The High Level Panel of Experts on Food
Security and Nutrition
(HLPE)
of the
UN Committee
on World Food Security
(CFS)
FSN Forum Workshop
Rome, 10 December 2015
The HLPE,
the science-policy interface for the CFS
I) What is the HLPE?
Functions, structure
II) How does it work?
The HLPE process as a dialogue
CFS : 2 key elements
>> New, informed and inclusive,
international governance
>> inclusiveness goes hand in
hand with evidence-based
They are complementary.
Importance to organize the
openness and transparency of
the processes.
Why the HLPE ?
Many analyses, need for a synthesis that
confronts them
Need of a starting point for analysis and
advice (HLPE recommendations to kickstart CFS policy process)
Crisis has revealed the need of a watchman
a sentinel that looks at problems ahead or
overlooked problems
>> 3 functions of the HLPE (CFS 2009)
Why the HLPE ?
Common evidence-basis before discussions
to progress to common understanding
Factor of level playing field between
countries and categories of actors
Understanding why people disagree with
each other
Key attributes of the HLPE
•
Created, appointed, mandated by the CFS
•
Working independently: clear separation of mandates
o
elaboration of scientific evidence and background
knowledge (HLPE)
o
Negotiations on positions or interests on issues
(CFS)
•
The HLPE has to address the multidisciplinary
complexity of food security: (i) many possible related
topics, and (ii) none of each can be addressed within a
single discipline
•
Demand-driven, tight agenda, present status of
knowledge
How to generate / organize / present
knowledge so that all actors are in position to
understand and make progress on such kind
of (difficult) issues?
A key question for the HLPE
The question on “how to handle
knowledge” was central in the debates that
led to the reform of CFS and governance of
FS
Five Knowledge Challenges
1) Diversity and complexity of issues; the variety
of their relations with food security and nutrition
in its four dimensions
2) Multi-stakeholder character of the food system
3) Multi knowledge holder character
4) Multi-context: Tension between universality of
issues and specificity of context.
5) Knowledge for action, given tension between
broadly shared objectives and specificities (and
multiplicity) of concerns and priorities of actors
What makes HLPE’s reports different
From other scientific reports
- Demand driven
- Answering a political question, often a “burning” issue
(urgency)
- Has to provide information, no “need more research”
- Has to provide recommendations
- Need to serve as a shared starting point for a discussion.
-
Functions of HLPE reports
Documents to serve as a base to policy discussions in CFS
>> have to be recognized and accepted as a credible base, by
members (Governments) and participants (civil society,
private sector, international organizations) in CFS.
>> a very broad and diverse range of publics:
academics and specialists of food security, academics and
specialists of the topic treated (most of whom are not food
security specialists), governments officials in various ministries,
diplomats, but also staff of various international and national
agencies, NGOs, local authorities,…
>> different from other documents produced by international
organizations
- Do not avoid controversies
- Do not avoid difficult topics (no “political” review)
- Not limited by the mandate of the organization
II) How does the HLPE work?
The HLPE process as an
interface for dialogue
The HLPE and the CFS
Preparation of
the reports
The HLPE as
an interface
for dialogue
on knowledge
and to
prepare a
political
dialogue
Critical importance of scoping
and V0 consultations
What do the consultations bring?
1) Receive from stake-holders expectations, concerns, points of
interests, priorities, perspectives, main questions to be
addressed.
Help identify linkages between perspectives and issues.
2) Receive from actors’ knowledge: inputs, resulting. Evidence
based. Stakeholders as knowledge-holders. Knowledge from
social actors.
3) Feedback, perception and critics on a draft
Address the concerns of the various stakeholders
E-consultations participation
E-consultations participation
Focus: Water partecipation
Focus: Water partecipation
Focus: SADL partecipation
Focus: SADL partecipation
Participation
Multifaceted interest to participate
• CFS stakeholders (members, participants) -> Outcome - CFS
• Academia – research - universities - > Knowledge product
• Specific communities of practice (topic – related) -> advocacy,
links to Food security
Growing importance of corporate / collective replies.
Many constituencies have put in place internal collective
processes to elaborate and bring forward contributions:
UN organizations (FAO), members (USA, France, Brazil, etc),
CSM, PSM, etc.
How are e-consultations
concretely used?
1) Identification and better delineation of the main areas of
controversies/contentious issues, underlying narratives,
competing approaches
2) Source of evidence : listing examples, case studies, references.
3) systematic, line-by-line examination of each comment.
In practice
>> Synthesis (made by HLPE Secretariat)
>> list of evidence suggested (list made by HLPE Secretariat)
>> line-by line examination (list made by the HLPE Sec)
Consultations as a way to enrich
the evidence-base of reports
The HLPE uses them to improve the substantive
criteria HLPE reports must meet:
• global in scope (various stakeholders; regional balance, local,
national, types of productions…) often a global, conceptual
description (framework, typology, in a figure).
• extent and diversity of the knowledge base
• diversity of examples
• “speak to” both specialists and non specialists of food
security and of the specific topic.
• expose the various points of view, including controversies
• more vulnerable populations and on gender issues.
• nutrition and of malnutrition
Help to treat controversial issues?
 Disentangle its rationales and explain to the policy makers
where the main uncertainties or pivotal points are either in
data or reasoning.
 Reports need to be carefully balanced and position
references in relation to debates, controversies and different
points of view (intradisciplinary controversies, or different
disciplinary approaches, or different stakeholders
perspectives and points of view).
 Fight the tendency to avoid difficult issues : importance of
evidence behind controversial topics, to force a discussion,
to show the importance of such issues. Fight stakeholders’
intentional blindness to issues (~IPCC).
Such a treatment of controversies or of contentious issues is
central to the HLPE process.
According to CFS Reform
Document
“This effort should help create
synergies between world class
academic/scientific knowledge,
field experience, knowledge from
social actors and practical
application in various settings.”
HLPE Reports 2011-2015
2011
2012
2013
2014 - 2015