Официальная обратная связь диалогов

The Working Table 1 started from the experience FEBA had on the project of the Online Observatory of Food Donation started in 2020 being the only digital touchpoint where most of the information about Food Banks in Europe are condensed. In this context the Working Table’s discussion started with a question: what is the future of data collection and digital transformation for FEBA members and the development of digital tools in the Food Banks’ context? What are the main challenges in collecting and using data within Food Banks? - Resistance to change - New way of looking at data and digital... Подробнее transformation and have a new mindset - Understand which type of data we do need - Capability to involve charities in the data collection process Some challenges are more technical, while others more related to competences and culture, some others related to multi-stakeholder perspective that must be involved in the process. At the same time, Food Banks have a clear idea on how data can be used in the future to foster their activities: - Data that can engage more donors and stakeholders - Data as fundamental information to make good decisions Participants also worked together to identify hypothetical investments need to boost the data collection process and digitalization of FEBA members related to technology: software to collect, shape and share data in order to publicly share meaningful information. Participants also underlined the importance of creating a community of IT experts within the FEBA network who can work together to let all the Food Banks to improve their own digital transformation pathways. In this journey FEBA is considered a pivotal actor with a unique understanding of how important has been the first step made by FEBA and the Pilot Group of 8 members in 2020. The main goals for the future are to focus, have energy and the desire to work together to build a better infrastructure that can let Food Banks collect, share and take out meaningful information throughout data. Скрыть

In this Working Table there was the chance to have both representatives from the private sector and FEBA members. The Working Table started with an exercise of associating words in relation to partnerships. It was found that the collaboration between Food Banks and the private sector is not only a matter of recovering and redistributing food but it goes beyond, it is a collaboration for the common good. The Working Table participants first discussed about what the Food Banks and private Companies give and get in this collaboration exploring the Food Banks’ views and the ones of the corporati... Подробнееons. While collaborating with Food Banks Companies give food, technical support, long-term perspective, operational efficiency, donations and volunteers. On the other hand, a fruitful corporate partnership with Food Banks, let Companies get: customized service, marketing opportunities, feel with the public, eyes on the ground, extensive coverage, a jump into reality, rapid solutions, professionalism, and flexibility. While collaborating with Companies, Food Banks give: immediate impact, continuity, expertise, readiness to operate, reliability, and flexible way to go beyond profits. On the other hand, a fruitful corporate partnership with Companies, let Food Banks get: continuity, necessary support to survive, marketing opportunities, trust and continuity of the relations over time, food, and donations. Then participants discussed about what hinders a fruitful partnership. One of the first issue highlighted is that for Companies it is often difficult to combine business priorities and pressure with the values and the main goals of the Food Banks. On the other side, Food Banks suffer from the different perceptions, goals and visions on what is the common good. Participants then highlighted the common necessity to overcome obstacles created by different goals and visions. The last part of the discussion focused on how COVID-19 boosted corporate partnerships and the fact that this challenging period was an accelerator for corporate partnerships and the collaboration between the private sector and the Food Banks in Europe. How to keep this relationship over time for a post-Covid Europe? Both private actors and Food Banks must invest on trust, shared goals, legal agreements, a clear and frank communication, a more efficient coordination, long-term relations, raising local awareness, engage volunteers from the Companies, rely on Food Banks’ logistic ability and invest on skills. Скрыть

The Working Group’s participants were a mix between Food Banks and external participants and this mix brought a great engagement and great insights that opened up very interesting discussions. The Working Table started describing the current context of COVID-19 that very much impacted the food redistribution organisations and the communities. Food Banks have been seen as front-line heroes of the pandemic, there are images all over the world of warehouses highlighting the passion and the commitment in supporting communities. Working Table’s discussion explored what has been the impact of CO... ПодробнееVID-19 on the Foodbanking Narrative and how Food Banks position themselves in the hearts and minds of the stakeholders such as partners, supporters, volunteers and the teams. There has been an awareness-driven around food waste and food insecurity but it is important to re-structure the narrative of who Food Banks are and what they do. Does the narrative in the media reflect the organisations where Food Bankers operate? Food Bankers can tell stories on ambition, passion, motivation, entrepreneurship and the impact Food Banks are having on the people and on the planet. The role of this workshop was to kick start the discussion whether there is a need to refresh the narrative and the position of the Food Banks and to do recommendations for FEBA. Food Banks are indeed seen as food package providers to feed the poor, to support charities, volunteers at the door of the supermarkets etc. But how Food Banks would like to be seen in the future? Food Banks are not the producers or the users – Food Banks are the dotted line that connect the needs. This connection of need is something really powerful to communicate. The bigger role of FEBA is to continue the discussion on this topics as an opportunity to look at branding and reposition ourselves in the hearts and minds of the stakeholders and looking at having a shared language. There is a new role for Food Banks as very important actors in the food system that can work towards a more sustainable future where it is important to build a common understanding. It is a very complex environment where build awareness is a key. The lack of understanding, where complexity is the enemy, can be damaging and limiting the future growth. Food Banks need to reframe the narrative to improve understanding and build broad-based support. Time is right to reframe and reshape Food Banks’ position and it is time to go! Скрыть

26 participants from all over Europe, from France, many from Italy, Spain, Poland, Sweden, Netherlands, Germany and the UK participated in this Working Table. All of the participants had very different backgrounds, some from academic research and institutions, some from national Food Banks and others from corporations and companies. During the first part of the discussion, participants talked about how young people can contribute to a sustainable food system in innovative ways and what Food Banks can do to involve and communicate with young people. First of all, young people have a new mindset... Подробнее and attitude, they are increasingly aware of and care about issues such as sustainability, because they directly affect their future. A second key point was education. Educating young people about food and sustainability and involving them from an early age is key. For example, now often it’s the kids that teach the parents new behaviours. Another buzzword for how to involve young people in food banking activities was „empowerment and participation “. They want to be engaged and be part of the processes and the organizations. Hybrid ways of involvement for example combining volunteering, training and workshops etc. could be a key factor for Food Banks. Another interesting thought on how to engage young people was through gamification, this could be school or university contests and projects, or hackathons, because many young people have an entrepreneurial approach. The participants talked about what added value young people can bring to the Food Banks and how they imagine the future of Food Banks. Digital skills for instance and the appreciation for more horizontal and less hierarchical ways of working will be a great asset for the future. Also establishing and strengthening partnerships with corporations, for example by hosting events in relation to food banking topics and engage young professionals. It was also mentioned, that in the future, it will be crucial to empower and engage the beneficiaries more, to address the root causes and follow a holistic approach, so that Food Banks become more of a community hub. Also being eco-friendly not only due to saving food, but also looking at the means of transportation and packaging for instance. It was a very interesting and fruitful discussion and new insights, because of the different backgrounds. One key message that the participants want to share is that young people are the leaders of change and through Food Banks’ involvement young people can really be protagonist of the future of our countries, of Europe and the world. Скрыть

During the Working Table participants focused on 4 topics related to volunteering and the Food Banks. - Development of cross-sectoral partnerships at local level by analysing the changing relations between Food Banks and local authorities, NGOs and charities, academia, the not for profit sector and the for-profit sector to see how these stakeholders can work together to respond to communities’ needs. The COVID-19 crisis has shown the need to rethink strategic partnerships and to adapt the modus operandi of the different actors; - The employee volunteering or corporate volunteering as an alte... Подробнееrnative way to respond to the lack of volunteers, due to the health crisis. The pandemic has limited if not stopped the engagement of elderly volunteers, has brought young volunteers to Food Banks but then created a new gap when younger volunteers have returned to universities and schools. . The discussion stressed the need for employee volunteering to ensure a return in investment, as well as the need to ensure the balance between the effort required when engaging employee volunteers and valuing their wider social impact. Changing volunteers’ profiles: : Participants highlighted different and changing situations for younger and older volunteers, before, during and after COVID19 and they also discussed the possibility to explore the so called "tasks-based" volunteering offers, to reply to the changing nature of work and lifestyles rather than keeping to the traditional “role based” approach.; - Participants discussed the European Solidarity Corps Programme which enables young people to travel abroad to volunteer full time. Participants discussed whether this Programme could be a good solution for those Food Banks that struggle to have permanent human resources available. These are the main aspects to work on for Food Banks relying on volunteers to better match the offer of people across Europe who want to volunteer and Food Banks’ needs and how they can organise their volunteers in the most efficient and proper way. Скрыть

This Working Table focused on new boundaries for food redistribution. Participants started by reflecting on trends of the food systems following also the interesting discussions during the FEBA Annual Convention’s plenary sessions. The facilitator of the Working Table also presented an overview on COVID-19 and its huge impact on the consumers changes in terms of food waste, the sources of surplus food for Food Banks and the changes and learnings. Participants agreed that the Food System is changing and Food Banks have a pivotal role to play in contributing to a more sustainable food future. ... ПодробнееFood Banks feel that it isn’t very much recognised and the environment where they are operating. The Working Tables started to list some of the challenges Food Banks are facing especially in terms of redistribution of food and the difficulty to connect with the network of donors. Another important challenge for Food Banks is to change the sources of food and working on the optimization of the process. Participants discussed the challenge to concentrate on a balanced and diversified diet especially to look for new sources of food concentrating also on fresh and perishable products. In this context, technology can be a great boost also from a logistical point of view and even tough FEBA is doing a great work on digital transformation and data collection, FEBA members need a lot of resources and capacity building for innovation and technology. The discussion also focused on the new poor and the challenges and stigma associated with accessing food. Moreover, participants discussed the need to connect producers and the availabilities of food at the farm level but the lack of economic incentives stop the process of bringing producers on board. Participants also discussed on the need to invest on Food Banks also to position themselves in a new light to receive the support of policies and governments, as innovative partners that contribute to solve a huge challenge such as food waste. Food Banks within the Food System play a crucial role in connecting the different actors. Food Banks are like hubs that know the charities’ needs, the sources of food, where the food surplus is and they make all the different pieces of the puzzle come together to get this food where is needed. Participants also discussed about the idea of having new technological model collaborating with start-ups to reinforce the network. FEBA is a big network with a lot of expertise and knowledge and these start-ups can support the developing of new models for logistic, to extend the life of products and providing new ways of accessing food. The working table listed 3 recommendations for FEBA: 1. Need of a continuous work at policy level with the EU and International institutions and also at national level underlining Food Banks’ importance in the food system transformation and the role they had during the crisis to have also a stronger voice with the private sectors and the food producers. 2. Need to work collectively to engage businesses and develop partnerships. FEBA is an umbrella organisation and can open doors that probably an individual organisation cannot. Therefore, it is crucial to keep on with the dialogue between the FEBA network. 3. Establish a FEBA Partnerships Working Group to support connection between Food Banks and all the external actors involved in this processes and share best practices on new models of food redistribution and the capacity building that Food Banks need. Скрыть

Outcomes from Discussion Group 3: How can the capacities and capabilities of Nairobi City County Government and local stakeholders be built to carry on, extend and identify opportunities to achieve an urban food system that is inclusive and resilient, including withstanding shocks such as the COVID 19? • In depth contextual analysis and mapping of the food system to Identifying capacity gaps and focus system strengthening on these key areas ( both on the supply side and demand side) as well as creating linkages where they are required. Map existing urban capacities/ actors such as highlight ... Подробнееthe number of urban farmers and their needs to provide services specific to their needs. • Multilevel governance and coordination across departments, civil society actors, private sector actors, researchers. Importantly partner with researchers, innovators and Implement innovation informed by research • Zoning and territorial planning geared towards promoting the food system in urban areas through identifying areas that can be used for urban farming and encourage and support urban farmers with capacity and finances to farm and market their produce. • Some areas of focus for capacity building and strengthening could include: Environmentally friendly, climate smart agriculture, nutrition sensitive approaches (through institutions such as schools, hospitals, and prisons), shock responsive social protection, focus on short and efficient supply chains and local production. Targeted professional development efforts including succession plan into hiring and capacity building. (This would help with attrition and losing already existing capacities, and mentor new HR capacities ) • Climate Smart Agriculture o Extensive clean-up of rivers in Nairobi so water can be used for urban agriculture o Country should limit clean/drinking water use to agriculture and domestic uses and avoid ‘wastage’ for example don’t allow car washing companies to use drinking water o Encourage urban small business to diversity their income by running small farms or holdings rearing chickens/goats/sheep (helps with shocks like COVID) • Early warning systems: o County to act on Food Strategy’s proposed institutionalization of a food contingency plan with early warning and early action components o Continuous monitoring of the food chain from the farmers to the consumer (surveillance) so that the food chain can be evaluated from time to time and enhance sustainability • Shortening supply chain is key as well as ensuring that supply chains are efficient: Increasing capacities in local food production (strengthen short supply chains, urban food production, lower taxes) through: o Household level gardens, kitchen gardens, chickens and goats to diversity food system o County could provide more support with ground work policy implementation: e.g. extension services (support farmers: subsides for urban farmers) o Promote food aggregation for local consumption ( investors storage) o Promote urban planning and zoning to support local production Скрыть

Conclusions from Discussion Group 4: Have the stakeholder analysis in the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy captured all the key food systems transformation stakeholders and their requirements / needs necessary to drive food systems transformation? Which Stakeholders are key to achieving the strategy and what are their needs? • Actors at national government, county government, private actors and donors are key in providing financial and technical resources for improvement of infrastructure such as market infrastructure and installing warehouses and cold rooms in order to handle the pr... Подробнееoduce with minimal loss and waste. Programs should benefit both formal and informal actors across the food system. In addition, Private Public Partnerships (PPP) are key in ensuring access to capital and other technologies. • Mobilise and involve major and micro food players such as the small/ medium traders, industries/ companies and supermarkets in the city which are key marketing and storage food points. This will also motivate producers due to ready market available for their produce. • Involve the financial institutions to finance food system actors’ dealings in the city. Also exploring innovative finance measures or ways of organisation such as Savings and Credit Co-operatives (SACCOs) to facilitate saving and access to loans especially for small scale farmers and informal actors across the food value chain) • Strengthen value addition and agro-processing dealers so as to minimize food loss and waste. This is through capacity building by national and local government, private consumers as well as • Women and children who are major handlers of food. Capacity building is crucial especially on issues of nutrition and food safety. Скрыть

N/A

Nairobi County is developing the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy. The process of drafting the strategy started in 2017 as part of the project called: “Developing Sustainable Food Systems for Urban Areas”, that was implemented jointly by FAO and the governments of the cities of Nairobi, Dhaka (Bangladesh) and Lima (Peru) (“NADHALI”). The strategic objective of the project was to enable more inclusive and efficient agricultural and food systems at local, national and international levels. The Nairobi City County Food Systems Strategy has the overall objective of attaining consis... Подробнееtent food security for city residents while safeguarding the commercial interests of food industry entrepreneurs. Currently the draft strategy has been published for a public participation process (https://nairobi.go.ke/download/nairobi-city-county-food-system-strategy-fourth-draft/). The dialogue answered the question: can the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy achieve a future of food that is sustainable, equitable and secure for its urban community? The discussions was guided by the specific objectives of the strategy which included: • SO1: Increase in food production, • SO2: Stable food supply to the city with stable incomes for players, • SO3: Reduction of food losses • SO4: Good welfare of food consumers. Key Questions • Does the vision of the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy align with the UN goals for urban communities? • How can the strategies and actions in the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy better support this vision? • What additional ideas, solutions, partnerships and action plans can be adopted / introduced to realize the overall objectives of a sustainable urban food system? • How can the capacities and capabilities of Nairobi City County Government and local stakeholders be built to carry on, extend and identify opportunities to achieve an urban food system that is inclusive and resilient, including withstanding shocks such as the COVID 19? • Have the stakeholder analysis in the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy captured all the key food systems transformation stakeholders and their requirements / needs necessary to drive food systems transformation? • As a food systems stakeholder, how can your work contribute towards a resilient and inclusive Nairobi urban food system? Скрыть

It was noted that Nairobi City County produces only approximately 20% of food consumed in Nairobi and therefore it is vulnerable to shocks and stresses to the food system such as the recent lockdown regulations associated with the COVID 19 pandemic which drove up the food prices and in many ways affected the access to nutritious food. There it was noted that the county should prioritise: • Intensifying food production within the city through incentivising small scale farmers to produce and providing the right assistance with access to finance, production technology and access to markets. In ... Подробнееaddition the opportunity of schools and institutions such as prisons, hospitals were identified as they have access to large parcels of land which could potentially be used as intensive production and education centers. • Taking stock of the food system in Nairobi county by identifying all related activities, stakeholders and initiatives as well as going further to ensure that the right linkages are made between different stakeholders as well as incentives directed towards those that require support to build capacity. • Zoning and territorial planning geared towards putting forward at the fore. This includes allocating and protecting spaces for agri-food related activities such as farm lands, markets, dams, etc. In addition ensuring the access of land to vulnerable urban populations such as women and urban poor. • Driving efficiency of the food supply chains through infrastructure and technology related develops, for example, transportation systems that are agri-food friendly (e.g. trains with cold storage and well developed road network system) and fast internet for online market places. Скрыть

Outcomes from Discussion Group 1: Does the vision of the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy align with the UN goals for urban communities? How can the strategies and actions in the Nairobi City County Food System Strategy better support this vision? • The strategy is recognised as the first step in offering a direction but resources should be directed towards implementation and monitoring and evaluation of the strategy. • There is alignment with SDG Goal 11 and 2, since it considers accessibility, affordability and nutritious safe food for all, including informal settlements. However... Подробнее, aspects of food insecurity among vulnerable populations and adaptation to climate change need to be priorities. We want to categorise the vulnerability of low income settlements into three. For the most vulnerable, we give food relief. For the moderate and low, we give food relief and enterprise support. • Actions around sustainability and environmental regeneration need to be strongly represented in the food strategy • It was noted that there are a number of bills and regulations mentioned in the strategy, these need to align in terms of priorities. Hence there is need for more policy incoherence across the different bills mentioned in the strategy • Beyond emphasizing food for all, the strategy needs specific actions that emphasise access to affordable healthy, safe and nutritious food for all especially the vulnerable populations beyond food aid. • We must include SDG 12 on consumption and production patterns. We cannot always depend on food coming from out of the city region and imported food. We should encourage urban and peri-urban production within the city and the strategy should strongly express through actions on hoe this will be promoted. Скрыть

Outcomes from Discussion Group 2: What additional ideas, solutions, partnerships and action plans can be adopted / introduced to realize the overall objectives of a sustainable urban food system? • Food safety action plan – this is key especially for guiding food handling, food certification as well as food retail. • Partnerships with urban planning and zoning departments- food production areas set aside; urban zoning to allow for farming. Architecture - city planners to mainstream open spaces for urban farming/kitchen gardens • Inclusion of consumers in the making of the policies, str... Подробнееategies, guidelines. Feedback loop. Street food vendors vs their enhancers who buy the foods. • Smallholder farmer - capacity building of urban farmers for food production in a sustainable manner. Dissemination of relevant technologies through our extension workers. • Inclusive food systems governance - participatory processes by as many stakeholders from the start to enhance ownership. Legitimising the role of platforms such as the Food Liaison Advisory Group (FLAG), which is a multi-stakeholder platform for food governance • Improve infrastructure, both physical and technological infrastructure, from farm lands to markets/consumers to reduce food loss, enhance waste reduction, with little/no food wasted as. For example there is an opportunity for the City to negotiate with upcoming Railway infrastructure for cold storage provision for transport of foods coming to the City. • Food waste management. Linkages with different farmers to make use of biodegradable waste Скрыть

While there was general agreement among dialogue participants on the roles of the livestock and sustainable development, there was an observation made that the livestock sector is reluctant to tackle the hard issues when livestock is part of the problem – both production and consumption. All stakeholders are thus challenged to do a better job addressing the hard trade-offs in livestock issues—and to figure out who pays, how and how much. Many groups did not diverge but recognised the importance of seeking out and initiating conversations with those who do – to find better solutions. Part... Подробнееicipants acknowledged that there are many areas where views are divergent, partly related to the diversity of livestock systems going forward – contrasting for example, pastoralists, smallholders, intensive farming as well as divergence on the consumption of livestock-derived foods. There are also contrasting views in relation to environmental and human health externalities (e.g. AMR) as well as towards efficiency vs resilience (do these complement or antagonize one another?). Most of these divergent views arise because of differences between objectives for different regions (and wealth categories) in different parts of the world. For example, at present, in LMICs livestock play multiple roles, whereas in HICs the focus is much more on only the provision of food products. Recognizing this diversity of views of the roles of the livestock sector in future food systems, participants noted that it is necessary to share positive messages without being 'defensive' of livestock or failing to acknowledge where livestock sector harms must be addressed and mitigated. A critical area of divergence revolved around to what extent synthetic protein can be an alternative to reduce the pressure of livestock systems on resources. On the one hand, some consider that a broader offer of plant-based alternatives may be essential to be able to deal with the increase in demand. Others consider that there are factors that might make this inappropriate in certain contexts including cultural factors, access and knock-on impacts on livelihoods, environment, human health and so on. In general more and more nuanced information on plant-based alternatives in relation to multiple sustainability dimensions would help decision making and targeted solutions. Скрыть

The dialogue focused on engaging and harnessing the diversity of both livestock sector stakeholders (taking advantage of the global spread and multi-stakeholder nature of the Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock, GASL) and those who are not directly engaged with livestock – from development agencies and practitioners to food sector actors and beyond. It included participants from all over the world, from pastoralists and farmers of all capacities who produce food to those who process, market and research food and wider food system dimensions. It aimed to facilitate new conversations to id... Подробнееentify the pathways of change and diverse solutions that are needed to ensure that livestock contributes across all action tracks and levers of change to future food systems. Prior to the dialogue, participants received a diverse set of resource materials about the roles of livestock and sustainable development. Each discussion group focused on one of the five action tracks, asking the question ‘…to what extent and how can changes in livestock systems…’ followed by a statement describing some contrasts in possible roles…’. Discussion group topics were: 1. Providing equitable access by all to diverse as well as safe and nutritious foods: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock systems benefit everyone, including the most vulnerable and poorest people, overcome food poverty and help end hunger and malnutrition in cities and rural areas – without compromising other goals in areas like health, environment or animal welfare? 2. Achieving just and balanced consumption of diverse food sources: To what extent, and how, can changes to the consumption of livestock-derived foods help the transition to healthy diets for all – without increasing obesity or the incidence of non-communicable disease? 3. Staying inside planetary natural and environmental boundaries and tackling the climate emergency: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems benefit nature and ecosystems and help us adapt to or mitigate climate change – while also sustaining people’s livelihoods and their nutrition and health? 4. Growing economic opportunities without compromising our sustainability goals: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock keeping, livestock ownership or livestock as a business help advance equitable livelihoods and achieve healthier diets – without damaging our natural resources or leaving anyone behind? 5. Building resilience to overcome food system vulnerabilities, shocks and stresses: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems help us prepare for, withstand, and recover from natural disasters, conflicts or disease threats – without unintentionally increasing the risks that livestock contribute to these? Discussion groups used the following questions to guide their conversations and structure feedback: • What is our consensus position – as a group - on this question? Where do we want to be in 2030? • What actions in the next 3 years will have greatest impact on the Discussion Topic and the outcomes we identified? • How will we measure or tell if these actions are successful? • What critical divergences in opinion among group participants are revealed, what are their effects, and how might we manage them? Скрыть

Embracing change: new connections Although the majority of participants were in some way connected with the livestock sector, there was consensus that further engagement is needed with those beyond the sector, whether in health, nutrition, food security, equity, environment, etc., or those who believe that animal agriculture and the consumption of livestock products should stop. Facilitating such engagement will require deliberate efforts from livestock stakeholders, including multi-stakeholder processes within and beyond the sector. The UN FSS provides a forum to expand and continue these con... Подробнееversations. Participants recognized that discussions about livestock often focus on the production aspects of the sector, and that these discourses need to expand, especially to include communications across the sector and especially with consumers. Harnessing diversity and nuancing communication Participants recognized that the global discussion about livestock usually lacks the nuance that reflects the diversity of the sector and thus the solutions required to ensure its contributions to future food systems. It was emphasized that a polarized debate that has extremes of ‘livestock all bad’ or ‘livestock all good’ is unhelpful and does not reflect the diversity of livestock roles across the world, or the need for multiple, different changes and solutions throughout the sector towards better food systems in future. The most-cited examples of global discourse that does not account for livestock sector diversity concerned the consumption of livestock-derived foods and the impacts on the environment. For the former it was noted that for wealthier countries and segments of the population across the world, the message about reducing consumption of livestock-derived foods or making dietary choices (such as veganism or vegetarianism) facilitated by easy access to diverse nutrients may be appropriate. For less-wealthy countries and populations, improving access, availability and affordability of quality, safe, livestock-derived foods could make a significant, positive difference to nutritional wellbeing (and its wider ramifications for stunting, cognitive development etc), especially for the most vulnerable (pregnant and lactating mothers, children in the first 1000 or even 3000 days, elderly). Regarding livestock and the environment, participants again highlighted contrasting narratives, between the damage livestock production inflicts on the environment and the positive benefits that must be harnessed. These range from emissions of greenhouse gases from ruminant animals where improving production efficiencies (emissions per unit of product) is paramount in most LMICs, to opportunities for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation across the world’s vast rangelands, to opportunities for regenerative agriculture approaches based on livestock management. Both of these (and other, such as One Health) areas will benefit from stronger, credible, well-communicated scientific evidence to inform all stakeholders, from policy makers to farmers to consumers and schoolchildren on the choices and implications as well as appropriate incentives. Presently, this is hampered by multiple very different global statistics which are often inappropriately extrapolated. Communication also needs to better incorporate very diverse, often essential roles of livestock for livelihoods, women and youth. Embracing change: action within the livestock sector The diverse livestock sector actors who joined the dialogue all acknowledge that, as with all sectors, change towards better future food systems must be embraced. What that change looks like is incredibly diverse because of the diversity of ways that animals and their products are raised, managed and consumed as well as their multiple roles. Key areas for change that were recognized include tackling those hard areas where livestock are indeed problematic – where environmental impacts, consumption patterns and production strategies are harming the planet and its people. Change also means grasping opportunities where incentives, information and policy can better support livestock’s positive contributions to environmental, health and livelihood outcomes. All livestock sector stakeholders must engage and commit to diverse and significant change. Such change needs to be informed by robust evidence and must include engagement well beyond the livestock sector itself. The livestock sector’s commitment to change must however go well beyond changing conversations and nuancing debates. It requires collective action, potentially facilitated through multisectoral and multi-stakeholder dialogues. Importantly, it is incumbent upon the sector to provide and embrace practical solutions to mitigate the challenges and harness the opportunities for livestock to fully play a role in sustainable future food systems. Among the 2030 outcomes for the sector were: healthier, more productive, and well cared for animals; reducing carbon emissions from livestock; quality over quantity; improve productivity, efficiency, sustainability, and resilience of the livestock sector; moving to regenerative farming; change the negative image of the sector; and to acknowledge and secure the contributions livestock for a healthy planet, its people and their diets. Скрыть

Discussion topic 1: Providing equitable access by all to diverse as well as safe and nutritious foods: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock systems benefit everyone, including the most vulnerable and poorest people, overcome food poverty and help end hunger and malnutrition in cities and rural areas – without compromising other goals in areas like health, environment or animal welfare? The consensus position was to scale out game-changing policies, technologies and business models that equip existing small-holders, pastoralist communities and agripreneurs. The outputs from these... Подробнее systems will be of high quality, environmentally sustainable and maximise human health. Making this work in a balanced way includes: - Championing smallholders and pastoralists. - Sustainable intensification adapted to local conditions, scaled by robust business models and producing high quality food. - Improved animal husbandry that reduces the need for antibiotics along with other social and environmental benefits. - Shift the focus of production, processing and marketing of livestock commodities more towards quality. - Recognize the essential role of diversity to ensure resilience. - Phase out or penalize current practices that result in environmental and public health externalities (and/or incentivize sustainable, healthy options). Actions to impact this topic include: - Policy changes that secure land rights, prevent ‘dumping’ of low-cost livestock commodities in developing countries and that champion small/medium farms and pastoralists. - Study and replicate successful business models (e.g. Ethio-chicken). - Identify new feed options. The success of such actions could be indicated through: - Public sector investment will support and facilitate such policy changes - Commercial viability. Not increasing livestock numbers but quality and yield. - Transparency – reporting, metrics, incentives to mitigate environmental impact Скрыть

Discussion topic 2: Achieving just and balanced consumption of diverse food sources: To what extent, and how, can changes to the consumption of livestock-derived foods help the transition to healthy diets for all – without increasing obesity or the incidence of non-communicable disease? The consensus position was that overall, there is a need to rebalance policies and discussions about consumption of livestock-derived foods related to local needs/context; to follow dietary recommendations on nutrition & health (avoid ultra-processed food), and ensure livestock is produced sustainably. Co... Подробнееnsumers need to make informed choices through more information, understanding, metrics, policies and incentives. Rebalance consumption: Ambitions should focus on rebalancing consumption and recognise that polarisation of the debate about consumption of livestock-derived foods is not helpful. - A better understanding of the relationship between livestock derived foods and balanced, diverse, holistic diets with consumption better aligned to dietary requirements and life stage (e.g. increase in women and children in first 1000 days; decrease in highly developed economies). - Context matters: Vulnerable communities will require more livestock-derived foods. In many resource-poor settings, availability, affordability and accessibility of safe, quality livestock-derived foods are challenges to be addressed. Procurement and social platforms promoting diverse diets and targeting both producers and consumers may be one vehicle. - Sourcing: Optimise sustainability & accounting for local resources & traditions - Explore, develop and encourage alternatives to livestock-derived foods in areas where they are not well-tolerated or produced. Actions to impact this topic include: - More robust information on nutrition and health outputs from the consumption of animal-sourced food and incentives to use this information for decisions, policy changes and education throughout societies. - Invest in improving understanding of the imbalances to better target solutions and actions. - Create greater awareness of the need for balance (in diets & sustainability), informing debates, and raising awareness of context in relation to livestock-derived foods. Better education/awareness to children who are in school now that will promote behaviour change from a younger age and can also include school food programs/meals that could impact both producers and consumers. - Better evidence can inform action by governments, retail, procurers (eg schools, hospitals), processers, livestock keepers. This should include research on the role of animal sourced foods in improving nutrition and its contribution to obesity (distinguishing between correlation vs causation). - Better metrics to help consumers make more balanced, sustainable, nutritious, healthy choices - Investigate better incentives to rebalance consumption, nutrition, health, sustainability, and welfare. Informing government policies related to subsidy programs. The success of such actions could be indicated through: - Debates will be more balanced and consensus on how balanced, diverse diets include sustainable and healthy animal-sourced foods will emerge. - Metrics: Report(s) from FAO on post-UNFSS specific actions will include those related to balanced, healthy consumption of livestock-derived foods. WHO targets related to nutrition, obesity, non-communicable diseases) will be accelerated through appropriate inclusion of livestock-derived foods. - Consumer-facing tools (e.g. Nutri-Score) and WHO recommendations will be used. - Research results and case studies provide critical information regarding obesity and livestock-derived foods; identifying solutions that result in positive outcomes for food, nutrition and biodiversity. Скрыть

Discussion topic 3: Staying inside planetary natural and environmental boundaries and tackling the climate emergency: To what extent, and how, can changes to livestock systems benefit nature and ecosystems and help us adapt to or mitigate climate change – while also sustaining people’s livelihoods and their nutrition and health? The consensus position was that there are no simple solutions, but not all food systems are ‘broken’, in many cases positive changes are underway and should be highlighted. Changes in livestock systems can best be achieved by mobilizing diverse groups of stakeh... Подробнееolders to a more positive common narrative, recognizing that incremental transitions, innovation, and continuous learning are needed. This includes: - Recognize the diversity of livestock systems and different roles they play in societies (e.g. the importance of ASF especially in LMICs compared to overconsumption in the Global North) and longer-term sustainability. Discourses that are polarised about livestock are not helpful because they miss the importance of diversity and the many emerging solutions. - The critical roles of farmers as part of the solution for changes requires addressing incentives (including transparency of reporting) for farmers to do things differently. This does not negate the importance of all actors, and the need for better partnerships between private and public sector, multi-stakeholder platforms, etc. - The right balance between livestock and nature will be found in different ways in different places - there’s no single global approach that works. The most striking difference is between global north and global south where, for example, per capita ASF consumption should generally decrease in the north and increase for many target populations in the south. There are also significant divisions between land-use types with some - rangelands particularly - better matching livestock production than any other agricultural product. While livestock production can have negative effects on nature and the environment, properly managed, it offers many benefits and advantages to land, soils and landscapes. These are in addition to its other nutrition, livelihoods and economic benefits. - Another area is livestock’s contribution to greenhouse gasses. There is a need to better understand its role in methane and the need for science-based evidence to inform policies and new approaches to support methane mitigation (e.g. feed additives, vaccines). Actions to impact this topic include: - Communication and knowledge sharing actions, such as peer-to-peer learning experience among farmers, knowledge sharing, exchange and transfer of best practices through global platforms. Communication with public, youth, schools using social media and other means. Better communication is also supported by more consistent terminology and metrics and by telling the livestock ‘story’ and the many vital ways it contributes to people’s lives and livelihoods and ecosystems. - Bridging diverging regional realities - need to view global issues - convergence of views and building understanding across different livestock systems. This can include matching animals to landscapes and land use as well as markets and consumers, promoting mixed crop-livestock systems that offer multiple benefits, enrich other assets such as soils, and contribute to circularity (thus minimising waste) in production systems and promoting carbon neural livestock production. Скрыть

Discussion topic 4: Growing economic opportunities without compromising our sustainability goals: To what extent, and how, can changes in livestock keeping, livestock ownership or livestock as a business help advance equitable livelihoods and achieve healthier diets – without damaging our natural resources or leaving anyone behind? The consensus position was that livestock is extremely important in several parts of the world and especially so in some parts where it is the main source of livelihoods. - Nutritious diets and sustainable livelihoods in Africa (and some parts of Asia) cannot be a... Подробнееchieved without livestock which are often a cornerstone of economies and rural livelihoods. There are clear regional differences in the way livestock are raised, produced and consumed. - Generalities do not help, rather nuances are required and livestock issues should not be siloed. - Improving the health and welfare of animals improves their economic value and reduces environment footprint. - Fairness throughout value-chains is needed, including incomes and costs. For some economies this means citizens being willing (and able) to pay more for quality livestock-derived foods. Consumer decision-making needs to be linked to its influence on food systems. - There are positive things happening across the livestock sector – genetics, precision-feeding, climate-smart agriculture; private sector engagement – methane management, all underpinned by sound science that needs to be contextually applied for solutions, policy and investment decisions. - In rural areas economic indicators can inform what is possible, leverage additional funding and government regulations to improve the value of livestock production and enhance local resilience – simple economic analysis doesn’t always bring this out. - Growing livelihoods and economic opportunities from livestock for individuals (men, women, youth) through to nations can look quite different in different settings. In LMICs, this may mean livestock production, elsewhere, waged employment is plentiful at the processing stage. Trade-offs must be considered, and incentives adjusted to take account of environmental as well as economic gains. Actions to impact this topic include: - Several other industries including tourism depend on livestock and agriculture and need to be considered. Don’t silo sectors, components of the value-chain or countries. - Livestock has received a lot of negative attention in the past but with the right investments can be transformed to be both economically viable and environmentally sustainable. - In some cases, it should be possible to take advantage of regional integration and diverse eco-systems, through a move to specialisation tailored to specific agro-zones (e.g. production of cattle in arid areas). - Focus on nature-positive solutions that do not require further conversion of lands. - Support is also needed across the value chain as this can help create jobs. All actors in the value chain must get their fair share Farmers need support for quality produce and access to markets. - Do a better job thinking through the hard trade-offs in livestock issues—figure out who pays, how and how much. Do not underestimate the challenges the sector needs to face. - Incorporate One Health approach into solutions, which may include guidelines for field agents, capacity building, creation of local or regional “One Health” associations, using an evaluation system adopted by everyone with common, multiple criteria. Скрыть