Официальная обратная связь диалогов

No areas of divergence raised.

Reliance on humanitarian assurance is short-term. To be resilient in the long-term, refugee youth need: training and access to information about nutrition, a means of food production, employment opportunities, and voice in decision-making about their future. Investment in new technologies to help overcome environmental and economic barriers to production and sustainability is also important. Refugees have self-determination and are a great force who can produce more than food for their communities. Refugee youth experience many issues that are related to food systems in their context. Too ofte... Подробнееn, people who are living in poverty or areas of conflict end up in refugee situations. Refugees should not be living in subhuman conditions. They should have access to food, water; as basic minimums. Beyond that, it is a basic human right to have a home and a means of food production or a livelihood. We also recognize we are working against ecological challenges in a natural environment that requires more intentional management. Responding to the climate crisis provides an opportunity for young people to share what they are learning about environmental conservation. Скрыть

TOPIC 1: Food and nutritional issues faced by refugees All refugees access, consume and buy food. Many also produce food. All are motivated to improve livelihoods and contribute to the economies of the countries in which they live. Yet many barriers exist. In many instances, refugees lack formal education about nutrition, resulting in malnutrition and improper dietary intake. There are also significant limits to refugees having limited access to food distribution and suitable land to produce their own food. Some questions that were raised included: How will food be distributed among people? Wh... Подробнееo has power over food distribution? For example, some people get half a chicken a month if they are lucky. Why is this inequality happening in food distribution? Unsafe situations such as conflict and violence are also barriers to accessing proper food. Some of the solutions proposed during the dialogue included: Provide formal training to refugees on nutrition. Ensure refugees have a voice in the food distribution process. (see more below) Facilitate safe access to land that is suitable for food production. Educate and incentivize the community to create gardens -(e.g. small gardens/home gardens to plant tomatoes, cabbages - increase food access) Ensure access to resources to buy the necessary food AND access to professional information on nutrition to accompany people in using their resources for a diet that really nourishes them. Скрыть

TOPIC 2: Youth Inclusion & Voice Youth face the challenge of exclusion from decision-making platforms that influence food systems. How can we ensure an inclusive approach so displaced refugees are part of the food-security system? Solutions proposed during the dialogue included: Provide opportunities for people to voice their needs and challenges Include youth voice in platforms where decisions that affect engagement in food systems initiatives are made. Ensure those voices are translated into action (beyond tokenism). Build capacity through trainings on how to work on digital platforms, s... Подробнееhare their stories digitally Support young people to conduct exchange visits with different stakeholders for exposure and experiential learning and support peaceful coexistence with the host community. Скрыть

Refugee engagement in food systems, addressing challenges as well as opportunities to the problem of food security Refugees’ views, perspectives and ideas on how the Summit activities and country efforts to transform food systems can be leveraged for greater food security, better nutrition and more viable livelihoods for refugees.

There were a couple of areas of divergence. The first was around the focus on developing sustainable, low cost technology to remove contaminants from the waste stream. It was suggested that we should stop focusing on adding new processes and more innovation to selectively capture an ever-increasing list of contaminants and instead, focus should be on upstream causes of this contamination. We should be asking why they are present in the waste stream in the first place and how we can rectify this (e.g. source reduction, not mixing waste streams in the first place, rather than paying to fix them ... Подробнееfurther down the line. e.g. producing new, less persistent pharmaceuticals). The second disagreement was over the suggestion of increasing the cost of synthetic fertiliser to make it less economical to overuse. Making fertiliser more expensive will encourage farmers to generate their own free Nitrogen (better crop rotations, cover cropping etc.) which will in itself have numerous benefits and be cheaper anyway for the same Nitrogen production. Counter points focused on instead making diagnostics cheaper to reduce indiscriminate and over-application. Lastly the presentation of the risks and benefits of the reuse of excreta needs to be presented in balance. There is already an overwhelming narrative about the health risks of reusing excreta for agriculture, and it’s the dominant argument used by those who oppose the idea. To encourage and improve the uptake of this very practice it needs to be framed in a more positive light rather than constantly discussing the health risks. There are known risks which need to be mitigated against, but industrial agriculture comes with its own health and environmental risks too. There was a feeling that the risks of excreta shouldn’t be blown out of proportion, and should be compared against the risk of continuing with “business as usual” and to degrade our soil resources and wider environment from industrial farming practices. It was suggested that we shouldn’t wait to be certain it is 100% safe before starting to think about implementing this in a safe and sustainable manner. Скрыть

Our drive to increase agricultural production, has been at the expense of long-term sustainability. Under a circular economy the production of agricultural commodities uses a minimal amount of external inputs and nutrient loops are closed to reduce discharges to the environment. By creating an economy in which waste is reused and pollution is mitigated, natural systems can recover. This approach supports the drive to produce food commodities in an environmentally sustainable manner, ensuring the needs of a growing population are met today without any long term negative impacts on food producti... Подробнееon in the future. The potential benefits for food security under a circular economy approach are therefore enormous. However, this can result in changes to greenhouse gases and nitrogen-related discharges, as well as inadvertently introducing into agricultural systems a suite of emerging contaminants, such as antimicrobial resistance determinants, pharmaceuticals, and plastics. As part of the UN Food Systems Summit 2021, this dialogue explored the concept of a circular economy, with a focus on Chinese agricultural systems. China has rapidly transformed their food production systems to meet a “Zero Increase Action Plan” for fertilizers and pesticides, and therefore provides an excellent case study to explore the concept of a circular economy in sustainable food systems further. China is predicted to reduce mineral N use between now and 2050 and organic fertilisers are assumed to help this transition. The aim was to: Share knowledge on the feasibility and risks of using organic fertiliser in agricultural production through adoption of a Circular Economy approach. Discussions in breakout groups focussed on the three key themes: 1. Current policy frameworks and future policy drivers  2. Technical adaptions in waste recovery and use of resources  3. Potential risks and mitigation measures   Скрыть

Several key themes emerged from the Dialogue discussions, in the context of understanding existing knowledge of participants, the possibility of translating knowledge from on-going sustainable agricultural systems in China to UK relevant scenarios and exploration of future opportunities to address identified knowledge gaps. Participants could see the benefit and value of adopting a circular economy in agricultural systems as it offered a means of ensuring that current and future food demands are met. This then lead to a discussion considering the risk-benefit of a circular economy. This reveal... Подробнееed we need more data to comprehensively understand the risks as well as the benefits but so far research demonstrates that these practices can introduce contaminants into our agricultural systems. This presents a risk to human and ecosystem health. Of particular concern were emerging contaminants. As their name suggests these contaminants are ‘emerging’ and our understanding is only in its infancy in terms of knowledge surrounding the associated fate and risks in agro-environments. We need to continue our work characterising these chemicals in the environment by developing analytical capabilities to ensure we can detect these chemicals at low, environmentally relevant concentrations. A key message was that we need to work with a transdisciplinary focus. This is a complex topic and understanding the risks and benefits of adopting a circular economy cannot be achieved by working solely on our areas of interest and in isolation. We need to adopt a nexus approach bringing together expertise in food, energy, sanitation, environment, human health, and policy. Collaborative thinking will require funding mechanisms to be put in place support future interdisciplinary research initiatives. A key theme emerged that we need to work with a solutions focus moving forward. We have a growing body of knowledge surrounding the risks of using sustainable agricultural systems and in particular the use of organic fertiliser but the benefits of adopting these practices are significant in terms of meeting global food demands. We therefore need to work on developing mitigation options to ensure that these practices are done in a safe and sustainable manner. Participants discussed mitigation options and put forward their own work investigating mitigation options such as additional wastewater treatment and use of biochar to adsorb some of the contaminants. This is an area where future work is needed and there is the potential to build collaborations through this Dialogue to explore this further. New policy developments are underway in the UK, largely driven by the new national strategy following the recent departure from the European Union. Focus areas are carbon reduction, driving down synthetic fertiliser use and pursuit of a circular economy. These mirror the efforts currently underway in China to ensure a zero increase in chemical fertiliser use. However, on a global scale, very little policy exists in terms of regulating the release of emerging contaminants in the environment even though sustainable agricultural practices, such as the application of organic fertilisers, provides a pathway by which these chemicals can enter the agro-environment. Environmental regulators therefore need to harness the latest scientific developments to establish research informed thresholds allowing for the safe use and application of organic fertilisers. This is going to require research outputs to be disseminated to regulators and presented in an accessible format. The Dialogue built on existing relationships and most importantly facilitated new connections with stakeholders and academics in the UK and China who have an interest in the use of sustainable agricultural practices to support future agricultural development. This will allow for combined expertise to address the crucial knowledge gaps identified in our discussions. Скрыть

Current Policy Framework and Future Policy Drivers There are current policies and frameworks in place concerning a circular economy in agricultural systems, in both the UK and China, although further development is needed given the complex nature of this system. Policies are driven by the need to reduce our reliance on chemical based fertilisers, recover nutrients and the need to become carbon neutral and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Existing policy is also in place to protect the environment from the presence of contaminants although this policy area is largely fragmented. In China fa... Подробнееrmers are given 100-500Y per tonne to use organic water-derived fertilizer though these aren’t always evenly distributed. There are also penalties in place for poultry/pork farmers who do not recycle waste and pollute water ways. The Chinese government also produces technical documents which advise farmers on how to use wastewater-derived fertilizers, i.e. how to apply and maximize benefit whilst minimizing risk. UK legalisations set environmental quality standards for contaminants and restrictions on the usages of animal manures given local climate and weather conditions. The UK plans to mitigate flooding partly though soil management policies such as reducing compaction. In the UK the drive to recover nutrients is part of the net zero by 2050 targets. In response to Brexit, new environmental and agricultural bills are in the pipeline which are in line with carbon reduction commitments and in pursuit of circular economy. UK policies include driving down synthetic fertiliser use and to making fertiliser use more efficient, e.g. full life-cycle analysis for nutrient additions. Whether existing legislations are followed is hard to judge or even control. We need to ensure guidance and regulations are clearly communicated and incentivised to ensure maximum support from farmers and land managers. In the UK water treatment companies and government are considering carbon credits to encourage better resource recovery and facilitate farmers to use organic fertilizers and increase soil carbon. Issues have been identified concerning heavy metals (Pb and Cd) and the build-up of these within soils over repeated application of fertilizer. Organic fertilisers can also introduce emerging contaminants into the environment however legislation permitting safe levels of these chemicals in the environment is largely missing. It is therefore important to consider the impacts on human and ecosystem health in development of new policies to account for this. When considering policy implementation in the context of supporting a circular economy, we need to consider nexus solutions. We need to link sectors together (waste and agricultural sector along with food, water, energy, human health and soil) to address relevant systemic issues and identify the primary drivers, concerns and points of intervention. Organic fertilizer is fundamental for improved soil health within agriculture, it also serves as a suitable waste removal technique and therefore has potential to be widely adopted in modern day agriculture over that of synthetic fertiliser. However more attention is needed in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to better control nutrient and contaminant concentrations. Ultimately, organic wastes need to be used in a safe and sustainable manner. In order to both improve global food demand and preserve/improve environmental quality we need to enforce environmental legislation. However we suggest a reduced focus on standardised guidelines, and instead increase awareness and train people to be local problem solvers. Previous experience has shown it is often the implementation of the policies which fail. We need positive incentives and support needs to be in place with a focus on education to reduce barriers to social change in practices which incorporate circularity principles which are nexus-smart. Current legislations and policies only assess the toxicology of single contaminants, more work is required to make this realistic by looking at mixtures of both inorganic and organic contaminants and the risk of antibiotic resistant genes to society. Скрыть

Technical Adaptations in waste recovery and use of resource? There is much potential to apply technical adaptation in waste recovery. Ultimately, we need to embrace new, more sustainable approaches to farming, rather than trying to alter a broken system. However, this will require a change of approach, focusing on the role of wastewater treatment in terms of making the waste products safe in terms of human and environmental health whilst maximising nutrient recovery to realise the benefits of this reuse. A balance needs to be met here. Current processes which are optimised for effluent waste s... Подробнееafety may include significant nutrient losses (e.g. denitrification). We need to investigate how the benefits of waste reuse can be met with only minimal risks. New technologies will need to be developed to complement existing waste infrastructure to ensure we can use these waste products as a resource. When considering waste reuse a significant barrier is the location and transportation of wastes suitable for fertilizer use. This may require significant infrastructure in place to support widespread use. Concerns were raised regarding the transportation and mixing of wastes as this may result in the loss of information regarding quality of the waste and contaminants present. An overarching governance is required in order to achieve this. It is important that research and industry work together in partnership with regulators to collaborate and address these issues. This needs to be supported by appropriate funding required for a sustainable future -is this funding coming from the consumer or cross sector funding primarily supported by waste and agriculture sectors? Скрыть

Potential risks and mitigation measures Both the UK and China have considerable expertise in understanding the risks associated with use of organic fertilisers in sustainable agricultural systems. There is a longstanding research programme in China on the risks associated with wastewater derived fertilizers, from field sites in Nanjing and Ningbo. Hazards include the introduction of inorganic contaminants (e.g. metals), organic chemicals, including emerging contaminants (e.g. pharmaceuticals and personal care products), as well the presence of pathogens (e.g. bacteria, viruses). Use of organic... Подробнее fertilisers can also introduce antimicrobial genes (ARGs) into the agricultural environment. ARGs can enter the food system via uptake into crops but can also damage soil structure by altering the soil microbial community and breaking the soil microaggregates held together by microbial activity. There is a need to both reduce the ARG load in fertilizer manufacturing, and to research how mitigation options can limit the risk of ARGs associated with wastewater derived fertilizers. We need to consider the legacy of existing contaminants and emerging contaminants as these both present a risk to ecosystem and human health e.g. heavy metals are often high in concentration and do not degrade whereas organic contaminants such as antibiotics are low in concentration but still remain bioactive and cause selection pressure on antibiotic resistance genes. Our research has shown that the build-up of Cd and Pb from waste products has resulted in impacts on soil health and the reduction in crop yield. It is important to consider these to achieve food goals as well as retain soil health. It is also critical to consider the effects of transformation products and not just the parent contaminants. Often these transformation products contain bioactive properties and still can influence soil health and organisms present within the environmental matrices. We also need to consider the influence of mixtures of contaminants. We know very little about how chemicals can interact, especially inorganic-organic chemical combinations. This is largely due to the difficulties in addressing mixture effects as well as detections of complex samples. We therefore need to advance our experimental and analytical capabilities to deal with this challenge. Mitigation measures exist which focus on reducing the concentration of contaminants in organic fertiliser through advanced treatment technologies such as anaerobic digestion, liquid-solid separation, and electrolysis. The extraction of struvite is the most advanced commercial operation globally. There is a need to address regional challenges when considering mitigation options as in some cases enhanced waste treatment is not an option when a country has limited sewage connectivity and sanitation options. In this case, bioremediation options may be more appropriate such as pollutant removal via wetlands or composting of faecal sludge from pit latrines. Research in China has evaluated the potential of biochar to become a suitable sustainable method in removing contaminants from environmental matrices. More research is needed to understand currently overlooked issues such as the potential for contaminants to desorb and release slowly into the environment, ecotoxicology (earthworms mortality rate with high biochar %) and the bioavailability of contaminants adsorbed to biochars. In order to overcome potential risks we need to integrate research and industry application and have integrated planning to move forwards. While we could focus on developing sustainable, low cost technology to remove contaminants from the waste stream; perhaps we should stop focusing on adding new processes and innovation to selectively capture an ever-increasing list of contaminants. Instead, focus should be on upstream causes of this contamination, ask why they are present in the waste stream and how we can rectify this. The focus should be placed on the risks of NOT making change (business as usual), rather than focusing solely on the risks of doing something ('least worst'). This allows a more balanced decision going forward. Скрыть

Ahead of the upcoming United Nations Food Systems Summit, Arrell Food Institute at the University of Guelph hosted three independent Food System Dialogues to bring together voices from across and beyond the Canadian Food System. The third dialogue explored strategies to put agriculture at the heart of a green economic recovery plan. There were 5 discussion groups in this Dialogue, all of whom discussed one of these three topics: - Canadian agri-food exports being recognized internationally as being the most sustainable on the planet - The agri-food sector as an engine of green prosperity - Mor... Подробнееe Canadian youth are choosing agri-food as a career option and being trained in a way that meets the needs of this rapidly expanding industry Framing speakers: David McInnes, Canadian Agrifood Benchmarking Project Vimlendra Sharan, FAO Michelle Nutting, Nutrien Bill Gruel, Protein Industries Canada Скрыть

Clearly establish a national sustainability benchmarking process, linked to a robust data collection framework, that transparently shows how Canadian producers perform environmentally on a global stage. Preliminary data suggest that although progress is still needed, our producers are often among the most sustainable on the planet. Canada can embrace the idea that we are the world’s trusted producers of safe and sustainable food and put agriculture at the centre of a green economic recovery program. Recent announcements in the 2021 federal budget move us in this direction. A next step is to ... Подробнееcreate a national sustainability benchmarking program that would give Canada economic advantage in export markets, contribute to our ability to meet our Paris climate commitments and to the UNFSS Action Tracks 3 and 4. Major global trends linked with population growth, climate change, new consumer expectations and novel technologies suggest that the next 10 years may be incredibly disruptive for food systems everywhere. In Canada, we have much to celebrate: our producers are amongst the most environmentally conscious in the world, most Canadians enjoy safe, healthy, and affordable food year-round. Nevertheless, systemic problems of food insecurity and disruptions to the food system caused by the pandemic mean that we need to do better. Together, by putting environmental sustainability at the centre of the Canadian agri-food sector's identity we can ensure Canada has the tools it needs to continue having one of the greatest food systems in the world. This will not only help support domestic producers and consumers as well as allowing those parts of our food system that depend on exporting to international markets thrive and expand over the next generation. Скрыть

• Improve ag education, at a young age especially • Address land costs/ownership barriers • Record protocols and be more transparent about sustainability efforts and outcomes within agriculture; sharing best practice but recognising that different situations need different approaches. • Explicitly include aquaculture and water-based food production • Consider further digitization of agricultural information beyond productivity – including carbon sequestration • Benchmarking and showcasing sustainability practices and outcomes in regional and national agricultural and food systems

While there were active discussions where divergent views were shared, each group was able to come to a general consensus at the end of their breakout.

This dialogue formed part two of a 3-part series dialogue aimed at connecting Innovation Ideas with Food Systems. The major highlights of the key issues emerging from the breakout sessions included: 1. What is needed to catalyze public and private investment in innovation systems for R4D in the region? • Smallholder famers, who still make up the vast majority of farmers in the region, are already actively practicing nature positive agriculture and growing interest in agroecological principles • There is growing interest by private sector in fostering sustainable production models • Each ... Подробнееpartner comes to agriculture with different expectations, so catalysing action will require different actors to work together in partnership • There is need to understand the gaps between available technologies and the capacity or willingness of farmers to adopt • Focus on partnership also reflects well the investment environment for climate-smart and nature positive agriculture • There are more public and private actors working to find innovative ways to deliver finance resources to farmers and provide incentives for other value chain actors • There is need to improve understanding of stakeholders needs and potential adopt and/or scale up climate-smart and nature-positive innovations for agriculture. 2. How can we better realign and coordinate national international research efforts to facilitate innovation and ultimate achievement of the SDGs? • There is need for new digital technologies that collect and organize information on farm conditions and options to improve productivity, address climate variability and address potential environmental impacts • There is need for more discussion and collaboration on how to help farmers and agri-businesses build and capture consumer markets for sustainable produce • There is a need to show the impacts of improved practices - needs to be improved evidence on how changes in farmer practice can drive improvements in sustainability. This is going to be a crucial for building sustainable markets for nature-positive agriculture. • There should be more attention on the knowledge and needs of farmers and consumers in developing climate-smart and nature positive agriculture products and markets. 3. Which innovations are ready for scale up and what is needed to take these to scale? • There are already be a number of technologies and approaches that we could taking off the shelf - agroecology for example. Such technologies to address interrelated climate and water management risks such as irrigation are perhaps not ground breaking, but will be essential • It was noted that in the past these have been public investment • Some specific on-farm technologies included: o New varieties and the use of underutilized species: farmer-led varietal selection o Agroforestry • There are a number of digital technologies and platforms that are being scaled, for an example how social media and digital platforms have been used in some countries to help link farmers to markets following the impact of COVID-19. In addition to how farmers are increasingly using platforms like YouTube on how to learn about new innovations Innovations are not necessarily something totally new. Innovation is equally about how local, old and new knowledge and technologies can be applied in new contexts or scaled-up. With this basis understanding there are a wide range of innovations ready for scale. Achieving scale may be about aligning interests - takes us back to partnership and respect. Скрыть

Protecting natural systems from new conversions for food production Key issues: • Public sector’s role on enabling policy environment is very crucial • Leveraging some public funds to scale up innovations such as the livelihood programs for communities in the forest as well as social forestry • Projects that can be funded for scaling up should be localized problems and the solutions are driven by the farmers themselves • One such innovation that also promotes biodiversity conservation is the nursery agri-business. Maybe the government can invest in the multiplication of plant varieti... Подробнееes that are resistant to climate change and local varieties, particularly in seed development. • Thailand has been promoting as ASEAN seed hub so maybe this can be linked to projects of the government • Thailand is also promoting this plant-based food hub. This plant-based food hub can be a solution to recover from the pandemic. • The innovation on seaweed as feed to reduce methane gas emission can address concerns for food security as well as climate change. • Involve the academe as they have an important role in empowering and educating the farmers • Philippines has good innovative projects that can be scaled-up e.g., rice network • Private and public sector should work together/collaborate • The public sector referred here may include research organizations, the academe, and civil society organizations • Promote 5P’s and not just the 3P’s: private, public, producer, people partnership • Decision making tools are very important for policy recommendations: forecasting tools; yield forecasting, big data, drones and other tools important for policies or decision making • Role of youth in agriculture should be further explored • Jackfruit can be a replacement for meat. This is an innovation that Thailand would like to promote in ASEAN plant-based food hub. • There should be a way on how society can pay back the farmers as payment for ecosystem services. Скрыть

Sustainably manage existing food production systems. Key issues: • Investment in irrigation systems and water harvesting technologies, so as to help local farmers adapt to the situation of water scarcity or depletion due to long drought, which is brought about by climate change. • Building water storage and rainwater harvesting systems/capacity of farmers R&D is important to enhance the resiliency of the farmers on the ground • There is need for policies and strategies to manage land-uses and how to mitigate land conversion • There was also a sharing on strong state regulation and ... Подробнееmanagement • There is need to look at innovative financial systems • Transdisciplinary action is of utmost importance • There is a gap between technology, the situation and the farmers - innovations should be patent-free and easy access to the farmers • The interlinkages and connections that exist within the global food systems should be leveraged to ensure social protection and inclusivity and environmental and economic sustainability for the entire society. • Investment in state-of-the-art data science methodologies and collection systems. • We must make use of knowledge sharing platforms for inter-sectoral and multi-institutional approaches and inclusive multistakeholder engagement processes should be a priority • I also think that we need strong state regulations to ensure that conservation and management as much as production are taken into account Lessons from COVID has brought elements on technology investment, which is critical such as digital platforms and online platforms The farmer should be enabled and empowered • Farmer end-to-end supply value chain – engagement at policy level and mapping out the value chain We should always have the farmer in the middle and always focus the famer to the private sector and investment and R4D, government. • reduce the distance between Lab to field for the maximum benefit Invest on platforms that promote development of tech and sharing of knowledge and encourage lessons sharing – stimulate the role of development agencies to promote these initiatives Скрыть

Restoring and rehabilitating degraded systems for sustainable food production and ecosystem services. Key issues: • Adoption of digital technology is common now, but there is a strong need to ensure that digital technology links the value chains more closely. It helps farmers and consumers and production to consumers in terms of using resources and in allocating resources. • Aside from the classic digital technology and softwares, there are also suggestions of using virtual innovation platforms which is a bit more friendly in areas or in countries where communication infrastructure is not ... Подробнееreally that good like in the Philippines. • Adopting a type of circular economy and the example provided was the use of bio-waste turning it into fertilizer, etc. This is more sustainable in terms of being able to use resources that are already at hand. • In relation to rehabilitating degraded systems, there was a concern about being able to invest, particularly in social forestry. But at the same time, there are issues in going into this type of big projects, which really needs big investments. So, policy will be very important because public investments will be needed especially for long-term projects and for wide-ranging type of social forestry projects. • Solution to support smallholders who produce sustainable products. • There is need to scale up the amount of information so that we are able to inform everyone that there is a market, that there is a demand for sustainable products. • Farm to table concepts to support smallholders - some supermarkets and small shops are already moving towards sustainable products, but this is not yet enough to support the smallholder farmers at this time. Скрыть

Not many areas of divergence were brought up due to time constraints.