Explore le compte-rendu officiel des Concertations

It is clear from the discussions that transforming food systems requires resources such as water, land, infrastructure (e.g. road networks and storage facilities) and implements to build strong value chains. The need for cohesion through famers’ groups was also highlighted. Upgrading the skills and education of farmers and extension officers is also important. Incorporation of nutrition in production and processing activities is crucial as well as educating the public in good nutrition practices.

None

The focus was organised around the objectives of Track 1 – ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all. National policies and programs that are related to Track 1 were discussed considering the food system in Botswana. Challenges were identified and solutions for bridging the gaps were recommended.

Transforming Guyana’s food system will provide an environment where: a. agriculture can continue to provide a good livelihood for many (not just farmers); b. the country can take advantage of emerging trade opportunities in agriculture both regionally and internationally; c. the country can meet its development goals by leaving no one behind; and d. Everyone can have healthy, affordable diets that promote good health and reduce non-communicable diseases. To achieve this the following conclusions emerged from the dialogue: - Greater emphasis must be placed on increased production in the non-t... Lire la suiteraditional sector, in an effort to increase the availability of fruits, vegetables and root crops which are required for balance and diversified diet. - There needs to be a focus on encouraging consumers to consume healthier diets. This may be achieved through the development of effective pricing policies which seek to curb the demand for foods high in saturated fat, trans fats, sugar or salt, thereby prompting persons to consume more fruits and vegetables. - Increasing investments in a more sustainable food system will require changes in policy and public and private sector support to encourage investments in national food production which plays an important role in supporting rural transformation and mitigating risks. - And with regards to climate resilience, the importance of maintaining and increasing the genetic diversity of crops and livestock within the country is recognized. It is urgent that both marine and terrestrial ecosystems are safeguarded from imminent threats to enhance climate resilience and provide safe, healthy and nutritious diets for all. Lire moins

Food Security Due to Guyana's agriculture sector vulnerability to factors such as flooding, market demand and volatile supply chain, ensuring Access to Safe and Nutritious Food for all, food availability, access, utilization and stability must be holistically addressed. As such, the following strategic approaches that should taken were highlighted in the dialogue: - Expanding the non-traditional agricultural sub-sector to promote diet diversification and enabling equality in availability and access, especially for rural populations; - Adopting appropriate harvesting, post-harvest, and storage ... Lire la suitetechnologies to reduce on-farm and post-harvest food loss and waste; and - Consolidate our National School Feeding Programme by strengthening connections between consumers and producers of food, including by fostering more robust food value chains and creating solid alliances between farmers and the wider society, to deliver safe, healthy and nutritious school meals. Guyana has signed the Declaration of Commitment for the Global School Meals Coalition. Climate Resilience In light of Guyana’s vulnerability, the Government of Guyana is fully aware of the increasing climate- related threats and is committed to the transformation to a low-carbon economy and enhancing the resilience of vulnerable ecosystems as well as local rural, and indigenous communities to combat the effects of Climate Change. Practical solutions from Guyana’s National High-Level Dialogue include: - Measures to de-risk the agriculture sector, such as a vulnerability fund or agriculture insurance, to mitigate risks to the sustainability and productivity of the sector.  - Relevant innovation and technological tools to assess food systems, identify risks and relevant actions to manage shocks and to increase the resilience. - Develop Climate Smart Practices to help address the adverse effects of Climate Change. - Increase investments in disaster preparedness focusing on addressing long-term and structural causes in addition to sudden shocks (droughts, etc). Funding and Financing Transforming the food system will require significantly greater public financing as well as private capital from national, regional and international partners. International support, including from FAO, IFAD, WFP, IICA, international financial institutions, and bilateral partners, will be critical to ensuring a more resilient agricultural sector through financing, technology, and creating an enabling global environment. Lire moins

There were no areas of divergence that emerged from the dialogue. The participants are all in agreement that there is a lot of work to be done to transform Guyana's food system, the solutions are known and it is a matter of implementing them so that the current challenges will be addressed.

The major focuses of the dialogue where: 1. Safe and Nutritious food for all - Healthy Guyanese Population This was aligned with Action Track 1 and offered an opportunity to bring together the elements of food safety, nutrition, poverty and inequalities in the framework of food systems in climate and environmental change to ensure that all people have access to a safe and nutritious diet. 2. Private Sector Perspective in Transforming the Food System in Guyana Public private partnerships are vital and re-emphasizes the importance of investment in agriculture infrastructure that contributes to a... Lire la suite well functioning food system. Focusing on the private sector perspective gave the Private Sector Commission the opportunity to express their commitment to working with government and other stakeholders to develop and implement a national food security system as a transformative strategy. 3. Vision for Guyana’s Agriculture Food System: Roadmap to 2030 By adopting a “food systems approach” rather than an individual sector approach, Guyana will be more productive, more inclusive of the poor, more environmentally sustainable and resilient, and better equipped to deliver healthy and nutritious diets to all Guyanese. Guyana’s food system transformation is at the core of our development aspirations. Guyana envisions a modernized e-agriculture sector with enhanced incomes, enhanced productivity, value-addition, increased market access, and the production of safe and nutritious agricultural commodities that Guyana will produce for itself and the global market. Lire moins

In following with the guidelines of the UN Dialogues Toolkit and to ensure a systematic, comprehensive approach to assessing food systems, the final U.S. National Dialogue focused on identifying pathways for building more socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable food systems in the United States. The discussions built on the results of the first and second U.S. National Food Systems Dialogues. The event agenda consisted of opening remarks, followed by one fifty-minute small group breakout sessions led by U.S. government experts and researchers, and concluding with a closing ple... Lire la suitenary featuring read-outs of the breakout session discussions by facilitators. To motivate the breakout discussions, participants were requested to come to the Dialogue ready to share their perspectives on the steps necessary to create pathways towards more sustainable food systems in the United States over the next 3-5 years, keeping in mind the challenges and solutions identified in the first and second National Dialogues.  Discussion Questions: To encourage a systematic assessment of pathways, breakout groups considered the following main questions: • How do we advance sustainable food systems in the United States over the next 3-5 years (economic, social, environmental)? What approaches are necessary? • How can food system actors work together to meet these goals? • Additional questions: o What steps/approaches are necessary to make progress? o What structures/processes are necessary to ensure that all stakeholders and perspectives are included? • Consider synergies and tradeoffs between the three pillars of sustainability: o What are the synergies among social, economic, and environmental objectives? o What are the tradeoffs among social, economic, and environmental objectives and how will we manage these tradeoffs and recognize or compensate those who might be made worse off? Breakout groups were asked to consider pathways to advancing the three pillars of sustainability: 1. Economic - Decent incomes for farmers, farm workers and workers along the supply chain plus fair and competitive markets that serve all sized producers (production, processing, aggregation/distribution, markets) 2. Social - Access to nutritious foods and healthy diets, bolster participation of socially disadvantaged groups 3. Environmental - Agricultural production that minimizes negative environmental impacts and mitigates climate change Lire moins

This report represents the views of U.S. stakeholders who participated in the Dialogue; it does not represent the official views of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) or the United States Government. The focus of the final Dialogue was to identify pathways for improving the sustainability of U.S. food systems. While the discussion topics were organized around the three pillars of sustainability as described above, some pathways addressed a single pillar of sustainability while others considered cross-cutting aspects of sustainability and tradeoffs across food systems. Participa... Lire la suitents agreed that all three pillars of sustainability should be considered holistically. The pathways towards more sustainable U.S. food systems by 2030 that emerged were: 1) resilient, efficient, and productive food systems based on fair and competitive markets; 2) nutrition security, equitable livelihoods, and inclusion ensured by collaboration; 3) climate-smart agriculture enabled by innovation, incentives, and markets; and 4) cross-cutting approaches including access to technology and adoption of innovation, climate change mitigation and adaptation, education and capacity building, equity and inclusion, incentives for change and investment at all levels, resilience, efficiency, and productivity, and trust and collaboration across sectors. (1) Economic Pathway: resilient, efficient, and productive food systems based on fair and competitive markets Dialogue participants identified building resilient, efficient, and productive food systems through fair and competitive markets as a pathway towards greater economic sustainability. Some participants hypothesized that increased productivity, efficiency, and deployment of appropriate technologies could increase profitability and create synergies between social, environmental, and economic goals. Some participants noted how resilient supply chains and access to rural broadband could increase market access. Some participants emphasized that science- and rules-based international trade is also a key to expanding market access. Funding and market-based mechanisms were noted by some participants to incentivize social and environmental actions. Some participants stressed the importance of resilience, noting the need to increase adaptivity across infrastructure, supply chains, and food systems. (2) Social Pathway: nutrition security, equitable livelihoods, and inclusion ensured by collaboration Dialogue participants agreed that pathways towards greater social sustainability require collaboration to achieve positive outcomes in nutrition security, equitable livelihoods, and inclusion. Participants emphasized the urgent need for diverse stakeholders to build trust and work together to make progress towards sustainable food systems. Some participants highlighted the importance of nutrition security, not simply increasing calories, but enhancing the quality of those calories and access to safe, nutritious, healthy food. Participants also agreed that producers’ equitable access to economic opportunities is a priority, and that policies and programs should prioritize the most vulnerable communities. Some participants noted the importance of youth engagement in food systems. Some participants highlighted the need to improve information flows amongst disadvantaged and minority farmers to increase access to markets and programs. (3) Environmental Pathway: climate-smart agriculture enabled by innovation, incentives, and markets Dialogue participants agreed that pathways towards greater environmental sustainability are built through innovation, incentives, and markets that enable the adoption of climate-smart agriculture. Some participants stressed that multiple levels of public investment and support are needed to plan and adapt to environmental crises. Some approaches mentioned by participants include resilient infrastructure and supply chains, voluntary incentives for climate-smart agriculture, financial measures to mitigate risk (price or yield supports, crop insurance, and insurance markets), investment in research and development, and extension and capacity building. Some participants noted that improved use of and access to technology could allow producers to stay competitive, resilient, and to learn from extreme climate events. Some participants explored the idea of building soil health and carbon markets, noting that better-functioning carbon markets could encourage farmer participation. (4) Cross-Cutting Approaches Some participants highlighted approaches that would address the social, environmental, and economic aspects of sustainability and should be considered in U.S. pathways towards more sustainable food systems. Some participants agreed that multi-stakeholder dialogue was an important first step in the pathways to more sustainable U.S. food systems. Cross-cutting approaches included: o Education and capacity building amongst producers and consumers o Equity and inclusion, with a focus on youth, women, and marginalized groups o Incentives for change and investment at all levels o Multi-stakeholder dialogue o Resilience, efficiency, and productivity o Trust and collaboration across sectors Lire moins

Economic Pathway: Participants agreed that pathways towards greater economic sustainability should be based on fair and competitive markets that contribute to productive, efficient, and resilient food systems. Some participants noted the importance of building more fair and competitive markets for large and small producers. Strategies mentioned by some participants include avoiding excessive market concentration and identifying and addressing barriers to entry to level the playing field. Some participants hypothesized that increased productivity, efficiency, and deployment of appropriate techn... Lire la suiteologies could increase profitability and create synergies between social, environmental, and economic goals. Some participants suggested that productivity gains were the best way to satisfy most stakeholders, noting that there should be sustainable, profitable production by our farmers. Some participants stressed the need for continued innovation and technology that is scalable and inclusive. Some participants noted how supply chains and rural broadband could increase market access. Supply chain dynamics could contribute to a more diversified output and expand market access opportunities for farmers, some participants hypothesized. Some participants noted that infrastructure and broadband could improve supply chain management and help to communicate economic signals across the value chain (e.g. commodity prices, availability, input costs). Rural broadband could connect farmers to consumers and producers of all scales to work with clients including integrators, feed sales, consumers, and processers, added some participants. Some participants emphasized that science- and rules-based international trade is also a key to expanding market access, noting that further discussions on the role of trade in sustainability and resilience are needed. Some participants noted that support for place-based food systems compliments a large-scale focus on national and global markets. One group outlined a Local Pathway, which could seek to strengthen domestic local and regional food systems through procurement, subsidies, and market access. The group also outlined a Global Pathway to contribute to global food security through a rules-based trading system and sharing U.S. expertise in agricultural research, innovation, and technology. Both Local and Global Pathways could be complementary. Another group noted that Indigenous communities face nutrition security challenges and that all communities should have access to decentralized food systems that allow for local food sovereignty. Funding and market-based mechanisms were mentioned by some participants to incentivize specific actions (social or environmental). For example, some participants mentioned that giving greater value to farm labor could generate more livable wages or better-functioning carbon markets could encourage farmer participation. Some participants stressed the importance of assuring livable wages, access to healthcare, and equity/fairness for all people with emphasis on those working in the food system. Some participants highlighted that approaches to investment and regulation should benefit national and international interests to grow markets and improve food systems at all scales. Some participants stressed the importance of resilience, noting the need to increase adaptivity across infrastructure, supply chains, and food systems. Some participants agreed that more diversified food systems could improve resilience, as well as generate novel economic opportunities. Improved nutrition security and the ability to adapt to climate-related shocks and stresses were additional benefits of resilience cited by some participants. Some participants noted a possible tradeoff between efficiency and resiliency, mentioning how efficient supply chains lacked resilience during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some participants noted that economic objectives may be in opposition to other sustainability goals, mentioning how sustainable agricultural practices could increase the cost of food production and food prices. Lire moins

Social Pathway: Participants agreed that pathways towards greater social sustainability involve collaboration to achieve positive outcomes in nutrition security, equitable livelihoods, and inclusion. One group suggested that the social aspects of sustainability are the most difficult to resolve. Some participants agreed that there is an urgent need for stakeholders to collaborate and take steps to alter existing power dynamics to enhance social equity in food systems. Some participants highlighted that nutrition security is a key element of social sustainability. Some participants noted that b... Lire la suiteuilding a resilient and sustainable food system will not simply involve increasing calories but enhancing the quality of those calories and increasing access to safe, nutritious, and healthy food. Some participants noted that building a nutrition “safety net” is important in disadvantaged communities and highlighted the opportunity for long-term savings in healthcare through nutrition assistance and education. Some participants agreed that food systems need to be easy and accessible to consumers, especially populations lacking in access to nutritious foods. Some participants noted that vulnerable low-income, marginalized, and/or non-English speaking consumers can lack access to available food delivery programs. Participants agreed that equitable access to economic opportunities by producers is a priority. Barriers to equitable livelihoods facing producers, noted by some participants, include geographical and market barriers and fair pricing that hinder the ability of smaller producers or new entrants in the production sector. Pathways identified for equitable access for producers by some participants include price controls to facilitate market access, support for creation of farm-to-school, food pantry, and other programs, the use of cooperatives (transportation and other) to get products to market, and the potential for food production and processing decentralization at the local level. Some participants also highlighted “soft infrastructure,” or community approaches that adapt food systems models to local contexts. Some participants noted that government procurement practices should prioritize the most vulnerable communities, for instance incentives could promote purchases of products from small minority-owned farmers and from American businesses. Some participants noted that incentives should ensure equitable distribution of wealth. Some participants highlighted the importance of incentives to remove institutional barriers and improve access to land. Some participants noted that government investment among and within various production sectors is unevenly distributed and should be more equitable. Increasing information access amongst disadvantaged and minority farmers was highlighted by some participants as important for increasing access to resources for all communities and stakeholders. Some participants noted that all programs should be inclusive of different languages and socioeconomic groups, citing the example of direct-to-consumer, on-line food delivery that may be difficult to access for those without internet or phone access or non-English speakers. Some participants noted that a central online space for accessing information, rural broadband and education, and intercultural education could increase access to resources for all. Some participants agreed that language we use needs to better reflect the diversity of stakeholders, foods, and production/harvesting methods of our food systems. Lire moins

Environmental Pathway: Participants agreed that pathways towards greater environmental sustainability are built through innovation, incentives, and markets that enable the adoption of climate-smart agriculture. Participants highlighted the urgency of climate change and agreed that food systems should transition to respond to climate change through more sustainable and environmentally friendly food production. Some participants emphasized that policy should be flexible as there is no one-size-fits-all approach and supportive of innovation. Some participants added that encouraging regenerative f... Lire la suitearming and exploring the circularity of farming operations are promising ideas. Some participants stressed that multiple levels of public investment and support are needed to plan and adapt to environmental crises. Some approaches mentioned by participants include resilient infrastructure and supply chains, voluntary incentives for climate-smart agriculture, financial measures to mitigate risk (price or yield supports, crop insurance, and insurance markets), investment in research and development, and extension and capacity building. Some participants noted the importance of voluntary, incentive-based measures designed in an equitable way to increase adoption of climate-smart practices. Other participants highlighted that price guarantees or yields-supports could mitigate risk and increase participation by ensuring that farmers will make the same income while experimenting with new technologies and climate-smart practices. Some participants discussed that additional financial incentives might include stacked financing, deferred interest on loans, deferred payment on loans, or higher levels of cropping insurance. Others noted that risk mitigation is important for both local and global pathways, noting that crop insurance to build soil health is a model that could be transferred to other countries. Some participants noted that increased investment in research and development is needed to improve sustainability. Some participants posited that capacity building and extension services targeting underserved communities are needed to help farmers transition to sustainable farming. Some participants noted that improved use of and access to technology could allow producers to stay competitive, resilient, and learn from extreme climate events. Some participants noted that nationally and internationally, sharing of data can provide better directions for researchers and producers, prompting development and adoption of innovations. Some participants cited the example of grocery-store availability of information on reducing food loss and waste such as the FoodKeeper app. Some participants explored the idea of carbon markets, noting that better-functioning carbon markets could encourage farmer participation. Some participants agreed that carbon markets would benefit from improved information flow as well as publicly shared definitions, measurements, and standards, which is where the government can play a role as an “honest broker.” Some participants discussed soil carbon and the need to support soil testing and verification to allow farmers to take steps to improve their soil health, likening the importance of investing in soil health to a retirement savings plan. Some participants recognized that soil health is a highly complex and multi-dimensional challenge and that farmers should not focus myopically on soil carbon as the only solution to soil and ecosystem health on their land. Likewise, some participants noted that soil health is one of many dimensions to the challenge of addressing climate change in the context of food systems. Some participants stated that there is also a need to focus on the health of water and river resources as well as air in this discussion. Participants speculated that environmental co-benefits could emerge from adapting agriculture to changing climates and producers could also benefit economically from have more adaptive and resilient systems, for example when facing water scarcity or other environmental crises. Lire moins

Cross-Cutting Approaches and Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue: Some participants highlighted approaches that would address the social, environmental, and economic aspects of sustainability and should be considered in U.S. pathways towards more sustainable food systems. Some participants agreed that multi-stakeholder dialogue was an important first step in the pathways to more sustainable U.S. food systems. Cross-cutting approaches included: o Education and capacity building amongst producers and consumers o Equity and inclusion, with a focus on youth, women, and marginalized groups o Incentives for ... Lire la suitechange and investment at all levels o Multi-stakeholder dialogue o Resilience, efficiency, and productivity o Trust and collaboration across sectors Some participants emphasized the urgent need for stakeholders to collaborate to make progress towards more sustainable food systems. Some participants noted the need to build trust between all relevant stakeholders (government, industry, farms, consumers, farm and food workers, and others). Some participants agreed that the U.S. National Food Systems Dialogues have provided a forum to meet people from across different interest groups and agricultural sectors and begin to listen to people with different perspectives. Some participants posited that an iterative dialogue and inclusive forum where all interest groups can participate would be an important pathway. Some participants highlighted the importance of taking steps to alter existing power dynamics to enhance social equity in food systems. Some participants agreed that examining the systemic inequities at play in the food system, such as issues of environmental justice, and having inclusive dialogue should be step one. Lire moins

While not all discussion groups reached consensus on a pathway or pathways, discussion participants built on each other’s ideas and agreed that pathways for U.S. food systems sustainability need to holistically consider economic, social, and environmental aspects and related trade-offs. Participants agreed that the complexity and interconnectedness of our food systems will continue to create challenges and require compromises for solutions that optimize all dimensions of sustainability. Some participants noted the significant challenge of identifying who should pay for actions to address cli... Lire la suitemate change at the producer and farm level. Some participants expressed that consumers should pay more for the climate-friendly agricultural commodities, but this is a tradeoff for equitable access to healthy foods. Some participants emphasized that policies should avoid tradeoffs such as farmers raising consumer prices to pay for sustainable practices. Some participants noted that the preference for the use of voluntary, performance-based incentives is complicated by the difficulty in quantifying environmental benefits. Participants agreed on the need to assure the inclusion and input from diverse farmers, including women and minority farmers, as well as the need to ensure their access to innovative programs and tools. Some participants recognized the need to listen to participants in all sectors of the food systems, including farm workers (including immigrant farm workers who often lack protected rights), owners of production, processors and retailers, and consumers. Some participants noted that local communities and producers stakeholder interests must have a seat at the table, in particular Black, Indigenous and other people of color (BIPOC) producers, pastoralists, hunters, fishers, and wild harvesters who must see their values and interests reflected in any pathway that is advanced through these discussions. Some participants noted that the communities and stakeholders most negatively impacted by current food systems, predominantly BIPOC communities, must be central in these discussions. Some participants mentioned relevant approaches including the “Values Aligned Approach” by the National Farm to School Network and long-term investment strategies and approaches led by the Intertribal Agriculture Council with Native producers under the Native American Agriculture Fund. Some participants noted the importance of youth engagement in food systems, and the need to address structural barriers for youth and youth of color through programs, removing institutional barriers, and improving access to land. Lire moins

There is not much divergence observed during the symposium proper as well as during the discussions of the open forum. One main divergence observed from the symposium emanates from the technologies developed by the SUCs. Some of the participants disagree that technologies being developed by SUCs are being fully utilized by the industry, specifically in the agriculture and fisheries sector.

The symposium focused on the role of State Universities and Colleges in modernizing, industrializing, and professionalizing Philippine agriculture food systems. Technologies and innovations play a key role to achieve and realize DA’s goal to modernize, industrialize, and professionalize the agriculture and fisheries sector. One of the enablers in creating such technologies is the academe, particularly the SUCs. With the mandate, technical expertise, and facilities to conduct RDE programs, the SUCs are major partners of the DA in its pursuit to steer agri-fishery growth and transformation tow... Lire la suiteard a modern and industrialized Philippine agriculture through its strategies under the Food Security Framework. Under the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA), the DA along with the other government agencies are mandated to support and prioritize the research and technology initiatives, tools, and facilities of SUCs for the latter to develop innovations. The SUCs in the country have been partners by the government (e.g. DA, DOST, CHED) and the private sector in developing and providing available tools and technologies in various segments of the value chain such as crop varieties, animal breeds, farm inputs, production and post production package of technologies, decision support tools for precision agriculture, machineries development, and value added food products. Providing these available opportunities for SUCs adapting innovations in food systems, it is important to provide a venue for the SUCs to increase their awareness and strengthen their collaboration through possible partnerships with the private sector; hence this webinar. Lire moins

The major findings of the symposium during the open forum are the following: 1. With the full devolution of the Agri-Aqua R4DE to the LGUs starting 2022 and with the start of the Mandanas-Garcia ruling, SUCs should initiate close partnership with Regional DA offices for better R4DE linkages (with possible funding) and synergy of relevant agri-aqua initiatives. There is also a need to strengthen the Agri-Business Incubation Centers for promising AB technologies (with the inclusion of other government offices such as the DTI aside from the DA and DOST). Further, with the pilot implementation of ... Lire la suitethe Province-led Agriculture and Fisheries Extension System (PAFES), SUCs will have an excellent partnership platform to be actively involved with DA and LGUs Agri-Aqua programs. SUCs are in the best position to be an important contributor to local area transformation. 2. Private sector, consumers, and farmers, as the next and end user of technologies, should now be fully involved during the early stages particularly in technology development process to establish the needs based and demand driven approach. 3. There is a need to revise parameters or indicators to measure the activities being conducted for research for development (R4D) within SUCs. Rather than an output-based statement (i.e. number of projects/research generated, number of research projects presented, etc.), there should be a focus on the number of technologies transferred or adapted/scaled and commercialized by the end users/clients/farmers/fishers. This can also be addressed by more impact-driven substantive evaluation methods. 4. The labor market in terms of their needs in modernizing and advancing towards the needs of the 4th industrial revolution in agriculture was also recommended to be looked upon. It was raised that entrepreneurial initiatives for the students are timely and significant; hence the need to focus on the business orientation/aspect aside from the employability aspect. This will have a great impact on the review of the agriculture and fisheries curriculum in the country. Furthermore, this will also have implications to the Philippine Qualifications Framework for Agriculture. 5. The current reward system present for university/college researchers is supply-oriented or supply driven. Publication is the basis and serves as an incentive to develop technologies. The rewards or incentives for university researchers are based on the number of technical publications and reports. The symposium recommended to have this revisited and reshaped to further strengthen the roles and responsiveness of the SUCs on addressing the needs/demands of the agriculture and fisheries sector. Lire moins

The outcomes of the forum are recommended priority actions that can contribute to the narratives along the five-point action tracks. 1. Research for development should aim for use and impact by the next user(s). To do this, it is suggested to involve the intended users from the planning process not only when the R4D has been already developed. The application of an inclusive approach in the agriculture and fisheries industry pertains to the involvement and participation of key stakeholders during the early stages of research planning and process. Through this participatory planning and consult... Lire la suiteations, prior to jumping into any R4D investment, technologies will be suitably developed based on the needs of the intended users. Also, resistance to the adoption of the technologies will be less. This method also opens a wider network of collaboration between the developers and the adopters of technologies, which are in this situation, the farmers and fishers. 2. There is a need to revisit and revise the reward system to university researchers who are the developers of the technologies. Specifically, there is a need to focus the criteria on the application of technologies being generated within their respective industry. As an initially proposed solution, the need to have intellectual property modalities and tools were emphasized to increase application of generated technologies in the agriculture and fisheries sector. However, some private sector representatives expressed that patenting might only hinder the scaling out to farmers. 3. There are numerous technologies being developed by SUCs. The need to follow up on a study on adoption and impact of these technologies on stakeholders was emphasized. There is also a need to validate and verify if the private sector or other significant groups are adopting or commercializing these technologies. It is also necessary to identify ways to further boost or develop these technologies for these to be adopted or commercialized. 4. There is a need to further involve the private sector, consumers, and farmers in the early stages of the technology development process. The challenge pertains to including or ensuring the involvement of key stakeholders before the start of any R4D activity. The assumption is that an industry or a taker should already be part of the endeavor beforehand. With this, an R4D investment should also have an immediate return on investments. 5. The financial gain for new products and technologies may be a very good incentive for technology developers. Lire moins

Food safety and traceability: solutions for sustainability: 1. education of consumers: to have information about product from the very beginning to the plate; 2. a common understanding of the objectives of the policy, surveillance, production, consumption; 3. a rapid process of safety and traceability checks.

Results of the discussion of politicians: 1. changes in the education system to provide basis for new production systems; 2. promoting healthy food consumption; 3. sustainable agricultural production systems: transition to environmentally friendly methods with appropriate transition and financial support.