowledge development in order to inform the adoption of improved practices. A soil health strategy could support the development of an ecosystem-based approach to food production, linking crop and livestock production to the ecosystems that are most environmentally appropriate. Consistent soil carbon measurement could also support carbon offset markets and provide an additional benefit for farmers. • Knowledge transfer and education require increased support, and should be tailored with the social science understanding of the barriers to adoption. Knowledge transfer can also be a two-way conversation that can help identify where more gains can be made to reduce emissions and sequester carbon. Consumers and the general public also require education related to the food system in order to better understand how the food system operates. • A venture capital fund could be created dedicated to supporting innovation and technologies in agriculture and food. Among other things, it could be built to recognize that the food system is evolving and there are opportunities for new technologies (e.g. vertical farming) and new protein sources (insects, cellular, etc.). In addition, participants gave significant attention to the need for strong and coherent policies and programming that could drive adoption of practices to reduce greenhouse gases and increase sequestration. The following ideas and considerations were noted. • Policies and programs to reduce food waste are a huge opportunity to reduce emissions, as well as decrease water and energy use, and need to span the full food value chain. Programs would need to help change consumer stigma around food waste and to change their expectations of perfect food. For producers, programs are needed to help innovate and find uses for food loss. • Support for local and organic school food programs could help local economies, build soil, provide nutritious food, and would help reduce emissions from transportation. • Current fertilizer industry programs to make fertilizer use more efficient have a conflict of interest, and consultancy services for crop production should have more independence. • Public policy needs to be considered over the longer term, not in 5 year segments as happens in Canada now. • Policies need to reflect flexible and innovative solutions, as well as the different challenges at each level of the food system and different production practices and commodities. • All three pillars of sustainability need to be considered when designing policies and programs. Environmental goals will not be reached if social and economic considerations are not being addressed at the same time. For example, a sudden and significant increase in the use of technology to produce food could improve environmental outcomes, but could lead to unaffordable food prices. • A science-based approach is necessary. For example, not everyone wants to eat food that uses genetically modified technology, but government is needed to show what is safe and what is not. Read less

Participants represented diverse perspectives and roles in Canada’s food system, but agreed that increasing the sustainability of Canada’s food production system is a priority. In doing so, a full food systems perspective is necessary and cannot be focused solely on greenhouse gases or just the production sector, but must reflect consumers and the variety of stakeholders throughout the supply chain. Despite the complexity of the food system at a global level, it was noted that solutions needed to be considered on a regional basis in order to reflect the regional diversity of the country an... Read mored landscapes and to increase sustainability while minimizing unintended consequences. It was noted that changes at the farm level can be costly in time and money, and that there is a need to support farmers with financial and non-financial incentives in order increase adoption of beneficial practices. Governments have a strong role to play in financing transitions to sustainable practices and technologies. However, continued dialogue and engagement amongst partners is an essential component in developing appropriate and integrated policies, programs, targets, and goals. A strong theme to emerge was the need to fairly, consistently, and transparently measure and report on the performance of the sector through performance metrics and data. Such work would support research priorities through the identification of problem areas, help to direct education and knowledge transfer, as well as track progress on performance. Communications were raised as an important theme, where it was felt that there is untapped potential to find solutions simply because some groups of people are not in contact. It was noted that opportunities to address food loss have arisen by bringing diverse stakeholders in different sectors together, and can often lead to reduced costs or to new revenue streams. Enhancing communication across the supply chain and with other sectors could lead to additional opportunities. Education was also a common theme throughout the discussions, where it was noted that the social and economic components need to be included when working with farmers. Peer-to-peer learning is essential and can be very effective, especially when supported with additional education and knowledge transfer initiatives that understand the realities at the producer level. The importance of raising awareness of agricultural and food practices at the consumer level, as well as the complexities and interrelatedness of the food system, were also discussed. Engaging discussions amongst the enthusiastic set of Dialogue participants yielded a number of note-worthy ideas to advance collaboration on sustainable production, including the development of a national soil health strategy, a Ministry of Food, additional targeted government funding programs to incentivize practice changes at the farm level, communications and education throughout the supply chain, dedicated data and performance metrics, and targeted environmental research supported with decision support tools. Their ideas are detailed in the following section under discussion topics/themes. Read less

The objective of this Dialogue was to explore and identify approaches to enhance the sustainability of agricultural and food production across the full value chain in Canada, recognizing the linkages between environmental performance and economic and social resilience. Canada’s Prime Minister has recently committed to increasing Canada’s nationally determined contributions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, reducing emission by 40% to 45% below 2005 levels and reaching net zero emissions by 2050. The agriculture sector worldwide, including the Canadian agricul... Read moreture sector, can be part of the solution to reduce emissions, while increasing and maintaining carbon stores. Most of Canada’s agriculture emissions are from biological processes, including from nutrients being applied to soils, and livestock digestion. Thus, continued innovation, development and adoption of on-farm climate-smart practices and technologies have the potential to improve efficiencies, achieve further reductions, and increase carbon storage. Canada’s government has dedicated programs and funding to support the sector in meeting these challenges. In addition, many companies that source agricultural products have made commitments towards reducing the emissions from their supply chains, as well as address other environmental priorities. Participants were asked to consider the challenges at the production level and through the supply chain in order to identify opportunities to improve carbon sequestration and reduce emissions through the food chain, recognizing the complexity and trade-offs that exist. Numerous examples of sustainability initiatives exist that can help improve environmental outcomes and demonstrate the sustainability of Canada’s agriculture and food sector, including both supply chain certification and verification systems. In addition, Canadian provinces have been benchmarking one of Canada’s leading environment programs, the Environment Farm Plan (EFP), against the internationally recognized SAI Farm Sustainability Assessment tool. An EFP is voluntary awareness tool and process, whereby producers assess their operations to identify the environmental strengths and risks and develop an action plan to address risk areas. Today, more than 40% of producers have participated in programs to develop their EFP. The Dialogue examined how to build on existing initiatives to increase carbon sequestration and practices to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as to enhance and improve participation in Canada’s sustainability initiatives, recognizing that these are complex, dynamic challenges and that all food system actors have a role to play. The dialogue focused on ensuring a broad representation of food system players were included in the generation of ideas. It also discussed the complexities, nuances and tradeoffs that cannot be ignored when developing solutions for the food system. Read less

While most participant groups came to similar conclusions, there were a few areas of divergence. • More research and data versus taking immediate action The most salient area of divergence was between those who focused on the need for more data and those who felt that Canada has enough data and the government needs to take immediate action to eliminate food insecurity. In the same token, some participants noted that this Dialogue was not ambitious enough to address food insecurity issue and that Canada needs to take action now and 2030 is too far away. These participants felt that between no... Read morew and 2030, Canada needs to have concrete actions implemented to eliminate food insecurity not just to get the right data and measurements. • Focusing on the collection of standardized data versus region-specific data Participants identified the need for a standardized methodology across time and place to measure food insecurity. However, some participants noted that there is a need for regional approaches and tailored surveys to specific populations. • Data on food bank use The need for more data collection on food bank usage and food insecurity was noted. However, other participants emphasized that, in their view, food banks should not be considered a viable long term solution to food insecurity. As such, they felt that focusing data collection efforts on food banks would be expending effort in the wrong place. • Focus on income versus a holistic food systems approach Some participants felt it was important to look at food security as an income issue and focus on making food more affordable and increasing incomes. Others preferred to focus on the broader cultural and geographic barriers impacting food insecurity. • Food waste data Some participants felt that more data collection was needed related to food waste. Other participants felt that food waste and food security are separate issues. While there is some overlap between the two issues, these participants did not feel that a focus on food waste would significantly help advance food security objectives. • Expanding the definition of food security Many participants believed the definitions of food insecurity needed to be expanded. This included a greater focus on non-market foods and cultural foods, issues of food sovereignty and the inclusion of nutrition and water security. There were, however, divergent opinions about which aspects should be prioritized and included. • Timely data versus quality data Many participants noted the need for timely data collection and dissemination, especially due to how quickly the food security situation changed during COVID-19. However, some participants cautioned against prioritizing speed over quality and coverage. These participants pointed to recent examples such as the quick turn-around online surveys conducted during COVID-19 (the Canadian Perspectives Survey Series); they felt that such a survey with its shortened format and time frames likely excluded marginalized groups. • The role of government, academia and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) It was identified by most participants that the federal government has a lead role in combatting food insecurity and that one federal department should be in charge of the food security file. Many participants noted that the federal government needs to fund more standardized surveys targeting vulnerable populations. However, some participants identified NGOs as the most appropriate data collectors as they better understand vulnerable populations and can act as knowledge brokers. There was a divergence of views on the data collection approach between those who think that the federal government needs to act as a singular source for food security information and those who believe the role of NGOs should be expanded. Some believed that more social scientists needed to be hired by government to undertake more food insecurity related research. In contrast, others believe that data should be more accessible so that academia and NGOs can conduct the research themselves instead. Some participants felt that the federal government has not historically been as respectful as it should have been as data stewards regarding transparency and full accessibility, especially concerning Indigenous populations. There was a divergence of opinions between those advocating for data sovereignty and the need to fund Indigenous-led (as well as NGO-led) data collection; and those who prioritized a centralized, standardized data collection and central sharing system for data. Participants noted that placing more responsibility on NGOs and Indigenous-led organizations may result in overburdening NGOs by involving them too much in constant data collection without additional support. Read less

• Canada needs a national food system surveillance system to act as an early warning for food security threats Participants believed that with appropriate data enhancements Canada could establish a system of data collection and dissemination, with a defined and broad set of food security performance metrics, including nutrition-related data, based on aspirational goals and targets. A key component of timely food security updates is frequent monitoring of food insecurity levels within the population. Participants suggested that after food security data sources are catalogued, the government c... Read moreould support organizations to access this data. One example proposed is a country foods database as a way to capture the availability of country food sources, hunting activity, and monitoring eco-systems. • Measuring the impact of climate change on food security Related to the need for a surveillance system, participants expressed the importance of understanding the impact of climate change on food security. Climate change is likely to have an impact on growing food, sustainable practices, and the seasonality of food access for remote communities. Participants recommended that the federal government track the impact of climate change on traditional food sources in remote and Indigenous communities, furthering the need for a country foods database. • Qualitative data collection Participants felt that in many areas there is a lack of qualitative data to complement the quantitative data. Qualitative data gaps exist around measuring the personal experience of food insecurity as well as the role of food in economic development and food sovereignty. Participants noted that there needs to be investment in case studies within remote communities who are excluded from current data collection and vulnerable groups who are not well represented in current data collection. Participants noted that case studies would help capture and communicate the experience of individuals and add context to the quantitative data collected. Read less

• Defining and measuring food insecurity Food insecurity is multifaceted and participants felt that in Canada we tend to only focus on affordability and households’ financial access to market foods. Restricting the focus to an income-based model neglects the broader cultural considerations and social and geographical barriers to achieving food security. Participants proposed that the definition of food security should be expanded to include access to other alternative food systems (i.e. traditional/country food systems, local harvesting, community food sharing, and food banks) and other cl... Read moreosely linked insecurities (i.e. nutritional and water security). The federal government needs to consult those who consume traditional foods to better understand these diets and ensure these food security dimensions are incorporated into surveys. • Increasing transparency Participants recommended that the federal government conduct a thorough analysis of food security programs to prove their effectiveness or request academics to undertake such analysis. Participants expressed that currently, they do not know whether programs and funding are actually reducing food insecurity. The linkage between data collection and policy development needs to be transparent. Participants noted that the federal government should improve communication about how data will be used as evidence in policy making when it is collected and provide follow up reports to convey the importance of the communities’ participation in data collection. Transparency and communication between the government and both rights holders and stakeholders in collecting data is key for coordinated efforts to advance food security data and measurement. • Data accessibility Participants urged governments to work on reducing the time lag between data collection and dissemination. Further, the need for a greater level of data granularity was highlighted. Organizations and researchers urgently need data to track who is most affected by food insecurity, the magnitude of the problem and how it is changing over time. • Frequent food insecurity data collection Participants felt that the inconsistent data collection in some provinces and in some years makes it more difficult to identify problems and trends. Therefore, participants urged that the federal government and provinces work together to ensure data is collected annually in order to avoid gaps in the data. The current lack of longitudinal data restricts research into whether the same households are becoming more or less food insecure over time. Thus, a longitudinal survey is needed. Read less

In discussion groups of up to 10 individuals representing diverse dimensions of Canada’s food systems, participants discussed their perspectives and brainstormed ways to address the identified food security data gaps. Each of the eight groups identified unique data gaps and solutions but many groups identified outcomes under common themes. These key outcomes identified by participants are listed below: • Establish a federal lead for achieving food security, increase collaboration between departments and fund further data collection. Many participants felt it would be helpful to have one fe... Read morederal body responsible for food security and the achievement of food security goals. Currently, participants believe there is considerable duplication and incoherency in efforts and as a result progress is being delayed. The lead department or agency should set a clear goal and strive to eliminate food insecurity with strategic milestones that can be gauged for progress over time through performance metrics. Further to setting goals, this government department or agency should take ownership of the process to gather data and develop strategies to foster partnerships with all stakeholders and rights holders by gaining their respect and mutual understanding of the significance of collecting information. This would include cataloguing all existing data that is being collected by stakeholders and rights holders (civil society, non-profit groups, other levels of government, and academia). • Improve data collection for vulnerable groups. Increasing sample size would help better assess the needs and food security levels of vulnerable groups. Participants recommended that the federal government increase sample size for marginalized groups when collecting data so programs and policies can be better targeted and assessed. Small sample sizes of marginalized demographic groups lead to an inability to measure the food security status of these demographic groups at a granular level. In particular, participants identified that the federal government needs to investigate ways that Indigenous-led data collection can be supported. Participants suggested that the federal government needs to focus on inclusive design and better reach for underrepresented groups by offering surveys in different languages and delivery methods while respecting their personal experiences. Participants felt that current data collection may exclude marginalized groups, especially online survey collection. • Develop and support partnerships with food security stakeholders and rights holders. While partnerships require a more intensive process and more resources, participants believe they would enable a deeper dialogue and understanding of food insecurity. Toward this goal, it was recommended by participants that the government work with stakeholders and rights holders to catalogue current data and measurements. Also, it was recommended that the federal government provide stable funding so that organizations can plan long-term priorities for data collection and invest in their organizations. Local groups have experience with the specific food security issues and can work to build trust within the community. Regarding Indigenous communities, it was suggested that the federal government needs to better protect and respect Indigenous data sovereignty and support Indigenous-led data collection. Data collection requires dialogue on a nation-to-nation basis to respect community developed data collection and sharing and ownership protocols. Read less

While participants commended the recent creation of a Food Policy for Canada they stressed the need for key organizational changes and investments into improving both food security related data collection and governance including data dissemination and access. The Dialogue provided a space for participants to share their perspectives about current food security data and measurements and ways to improve them. Main Finding 1: The role of the federal government in collecting, disseminating, and utilizing data to address food insecurity needs to be well defined and collaborative. Main Finding 2: T... Read morehere is a need for the federal government to increase investment in data collection methods that reflect the regional variation of food systems and populations across Canada. Increased focus on measuring and monitoring food insecurity within vulnerable populations is needed. Main Finding 3: Governments and organizations who collect data to measure food insecurity can improve data collection by supporting partnerships with target groups. Main finding 4: Transparency in the collection, use and dissemination of data needs to be improved. Target groups should be consulted throughout the entire process including survey design, analysis, and providing access to and/or ownership of final data products. Main Finding 5: There is a need for a food security definition that reflects the complexity of the dimensions of food security in Canada. A clear definition of both food sources and security are important when collecting data and measuring the status of food security. Main Finding 6: A comprehensive understanding of the interconnectedness of food costing and household income is necessary to understanding the affordability of food. Main Finding 7: There is a need for up to date, timely data on the current food security situation across Canada. Read less

Canada has committed to achieving zero hunger and food security for all Canadians and to achieving food security related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. The opening speech of Canada’s 2020 parliament (Speech from the Throne) emphasized that every Canadian deserves to have nutritious food on the table. The need to continue working with partners – including directly with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Nation – to address food insecurity in Canada was also highlighted. With these commitments in place, it is crucial that Canada has the ability to measure progress towards achi... Read moreeving the Food Policy’s priority outcomes. The focus of the Food Security Data and Measurement Dialogue was to identify how current methods of measuring food security can be improved upon in order to better track the achievement of Canada’s food security commitments. A key rationale for identifying data and measurement issues is the urgent need to develop appropriate actions targeting vulnerable people so that Canada will be on the path to meeting the SDGs relating to the food system including zero hunger, good health and well-being, responsible production and consumption, and climate action. The Dialogue was motivated by the following future statement: “By 2030, Canada will have the data needed to assess the ability of all those living in Canada to access sufficient amount of safe, nutritious, and culturally appropriate foods. Such data will be used to monitor and track Canada’s progress towards achieving SDGs and indicators in the Food Policy for Canada. As a result, progress will be made toward the SDGs.” The future statement was closely aligned with the UN Food Systems Summit Action Track 1: Ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all by 2030. The Dialogue focused on fostering a diverse discussion with partners, stakeholders and rights holders about how to achieve the future statement. The attendees were specifically asked to provide their perspectives and input on the following four areas: (i) identifying current data gaps, (ii) approaches to close the identified data gaps, (iii) barriers and challenges in meeting the future statement, and (iv) identifying stakeholder and rights holders’ roles in meeting the future statement. Read less

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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