Explore le compte-rendu officiel des Concertations

Some of the biggest vulnerabilities within food systems include the lack of availability and access to information, making it difficult for farmers to understand which innovations are most suited to address food and agriculture challenges at their level. Participants all agreed that information and data should be better shared, and called for more accurate measurements overall – but there were varying views as to which area should be prioritized (e.g. policy-making, actions on the ground, etc.). The discussion also revolved around the need to rethink funding structures, with a focus on rewar... Lire la suiteding innovation. Areas that need further exploration include trade-offs with other systems. Participants indeed questioned the extent to which innovations will be accepted in the market – as most of them will require trade-offs. Building on this, it will be crucial to create innovation ecosystems that can be easily deployed and scaled up – which will require overcoming existing barriers in the system. The debate then lies in identifying what the systemic barriers are, and agreeing on how to overcome them. Practices that are needed for food system sustainability may differ, as stakeholders agreed that there is no ‘one-size fits all’ approach. Innovations will thus need to be context-dependent and tailored to the needs of farmers. Although innovation management can become quite complex, customizing innovation is key. Lire moins

Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture – technical gaps, needs, and opportunities drawing from the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture This group discussion focused on innovation gaps, with big capacity gaps being found amongst ministries, specifically regarding multiple approaches and initiatives, and getting action on the ground. Furthermore, there is high uncertainty around carbon sources and sinks, and capacity gaps to do MRV (Monitoring, Reporting and Verification) – especially for the livestock sector and pastoral systems, particularly in Africa. Participants noted the importance of m... Lire la suiteetrics for adaptation and resilience for land-based systems. Indeed, there are big gaps between concrete actions and what is being measured – this is for example the case when it comes to the volatility of soil carbon. There are also digital gaps in decision-support systems, agricultural advisories, and digital services (also showing the importance of dealing with data ownership). Participants also noted the need to continue developing basic / practical technologies such as water management technologies, solar water pumps, varieties suitable to different agroecological features (soil management), and practical steps to deal with Bio Circular Green Economy (BCG) and resilient food systems approaches (amidst a pandemic). Lastly related to the Koronivia process, participants highlighted the need to extract actions from this process and implement them. Solutions to these problems were also discussed. These included fostering public-private partnerships in innovation, reducing food loss and waste, as well as building the production capacity of smallholder farmers – not by introducing high technological advancement, but rather by catering technologies to specific site problems (for example, by packaging technologies for specific agroecological natural systems). Finally, participants agreed on the importance of deciding where to embed actions – whether it be in national processes or in multilateral agencies. They also discussed the use of metrics and how they can help in getting finance flowing. The group concluded that agriculture is the most promising poverty reduction method in the Global South, and that we should not forget the multiple positive outcomes agriculture can have on food security, nature, and poverty. Lire moins

Private sector investments in innovations supports the delivery of outcomes for people, nature and climate During the discussions in this breakout group, five key messages emerged. To start with, participants emphasized the need to put farmers first. Too many existing commitments focus solely on companies, while . farmers need to know that they are also part of the solution. Additionally, and because they run the highest risks, farmers need better access to investments. However, they also often risk their land as collateral and therefore need to be provided with alternatives and assistance. Go... Lire la suiteing beyond, farmers need incentives to adopt innovations. Making the business case for farmers notably includes showing that innovative solutions can be affordable, and that they stand as investments rather than costs. The second key message that emerged from the discussion is that solutions from the innovation ecosystem can make it easier for farmers – for example through packaged solutions such as coupling insurance with climate information, or media innovation (including educational entertainment shows on national and regional TV programs). Participants also pointed to conditioned solutions as an option – such as financial innovation offered by banks in Brazil, who are conducting assessments to help identify gaps at farm level and offer tailor-made support. The third key message was the use of policies to help farmers transition. Policies can level the playing field by reshuffling regulatory tools and looking out for factors that may hinder the transition. Currently, the competition is not equal, and good practice requires using taxes, custom codes, and procurement guidelines. Furthermore, subsidies could be redirected to SME and farmer levels. Another key message identified was that consumers at the other end of the spectrum must also be involved and helped. Lastly, participants agreed that digital, finance and media should all be framed in the innovation and solution ecosystem. Lire moins

The investment gap in agricultural innovation is bridged, ushering in a new era of innovation and sustainability, delivering benefits for people, nature and climate Moving towards more integrated approaches for smallholder farmers, a partner identified the need to set a climate change adaptation target within its organization (i.e. 75% of approved projects focusing on sustainability) as a way of pledging support to the campaign, along with a commitment to evidence building (from proof of concept to scale). Throughout the discussion, participants agreed that public investment remains essential ... Lire la suiteto support research and transition for farmers. In particular, identifying ways to repurpose and realign agricultural subsidies would provide the right incentives to engage investors and ensure investments align with the SDGs and climate change targets. For example, innovation in sustainable protein sources is particularly appealing for investors, as food systems transformation and ESG criteria have risen to the top of the agenda. Yet, private investment business cases are needed to move beyond public subsidies for food systems. On this matter, working with social entrepreneurs is key. This means expanding the pool of entrepreneurs interested in social returns, but also better connecting them with one another. A variety of partners can offer capacity building to social entrepreneurs. In addition to this, participants agreed that doing more co-investment and working with the private sector towards joint sustainability goals can be transformative whilst leveraging multilaterals as mediators. Collaborative engagements could include PPPs and blended finance mechanisms. Participants also asked for increasing investment in proof of concepts, as successful proof of concepts can then be taken to scale. Overall, more funding is needed, but also better funding. To ensure no geography is left out, there must be a combination of national and international investments. In relation to ensuring no one is left out, taking into account social equity and fostering a just rural transition are also key, as there is no one-size-fits-all solution given the diversity of contexts and needs at farmer level. Moreover, better identifying research gaps and ensuring easy access to the right data would benefit both the public and private sectors. Participants emphasized the need to bridge evidence gaps by testing hypotheses, pulling together evidence of what works, and developing metrics to measure the level of transformation in agricultural innovation systems. We should recognize that agricultural innovation is not only about ODA (Official Development Assistance) – and that it is part of a broader story around food transformation. To do this, metrics are essential: we need to be better at understanding what counts as innovation for agriculture and have the right metrics to ensure we are on track. There is a need to develop models for sustainability and to test hypotheses on recommendations that have been made elsewhere (especially on end-to-end innovations and payment-by-results), thus pulling together evidence of what works for investors in agricultural innovation. Continuing to ensure information-sharing and connecting stakeholders across the board is important. Lastly, and coming back to the core of the issue, participants noted that building a stronger understanding of market barriers and innovation needs – especially around what works for farmers – is essential to catalyzing change. Lire moins

Innovation ecosystems unlock the power of new and emerging technologies – from social media to fintech to data and digital services – to accelerate food systems transformation The biggest issue participants reflected on as part of the broader topic of "Innovation ecosystems" is the need to ensure a balance of power, and to avoid excluding any stakeholder group. This means paying particular attention to vulnerable populations, and, going beyond, actively supporting those who suffer the most from systemic shocks such as the COVID-19 crisis. Moreover, it is important to question whom certain ... Lire la suiteactions are successful for, and whose interests are being served, which aids in protecting vulnerable groups of stakeholders. Another area of interest explored by the group was the role of policy officials – including what they know, as well as what gaps need to be filled. For example, in the lead up to COP26, we must figure out which areas need to be ramped up and how academics can help in feeding into policy officials hands. The group asked for greater focus on the policy action side, with a view to foster dialogue and ensure academic information is widely shared with policy makers. Additionally, the use of concrete case studies could help identify risks and responsibilities (i.e. “who has done it, and how it worked out”). This would contribute to answering the question of whether all innovation is good, and would ensure better alignment with peoples’ needs and interests. Participants also talked about the role of the private sector , and emphasized the need for greater work on regulations (which requires overcoming a lot of external factors, but block chain mapping helps). Participants notably discussed the opposition between development NGOs / organizations who demand transparency, and the private sector, for whom the question of access to information and Intellectual Property is particularly important to navigate in a highly competitive landscape. Another really important issue the group highlighted is that indicators that define a development program can be constraining to innovation. Indeed, innovation by definition means ‘unexpected outcomes’, and traditional indicators built within a program usually don’t explore these unintended outcomes – which go unreported. As an example, one participant reflected on when they worked with Kofi Annan, who said how “lots of effective solutions don’t make it off the shelf”, specifically at a policy level. Lire moins

User driven innovation, underpinned by robust partnerships, delivers impacts for people, nature and climate This breakout group mainly focused on how to create a more integrated and responsive R&D system. This included a discussion on increasing public investment in R&D around proteins, as well as a reflection on the importance of farmer-focused, demand-driven innovation. First, to get the support and facilitation needed, there must be greater clarity on the cost of innovation to guide demand. Second, we must tackle subsidies and how they distort the market. Lastly, it is important to ... Lire la suitecreate stronger ties between local grassroots projects and national data collection, so that localized action is better informed by big data and scenario planning, taking advantage of ‘composite’ technology. Participants also emphasized the need to put data directly into the hands of those who create value. Lire moins

Agricultural production has a positive impact on biodiversity under a changing climate The discussion focused on how to support a shift towards production systems that deliver more diversified diets (including through a change in consumer dietary habits / reduction in meat consumption) and on the adoption of organic / agroecological / environmental practices that support and protect biodiversity. Stakeholders noted the need for a shift in current dietary habits, together with the scaling up and sharing of knowledge and evidence on practices that support ecosystem services, as well as increased... Lire la suite diversification strategies (within fields and across fields and landscapes) that support ecosystem functions and resilience. Group members flagged contributions and pledges related to building and further developing the current knowledge base by sharing lessons and examples of current practices. They also noted the need to consider and take into account the work of the private sector, as well as to support research that is inclusive, that builds on local and indigenous knowledge, and that promotes local innovation. The need to focus on current livestock practices was noted as a critical area for future knowledge development, including building on lessons in the policy arena that support a shift from livestock production, looking at how to effectively support transitions (for example through improving fertilizer efficiency), and supporting both marginal / transitional and transformational improvements. Stakeholders noted the importance of the campaign in raising issues related to institutional development and support, a repurposing of policies to support farmer-focused R&D, increased investment in capacity building, as well as in practices that support biodiversity. To get the right support and facilitation, the campaign can assist by highlighting the need to invest in and focus on this area, showing the link with agroecology approaches, and making other links across the food system – for example through a focus on influencing and changing consumer preferences, and on food loss and waste. Stakeholders also noted that it would be useful to develop a set of objectives and outcomes for practices that protect agrobiodiversity. This set of objectives would take into account and build on experience and evidence gained from existing practice, and would help inform the development of a platform / toolbox assisting farmers in the design and implementation of future programs – giving them a clear view of associated costs, benefits and risks. This platform could be developed as a public good to be further refined by practitioners, and would include a set of indicators. It would also make sure to use a broad definition of innovation – not solely focusing on technology development, but also taking consideration of practice and social engagement. Lire moins

Agroecological practices that deliver benefits for people, nature and climate are deployed at scale The participants in this breakout room pinpointed to several areas that need urgent action. First, there needs to be better engagement between farmers, research, and innovation development. In addition, demand-driven innovation, tailored to the needs of farmers and adapted to local challenges, must be supported. Second, we must steer public investment towards smallholder farmers and agriculture, and foster public-private partnerships to pull in private sector investment with a focus on evidence-... Lire la suitebased approaches. Third, there is a need for developing and harmonizing outcome indicators and metrics. Lastly, mechanisms must be provided to build bridges between knowledge and investment in adaptation and resilience. In order to facilitate action for the above areas, participants identified the following supporting/ enabling mechanisms: • A scientific toolbox that could help improve farmers’ choices by sharing evidence on what creates value for them – whether it is agroecology, climate-smart agriculture, or incorporating indigenous sources of knowledge into digital-based advisory services; • Farmers’ dialogues and a systematic inclusion of farmers in the development of research and innovation as important mechanisms; • Further investment in public goods relevant to agriculture and rural livelihoods, to create an enabling environment in which farmers are empowered to make the right choices. This includes improving infrastructure, sharing knowledge through climate advisory services or advice on markets, disease and pest threats, as well as building evidence on what works. This will also incentivize and pull in private sector investment. Closing the economic development gap through health, education and other infrastructure will position smallholder farmers on a level playing field and enable them to compete; • Tailored and locally-relevant impact assessments and cost-effectiveness analyses, involving farmers as economic actors and as co-designers. There is a need for more high-quality, long-term research at scale, which is demand-led, system-based and deepens the evidence-base on what works in different localities; • Improved and harmonized outcome indicators (climate, biodiversity, nutrition, livelihoods / social inclusion, etc.), to deliver on the multiple objectives demanded in agriculture. These can provide a common framework for assessing the value of different approaches in different contexts and for different ends, and can help overcome unhelpful dichotomies between different approaches. These outcome indicators can also help reduce investor uncertainty. Finally, as mitigation and nature objectives become increasingly important, we need to bring those outcomes together with the “human face” that comes through livelihoods / income and adaptation outcomes. We need to find mechanisms to bridge the divide between adaptation and mitigation for communities and investment streams. An adaptation and mitigation commission is one option to facilitate and coordinate this. Lire moins

This Dialogue sought to lay the ground for contributions and pledges and to put agricultural innovation in the spotlight in the lead up to COP26 later this year. Additionally, questions were raised regarding how we can get there and the support and facilitation that stakeholders need. Breakout rooms produced fruitful discussions on the critical gaps and priorities, and paved the way for future contributions and pledges. The following points were recurring themes in multiple breakout rooms and send a clear message to stakeholders – including civil society organizations, policy makers, and far... Lire la suitemer organizations – regarding the opportunities, priorities, and areas to focus on: • Firstly, participants emphasized the need for farmer-driven and farmer-centric approaches. While recognizing the importance of top-down methods in policy-making, the different groups highlighted the key role of bottom-up approaches in ensuring research and innovation are tailored to the needs of farmers and offer practical and context-specific solutions. Participants agreed that farmers’ perspectives should serve as a foundation for innovation – particularly when it comes to financial assistance and access, as well as cross-government coordination. The dissemination of knowledge through simple processes and technologies is needed to place research directly into farmers’ hands. The focus must shift to creating action on the ground that adapts to every farmer, as well as to every consumer. Overall, participants agreed that it is key to address the concerns of all actors in the value-chain – including consumers, for whom accessibility and affordability are essential drivers of behavior change. • Secondly, in relation to the above point, there are challenges in the adoption of innovation among farmers. This is why providing farmers with clear information on risks and opportunities associated with innovation is important to allow farmers to make informed decisions. Beyond enabling greater access to information, it is also key to keep innovations within farmers’ reach and to ensure equal access to innovations, making them both physically and financially accessible. Focusing on local, context-specific innovation approaches tailored to the needs of farmers is indeed essential to achieving global goals, hence showing the need for more context-specific conversations. • Third, metrics were identified as a key success factor for innovation. Examples include soil sampling, adaptation measuring, as well as indicators for projects, programs and policies. Improving indicators allows for further clarity on the targets and what to achieve. In addition to clearly measuring outcomes, commitments themselves must also be clearly set out. Beyond identifying targets and improving indicators, successful innovation indeed requires engaging with a range of stakeholders to come up with a clear and tangible solution. However, for the market to move towards these targets, a strong enabling environment is needed. • Fourth, there is a strong call for new forms of finance, new partnerships, and new business models. Some of these have already been initiated: for example, new forms of finance have been developed to support food systems in rapidly emerging economies, and new partnerships are emerging between the public and private sectors. At the same time, the private sector is increasingly looking at how to best serve farmers. As a summary of this discussion, the closing speaker reminded the need to support civil society organizations and farmers – who are key stakeholders driving change – as well as the need to unlock capacity and finance to scale up new innovation business models. In conclusion, this Dialogue and the broader campaign on agricultural innovation provided further evidence of the need to scale up agricultural innovation to enable food system transformation, and helped build momentum around the innovation agenda in the lead up to the UN Food Systems Summit and COP26. Lire moins

This Independent Food Systems Summit Dialogue (FSSD) aimed to enrich the canvas of perspectives on how food systems can be transformed for a climate-smart future. It opened up space for dialogue on a new Action Agenda for Change developed by the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), and gave stakeholders the opportunity to pledge their support to a global campaign on agricultural innovation, co-chaired by CCAFS and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). The dialogue explored opportunities for stakeholders to become an integral par... Lire la suitet of this campaign, which will see significant announcements and initiatives at both the UN Food Systems Summit and COP26. In addition, the dialogue pinpointed ways in which both summits can align in their objectives to support the kind of transformation we seek, and how we — as a global community — can act to support this alignment. Lire moins

Theme-3: Environment, disasters, climate change, shocks, compensation mechanism: • Raise embankment level and construction planned-wise • Permanent embankment • Proper maintenance of sluice gates, inlet and outlet structures to keep those functional • Community participation for proper O&M • Close coordination of different govt. agencies at Upazila level like central or district level • River de-siltation • Excavation or Re-excavation of silted up canal, pond and other water bodies • Rain water harvesting • Dug well • Increasing facility of early warning system regardin... Lire la suiteg cyclone storm and tidal bore • Watch tower in haor • Thundering tower • Cyclone shelter • Crop diversification • Short duration, draught tolerant and saline tolerant crop cultivation (Tree plantation (plum, Hijol) • Subsidy to agri. machinery (irrigation, ploughing, harvesting etc.) • Liming to reclaim soil acidity (Northern areas) • Community awareness build up and capacity strengthening to cope with disasters • Sorjon system cultivation • Increase organic fertilizer use • Need assistance in vermi-compost use • Increasing seed storage facility • Market management development • Control in fishing, awareness • Increase awareness to cultivate rabi vegetables • Scope for duckling • Increasing of mechanization/harvesting tools • Sustainable crop management • Gher-based crop cultivation promote (Southern belt) • Wide pond banked crop cultivation practice (Southern belt) • Infrastructure & transportation support (horse card, cow card in northern belt) • Introducing cold storage facility Lire moins

Theme-2: Markets, equitable livelihood opportunity, scale-up farming/entrepreneurship: • The public institution Local Supply depot (LSD) under Ministry of Food offer the rice price for farmers is less than open market in country so farmers are less interested to sell their rice to LSD. Government need to rethink for the rice price review. • Weak road communication in southern part in Bangladesh and lack of available transport so that farmers face the commodities transporting in distance market. The parliamentary member under government can improve the situation. • Farmers cannot access d... Lire la suiteirect to big districts markets like Dhaka, Sylhet, Chattagram markets, so they sell their product in local intermediaries and get low price • Most of the areas in Bangladesh, market intermediaries take 45-50kg weight per mond (1 mond=40Kg) for different commodities instead of standard 40 Kg for selling their products so that farmers loss 5-10Kg product in the market. The government market monitor can stickle monitor to address the issue. • In Bangladesh, there is not cold storage except potato so that different perishable commodes like tomato, carrot and green chili sell very minimum price in peak harvesting time. In this case, government can arrange the cold storage in bigger district level so that farmers will get benefit. • Farmers cannot access to low interested loan (2-6% interest, special loan) which are offered by the different Bank due to Bank needs different mortgage if any farmer want to take loan. Farmers cannot manage the mortgage so that they cannot get the loan for quality produce production for marketing. The government can advise to Bank to flexible the issue. • Lack of training for quality produce for marketing and marketing knowledge in farmers level. • Farmers sometime cannot access to private processing or exporting company due to farmers have lack of knowledge so that they do not meet the buyer demand. Farmers shared the Mung bean as an example. DAM, DAE or any NGO can facilitate the issue shared in group recommendation through forming Farmers field School (FFS) or promote any other initiative. • Commodities drying is an issue specially for rainy season, farmers cannot arrange drying facility so that farmers sell their produce in low price with high moisture content. Rice, maize, mung bean, sunflower seed are an example. • Farmers face the postharvest loss issue, establish cold storage in local level, demand based production and training on postharvest loss can reduce the loss • Farmers especially women farmers engage food processing for tomato, green mango, olive, chalta (elephant apple), Ambra etc. but they cannot get market and cannot continue their business. Different company produce the similar type of food processing so that farmers cannot compete with of those companies due they have different promotional activities in the market. Farmers said, government or any other organization could provide the training on food processing, packaging, levelling and give them some equipment for quality food processing and marketing and ensure low interest loan. • One-market personnel can hire under the Upazila Agriculture Office for providing the marketing supporting for the farmers. In current, stuffing structure under Upazila Agriculture Office, they work mostly on production side. • Farmers do not get market information from big market like Dhaka, Sylhet, Chittagong, Barisal, Khulna so they cannot bargain with traders to set their product price consequently they do not get good price. • Price volatility high in the market and if supply is more in the market then quickly go down the market price. Storage system in market can reduce the problem. Lire moins

Theme-1: Food safety, food security, nutrition-sensitive and nature-positive production: Increasing farm mechanization and engage youth, Engaging women labour especially in harvesting and vegetable production, Adapting bio technology, Increasing awareness on safe, nourished and healthy food, Promoting bio safety technology with government subsidy, Expansion of appropriate agricultural mechanization for small and marginal farmers , Introduce collective farming , Social safety net program of the government, Investment in agriculture through distributing seeds and fertilizers among smallholders, ... Lire la suiteFinancial support to farmers from Upazila Parishad and different NGOs, Distribution of vegetable seeds with appropriate technology at farmer level, Ensuring marketing the extra produce at reasonable price, Initiating maximum utilization of land for farming following the directives of Hon'ble Prime Minister. Lire moins