Concertation Indépendante
Cible géographique:
Sans cible géographique
Main findings
The multistakeholder approach is one of the 3 key Dutch priorities for the UNFSS 2021. In general, participants agree multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs) are key for SDG2 and the 2030 agenda. Only together stakeholders can address the challenges ahead. Despite the challenges they face, for instance, to level the playing field for each stakeholder to participate and contribute meaningfully, participants agree MSPs can be a good vehicle for the much-needed transitions of food systems, provided they respect a few crucial rules. In this regard, the following suggestions were made for replicating an
... Lire la suited/or scaling up MSPs working on sustainable food systems: *Legitimacy and efficiency: Core to viable multi-stakeholder platforms are the interlinked notions of legitimacy and efficiency of the structure and the process. -Representation and inclusiveness: These are fundamental key pillars to build the trust necessary for legitimacy. Recommendations raised during the independent dialogue in this regard include (1) making sure from the beginning that all stakeholders affected by the given issue are included and equally represented in the MSP; (2) giving special attention to including minority groups and “unusual suspects” (such as street food vendors, women cooking in markets and other settings). -Political will: Additionally, participants indicated that a strong political will is crucial for effective MSPs, and can also help to convey legitimacy. -Ownership: Furthermore, legitimacy relies on the adequacy of the process to engage stakeholders in a meaningful dialogue in which they feel a sense of ownership and the possibility of gaining benefits. This requires transparency, continuous communication, openness, and respect. In this regard, participants highlighted the importance of (1) having an independent convenor; (2) establishing and respecting transparent processes and governance mechanisms in the MSP; (3) defining clear principles, and in particular, making sure human rights are respected, and (4) instead of having a pre-defined agenda and solutions, ownership requires focusing on country, local and community-owned challenges and solutions. A specific call was made during the keynotes for (funding) “donors and global players to “change their behavior to align to country priorities and respect country ownership”. *Effective collaboration: -Diversity: Fostering a working relationship based on trust, mutual respect, and open communication also requires an understanding of each other's strengths and weaknesses. Stakeholders bring to MSPs their own mandates, interests, competencies, and shortcomings. Unless these factors are openly acknowledged and processes are in place to facilitate stakeholder discussions and negotiations, effective collaboration will not be achieved. Recommendations in this regard included: (1) setting up continuous learning processes; (2) having a clear and uninterrupted communication strategy, including sharing and celebrating results; (3) building on each other’s differences, value those different skills, perspectives and make them work together; (4) recognizing each other’s expertise and strengths, and come together to find common ground; and (5) applying the principle of “sufficient consensus” rather than full agreement on every issue to proceed and move on. -Power relations: Multi-stakeholder platforms have been criticized for failing to address asymmetries and unequal power relations. In particular, the treatment of diverse stakeholders as equals is seen as problematic as it does not recognize the differences in authority, legitimacy, interests, and power of different stakeholders. In this regard, participants indicated the importance of addressing power relations through standards and internal mechanisms and processes for inclusivity, transparency, and accountability. -Effectiveness and accountability: Additionally, MSPs also raise questions related to the effectiveness and accountability of these kinds of mechanisms. In this sense, the dialogue identified as crucial recommendations: (1) defining clear responsibilities for each stakeholder involved; (2) having a clear shared agenda and goals (with time frame) based on a shared analysis; (3) having internal mechanisms in place to make partners accountable; (4) focus on concrete solutions; (5) monitor and evaluate impact; and (6) invest in (mutual) learning about multi-stakeholder approaches. -Time and resources: Finally, participants stressed that multi-stakeholder collaboration requires sufficient time and resources. Time to build trust, withstand internal and external changes, align different stakeholders, build their capacity, and organize processes where they can give input, feel connected and committed, and feel confident and empowered to engage in collaborative work. A specific plea was made to move from a siloed funding approach, which still prevails, so that MSPs can address health and planetary challenges together. Independent MSPs can be a space for constructive and productive deliberation. Participants concurred that multi-stakeholder dialogue in MSPs is useful to make everybody´s voices heard, change behaviors, and empower all actors. In other words, the outcomes of MSPs go beyond the concrete solutions adopted. Multi-stakeholder approaches can be real game-changers to advance food systems transformation. It’s important to note however that decisions taken within multi-stakeholder collaborations should be complementary to, and not substitute democratically accountable and rights-based decision making around food. Lire moins
Piste(s) d'Action: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Mots-clés : Data & Evidence, Environment and Climate, Finance, Governance, Human rights, Innovation, Policy, Trade-offs, Women & Youth Empowerment