Online Consultation on the
CFS Global Strategic Framework
26th of July to the 15th of October 2011
Collection of contributions received
Proceedings | 2
Table of contents
Contributions Received ....................................................................................................................... 8
1) Claudio Schuftan, People´s Health Movement (PHM), Vietnam................................................. 8
2) Shaheel Rafique, IFAD, India ...................................................................................................... 8
3) Dyno Keatinge, AVRDC-The World Vegetable Center, Taiwan Province of China .................... 9
4) Jean-Marie Cordier, JTS - les Semences du Jardin Tropical, France ........................................ 9
5) Tollander Wabwire, Southern Vagabond , Kenya ..................................................................... 10
6) John Hunte, Organic Growers & Consumers Assoc, Barbados ............................................... 11
7) Yves Garenne, Ecophanie, France ........................................................................................... 11
8) Hanefi Isselmou, Alliance contre la Faim en Mauritanie, Mauritania ........................................ 12
9) Herman Jolink, Fodder Solutions Africa, South Africa .............................................................. 13
10) Kaza Desalegn Kebede, Justice Sector SNNPRS, Ethiopia /IFAD, Italy ................................ 13
11) Suman K A, Change Planet Partners Climate Innovation Foundation, National Alliance
Against Hunger and Malnutrition, India ......................................................................................... 14
12) David B Williams, Chartered Engineer, United Kingdom ........................................................ 14
13) Oluwole Ogunmusire, GFDI Consult, Nigeria ......................................................................... 18
14) John Teton, International Food Security Treaty Association, United States of America ........ 19
15) Crisantos Obama, Misión Permanente de Guinea Ecuatorial ante la FAO, Equatorial Guinea
....................................................................................................................................................... 20
16) Cheikh Hassan Saleh .............................................................................................................. 21
17) Darana Souza, UNDP, Brazil .................................................................................................. 21
18) Comments by Francisco Sarmento, facilitator of the consultation .......................................... 22
19) Ali Ghawampour, Iran Fisheries, Iran...................................................................................... 23
20) Daniela Alfaro, CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers, France . 23
21) Murdock Tiantang Ren, China ................................................................................................ 24
22) Comments by Francisco Sarmento, facilitator of the consultation .......................................... 26
23) Abdul Razak Ayazi, Afghanistan Embassy Rome, Italy .......................................................... 27
24) Lijbert Brussaard, Wageningen University, the Netherlands .................................................. 29
25) Muhammad Ayaz Keerio, ACTED, Pakistan ........................................................................... 30
2
Proceedings | 3
26) Jean-Marie Cordier, JTS Semences, France .......................................................................... 30
27) Layla Idris, Women Agricultural Engineers Society, Sudan .................................................... 32
28) Kazi Eliza Islam, CARE, USA ................................................................................................. 32
29) Birendra Adhikari, National Network on Right to Food, Nepal ................................................ 33
30) Françoise Falaise, France ....................................................................................................... 33
31) Nazimi Açıkgöz, Ege University, Turkey ................................................................................. 34
32) Farhad Mirzaei, ASRI, Iran ...................................................................................................... 36
33) Robynne Anderson, International Agri-Food Network, Canada .............................................. 36
34) Roderick Valones, Save the Children International, Philippines ............................................. 37
35) Rahul Goswami, Ministry of Agriculture, India ........................................................................ 37
36) Daniela Alfaro, CGIAR Consortium, France............................................................................ 38
37) Enoch Raymond Nyayiti, Center for Environmental Education and Development (CEED),
National Alliance Against Hunger and Malnutrition, Nigeria .......................................................... 40
38) Chabi Ayedoun Simon, Juriste Consultant Droits de la personne et Des TIC, Benin ............ 41
39) Muhammad Ayaz Keerio, ACTED, Pakistan ........................................................................... 41
40) Joseph Sunday Ikpoh, Pastor from Nigeria............................................................................. 42
41) Department of Agrarian Reform, Secretary Virgilio R. De Los Reyes, the Philippines ........... 43
42) Kaisa Karttunen, Senior Agriculture Consultant, from Finland................................................ 46
43) Hanefi Isselmou, Alliance contre la Faim en Mauritanie, Mauritania ...................................... 47
44) George Kent , University of Hawaii, United States of America ............................................... 48
45) Carlos Villan Duran, Spanish Association for International Law and Human Rights, Spain ... 49
46) Atef Abdel Meguid Mohamed Al Reeqi, Sudan ....................................................................... 50
47) Cirilo Antonio Otero, Centro de Iniciativas de Politicas Ambientales CIPA, Nicaragua .......... 51
48) Kwesi Atta-Krah, Bioversity International, Italy ....................................................................... 51
49)Abdou Yahouza, CLUSA/projet sécurité alimentaire ARZIKI, Niger ........................................ 53
50) Alex Mokori, Centre for Nutrition Education and Technology, Uganda .................................. 54
51) Edward Mutandwa , RDA, Rwanda ......................................................................................... 54
52) Buka Mupungu Nathanael , Confederation paysanne du Congo [ copaco] membre de la
propac et de la via campesina, Democratic Republic of the Congo ............................................. 55
3
Proceedings | 4
53) Renato Carvalheira do Nascimento, Ciência e Tecnologia da CAPES - Ministério da
Educação, Brazil ............................................................................................................................ 56
54) Peggy Pascal, Solidarites International, France ..................................................................... 57
55) Marcelo Huarte , Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA)/Asociación
Latinoamericana de la Papa (ALAP), Argentina............................................................................ 57
56) Benone Pasarin, The University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine
Iasi, Romania ................................................................................................................................. 58
57) Francisco Pérez Trejo, FAO - Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean, Chile .. 58
58) Lizzy Igbine, (NIWAAFA) Nigerian Women Agro Allied Farmers Association, Nigeria .......... 59
59) Switzerland’s comments, received through the Permanent Representation of Switzerland to
FAO, IFAD and WFP, Italy ............................................................................................................ 59
60) Abdoul Nasser Ibrahim, FAO, Burkina Faso ........................................................................... 61
61) Xavier Meignien, Institut International du Froid / International Institute of Refrigeration, France
....................................................................................................................................................... 61
62) Mahdy El Qaissy ..................................................................................................................... 64
63) Pradip Dey, Indian Society of Soil Salinity and Water Quality, India ...................................... 64
64) Per Mogstad, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway ................................................ 65
65) Private Sector Statement ........................................................................................................ 66
66) Dyno Keatinge, AVRDC - The World Vegetable Center, Taiwan ........................................... 68
67) Vincenzo Lo Scalzo, Agora Ambrosiana, Italy ........................................................................ 68
68) Jean-Robert Nchekoua Tchoumba, UN Public Administration Network, Cameroon .............. 71
69) Gisele Henriques, CIDSE, Belgium ......................................................................................... 71
70) Rahul Soman, INDOCERT, India ........................................................................................... 78
71) Hirunya Srasom, Sub-Committee on Food Security of Thailand, Thailand ............................ 79
72) Michel Buisson, Groupe SA, France ....................................................................................... 80
73) Christophe Golay & Michaela Büschi, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law
and Human Rights, Switzerland .................................................................................................... 85
74) Frédéric Paré, Coalition pour la souveraineté alimentaire, Canada ....................................... 88
75) Rosario Alurralde, Bolivia ........................................................................................................ 94
76) Radha Holla Bhar, International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) Asia, India .................. 97
77) Campaña Derecho a la alimentación. Urgente, Spain ............................................................ 97
4
Proceedings | 5
78) Aruna Sharm, National Human Rights Commission, India ................................................... 105
79) Aftab Alam Khan, ActionAid International ............................................................................. 105
80) Cecilia Murcia G., Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, Colombia ................................... 107
81) Dr. Aruna Sharma, Government of Madhya Pradesh, India ................................................. 107
82) Mike Brady, Baby Milk Action - UK member of the International Baby Food Action
Network, United Kingdom ............................................................................................................ 108
83) Wenche Barth Eide, University of Oslo/International Project on the Right to Food in
Development (IPRFD), Norway ................................................................................................... 110
84) Michael Appleby, World Society for the Protection of Animals , United Kingdom ................ 111
85) Shah-I-Mobin Jinnah, Community Development Association, Bangladesh .......................... 112
86) Secretaria Nacional de Planificacion y Desarrollo del Ecuador Desarrollo del
Ecuador, SENPLADES, Ecuador ................................................................................................ 114
87) Dania Tondini, AVSI Foundation, Italy .................................................................................. 121
88) Australian Government.......................................................................................................... 122
89) Government of Canada ......................................................................................................... 124
90) Julio Prudencio, Bolivia ......................................................................................................... 125
91) Delisle Hélèbe, University of Montreal - Nutrition, Canada ................................................... 127
92) Dr K V Peter Kuruppacharil, World Noni Research Foundation, Chennai , India ................. 128
93) Zakir Md. Hossain Zakir, Krisoker Sor (Farmers' Voice), Bangladesh.................................. 128
94) Schaltenbrand Hans, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Swiss College of Agriculture
SHL, Switzerland ......................................................................................................................... 129
95) Griselda Alfaro, Accion por los Derechos del Noroesste (ADN), Docente de la Facultad de
Derecho y Cinecias Sociales, UNT, Argentina ............................................................................ 129
96) Hanefi Isselmou, Allinace Mauritanienne "Agissons contre la faim et la Malnutrition en
Mauritanie, Mauritania ................................................................................................................. 131
97) Interministerial Chamber for Food and Nutritional Security, Brazil ....................................... 132
98) Bongolo Gatien Clotaire, Cercle de Protection de l'Environnement(CPE), Congo ............... 133
99) Kodjo Dokodjo, Direction des Statistiques Agricoles, Togo .................................................. 133
100) UN High Level Task Force on Global Food Security (HLTF) .............................................. 134
101) Charles Gimose, Excel Kenya, Kenya ................................................................................ 135
102) Aruna Sharma, Government of Madhya Pradesh, India ..................................................... 136
5
Proceedings | 6
103) Government of Canada ....................................................................................................... 136
104) Government of Spain .......................................................................................................... 137
105) Melanie Sommerville, University of British Columbia, Canada ........................................... 145
106) Isabel Cristina Marín Arriola, Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico ................................... 146
107) Marta Andrich, Argentina .................................................................................................... 148
108) Civil Society Mechanism ..................................................................................................... 149
109) Fabio Franco Giraldo, Corposan, Colombia ....................................................................... 150
110) Daniela Alfaro, CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers, France
..................................................................................................................................................... 151
111) HSI Farm Animal Welfare, Humane Society International, United States of America ........ 152
112) UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Switzerland ............... 153
113) CAB International (CABI), Kenya ........................................................................................ 155
114) Jean François Belieres and Marie Aude Even from FAO, Italy .......................................... 156
115) Government of France ........................................................................................................ 161
116) Ministerio de Agricultura y Ministerio de la Mujer y Desarrollo Social del Perú .................. 167
117) Justin Bienvenu Moyo, ACFM, Congo Brazzaville .............................................................. 170
6
Proceedings | 7
Welcome to the Online Consultation on the CFS Global Strategic Framework.
This online consultation that will open on the 26th of July and run through the 15th of October 2011, is
designed to support the work of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), by taking advantage of
innovative technologies to gather views and inputs from relevant partners.
The CFS has just undergone a reform process to be the foremost inclusive international and
intergovernmental platform for a broad range of committed stakeholders to work together in a
coordinated manner and in support of country-led processes towards the elimination of hunger and
ensuring food security and nutrition for all human beings. For further background on the CFS reform,
see the CFS Reform Document.
The objective of this online consultation is to give to all stakeholders, at national, regional and global
levels, the opportunity to provide concrete inputs and suggestions to one of the important tasks
agreed to by the Committee, which is to develop a Global Strategic Framework for Food Security
and Nutrition (GSF) an important framework to enhance the roles of the reformed CFS and to guide
food security and nutrition policies and action at all levels. A summary of this online consultation will
be presented at the 37th Session of the CFS, which will take place in Rome, the 17th to the 22nd of
October 2011.
This consultation is based on the Annotated Outline for the GSF, the contents of which are intended
to be indicative and to “stimulate discussion and debate”, especially regarding the priority issues and
policy options. I would like to invite you to read this document and provide your views and inputs. You
may consider your possible contribution by considering and answering (some or all) of the questions
below. References that may be useful to support the analysis and policy options are welcome.
Guiding questions
1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what
specific changes would you suggest?
2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional longterm challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
3. Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant
for the GSF to include?
4. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy
options do you think are most relevant for the GSF to include?
5. Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all
levels (national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and
to whom?
I would like to thank you in advance for helping to raise awareness of this consultation, providing
feedback on the GSF Annotated Outline and giving specific suggestions for the development of the
GSF.
The FSN Forum team and the CFS Secretariat will do all that is possible to ensure that “the voices of
all relevant CFS stakeholders – particularly those most affected by food insecurity - are heard” as
stated in the CFS Reform Document, but I kindly request that you please assist us in getting the word
out and helping those people participate as much as possible.
I am looking forward to a rich and constructive consultation. Francisco Sarmento – Facilitator
7
Proceedings | 8
Contributions Received
1) Claudio Schuftan, People´s Health Movement (PHM), Vietnam
Estimado Francisco,
Attached some tracked comments to the GSF document. As you will see, I feel it needs to emphasize
more the HR aspects of its mandate. It also needs to be more assertive an use more will than should
as appropriate. Hope this contributes a grain of salt.
Cordialmente, Claudio
GLOBAL STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR FOOD SECURITY schuftan.doc
2) Shaheel Rafique, IFAD, India
Key points to be considered:
1. On the ground small interventions like kitchen garden, orchard management in the tropical and
sub-tropical areas needs extensive promotion with resource recycling as a priority; livestock and small
ruminants nutrition management and production in arid and semi-arid areas needs more attention
from public and private sectors; and employment in non-farm sectors need to be scaled and
mainstreamed through vocational training, this is an emerging area needing global attention for best
practices and lessons.
2. Knowledge management in food and nutrition security to become national Government's policy as
much as possible related to innovations in food and nutrition security.
3. Use of human resource for educating the mass on nutrition and nutrition security. The Home
Science stream in Agricultural Universities creates such human resources every year. A strong focus
on public education of the poor on food and nutrition management.
4. Role of traditional institutions and local bodies and their mandate to play a bigger role in the Public
Distribution of Food.
5. Creating non-negotiable as far as food storage and various types of losses that occur as a result of
shear neglect. Public bodies and religious institutions role in nurturing the idea of not wasting food
and, R&D to support with simple household techniques to retain, preserve and store nutritive value of
food.
6. A global agenda for a way forward that is simple to understand and easy to implement meeting the
needs of countries that have a large population of the poor.
7. Lastly and more importantly, educating urban masses on what is a farm and what is agriculture and
what is agricultural science to create greater appreciation of public sector extension services,
agriculture as a profession and to appreciate where and how food is produced.
Thanks for this opportunity to contribute.
These were just a few personal thoughts and not in any way related to the organization that I work for.
8
Proceedings | 9
3) Dyno Keatinge, AVRDC-The World Vegetable Center, Taiwan Province of China
The document at present only appears to address the issue of hunger and under-nutrition whereas
malnutrition extends to a far greater number of people worldwide including those who have excess
oils and carbohydrates in their diets and insufficient minerals and vitamins from fruit and vegetables
leading to obesity and severe ill health. Both areas of malnutrition must be addressed.
Obesity and ill health are now strongly correlated with poverty. It is an issue which can no longer be
swept under the carpet. The paper indicates that the role of agricultural research institutions will be
vital in developing local and global solutions. It indicates that there has been lack of funding in the
past but it fails to comment on the huge disparity between funding for research into staple cereals and
that of "other agricultural commodities" which are vital for overcoming malnutrition and providing
proper diet diversity. This factor is also not mentioned in the discussion on price volatility.
In times when prices of basic foods increase it is items such as meat, milk, eggs, fruit and vegetables
which drop out of poor people's diets first and this is one of the principal causes then of
malnourishment. This is particularly the case for vulnerable populations and this needs to be covered
also in the vulnerability section.
The paper calls for the empowering of women and preventing inter-generational reproduction of
hunger. What it needs to say is that current efforts to overcome inter-generational transfer of
malnutrition from low birth weights globally such as the present 1000 days program are presently
flawed. If more effort could be made to ensure young women are properly nourished by eating
sufficient green leafy vegetables and a proper well balanced diet before, and when, they become
pregnant then most of the issues of inter-generational transfer of malnutrition in the first trimester of
pregnancy would have a better chance of being overcome.
The framework paper champions the needs of small holder farmers and to give them routes out of
poverty. This is entirely appropriate but evidence suggests that the likelihood of being able to grow
oneself out of poverty growing rice or maize is small but if one was to adopt horticultural crops the
return to investment is likely to be much higher and there is a better chance of escaping from poverty.
Even landholding sizes as small as 10 by 10m can give families many additional income earning
opportunities and nutritional benefits for their own consumption. Vegetables are vital for health. If we
ignore or underplay this fact then we may well be able to feed the world in 2050 but we will not be
able to nourish it!
The achievement of MDG 1 at the cost of less progress in MDG 3, 4, 5 and 6 is a dramatically false
economy. The balance of agricultural effort which is currently misplaced by an over-weaning
emphasis on cereals must be amended to ensure that all people can consume well-balanced and
healthy diets including enough carbohydrate, protein, minerals and vitamins.
4) Jean-Marie Cordier, JTS - les Semences du Jardin Tropical, France
English translation
Good morning,
your initiative « Online consultation on the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition
» presents the huge advantage of restoring the human dimension to the relations between individuals
and the system. It deserves to be recognized. However it is desirable that the network continues to
offer permanent personal points of entry to allow a private individual to enter into dialogue with the
system at his own level. It is well known that new ideas are rarely born to order or where one is
9
Proceedings | 10
expecting them . It would be convenient if a single individual, without having to make a fulltime job of
it, could bring the discussion to bear on problems as he sees them without being automatically
objected to by the dominant view, the existence of “ ad hoc” mechanisms and the need to normalize
communications.
Today, it is necessary to find the ad hoc window, the interlocutor that will give a « feedback » instead
of rejection , and then good luck, fellowship… and the chance of personal initiatives… what will
remain??? The system has been conceived in such a way that innovation can not be taken into
consideration until it has proven its worth , which needs approaches that are rarely within the range
of individuals. It could be most interesting to create a « newspaper» (maybe a blog) where the non
conventional approaches could be given exposure. One could expect that the owners of the system
would benefit from the flow of ideas and take them into consideration in their everyday activities. In
order to invigorate this newspaper, it could be worthwhile to find a way to compensate the
contributors. It is plausible that the officials of national research structures for agriculture and
development could find a lot of interest in this approach.
Best regards
French original
Bonjour,
Votre initiative « online consultation on the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and
Nutrition » présente l’immense avantage de redonner la dimension humaine aux relations entre les
individus et le système. Elle mérite d'être saluée.
Mais il est souhaitable que le réseau continue à proposer en permanence des points d’entrée à taille
humaine qui permettent au particulier de dialoguer à son échelle avec le système. Il est bien connu
que les idées nouvelles naissent rarement sur commande et là où on les attend. Il conviendrait qu’un
individu seul, sans devoir en faire un job à plein temps, puisse porter la discussion sur des problèmes
tels qu’il les récent sans se voir automatiquement objecter la pensée dominante, l’existence
d’instances "ad hoc" et la nécessité de normaliser les communications. Aujourd’hui , il faut trouver le
guichet ad hoc, trouver l’interlocuteur qui donnera un « feed back » autre qu’une fin de non recevoir,
et après beaucoup de chance, de copinage… et le hasard des initiatives personnels… que restera t
il??? Le système est conçu de telle sorte que l’innovation ne peut être prise en considération que
lorsqu’elle a fait ses preuves, ce qui nécessite des démarches qui sont rarement à la portée des
particuliers. Il pourrait être de tout premier intérêt de créer un « journal » (on dit peut être un blog) où
pourraient être exposées les approches non conventionnelles. On pourrait alors espérer que les
permanents du système, fassent leur profit de ce flux d’idées et les prennent en considérations dans
leurs activités quotidiennes. Pour dynamiser ce journal, il pourrait être intéressant de trouver un
moyen de dédommager les contributeurs.
Il est fort vraisemblable que les agents des structures nationales de recherches agronomiques et de
développement puissent trouver beaucoup d’intérêt dans une telle démarche.
Salutations
5) Tollander Wabwire, Southern Vagabond , Kenya
Provide guidance to development organizations, as opposed to weak governments [without systems]
like Kenya, on how best to harness arid and semi-arid area that forms over 3/4 of its total land area for
food production.....farming technology e.g. irrigation, seeds, crop types, fertilizers and markets. There
is serious failure here that I feel with regional collaboration and assistance; much can be achieved
10
Proceedings | 11
when we look back to the potential cumulative benefits. People are actually dying right now in
Kenya....It is too late for this time round but if we cannot plan for such, then let others teach us how to
manage food security.
6) John Hunte, Organic Growers & Consumers Assoc, Barbados
The goals and rationale of the GSF are clear and crucial at this stage of climate change and
economic instability. My opinion is that the free market model of enterprise and private sector, profit
driven, food distribution systems are the structural weaknesses regarding both nutrition and food
security. The notion of a nations’ economies that can afford to import, rather than produce food,
leaves that nation of the mercy of the international food distribution networks and can in many cases
lead to small economies only able to import the cheapest, poorest quality, processed food products.
Resulting in Chronic non communicable diseases and obese malnutrition.
Food security needs to be seen as a mission of National and international security, undertaken on a
national level by governments through central planning and purchasing systems. Centralized
planning, purchasing and procurement of farm produce will alleviate national gluts and reduce
shortages. It will also permit for governments to better control the price of fresh produce, encourage
new farmers (a guaranteed market and fair price are huge incentives for any business), reduce crop
theft and allow for better delivery to consumers via existing marketers and consumers. Food quality
(through grading) and food safety can be better managed.
The most nutritious food is fresh, local food and with a centralized planning and procurement system,
assessments can be made of the nutritional value of locally produced crops which in turn can be
delivered to the areas where maximum nutritional is most vital. Governments can better organize the
distribution of nutritious food through school meals systems and to hospitals. Government agencies
which currently have the equipment and manpower can be utilized to collect many of the seasonal
fruits that many householders have on their properties, subtract a fee from the householder for the
services and supplement the householders’ income with the remainder of the value of their fruits. This
will act as an incentive for more people to plant more fruit trees and can act as a genuine means of
poverty alleviation for the needy and elderly who cannot farm in the traditional sense.
The centralized planning and purchasing system can also help with the co ordination of small farmers
into groups and by withholding of a percentage of the farmers payment, saving schemes can be
developed in a credit union or cooperative format Over a period of years this saving scheme can act
as a revolving fund for farmers and a means of obtaining shared labour and equipment programmes.
Input supplies for the farms and crop waste can be better coordinated so that some crop waste can
go to pig or rabbit farmers, while some can go into compost systems.
Increased research and development into local crops that can be solar dried and semi processed for
longer shelf life would also help, especially in the Caribbean where we are maybe 15 years behind
Africa in these techniques. Finally (whew!)
This national model can be used on an international scale for government to government control over
food export and imports, maintaining the highest quality nutrition, affordability and not competing with
the availability of the locally grown alternatives. It would be like a NATO for food.
Thank you for the opportunity.
7) Yves Garenne, Ecophanie, France
English translation
11
Proceedings | 12
As a private citizen, one can only be very concerned that food security depends in part on financial
speculation. Even now, there are traders that with a click of the mouse could ruin entire sectors of
agriculture. How can this continue in our world, where farmers die of hunger or can not live decently
on their labour? Food security will also depend on the level of education that is given to children today
to improve their appreciation of the respect that we owe to farmers. The other educational option
consists in understanding the relationship between children and food. At what level of
nourishment are enjoyment and pragmatism combined? On the other hand , the idea of a multistakeholder platform in the spirit of the Rio Convention is indeed an innovation that we can but
encourage.
French original
En tant que simple citoyen, on ne peut être que très inquiet que la sécurité alimentaire dépende en
partie de la spéculation financière. Il existe encore des traders qui d'un clic de souris peuvent ruiner
des pans entiers de l'agriculture. Comment peut continuer notre monde où des agriculteurs meurent
de faim ou ne peuvent pas vivre décemment de leur travail ? La sécurité alimentaire dépendra aussi
du niveau d'éducation que l'on donnera aux enfants d'aujourd'hui pour améliorer la prise de
conscience du respect que l'on doit aux agriculteurs. L'autre option éducative consiste aussi à
comprendre la relation de l'enfant à l'aliment. Quel est le niveau d'alimentation qui conjugue le plaisir
et la raison ? Par contre, l'idée d'une plateforme multi-prenante dans l'esprit de la convention de Rio
est réellement une innovation que nous ne pouvons qu'encourager.
8) Hanefi Isselmou, Alliance contre la Faim en Mauritanie, Mauritania
English translation
Sirs, it is an honor for me to read the Introductory Note: On Line consultation of the CFS on the
Global Strategic Framework. I am reassured that our problem with hunger in Mauritania, if not to say
famine, is shared with us by the international community as a whole. This big social problem has
been until now restricted (in terms of corrective efforts ) to the states and their multilateral partners.
The civil society was notably absent in this fight where it should have been the spearhead. We hope
that the recent reform of CFS will allow the emergence of this new fundamental awareness in order
that all the efforts to eradicate hunger in the southern countries may be succesful. Any way, at the
level of the alliance against hunger in Mauritania, we will not spare any efforts so that the international
and inter-governmental platform emerging from the reform of CFS may be a real alternative,
capable of pooling together the efforts of all with the object of abolishing hunger in the world in the
shortest possible time. Our warmest encouragement. We are placing this information on our website
www.sosabbere.asso.st
French original
Messieurs,
C'est pour moi un honneur de lire la Note d’introduction : Consultation virtuelle du CSA sur le cadre
stratégique mondial.
Je suis rassuré que notre problème avec la faim pour ne pas dire la famine en Mauritanie, est partagé
avec nous, par l ensemble de la communauté internationale. Ce grand problème de société jusque-là
réservé (point de vue lutte) aux états et à leurs partenaires multilatéraux. La société civile été le grand
12
Proceedings | 13
absent de ce combat dont elle doit pourtant être le fer de lance. Nous souhaitons que le réforme
récente du CSA aurait permit l émergence de cette nouvelle conscience fondamentale pour la
réussite de toute œuvre allant dans le sens de l éradication de la faim dans les pays du sud. Dans
tout les cas au niveau de l'alliance contre la faim en Mauritanie nous n'épargnerons aucun efforts
pour que cette plateforme internationale et intergouvernementale issue de la réforme du CSA puisse
être une réelle alternative capable de mettre en commun les efforts de tous afin de venir à bout de la
faim dans le monde et dans les délais les plus courts.
Nos sincères encouragement. Nous relayerons cette information sur notre site
http://www.sosabbere.asso.st
9) Herman Jolink, Fodder Solutions Africa, South Africa
Having lived and travelled in Africa for 55 years it is imperative to understand that Africa is a continent
of natural herders and gatherers. Thus, by focussing on basic agriculture that has little reliance on
high technology and high capital input, we can turn the continent back into the food basket it used to
be using the indigenous population. I have linked in with Fodder Solutions from Australia and will be
manufacturing their fodder units throughout Africa. The units are solar powered, no working parts and
use 10% of the water required under normal irrigation and ALL the water is consumed by the
livestock. These units are very cost effective and will allow small subsistance farmers in drought areas
to be sustainable. Their units have been used by the UN in Iraq successfully.
I hope this may be of help.
10) Kaza Desalegn Kebede, Justice Sector SNNPRS, Ethiopia /IFAD, Italy
The strategic framework has noble and whole inclusive as well as universal points as to me save
some ones to be added. As to me focussing on the human rights and using the untapped traditional
knowledge needs to be included and emphasized.
This could add the value because for centuries the international organizations, regional and local
counter parts are there in commitment in spite of the fact that still now, there is global food insecurity
everywhere and hunger, especially in developing world. I think there is something wrong which the
stake holders have not understood. So, giving emphasis on the human right approach and involving
the traditional/indigenous knowledge as one of the tools to address the problems, it will be positive
because still now we have not given much emphases and attention to the role of indigenous
communities in food security realization, and also their direct participation for solving the problems.
Most of those facing the problems of food insecurity are rural poor and indigenous people.
So, it needs to involve their direct participation to know the root problems, their causes and the
solutions and protect their rights by holistic human right based approach. This could empower the
indigenous communities living in Ethiopia, for instance, and increase their involvement and minimize
the burdens of the international organizations as the community capacitating paves the ways for selfhelp of the community and direct democratization as well as enhancing global network with the direct
victims and the owners of the solutions.
13
Proceedings | 14
11) Suman K A, Change Planet Partners Climate Innovation Foundation, National Alliance
Against Hunger and Malnutrition, India
Dear all,
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this very important consultation.
Given the urgency and magnitude of the food security and nutrition challenges worldwide, the
reformation process and document was expected to have some bold/radical proposals therein.
Especially in the areas of inclusiveness, the governance, hard evidence base , unparalleled national
government's buy-in , extensive use of ICT technologies to guide the vision and mission of the
framework. It might be pertinent for the framework to consider studying some new and emerging
models/innovations in the above three areas happening worldwide especially in the spaces such as
climate change and energy and revisit the structure. As an example in the context of climate change
reputed scientific bodies such as IPCC backed by national governments came together to support
with hard evidence pieces to guide international policy & communiqué actions Similarly, in terms of
governance, a neutral yet a very innovative model of governance in the form of IRENA is fast
emerging to address the challenges of accelerating solutions to unprecedented energy challenges. In
terms of inclusiveness, the reform document especially in terms of membership and participation
needs to consider a wide and deep representation of the populace actually affected by food insecurity
and malnutrition.
Secondly scope for encouraging 'e-multi stakeholder platforms' could find a place in the scheme of the
Framework to encourage wide participation as also address inclusiveness dimensions. In my view,
questions 2 through 5 can become clearer as the Framework moves through its Phase II. Climate
Change happens to be among the forerunners of the long term challenges and the Framework must
devise a mechanism to include and address this in its scope and scheme of things.
I do hope the inputs prove useful.
Best regards Ms Suman K A.,
Change Planet Partners Climate Innovation Foundation India
12) David B Williams, Chartered Engineer, United Kingdom
The World’s food supply is in a very critical situation. The global population continues to grow at an
increasing rate, and the majority of staple foodstuffs are provided by a very small group of plants.
Cereals and grain crops, either consumed directly or fed to animals which then produce foods, are the
vital resource that prevents mass starvation in the world today.
The world’s population reached one billion around 1800. By 1900, it had increased to 1.6 billion and
by 2000; the figures had reversed to give a total of 6.1 billion. The current rate of population growth is
now one billion people every 12 years and by September 2011 the global population is predicted to be
7 billion people.[1] But whilst the population increases, the resources needed to produce foodstuffs,
are becoming degraded, less easily available and more expensive.
[1]
Population Reference Bureau, Washington DC.
14
Proceedings | 15
For the last five years, production and consumption of grain crops has balanced on a knife edge as
climatic events and political situations in different countries have produced local shortages. To date,
strategic stocks carried over from previous years have been sufficient to avoid actual famine, but the
capacity to replenish those stock-piles is being reduced, at the same time as the demand for food
grains continues to increase. In 2011/12, FAO predicts that food grain production will almost meet
consumption needs, but that is always assuming that there will be no undue climatic, political or
economic event to disrupt the situation. And in 2012/13, the demand for food grains will increase by
1.6% as it will in 2013/14 and beyond. How will farms be able to continue to meet the ever increasing
demand for their harvests?
Year
Production
(MMT)
Consumption
(MMT)
Surplus
(MMT)
Global Production and Consumption of Food Grains [2]
2007/8
2008/9
2009/10
2010/11
2132
2286
2263
2239
2011/12*
2313
2140
2191
2231
2275
2307
-8
95
32
-36
6
(MMT = million metric tons)
* Estimated
Food crop production uses up finite resources. The availability of at least two of these resources,
water and arable land, is reducing because of competition from the growing urban population and the
cost of other resources such as artificial fertilisers and vehicle fuels is increasing with the global rise in
prices of hydrocarbons. This means that merely increasing production is not a viable solution to the
problem of securing future food supplies.
Agriculture is currently the largest global consumer of fresh water which is rapidly becoming a scarce
resource in many regions. To produce each kilogramme of wheat requires around 1300 litres of
water; rice consumes much more, needing around 3,000 litres for each kilogramme of production.
Diminishing water supplies have already forced changes in national food policies. For example,
Saudi Arabia has already been forced to abandon its national policy of self sufficiency in wheat
production because of diminishing irrigation water resources. Other Middle Eastern countries are
following similar policies and further countries are sourcing food production “offshore” as a means of
dealing with lack of the necessary resources “in-country”. For some years, disputes over water
supplies have been predicted to be the factor that will trigger conflicts; unfortunately, the day when
that takes place is drawing closer.
The manufacturing process for nitrogen fertiliser is a heavy consumer of natural gas, so the current
increases in hydrocarbon prices have had a significant impact on fertiliser costs. Despite the recent
increases in revenues from cereal production, many farmers are seeking to reduce their use of
manufactured fertilisers partly because of the financial cost and also because of the potential for
leaching of nitrates into water supplies.
[2]
World Food Situation, Supply and Demand Brief, UN Food & Agriculture Organisation 7/7/2011.
15
Proceedings | 16
Land availability is also under pressure. In many countries, increasing population is encouraging
development of not only improved housing but employment and leisure facilities and the
communications links that are required to connect them. These all consume land and take it out of
agricultural production.
Additionally, labour is frequently a diminishing resource as populations move from rural to urban
areas, making farm-work less attractive to many.
All of the above factors inhibit the increase of agricultural production, so whilst politicians and
academics may recommend that food production be increased, the practical aspects of doing so are
far from straightforward.
Because basic food commodities are at the bottom of the food chain, they have traditionally been
regarded as low cost and relatively expendable. This has resulted in transport and storage facilities in
many regions of the world that are quite simply inadequate. Vast quantities of grains and other
foodstuffs fail to be used in the food chain because they are spilled or spoiled between the farm and
the processor or consumer. In many countries grain can be seen along the roads as it spills from
leaking trucks. In other countries, more perishable farm produce is bruised and battered to pulp as it
is carried along inadequate roads between farm and market.
In my opinion, one massive step in improving food security in many countries has nothing whatever to
do with agriculture, but everything to do with infrastructure. Improving roads, storage structures and
storage technology has the potential to reduce the loss of well over 250 million tons of cereals each
year.
Getting produce to market requires efficient and effective transport links. In many countries these still
do not exist. As a result, large volumes of foodstuffs deteriorate before they reach the consumer, if
they reach the consumer at all.
Farm produce needs to be stored between harvest and consumption. In the right storage facility,
grain can be stored for several years. If the store is inadequate, it may rot in weeks or even days.
Very few countries have good facilities for the storage of grain, some have adequate facilities, but in
many more countries, the facilities are poor or even appalling. Again this is not in the realm of
agriculture; it is in the realm of infrastructure and engineering, usually at a very basic level.
I have inspected several hundred grain storage facilities in the former Soviet Republics. The majority
were built to designs from the 1930’s and are hopelessly inadequate. They are unhygienic, inefficient
and lack any form of quality control. They are havens for insects, rats and birds. As a member of an
EU review team, I measured post harvest grain losses in Ukraine ranging from 25% to over 60%.
Because the stores throughout the CIS were built to common designs, this level of loss can be
applied throughout the entire region. According to FAO statistics, the CIS countries harvested some
187.5 million tons of food grains in 2009, which means that almost 50 million tons will be lost due to
inadequate transport and storage facilities.
The Indian sub-continent is another region where crop storage and transport facilities are inadequate.
India itself admits to losing around 21 million tons of wheat each year, equivalent to the entire
production of Australia, whilst the situation in Pakistan and Bangladesh is even worse. Pakistan has
recently embarked on, yet another, feasibility study to rectify its crop storage problems, but as yet has
16
Proceedings | 17
no real plan of how to implement the recommendations of the plan, when it is produced. Successive
plans have been made to improve the nation’s crop stores for at least 25 years, with little apparent
progress towards concrete implementation. Bangladesh is also moving in the right direction, but also
at a pitifully slow rate.
In East Asia, the situation with regard to rice storage is also in urgent need of improvement. In China,
Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia, around 185 million tons does not reach the consumer each year.
In Africa, the situation is also in a dire condition. In 2008, Ghana lost over 50% of its entire maize
crop due to inadequate storage facilities. In other less developed countries, the situation is far, far
worse.
Even in Europe and the USA, many storage facilities are antiquated and inadequate and standards of
management and maintenance are below par. I have personally investigated several large scale
losses that were due entirely to inadequate facility maintenance, poor understanding of the situation
and poor management.
Government and commercial policies can also cause wastage and loss of foodstuffs. The well
intentioned balladi bread subsidies in the Middle East are intended to ensure that even the poorest
members of the population can afford bread. But in effect the vast sums paid into the bread market
actively encourage waste, excess consumption, diversion and smuggling. Over 60% of the entire
production of one large flour mill in Saudi Arabia is smuggled into the free market of Yemen making
participants of the smuggling ring a very lucrative living at the expense of the Government of Saudi
Arabia. But reduction of the subsidies on bread were a major factor in the recent overthrow of the
Egyptian government.
Improvements in the transport and storage infrastructure can increase the amount of available food
grains by at least 250 million tons each year, without growing a single extra ear of wheat. Surely, we
need to at least buy ourselves some time whilst the agriculturalists can work out a better long term
solution.
In the developed economies, enormous quantities of foodstuffs are wasted by a combination of
supermarket purchasing policies, sales promotions that encourage families to buy more food than
they actually need, over cautious “use by” and “sell by” dates, and in many cultures, the practice of
showing excessive generosity to guests.
The majority of large supermarket companies place a huge value on the cosmetic appearance of
fresh foodstuffs on their shelves. Fruits and vegetables are required to have uniform appearances
and have no blemishes. As a result, large quantities of perfectly edible and nutritious fruits and
vegetables are discarded simply because of minor “imperfections”. Thousands of tons of carrots are
discarded because they are not perfectly straight. Apples that do not exhibit the “correct” degree of
colouration on their skins are also rejected. Both are perfectly edible and nutritious, but are not
accepted. Cauliflowers and broccoli that are 110 mm in diameter are also discarded, when the
purchase specification states that they should be 90 - 100 mm.
Supermarkets frequently force farmers to over-produce as a form of insurance to ensure that they
have sufficient supplies. The surplus crops are never harvested and are often destroyed in the fields.
17
Proceedings | 18
Their aggressive purchasing policies frequently leave farmers holding large stocks of produce that
cannot be sold.
Supermarkets frequently mark foodstuffs with date stamps that recommend the latest date by which
the product should be consumed. Because they are designed to protect the store from legal action
resulting from the sale of unsafe food, they are generally quite conservative. However, this can
encourage shoppers to throw away food that is still quite edible because the “use-by” date suggests
that it may be unsafe. This encourages the consumer to buy more food.
Many cultures encourage families to treat guests with respect and to provide them with a very
generous amount of food. In poor communities, this can result in families providing guests with tables
that are overflowing with dishes, rather than suffering the indignity of being considered ungenerous
hosts. This practice also leads to wasted food.
In the United Kingdom, studies have suggested that 30% of the vegetable crop is never harvested for
reasons that include failing to ripen at the required time in the harvesting schedule or being surplus to
the markets requirements. 30% of the vegetables that are harvested are lost by trimming, quality
selection and for failure to comply with cosmetic standards. And 30 – 50% of the vegetables that are
purchased by the end user are then thrown away because of further trimming, over buying and
conservative “use-by” recommendations. This means that 71% of the entire vegetable production of
the UK never reaches the nations tables. If production were to be doubled, the actual increase in
supply would be no more than 27%.
Unfortunately, this pattern of behaviour is not peculiar to the UK. A recent BBC study concluded that
whilst British farmers have to produce 5 kgs of foodstuffs for every 1 kg that is eaten, in less
developed countries the figure is 9 kgs of production for every 1 kg consumed.
To continue to consume vast amounts of resources in the form of water, diesel fuel, natural gas,
manpower and machinery in the production of foodstuffs that never reach the consumer is totally
unsustainable. The world is capable of producing sufficient foods to provide adequate nutrition for its
people for many years to come, but only if the current monumental levels of food wastage are
reduced.
13) Oluwole Ogunmusire, GFDI Consult, Nigeria
Brilliant consultative platform by GSF, this practice should be adopted at community levels for
effective communication: DEVELOPING A RESPONSIVE POLICY FRAMEWORK
Imperatively, there is need to re-focus on government and institutional agricultural policies and
practices of under-developed and developing nations. Most of these nations lack the appropriate
capacity to implement and sustain most of their agricultural programmes. There is a structural
disconnect between stakeholders which has to be reconnected by bridging the infrastructural gaps
especially in the area of information management and sectoral practices (best practices, farm
extension services etc.). This is very crucial because Africa as an example is rurally inclined and the
polity of government in this region shows through statistics, a rural bias even though the continent
depends on the rural sector for over 80 percent of its farmer produce. There is need to synchronize
farming intelligence by bridging the gap between stakeholders and enabling; innovative development,
effective communication, information management and assist the government in developing a
18
Proceedings | 19
responsive policy framework for an equitable agricultural industry. WORKING TOWARDS
ECONOMIC LIBERATION Accountability measures and responsible utilization of foreign aids, relief
funds and grants should be looked into, foreign aids should be seen as a means of actualizing
economic liberation and not a free meal as some of the benefiting nations have learnt to depend on
external funding, therefore showing inadequate budgetary commitment to agriculture. The focus
seems to be lost on some nations and there is need to establish pre-requisite/criteria and enforce
compliance to requirements before accessing specific financial aids.
14) John Teton, International Food Security Treaty Association, United States of America
The International Food Security Treaty (IFST) would place the fundamental right of everyone to be
free from hunger under the protection of enforceable international law.
The IFST is being seen by leading religious and political figures and ever more members of the
human rights, anti-hunger, law, international relations, and religious communities as both feasible and
essential to any serious effort at eradicating the world’s most pervasive and injurious public health
problem. Many of their statements endorsing the IFST are published along with the Treaty text at
www.treaty.org.
Epidemiologist Geoffrey Rose pointed out that the primary remedies of disease must be economic
and social and Nobel Laureate economist Amartya Sen observed that in modern times nobody
starves unless someone wants them to. An effective attack on hunger requires the social remedy of
human rights law—hard law that puts real meaning into otherwise high-minded but toothless
declarations.
Under the IFST, each nation will be obliged:
1) to GUARANTEE A MINIMUM NUTRITION for people within its borders who can’t get access to it
on their own
2) to CONTRIBUTE TO A WORLD FOOD RESERVE AND RESOURCE CENTER for any nation
needing emergency help to meet that guarantee
3) to ESTABLISH AND ENFORCE LAW against the use of hunger as a weapon, and
4) to SUPPORT UN FOOD SECURITY ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS if it’s proven that any nation is
unable or unwilling to enforce that law on its own.
U. S. House of Representatives Hunger Caucus Co-Chair Jim McGovern has described this Treaty as
“doable.” The Treaty has the same synergy of common sense, inherent morality, and hard law that
ended slavery and guaranteed women’s suffrage.
Present global hunger statistics reveal the inadequacy of swiping at edges of hunger with half-hearted
development and emergency food aid programs. Valuable as they are in alleviating some aspects of
hunger in selected locations, they’ve not prevented the now imminent failure of the international
community to achieve Millennium Development Goal #1, the halving of world hunger—let alone
extreme poverty—by 2015.
That failure echoes the underlying failure of those in positions of influence or political power who
ignore or attempt to impede the advance of this most vital of human rights initiatives, the IFST. The
description of a “rights-based approach” that appears as a policy option in the Global Strategic
Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GFS) Annotated Outline does not go nearly far enough to
redress that failure. FAO’s Right To Food Unit is currently focusing on the Right to Food Voluntary
Guidelines. The Guidelines and the much narrower, but binding IFST are in fact complementary, as
was pointed out long ago by Michael Windfuhr, one of the principal originating authors of the
Guidelines.
19
Proceedings | 20
It is therefore incumbent upon the CFS Plenary to update the GFS by incorporating a wholehearted
commitment to promote the International Food Security Treaty and to urge all nations to push for the
Treaty’s adoption and implementation worldwide.
15) Crisantos Obama, Misión Permanente de Guinea Ecuatorial ante la FAO, Equatorial
Guinea
English translation
I am grateful for this initiative of including a consultation on the CFS Global Strategic Framework. And
apart from the institutional vision, I considered appropriate to offer my brief comment as a citizen of a
country that intends to participate in the joint and coordinated effort towards eliminating hunger and
ensuring food security.
From the principles of the CFS reform, the need to strengthen the links with the territory, and
countries, has been emphasized. And apparently since 2009, and about to celebrate the 37th
session, the link between the CFS and the countries still remains weak.
In many countries is still confusing to distinguish between the CFS framework and the one of FAO,
and its level of coordination on the field. It is not known if we are still in Phase I or II under the CFS
framework. Besides, I think that while scientific and technical information about hunger and its causes
in the world must be constantly updated, enough is known now about this problem, and the CFS has
to act accordingly and reduce his efforts in finding technical expertise. In Africa, the CAADP
framework is well known and many countries have adopted it. The CFS should assess its
effectiveness and needs to update or revise the less conclusive measures.
In conclusion, as requested to FAO, the CFS should be move to the field to offer advice and concrete
support to countries on the elimination of hunger and food security. Ad hoc groups of countries or
regions -supported by the CFS- could set actions and measures and move to other countries. In the
last Africa Regional Conference, held in Angola, a similar measure was proposed, but no monitoring
mechanism was adopted.
Therefore, the CFS Global Strategic Framework should be dynamic and specific in action, and not just
a global benchmark of the current situation. The CFS should address and define specific aspects of
regions and countries related to hunger and food security.
Many thanks
Spanish original
Quiero agradecer ésta iniciativa de incluir una consulta sobre el Marco Estratégico Mundial del CFS.
Y al margen de la visión institucional, he creído oportuno ofrecer mi breve comentario en tanto un
ciudadano de un país que pretende participar en el esfuerzo común y coordinado hacía la eliminación
del hambre y garantizar la seguridad alimentaria.
Desde la base de los principios de la reforma de CFS, se destaca la necesidad fortalecer el vínculo
con el territorio, con los países, y por visto desde 2009 y punto de celebrar la 37 sesión, el vínculo
CFS y los países sigue siendo débil.
En muchos países sigue siendo confusa distinguir el marco de CFS con el de la FAO y su nivel de
coordinación sobre el terreno. No se sabe si estamos todavía en la Fase I o II del marco del CFS.
Creo a demás que si bien la información técnica y científica sobre el hambre y sus causas en el
mundo debe actualizarse constantemente, se conoce lo suficiente actualmente sobre ésta
problemática, y CFS debe ya actuar en consecuencia y reducir sus esfuerzos en la búsqueda de
20
Proceedings | 21
conocimientos técnicos. En África el marco del CAADP es bien conocido, muchos países lo han
adoptado, CFS debería analizar su efectividad y es necesario actualizar o revisar las medidas menos
concluyentes.
En conclusión, como se pide a la FAO, el CFS debe trasladarse sobre el terreno para ofrecer
asesoramiento y apoyos concretos a los países sobre la eliminación del hambre y la seguridad
alimentaria. Grupos ah doc de países o regiones apoyados por el CFS podrían concretar acciones y
medidas y trasladarlas a otros países.
En la última Conferencia Regional de África en Angola, una medida similar fue propuesta, pero
ningún mecanismo de seguimiento fue adoptado. Por tanto, el Marco Estratégico Mundial del CFS
debe ser dinámico y concreto en acción y no simple referencia mundial de la situación, debe tocar y
definir aspectos concretos de regiones y países sobre el hambre y la seguridad alimentaria.
Muchas gracias
16) Cheikh Hassan Saleh
English translation
We can say that the function of the CSA is set up clearly; it was formed by comparing the current
situation and a review of the past (the charter of food aid) with the end of generating solutions to the
problems associated with food insecurity and malnutrition especially in our developing countries,
which are most affected by the structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition.
French original
On peut dire que la fonction du CSA est établie clairement ; si était formé par une comparaison de la
situations actuelle et révision de passé (la charte de l’aide alimentaire) en fin d’engendrer les
problèmes liés a l’insécurité alimentaire et la malnutrition en particulier dans nos pays en voie de
développement qui sont le plus touchés par les causes structurelles de l’insécurité alimentaire et la
malnutrition.
17) Darana Souza, UNDP, Brazil
Dear all,
I think this is an important initiative and I particularly believe that the role of the CFS shall become
pivotal in achieving world food security and nutrition.
I would like to particularly make two brief comments on question 3:
1. There is little attention to certain key non-food determinants of food security throughout the outline.
It would be important to more clearly consider the importance of proper access to health services and
infrastructure, particularly water and sanitation, which are paramount to achieving food security.
2. The document stresses the role of smallholder farmers amongst its priority issues. In this context, it
would be important to mention the necessity of adapted actions for traditional populations with the aim
of encouraging differentiated initiatives to attend this type of public.
21
Proceedings | 22
Warm regards,
Darana Souza
International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG)
Poverty Practice, Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP
18) Comments by Francisco Sarmento, facilitator of the consultation
During this period, we continued to receive valuable comments on the Annotated Outline from
individuals in different organizations, and particularly from government officials.
I would like to thank all contributors, and inform you that the Civil Society Mechanism linked to the
CFS, as well as the Private Sector (Agrifood Network) have started their autonomous consultations on
the GSF. Furthermore, an important consultation focusing on nutrition aspects is being conducted by
the SCN. This clearly demonstrates interest in this important exercise. We look forward to receiving
the outcomes of all these consultations.
I was pleased to see that, as suggested in my previous letter, most general comments focused on the
structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition as well as priority issues to be addressed by the
GSF in the long term.
In a nutshell, the major comments received reflect change from past, conventional diagnoses of food
insecurity resulting from food scarcity, to a different focus on the complex challenges having to be
addressed to ensure universal access to healthy and adequate food by means of a systemic intersectoral approach involving social participation.
A number of the structural causes were highlighted including unequal power relations, gender
discrimination, poor health, inadequate education (from the earliest levels), poor infrastructure
(transport, communication, marketing etc), wastage (post harvest losses and consumption wastage)
climate change, malfunctioning markets and food price volatility.
The following aspects were identified for priority attention:




The interrelated aspects of malfunctioning markets and food price volatility
Investment that would reduce hunger and improve nutrition taking into account the
fundamental role of small holder producers
Reversing the decline in agricultural productivity, and the role of global research in developing
solutions to this
Ways to meaningfully measure and track improvement in food security and nutrition at
national and global levels, linking policies and other initiatives to outcomes.
It was strongly argued that institutional change is required to enable more comprehensive and
inclusive processes to analyze such interrelated problems, to prepare policies to address them, and to
implement policies effectively.
22
Proceedings | 23
Participants emphasized that the GSF and CFS should also offer guidance on how to improve food
security and nutrition at regional and national levels by, for example, by pointing out consumption
patterns that could be sustainable for the majority of national or sub-regional populations. In this
regard it was mentioned that “South Asia's top three income deciles consume up to 50-55% more
cereals than the bottom three, and the top three urban deciles consume 100-150% more meat and
dairy than the mid-three rural deciles”.
Referring to sections III and IV of the Annotated Outline, it was suggested that a GSF should allow for
short and medium-term issues to be treated separately. It was also proposed to connect Core Issues
with their corresponding policy responses and merge sections III and IV under a new title: “Core
issues and policy options”, to make the GSF more reader friendly.
It was requested that lessons learned from an increasing number of countries that use the right to
food as a framework for the design, implementation and evaluation of national laws, policies and
programmes be included in the GSF, particularly examples from the local level
Proposals received thus far are useful as they point to linkages between broad challenges to be
addressed and possible policy solutions for these. The Annotated Outline includes most of the
preceding broad proposals. What is required now are specific ideas on how a GSF and the CSF can
help to address them effectively.
I look forward to your more detailed, specific suggestions in this regard.
In again thanking all contributors for their inputs I, once more, encourage the widest participation in
this important exchange.
Francisco Sarmento
19) Ali Ghawampour, Iran Fisheries, Iran
Dear all,
Thank you for this opportunity to participate in this consultation system, In Southern region of Iran
(Abadan-Khuzestan province), the irrigation of agriculture crops (which date is dominant crop),is done
by ditches which are dug from river to field and fill gravity. This year Fishery department of Khuzestan
delivered free carp fingerlings to some farmers to evaluate results as a pilot project to expand the
project in future with more farms. I think this can be a good way to increase income for other
provinces in country and also other countries which this system of irrigation follows.
20) Daniela Alfaro, CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers,
France
Dear colleagues,
As representative of the CGIAR in this Forum I would like to express my satisfaction and high
expectations with the results of the initiative. Undoubtedly, the elaboration of a Global Strategic
Framework regarding food security is fundamental to overcome the current and unacceptable
situation of almost 1 billion people around the world suffering hunger. Defining such strategy with the
23
Proceedings | 24
help of a collaborative effort between experts, related institutions and other participants constitutes, in
my opinion, an excellent way to achieve positive and timely results as the situation demands. Over the
past 40 years, the CGIAR has been fully committed to enhance agriculture and natural resources
research in order to reduce poverty and hunger, improve human health and nutrition and produce
greater ecosystem resilience. This is made through its fifteen member centers and the participation of
many of our partners among civil society organizations, academia, national and international research
organizations and the private sector. Our Strategy and Results Framework and the CGIAR Research
Programs (CRPs) resulting from the CGIAR reform, are now the mechanism by which the CGIAR
Centers and its partnerships will produce international public goods with the highest concrete results
in the life of the people suffering from food insecurity and poverty. I´m fully confident that significant
contributions could be made through this Forum and I´m looking forward to exchanging experiences
and ideas with its participants.
Thank you very much.
Daniela Alfaro - Senior Analyst, CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers,
Montpellier, France.
21) Murdock Tiantang Ren, China
English summary
For the original in Chinese please see:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/Creative_Agriculture_and_Food_Securi
ty_ZH.doc
Creative Agriculture and Food Security-A Summary
In 2010, China’s food production grew for the seventh consecutive year, for the first time in half a
century. But it didn’t come about at no cost: greater use of chemical inputs, environment degradation,
increased incidence of natural disasters, deterioration of rural living environment, acceleration of
urbanization and industrialization, reduction of arable land, ageing of rural labor force etc. It is
therefore imperative to change the modality of agriculture production and promote agricultural
creativity.
There are worries that development of creative agriculture may bring about negative impact on
food security. But in fact the major causes of food security come from social, political and economical
dimensions, such as poverty, inequality and discrimination; lack of resources; conflict and social
instability and market access issues.
1. Creative Agriculture Preserves Ecological Balance
Agriculture is an important source of greenhouse gases, contributing 30% of global
anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. China’s fertilizer production and utilization account for over
one-third of the world total. The use of fertilizer itself produces greenhouse effect, and its production
also consumes great amount of energy such as coal and oil, contributing to temperature increase and
pollution.
24
Proceedings | 25
The use of chemical fertilizer causes damage to soil and crops become more susceptive to pests
and diseases, which in turn must be controlled by large amount of agro-chemicals. Increased
dependence of crops on fertilizers and chemicals has raised the threat of drought and flood.
China has a fine and long history of ecologically friendly agriculture. F. H. King, an American soil
expert, raised a question about a hundred years ago: why the soil is still fertile after four thousand
years of farming in China? The answer is simply ‘manure’, which guaranteed sustainability.
In order to restore the ecological functions of soil, achieve agriculture sustainability and ensure
food security, we must optimize agriculture production modality and review and support ecological
and creative agriculture.
2. Creative Agriculture Ensures Farm Land Security
Creative agriculture is helpful to urban development in many ways. As ‘lungs of the cities’, it helps
control pollutions, provide green landscape and keep a fresh and tranquil living surroundings; it
supplies fresh, hygienic and pollution-free agricultural produces and increase employment and
income; it provides venues and opportunities for urban dwellers to interact with rural life and
agriculture; it helps preserve and pass on agricultural and rural traditions. More importantly, creative
agriculture can serve as fences and green buffers, mitigating excessive expansion of cities, therefore
ensures farmland security and food security.
3. Creative Agriculture Ensures Crop Diversity
Human beings are becoming increasingly dependent on a few major crops, rice, wheat and corn
in particular. Yet biodiversity is very important to ensuring food security and the survival of human
race.
There are many other plants in the nature that can be cultivated for agricultural purposes and
some of them may well substitute major food crops. Over 7,000 plant species have been cultivated in
agricultural history, but currently only 30 of them are farmed for food use. The spreading of high-yield
crops caused many local species and wild and semi-wild resources and materials to diminish or
become extinct. Those materials contain many good properties, the loss of which undermines the
genetic base of modern crop breeding and variety improvement efforts.
Crop diversity is highly relevant to food security. Different regional and climate conditions suit
different crop farming. And different crops vary in the extent of damage that may be caused by natural
disasters. Chinese people have realized centuries ago that ‘to avoid disasters, cereals need to be
cultivated with five different varieties’.
4. Creative Agriculture Promotes China’s ‘New Countryside Strategy’
Creative agriculture implies high added value to agriculture produces. Many improved varieties,
such as color wheat and fruit-use corns, have very high commercial value as well as good nutritional
value. This will help to attract social resources and develop a healthy value chain.
Creative agriculture has both technological and cultural dimensions and may induce muchneeded combination of industrial civilization with agriculture. This is particularly relevant in China and
will promote the integration of its urban and rural development. By absorbing rural labor force, creative
agriculture may help reduce and movement of migrate rural workers and therefore saves social costs.
This is an important aspect of the so-called harmonious new countryside development.
25
Proceedings | 26
The essence of creative agriculture lies in its full exploration of agriculture’s technological and
cultural values. Differentiated and diversified agricultural development will provide political,
economical, ecological, technological and cultural guarantee to food security. It is important to give
play to the ‘soft power’ of creative agriculture at the same time of emphasizing quantities of
agricultural production.
22) Comments by Francisco Sarmento, facilitator of the consultation
We have received comments from individuals belonging to or working for different organizations: from
civil society organizations to consultancy companies, from UN agencies to governments. While most
contributors preferred to provide general additional suggestions to the future Global Strategic
Framework, others provided concrete inputs on the annotated outline. I would like to thank all
contributors, particularly considering the period of the year.
It was interesting to note that, to a certain extent, most comments and (or) suggestions focused on
subjects covered by questions II) to IV), reflecting a general concern with the major structural causes,
challenges, priority issues and policy options for the GSF.
Suggestions related to the most important structural causes of hunger and mal-nutrition as well as
present and future challenges were given in the context of the current industrialized food system and
its emphasis on cereals, the vulnerability to financial speculation and the much-noted (but not enough
mentioned) dichotomy: roughly a billion people are undernourished while a similar number are
considered too fat. It was mentioned, never minding any effect from climate change and rising
temperatures (something to be also addressed in the annotated outline), that our system continues
to consume vast amounts of resources in the form of water, diesel fuel, natural gas and machinery in
the production of foodstuffs that sometimes don´t even reach the consumer due to supermarket
purchasing policies.
In fact, the emergence and recent development of large-scale and efficient food production and
distribution (based on low prices and high quantities) changed our relationship with food and
ultimately left a more vulnerable and paradoxical system. A challenge that might need to be
addressed by all stakeholders participating in the CFS.
Particular importance was also given to the promotion of appropriate food security and nutrition
governance frameworks with multi-stakeholders participation. It was even suggested the need to offer
concrete support to countries in order to change existing anachronic governance structures. It would
be interesting to further discuss concrete alternatives to strengthen multi-stakeholders participation
(for example, legal recognition and capacity) in the context of existent national and regional food
security and nutrition strategies as well as its possible convergence with other multi-stakeholders
structures previewed in regional agriculture and food security programs (as for example CAADP).
Contributions also emphasized the importance of a stronger state planning and overall intervention in
agriculture and its major infra-estrctures, increased research and development of local crops and use
of adjusted (social) technologies. They also called for the education of children regarding nutrition
and to the recognition of the importance of the role of smallholder farmers - a set of contributions of
which the major common line is the importance of local agricultural food systems in the fight against
hunger and malnutrition.
In terms of policy options, the idea of using and reinforcing a Rights based approach in the annotated
outline was clearly supported. It was also mentioned that the CFS should use the GSF to provide
tangible advice for the elimination of hunger, not forgetting to take into account the existence of
regional differences. This raises the question of how to better manage regional and national
particularities in the context of a strategic framework which is intended to be comprehensive.
26
Proceedings | 27
I would like to thank once again the contributions received and to take this opportunity to encorage
participation in this important discussion. The main member stakeholders, namely governments, and
also other participants in the CFS are invited, to promote independent discussions and to send, the
gathered contributions, based, if possible, on specific contributions to the already presented annoted
outiline, answering, as far as possible, the following guiding questions:
1. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term
challenges that should be considered, and which do you think are the most relevant?
2. Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant for the
GSF to include?
3. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy options do you
think are most relevant for the GSF to include?
4. Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels
(national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
Looking forward to receive your suggestions,
Francisco Sarmento
23) Abdul Razak Ayazi, Afghanistan Embassy Rome, Italy
The electronic consultation on the annotated outline is appreciated and hopefully will contribute to the
improvement of the final version of GSF for consideration by the CFS in October, 2011.
In general the annotated outline is a good start. However, a number of points need to be further
clarified. In this respect, I wish to submit the following comments for consideration of the CFS Bureau.
Background
Under item (ii), the first three bullet points can be labeled as “principles” but not bullet point 4
and 5. I suggest that the latter two be covered under a separate paragraph which will briefly state the
nature of the GSF, namely, that (i) it is intended to provide a global and holistic perspective in
improving food security at all levels (ii) be inclusive to serve all stakeholders and (iii) be a living
document but not legally binding.
In bullet point one the phrase “where appropriate” is questionable because the Five Rome
Principles (FRPs) on food security are fundamental and overarching. They provide the imperatives for
global food security and are always relevant and important both individually and collectively.
I. Statement of Rationale, Purpose and Function
It is essential to make crystal clear to all stakeholders about the rationale of the GSF. The
statement on rationale as reflected in paragraph 2 is circumlocutory. It needs to be sharpened and
made distinct from the purpose of GSF.
One can live with the preliminary definition of the purpose of GSF as approved by the CFS
Bureau (paragraph 1) which in a nutshell is to “enhance the role of CFS and promote its global vision
on food security for all people”.
27
Proceedings | 28
The first three bullet points of paragraph 3 lump together diverse tasks. Their further breakdown
could help add to clarity and lucidity, such as:






identification of key bottlenecks, challenges and opportunities
diversity in strategic approaches currently in practice that meet different situations
lessons gained from responses to macro-level challenges and also shocks (whether
endogenous or exogenous).
range of policy options and core recommendations practiced by different stakeholders
areas that can benefit from consensus building and convergence
promoting international credibility on issues of food security
For consistency the word “objective” in the first line of paragraph 3 could be changed to
“purpose” and perhaps the word “may” to “will”.
II. Long-term Challenges and Structural Causes of Food Insecurity and Malnutrition
I wish to make two observations on section II. First, while recognizing that immediate
challenges to food security (whether short or medium-term-term) are for the most part due to
unresolved long-term structural problems, it is still important to make room for separate treatment of
short and medium-term issues in this section. This would call for a change in the title and a separate
paragraph to highlight the main short and medium-term challenges. Second , paragraph 6 says that
long-term issues “will have to be examined and analysed”. Is such examination and analysis
necessary since the purpose of the GSF is to present Guidelines and not serve as a compendium on
the environmental, economic and social issues affecting food security at all levels. The best way to
handle this problem is to make references to the existing or forthcoming publications related to each
short, medium and long-term factors that need to be listed. There is adequate published material on
hand from different sources to serve as reference material and the selection could be left to the
HLPE.
III. Priority Issues to be Addressed
and
IV. Policy Options
I wish to make the following observations on these two sections. First, the titles. I think the
title of section III should have been “Principal Issues to be Addressed” because all the 9 bullet points
under paragraph 8 are basically principal issues and not priorities which ought to be spelled out with
greater specificity. Similarly, the title “Policy Responses” would have been more appropriate for
section IV because the 8 bullet points under paragraph 10 constitute a package of responses and not
options. In my opinion, using the word “option” in the title is incorrect. Secondly, there are textual
repetitions between the two sections such as bullet points 2 of paragraph 8 with bullet points 2 of
paragraph 10; bullet point 4 of paragraph 8 with bullet point 7 of paragraph 10; bullet point 7 of
paragraph 8 with bullet point 8 of paragraph 10. Such repetitions should be avoided. Thirdly, I wish to
suggest merging these two sections into one with the title “CORE ISSUES AND POLICY
RESPONSES”. One short paragraph will deal with the nature of the Core Issue to be immediately
followed by another paragraph on best Policy Response or Responses. This will make it easy for the
reader to connect Core Issues with their corresponding Policy Responses. For example, the bullet
point related to investment in agriculture (page 5) will be merged with the text on agricultural
28
Proceedings | 29
investment on pages 6 and 7. To state another example. The text on “vulnerability” on page 4 as a
Core Issue will be merged with the third bullet point on page 6 (Safety nets, social protection and
nutrition) which are Policy Responses to mitigate vulnerability. Both paragraphs should be brief and
focused which, in turn, will require considerable modification of the existing text. The narrative should
avoid listing events of the past and focus only on the nature of each Core Issue and Policy Response.
Of course there may be some Core Issues for which there is no specific Policy Response. In that case
the text should explain why this is so. I also suggest making separation between long and short-term
Core Issues and Policy Responses.
V. Monitoring Progress towards Objectives at Country Level
The text of section V needs another look to ensure that the narrative reflects the essence of the
title, namely focusing on country level monitoring, like paragraph 13. The modified text should allow
for the treatment of two other areas of concern to developing countries. One , capacity building at
country level in the area of statistics related to food security and two work on appropriate indicators
and their testing. A paragraph could also be added on the periodic evaluation of the progress in food
security at the country level.
VI. Definition of Terms
I do not see the need for including the definition of terms in the GSF. If it is to be included, then it
should be made into an Annex with all pertinent definitions (not just two) and the best indicator related
to each term . May be another Annex on selected bibliography could also be considered.
Finally, I think it is advisable to include another section on the organizational aspects of
implementing the GSF at the country level. This will include (i) legislative requirement (ii) high level
body for policy coherence (iii) responsibility of line ministries for implementation (iv) inter-ministerial
coordination and (v) interaction with other stakeholders (internal and external).
Abdul Razak Ayazi,
Agriculture Attaché,
Afghanistan Embassy, Rome
24) Lijbert Brussaard, Wageningen University, the Netherlands
Food security is underpinned by food systems that link the food chain activities of producing,
processing, distributing and consuming food to a range of social and environmental contexts. A food
system approach therefore seems pertinent in adressing food security. We can consider the global
food system, but given that more than 85% of the food is produced and consumed regionally (where a
region can be as big as a continent, such as Australia), the challenges of food security are most
meaningfully addressed at that level. I pose these challenges as (research) questions:
1. Next to the global food system, which regions/ (sub)continents encompass food systems in that the
interactions between food system actors within them are much more important (culturally and
materially) than between them?
2. Given that there is sufficient food for 6 and even 9 billion people, which critical global social,
economic and political factors prevent food security in each of those regions/(sub)continent?
29
Proceedings | 30
3. How is food security in each regional/ (sub)contentinal food system connected to the competition
between agriculture and other economic sectors for, and governance of natural resources: land,
minerals, water, energy and biodiversity?
4. How is food security in each regional/(sub)contentinal food system connected to population
pressure, dietary preferences and cultural factors?
5. For each of the regions/(sub)continents: how can multi-stakeholder involvement for achieving food
security and minimizing its environmental impact be attained?
6. How will the boundaries of regional/(sub)continental food systems be affected by changes in the
distribution of temperature and precipitation under global climate change?
7. How can adaptive capacity be conceptualized, investigated and operationalized similarly for
ecological and social aspects of social-ecological systems?
25) Muhammad Ayaz Keerio, ACTED, Pakistan
Dear All,
Thanks allot for providing a good opportunity to discuss on the food security. Our developing
countries require more attention on the sustainable agriculture for achieving better livelihood. We
have to organize all the institutions working in this sector to promote the organic farming, reduce the
chemical and other fertilizers which create erosions in the soil as well as create environmental
problems, which are harmful to human beings and animals.
26) Jean-Marie Cordier, JTS Semences, France
English translation
In our opinion, the themes addressed in the "annotated outline of GFS" are perfectly relevant, but too
removed from the "fundamental issues" that are at the origin of the hunger problem. To answer the
first "symptomatic question" and start to implement the conclusions would represent a huge step
forward. First of all, it will be better to remove the references to the past and traditions, because the
situation of the needs has developed unfavorably, both in terms of the numbers of individuals whose
food supply requirements have to be met and in terms of the social impact. Therefore, it is
appropriate to "reinvent" pragmatic solutions on the basis of the current conditions. It is necessary,
unless we want to see all efforts destroyed, to anticipate and manage that part of the additional two
thousand millions of people that humankind is forecasting, who will swell the thousand millions that
are already stricken by malnutrition. It is necessary to maintain social interaction among those who
have food and those that have less. Secondly, we should take into consideration the following
remarks:
1. - Food must be consumed to be effective. This consumption is not an isolated act, but a daily
need. Each consumption takes away a part of the available supply, which means it has to be
renewed. The first challenge is to make undernourished people solvent so that they can pay for their
food; in other words to enable the producer to finance the production of the following harvest. To
summarize, hunger and malnutrition have unemployment as the driving force.
2. Furthermore, the only sector where one could create employment making products with a waiting
market is food producing agriculture. The road is already well marked out "produce to feed yourself"
30
Proceedings | 31
(i.e. produce your own food). We have not said that it will be easy. However we reassert that it is the
road forward.
3. - This road means a transitional phase, investments, training and progressive monetization as a
result of a production surplus. But it presents some interesting characteristics. It is a strategy that
could be applied almost anywhere, with few logistic problems.
4. - it turns an evil into a benefit by passing responsibility to, and thereby re-humanizing, the
beneficiaries (a solution that is in direct contrast to hand outs).
5. - From this stage on the already identified questions arise. However, two priorities must be handled
carefully,
(1) The local political context and its handling,
(2) Agricultural researches and their disseminations.
6. - It seems inappropriate to treat “urgency" separately from “development." It would be better to
make it a pioneering stage. But this assumes that the medical and agricultural elements complement
each other. Maybe, on the other hand, the rules governing intervention could permit aid interventions
only when the situation is extremely serious.
7. - It would be desirable that the organization of these interventions were to be effected using a
"commercial" and not "administrative" model, with the object of facilitating their integration into the
global system. This does not mean that one should not develop a degree of local protectionism.
Thank you.
Jean-Marie
French original
De notre point de vue, les thèmes qui sont abordés dans le « annotated outline du GSF » sont
parfaitement pertinents, mais trop éloignés des « fondamentaux » qui sont à l’origine du problème de
la faim. Répondre à la première des « questions indicatives » et mettre en œuvre les conclusions,
représenterait déjà un immense pas en avant. Il conviendrait tout d’abord d’écarter les références au
passé et aux traditions, car le contexte des besoins a évolué défavorablement tant en nombre
d’individus à satisfaire sur le plan alimentaire qu’en terme d’empreinte sociale. Il convient donc de «
ré-inventer » des solutions pragmatiques sur base des conditions actuelles. Il faut, sous peine de voir
annihiler tous les efforts, prévoir et gérer la part qui, parmi les 2 milliards d’hommes supplémentaires
que prévoit l’humanité, va venir grossir le milliard déjà frappé par la malnutrition. Il faut maintenir la «
continuité » sociale entre ceux qui ont de la nourriture et ceux qui en ont moins. Il convient en second
lieu de prendre en considération les remarques qui suivent : 1°- La nourriture doit être consommée
pour être efficace. Cette consommation n’est pas un acte isolé mais une nécessité quotidienne.
Chaque consommation détruit une partie de la disponibilité, ce qui induit la nécessité de la
renouveler. Le premier défi est de rendre solvables les mal nourris, afin de leur permettre d’acheter
leur nourriture ; c’est à dire permettre au producteur de financer la production de la récolte suivante.
Pour faire court, la faim et la malnutrition ont le chômage comme moteur. 2°- Or, la seule niche où
l’on peut créer du travail pour une production qui a des preneurs en attente est l’agriculture
productrice de nourriture. La voie est toute tracée « produire pour se nourrir » (produire sa propre
nourriture). Nous n’avons pas dit que c’était simple. Mais nous affirmons que c’est la voie à suivre. 3°Cette voie suppose une phase transitoire, suppose des investissements, de la formation et une
monétarisation progressive grâce aux surplus de production. Mais elle présente quelques
caractéristiques intéressantes. C’est une stratégie applicable quasiment en tout lieu, avec peu de
problème de logistique.… 4°- Elle fait d’un mal un bien en responsabilisant donc en réhumanisant les
31
Proceedings | 32
bénéficiaires (solution à opposer à l’assistanat) 5°- A partir de ce stade, se posent les questions déjà
identifiées. Cependant deux priorités doivent être ménagées, (1) le contexte politique local et sa
gouvernance, (2) les recherches agronomiques et leurs diffusions. 6°- Il semble inopportun de traiter
« l’urgence » séparément « du développement ». Il serait préférable d’en faire un stade pionnier. Mais
cela suppose une complémentarité entre le médical et l’agronomique. Peut être également, le droit
d’ingérence peut il permettre d’éviter que les interventions d’assistance n’aient lieu que sur des
situations outrageusement dégradées. 7°- Il est souhaitable que l’organisation de ces interventions
soient réalisées sur un modèle « commercial » et non « administratif » afin de favoriser leur
intégration dans le système mondial. Ce qui ne veut pas dire qu’il ne faut pas développer un certain
protectionnisme local.
Salutations
Jean-Marie
27) Layla Idris, Women Agricultural Engineers Society, Sudan
Agriculture is the back bone of economy in the most developing countries a fact that most policy
makers and governments neglect in favour of industry sectors. In Sudan for example the budget
directed to agriculture sector declines with petroleum export. Also the support polices to agriculture
cooperatives had changed to in favour of the small farmers who are making the major group of the
poor in the country. I think agriculture cooperatives could play major role in boosting agriculture
production and eradicate poverty. Some Asian countries as Malaysia have success experience
through agriculture cooperatives to deal with the poor and agriculture production.
28) Kazi Eliza Islam, CARE, USA
Structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition: There are lots of social, cultural, political, and
economic factors at various levels and dimensions of society are working as structural causes of food
insecurity and malnutrition in any given contexts. To sustainably address these two interrelated,
extremely complex and multifactorial problems, in-depth and holistic analysis of underlying and
structural causes is extremely important. Though apparently food insecurity seems to be a problem
related to availability, access and utilization, and often seen as a result of economic poverty, if we do
an in-depth analysis we will see that starting from unequal power relations, gender discriminations,
women marginalization/exclusion and lower status in society, national/international policies related
land, agricultural, labour, trade, market etc, socio-cultural practices, all those directly or indirectly
contributing to food insecurity and malnutrition. Here I want to highlight at least two of those structural
causes: (a) Gender discrimination/women marginalization (b) Unequal power relations Women and
girls all over the world suffer from disproportionately higher burden of poverty, food insecurity and
malnutrition. Though women are contributing to 60-80 percent of agricultural production in developing
countries, due to social and cultural marginalization they own less than 2% of world's land and less
than 10% of credit provided to farmers. Due to highly prevalent gender discrimination, women
especially in developing countries face wage discrimination, lack access to land or any productive
assets and decision making power. All these factors directly and indirectly contribute to their food
security and nutritional status. Social, political and economic empowerment of women has been
proved to contribute not only in improving their own food and nutritional status, it contributes to
improve well being of other family members especially children nutritional status. Unequal power
relations is another major structural issue that must be addressed in order to achieve sustainable gain
32
Proceedings | 33
in food security and nutritional status of the poor, most marginalized and vulnerable population. In
many developing countries, despite having enough government owned cultivable land, and water
bodies, from where poor people could earn their livelihoods and address food insecurity, due to power
dynamics poor people often do not have access to those resources. Most of those government owned
land or water bodies are captured by few powerful people. Poor people often are victims of unequal
power relations and become dependent on those powerful people for their survival, face exploitative
behaviour; marginalization and exclusion that helps perpetuate their poverty from generation to
generation. As a result even enough foods are available at local or national level, access become the
major issue to address food insecurity for the poor. In developing countries, food insecurity is not
because lack of availability of food at national or local level, it is mainly because lack of access to food
due lower purchasing power or lack of access to land or productive assets by the poor. Unequal
power relations between poor and rich, act as a major underlying cause of poverty and food insecurity
in most of the developing countries. Along with many other causes, these two structural issues must
be considered and addressed in order to achieve sustainable improvement in food security and
nutritional status of poor and vulnerable population.
29) Birendra Adhikari, National Network on Right to Food, Nepal
Food insecurity and nutrition challenges are more prominent to land less, socially marginalized and
small holders. This cannot be addressed if government improves the participatory planning system at
grass root level where these people actively participate in planning and implementation of production,
distribution and consumption related activities. So firstly, the government should have firm plan to
accommodate them with due consideration of FAO guideline. In many countries, the local level
planners have not aware about the nutrition rather they are concerned about food sufficiency. In
Nepal, we have observed that:
Politicians prefer to say up to food sufficiency because this is more attractive and less challenging
than nutritious food supply.
Central government produce some extension materials about nutrition in some auspicious day and
distribute in the urban areas.
The local government has no mandate for food sufficiency and nutrition. The elites lead on local
planning and prefer on rural roads, buildings and irrigation which has less value to the destitute.
There is no monitoring by central governance over local planning and the destitute, never claim their
grievances because they think this not possible to them.
The written document of annual plan remains with village secretary which if he likes can be changed
over time.
So I like to suggest influencing local government globally by CFS approach to develop a scientific,
transparent and ecological based plan with true preference to destitute people who are suffered with
hunger and malnutrition.
30) Françoise Falaise, France
English translation
As a senior nutritionist, with a long career in different developing countries, I can only applaud your
initiative. It is clearly necessary to redirect the ways in which malnutrition is fought. Avoid hand-outs
and aim for self-sufficiency, the paths to be followed are known, but I am convinced that the
33
Proceedings | 34
political aspect has to have priority . I can do no better than to refer you to the article by Olivier De
Schutter, former Secretary General of the International Federation of Human Rights, a professor of
the Catholic University of Louvain and United Nations Special Reporter on the right to food. I attach
the said article, which appeared in the Nouvel Observateur, France of 23 June 2011. I would just say
a final word: to free people from exploitation by their politicians, only education can bring democracy.
Françoise Falaise
Senior Nutritionist
French original
Comme nutritionniste senior, à l'issue d'une longue carrière dans plusieurs pays encore émergents, je
ne puis qu'applaudir à votre initiative. Il faut évidemment réorienter les formes de lutte contre la
malnutrition. Eviter l'assistanat, viser l'autosuffisance, les voies à suivre sont connues mais j'insisterai
sur la priorité à s'occuper d'abord de l'aspect politique. Je ne puis mieux faire que de vous référer à
l'article de Olivier De Schutter, ancien secrétaire général de la Fédération Internationale des Droits de
l'Homme, professeur à l'Université catholique de Louvain. Rapporteur spécial de l'ONU sur le droit à
l'alimentation. Je joins en attachement cet article paru le 23 juin 2011 dans Le Nouvel Observateur France. Je n'ajouterai qu'un mot: pour libérer les populations de l'exploitation par leurs politiques, seul
l'enseignement pourra promouvoir la démocratie.
Françoise Falaise
Nutritionniste senior
31) Nazimi Açıkgöz, Ege University, Turkey
Dear team members,
I hope that you have reached out to all potential contributors. Especially Universities or academics
might contribute to the of CFS’s global strategic framework, around their own local issues like the
examples below:
1.Seed companies are mostly marketing improved and registered cultivars. They may be either self
bred or purchased from a breeding company. In any case, for variety improvement, they have to
supply genetic materials as line or as gen. Plant breeding companies, public or private research
institutions, universities or other seed firms are providers of needed genetic materials. In western
countries plant-based organization like "RICE COUNCIL" in the United States and "ENTE NATIONAL
RISI," in Italy are also involved in research and development (R&D). But in some countries like
Turkey, the mentioned channels are not functioning effectively. Because in such countries plant
breeding companies and mentioned plant-based organizations rarely exist. Therefore Pakistan bought
a single gen (Cry3) to disturb to his seed company freely and Brazil has ordered to an international
seed company a totally new cultivar for whole land use.
a.The establishment of NGO’s in emerging countries is especially important as public supports for
R&D decreases these NGO’s might replace public supports. It is well known that Netherlands cut
almost all public support for plant genetic studies except in few fruit species. Global privatization
policies force to cut the number of employees as well. So what support is left for the seed sector in
genetic area? How can we keep plant breeding activities running?
b.Is it possible to bring together the above mentioned agricultural NGO’s to support R&D, especially in
plant breeding? All stakeholders of a plant-based NGO, for example in case of rice, producers,
processors, millers, traders, exporters etc. are aware of the benefits of any genetic investment as
34
Proceedings | 35
income receivers. For example in Turkey regional NGO’s are very common, like ANTBIRLIK,
TRAKYABIRLIK. There are many plant species in their portfolio and a genetic improvement project of
any species might be perceived as unnecessary or a luxus. But plant-based NGO’s may approach
such an attempt with more sympathy. Rice Experiment Station (Biggs) of California rice growers is
one of the examples. For similar application we make those NGO’s and their members to conscious of
importance of genetic investments. But first of all we have to persuade policymakers, bureaucrats, etc
to prepare necessary regulation. Because the consultancy system is not functioning very well in
emerging countries, journalists help seems to be indispensible.
c.Wouldn’t orienting university manpower to life science R&D programs be a practical solution? One
interesting case in Turkey might be the patterned sample. Upon some speculative news on the
amount of her seed import, the head of Higher Education Council (YOK) said: ”As an intellectual, I
sometimes feel inferior”. Unaware of the reality that, thesis in Agricultural Faculties %80 oriented to
industry in western countries, whereas the same figure is below %20 in Turkey. And the reason is
simple, regulation for academic promotion requires abroad publications (SCI index!), for which local
findings are not very interesting. On the other hand cooperative research projects are not very
welcomed neither by initiators nor supporters in Turkey. Not to be able to prepare plant breeders for
industry is one other question. Single model universities are not ready for such advanced attacks.
How can you explain that there are over 40.000 unemployed agronomists and numbers of hired
foreigner plant breeders?
d.Encouraging the establishment of plant breeding companies seems to be a quite promising! “Global
wheat rust project gets us$40 million support” (The grant will support efforts to identify new stem rust
resistant genes in wheat). This phrase has been taken from news of an agricultural portal
(http://www.globalrust.org) and is a remarkable one to clarify the value of “gen”. So plant breeding or
line improving is one of promising investment. The question is how to start it in emerging nations,
where model business enterprises are lacking. Therefore business incubation conferences with
universities, agricultural entrepreneurs and agribusiness incubators, agricultural research institutions,
funding agencies, venture capitalists, entrepreneurship, development and government organizations
may be the best solution. Morphological or molecular characterization studies would be a good start
for such new plant breeding firms.
e.Re-orientation of public R&D support to life science: Public agricultural research units release 24
new varieties annually. This amount is not sufficient for almost 150 cultivated plant species because
some species have started to be grown in many new area like “second crop”, “glasshouse”, “off
season“, etc. that they all need new varieties. Unfortunately only 1% of “The Scientific &
Technological Research Council of Turkey’s” R&D support is going to agriculture!
(http://agrobiyoteknoloji.blogcu.com/)
f.Newly established national seed companies need a lot of support to compete with multinational
giants. The main requirement is line and or gen. Turkey is going to have its two million employees and
public support will decrease for plant breeding in the near future. So how can we overcome their
competitive disadvantage? Starting with the establishment of plant-based NGO’s, they are numbers of
discussion items like restructuring of universities, to switch to national needs.
2.The 21. Century is the time for competition for farming. Fragmented, scattered and with time
decreasing farm size (inheritance!) agriculture would be an unproductive sector. Every country has to
arrange such standards immediately. In Turkey some farmers had gained unofficially through
deforestation a lot of land. But they could not let register them. Assuming one has 30 hectare
registered and 40 hectare nonregistered land, he is aware that he would not receive 70 hectare after
a land consolidation in his region. So would he vote for such a land consolidation in his village and
what about if most of villagers more or less in the same condition? Simply they refuse it, and dilemma
35
Proceedings | 36
start here. No one can do something due to political expectation. An international research study on
this subject might lead to alternative solutions.
3.Being a farmer is really a hard job and farmers are not recommending their profession to the next
generation. As long as we see farm incomes steady decreasing we will see fewer young farmers.
Non-cultivated lands need to be organized for future productivity. Today almost 2,5 million hectares of
Turkey`s 28 million cultivated land is simply left to nature (it might be good for biodiversity!). Again a
research project on such issue might be very useful. Assuming a recommendable result might come
out: “encouraging or supporting of establishment of agricultural companies for similar cases”, which
suppose to be one of the target of CFS!
Prof. Dr. Nazimi Açıkgöz
Ege University
32) Farhad Mirzaei, ASRI, Iran
We need livestock and livestock production system which is adapting to the changing climate,
otherwise people around the globe will suffer to the food scarce, so it is a multi sectional issue and
needs inter-regional and international collaboration to alleviate painful.
33) Robynne Anderson, International Agri-Food Network, Canada
The outline is very constructive in many areas. It is important the GSF be additive not duplicative and
be quick to endorse actions occurring in other multilateral and regional fora. In the existing draft, there
three areas of concern I would like to highlight: To be added:
1) Meeting nutritional needs a) Increase availability of nutritional foods through R&D, improved
distribution, and integrated production strategies linking agriculture, nutrition and health goals. b)
Support the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) programme. c) Encourage consumers to choose diets that
offer a healthy nutritional balance as well as environmental efficiency.
2. Research, Development and Extension In addition to Support for R&D there must be a more
fullsome articulation of the importance of supporting the transfer of knowledge and best management
techniques within and to the farming community. Without participatory approaches to extension and
advisory services, there is little hope for change in practice.
3. Rather than framing the issue as price volatility, we believe it is more holistic to focus on improving
markets overall. Properly functioning markets must be the goal rather than the immediacy of price
fluctations - that is the longer term solution to reducing poverty and increasing food security. Many of
the points below are captured in the existing outline and could be pulled together under "Improving
markets". Improving markets a) Improve trade policies at global and national levels, including
finalising the WTO Doha Round and prohibiting export bans. b) Establish emergency reserves to
ensure availability for the most vulnerable. c) Establish transparent monitoring and data-sharing on
availability, stocks, demand, price and quality of agricultural commodities. d) Improve smallholder
farmers’ access to markets through investments in transport and storage infrastructure, as well as
information access.
36
Proceedings | 37
34) Roderick Valones, Save the Children International, Philippines
I have two points to comment on in this discussion while taking the framework of food and nutrition
security as guide and also in consideration of the guiding questions posted.
My first comment is on the aspect of food availability. I think we forgot the very basic thing that all food
and nutrition security measures we are doing needs the participation and ownership of these small
food producers. What I observed was most of the policies are not in support to enabling these small
producers such as the small-scale farmers and fishers to contribute to solving their problem of hunger
and malnutrition. Most often they are not involved in the policy discussions and program development
efforts. They are seen as recipient rather than the main actor/contributor to solve the problem. On the
other side of the food security spectrum, you may find consumers to complain about the price of
agricultural commodities. We should bear in mind that for us to support these small producers to
tackle their hunger and malnutrition problem we as consumers should also pay the right price that
small-scale farmers and fishers deserve so they can also generate income to support the basic food,
health, and nutrition requirements of their family. If not they'll end up leaving the farm to look for good
paying works.
My second comment is on the aspect of food use. If only consumers can eliminate the consumption
wastage the world will never go hungry. It is because consumption wastage accounts for 60% of the
loss. The rest is lose due to poor or inappropriate post-harvest practices and technologies and during
food distribution, which accounts for 40% of the total loss. Everyone is responsible to making the
world food secure. We can contribute by: 1) not wasting food--taking only what your body needed;
and 2) supporting policies that enable small-scale producers (in food producing country) to generate
surplus--i.e. policies that discourage importation dependency.
35) Rahul Goswami, Ministry of Agriculture, India
Dear Mr Sarmento,
In response to the online consultation call on the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and
Nutrition (GSF), I provide reactions and views based on our work. Please find two files. One is a pdf
document which contains the draft Global Strategic Framework - and which is annotated with a
number of my comments and suggestions. The other is a text file which contains only the comments
(page referenced) for easier reading but without the accompanying draft.
About the GSF draft, what is required in the CFS-GSF is the essence of sustainability - bioresource
determined sustainability as well as total cost sustainability (processed food particularly) - connected
to food supply. I strongly recommend the addition of one more point, that of the GDP-dominated
economic growth pathways that most UN/FAO member states currently follow and which has a
continuing and pervasive impact on social sector and food + agri policy. A quick look at FAO's food
price index and food commodity price index since 2011 January will confirm that it is the steady rise in
the prices of food staples which is most burdensome. Volatility is no doubt a characteristic of the cost
+ price dynamic in countries of the South, most visibly, but the GSF must not disconnect volatility from
the steady upward inflation of food costs for rural and urban households.
37
Proceedings | 38
If we discuss cross-border movement of capital into the food industry (organised aggregation,
processing, logistics, retail) we must also include the growing development, within countries, of the
food and food services industries. These may or may not attract trans-national capital, but either way
exert a major influence on crop selection and a localised imbalances in food staples (cereals, pulses).
At what cost? The GSF needs to side with the smallholder and urban/rural poor on this matter.
The GSF must aim to help UN/FAO members states build this infrastructure into agri + food
administration, however the ability and motive of the market (financial + commodities) to pipe this into
decision support systems that govern trades and movements must be recognised early enough. The
CFS-GSF may flag investment issues as requiring close monitoring at national and sub-regional level,
but where are the commitments from states to follow this direction with policy regulations that ensure
such outcomes? The interests of the majority of small farmers in less industrialised countries, and the
interests of rural and urban poor, marginal and low-income households - these are the interests the
CFS must protect. CFS guidance cannot accommodate other interests.
In spite of well over two decades of international attention, agricultural technology transfer, 'advances'
in crop science and new information channels to aid human development, under-nutrition levels
remain persistently and unacceptably high in sub- Saharan Africa, South Asia and parts of South-East
Asia. Food, nutrition and health must be viewed and treated by the CFS as a development continuum.
The cycle reflects multiple deprivations, such as inadequate access to health and child care services,
drinking water, environmental sanitation, inadequate access to household food security and
livelihoods, inadequate caring practices and underlying gender discrimination, poverty and exclusion.
It is these that the CFS-GSF must focus on.
The CFS-GSF cannot advocate increased and greater trade in food and food products while ruing
price volatility - the one is caused by the other. The GSF cannot include an encouragement to the
increased movement of food and food products at the cost of deepening the causal relation between
reduced food access and lowered development potential. In most countries, science and governance
related to food and nutrition has been fragmented. The CFS-GSF can advocate science-based
solutions which address hunger and malnutrition only if they are based on independent publicly
funded research and not driven by corporate interests.
Thank you for providing this excellent opportunity to contribute to this important discussion.
Yours sincerely, Rahul Goswami
Social Sector Researcher, National Agricultural Innovation Project (Agropedia programme), Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India; Research Associate, Centre for Communication and Development
Studies, India
36) Daniela Alfaro, CGIAR Consortium, France
1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific changes
would you suggest?
According to the reference document, the GFS still represents a work in progress with an initial
expected outcome in October 2012, while the needs of the fight against hunger will eventually
38
Proceedings | 39
determine further improvements of the strategy. As such, it probably still has an important way to go
until it´s finished. Nevertheless, I understand that, in the context of the CFS, the value added by the
GSF (its “rationale”) it´s clear: I believe there´s an evident need for producing generally agreed
guidelines in order to improve coherence and coordination in terms of global, regional and national
guidelines actions to prevent future food crisis. Nevertheless, it could be useful to make a cleaner (or
more straightforward) definition of the rationale of the GSF in the text, which could be not as clear as it
would be necessary given its importance to understand the GSF objectives. Regarding its purpose,
the GSF would have an important function in terms of enhancing the role of the CFS as a platform to
improve coordination between initiatives at all levels. I believe the definition is indeed, clear enough.
The CFS would probably find very useful and practical to have a strategic framework approved by
stakeholders and the High Level Panel of Experts to face the emerging challenges in terms of world
food security. With respect to the GSF functions, I would like to say that even though I totally agree
with paragraph 3 of the reference document, it´s seems to be a difficult task to achieve such a
comprehensive framework in just 1 year. Given that the GSF creation process will be inclusive and
will seek a general consensus in each and every aspect it could take a longer period to effectively
finish it. Overall, although the ideas are clear enough for this step of the process, I understand further
efforts should be made to distinguish the purpose and functions of the CSF from those of the GSF.
2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term challenges
that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
I believe the most relevant structural challenge is the lack of enough agriculture research that could
allow the needed increase in productivity (especially in poor rural producers) in order to feed more
than 9 billion people in 2050. Even though short-term measures are to be urgently taken to prevent
the deepening of the already ongoing food crisis, none of this aid measures would be enough to avoid
futures famines in developing countries. I believe that only by increasing productivity with a
sustainable use of natural resources could lead to a future without hungry. Additionally, I believe that
enough political support from the governments of each country (developed and developing ones) are
critical to achieve worldwide food security or, at least, the Millennium Development Goals in the
medium term. The case of Zero Hunger in Brazil shows that when there´s sufficient political will
(especially in a food rich country), there´s no excuse to implement effective programs against poverty
and hunger.
3. Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant for the GSF
to include?
The GSF annotated outline makes a good review of the major issues to be addressed, including price
volatility, uncoordinated policy response, lack of investment and research in agriculture and the
problem of land tenure. Even though the identified challenges in the outline are comprehensive
enough, I would like to highlight the structural domestic sources of food price volatility and food
insecurity. These are increasingly recognized as important factors hindering food security worldwide,
and they usually don’t depend on international factors. Lack of market transparency and clear rules in
market functioning could usually result in deficient and/or asymmetric price transmission. This leads to
the need of a detailed analysis of the situation in each country to properly design the needed
measures. In past June, the CFS´s High Level Panel of Experts carefully reviewed the available
evidence in this direction.
39
Proceedings | 40
4. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy options do you
think are most relevant for the GSF to include?
Overall, I agree with the policy options described in the annotated outline. Notwithstanding that, I
would like to stress the need to effectively reach the poor with, for instance, agriculture research and
investment in agriculture. The appropriate (participatory and inclusive) definition of the needs of rural
producers and a correct design of the responses to these needs are a substantial part of the solution
to hunger in developing countries. Regarding the strengthening of international trading systems, I
believe some additional options could include the complete elimination of the trade distorting domestic
support measures in developed countries in order to enhance competition fairness and
competitiveness of small rural producers in developing countries.
5. Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels (national,
regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
The monitoring of the situation of food security at the regional and national level is crucial to
understand the effectiveness of the policies undertaken and, more importantly, to be able to change
them if they are not working as expected. Moreover, I believe there´s an important lack of monitoring
systems about food security situation in many developing countries. Usually, the emergence of a
deadly food crisis or a derived political crisis is the signal to act because there are not appropriate
indicators to anticipate them. I understand that it´s impossible to know which actions to take
(especially in the short term) if we don´t know, firstly, which is the concrete situation in each country.
Consequently, the GSF should use the HLPE support in order to define indicators of hunger
especially designed for developing countries. Regardless of the increasing interest of the international
community in the elimination of hunger, the statistical system about this major problem is still in its
infancy. In such sense, it´s worth noticing that although the recently adopted G20´s Agriculture Market
Information System (AMIS) seeks to collect better information regarding food market (production,
consumption, stocks, prices), it does not extend its coverage to indicators dealing with hunger or food
security. Thus, there´s still plenty of room to advance in the direction to know more about hunger
itself. The GSF guidance in terms of improved monitoring system could be directed to governments,
international or regional organizations working in the country and NGO, provided that the situation in
each country could lead to a different optimal combination of receptors.
Thanks. Daniela Alfaro- Senior Analyst- Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers
37) Enoch Raymond Nyayiti, Center for Environmental Education and Development
(CEED), National Alliance Against Hunger and Malnutrition, Nigeria
Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific changes
would you suggest?”
Answer: The rationale and functions of GSF is clearly stated but the specific changes we wish to see
is how smaller CSOs/NGOs in countries can be carried along as a deliberate policy of inclusion. Often
times countries in the UN status do not attend the CFS meeting with CSOs representation and this
tend to down play the significance and role expected of them to play in the achievement of CFS and
of course “Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and of course GSF as set
now additional long-term challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most
40
Proceedings | 41
relevant?” Answer: The long term planning to be considered to my mind and our thinking is the
inclusion of CSOs in the planning and execution process.
“Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant for the GSF to
include?” Answer: Additional issues to be considered is funding and capacities development of CSOs
and their technical competencies.
38) Chabi Ayedoun Simon, Juriste Consultant Droits de la personne et Des TIC, Benin
English translation
I thank you for this very commendable initiative in terms of the fight against hunger, especially in the
sub-Saharan African States. I have two contributions. The first is the consolidation of democracy
among the states and the second is the systematic incorporation of human rights in all development
projects. Indeed, the right to food is a full human right. As such, it must be promoted and protected in
the same way as the rights of first generation, i.e. the rights to freedoms. In fact, "a hungry man has
no ears" (hunger knows no law), as we say in Africa. This shows the importance of the right to food in
the promotion and maintenance of peace and therefore of freedom.
French original
Je vous remercie pour cette initiative assez louable en matière de lutte contre la faim surtout dans les
Etats de l'Afrique subsaharienne. J'ai deux contributions. La première est la consolidation de la
démocratie dans les Etats et la seconde est de rendre systématique l'intégration des droits de
l'homme dans tous projets de développement. En effet, le droit à l'alimentation est un droit de
l'homme à part entière. Par conséquent, il doit être promu et protégé au même titre que les droits de
la première génération c'est-à-dire les droits-libertés. En fait, "un homme affamé n'a point d'oreille",
dit-on en Afrique. Cela montre l'importance du droit à l'alimentation dans la promotion et le maintien
de la paix, et donc de la liberté.
39) Muhammad Ayaz Keerio, ACTED, Pakistan
1. The developing countries are fighting with hunger. We have addition in the policy of food that the
education to the Rural communities is on top priorities, because without education we can't remove
the hunger from the world. So we build a strong network to promote the food sector activities in the
remote areas where no access of com.
2. I believe that the low productivity of agriculture and the most relevant structural challenge is the
lack of enough agriculture research that could allow the needed increase in productivity to provide the
food for the world till 2025 in order to feed more than 9 billion people in 2050. We have taking long
term measures for grow the better health and productive crop, and more research on the high yielding
varieties in short period of time. Extensive studies on food and mall nutrients in rural areas where
most the people suffer the hunger and nutritional deficiency.
3. The most relevant issues the food soaring price in the developing countries. The people (farmers)
sale their produce in the low price and same commodity will repurchased on the higher price, no
government control over the price of agriculture commodity so the poor farmers suffer the heavy loss
41
Proceedings | 42
of income. Take proper measures in the developing countries and changes the necessary in the
government laws to safe the farming communities for the soaring price.
4. The proper policy for the safe guard the interest of the farming communities, remove the middle
man form the market and government directly purchased the agricultural produce from the farmers.
So the framers will be happy and they do the more struggle on increase their production. The Food
security experts reach on the communities of framers and give them valuable suggestion for improve
the food standards as well living standards.
5. In this aspect GSF will provided the comprehensive guidelines to the least developed countries
through the food securities expert and monitor the government policies on agriculture and food. The
GSF insured to secure the interest of the poor farmers and producer of rural areas. Improve the
communication structures from the villages to the markets, easily accessible markets provided to the
farmers. Due to the less monitoring of the food security may cause the heavy loss to human health as
well as the production of the agricultural commodities.
Muhammad Ayaz Keerio
Program Manager
ACTED Pakistan
40) Joseph Sunday Ikpoh, Pastor from Nigeria
I have read a lot about your organizations contributions to agricultural developer globally. i have
studied the trend of agricultural development in my country NIGERIA/ Africa as a continent and many
countries in other continents of the world for more that 3 decades. I have followed closely all the
policies from your food and agriculture organization and the world bank as international bodies and
the various countries as local.
I have observed that despite several summits/ conferences/seminars and colloquiums that have been
held so far on how to revive agriculture, the present political leaders of all the less developed
countries do not have the political will to address the problems that have hindered the growth of this
sector. Corruption has blinded their eyes and they don't think right anymore. Those that you call
professionals and experts in the filed of agriculture have collaborated with the corrupt leaders to
deceive the people through propaganda.
GOD has directed me to bring this vision to you and your organization through this medium that if you
sincerely want to transform agriculture globally to ensure food security and good nutrition to all, you
should help the less developed countries to lay foundation for trained/ organized and united farmers
from the grassroots first and foremost before you embark on any further assistance and researches.
The number one priority of your committee should be to lay grassroots foundation for agriculture
development in every less developed country of the world. Emphasis most be laid on human
resources development at the grassroots to raise farmers that have economic and social values.
When once a durable and sustainable foundation is been laid from the grass root for periodic trainings
by the experts to deliver modern research findings from the local and international professionals and
to render extension services to the rural farmers,the result will be well planned agricultural
development and only then will every policy and aid from your organization and other international
organizations and agencies/ charitable organizations and associations will be implemented and
utilized judiciously down to the grass-root. Do not depend on the government of the less developed
countries anymore nor rely on their corrupt officials. Don't believe their propaganda's anymore. Too
42
Proceedings | 43
much grammar/ isms and schisms at various summits /fora and conferences will not solve the hunger
problems in the world.
Discuss the issue of laying foundation from the grassroots in the forth coming conference. With God
its possible.I will deliver to you and your organization the details on how to lay this rural foundation as
God has directed me anytime you want, I have also volunteered to render any service that you want
from me in order to lay this foundation.
My prayer is that God will open the eyes of the members of your committee to see this vision and use
the committee to bless the world. Thank you for this opportunity given to me to deliver the vision and
God bless you .....
Hope to hear from you soon
Pastor Joseph Sunday Ikpoh
41) Department of Agrarian Reform, Secretary Virgilio R. De Los Reyes, the Philippines
Acknowledged is the information provided by FAO Representative in the Philippines, Kazuyuki
Tsurumi, to the Department of Agrarian Reform, Secretary Virgilio R. De Los Reyes [dated 2 August
2011] about the global e-forum from 26 July to 15 October 2011 hosted by the Committee on World
Food Security.
Taking a rapid read-through of the Collection of Contributions received [discussions from the 26 th of
August to the 15th of October 2011 Online Consultation on the CFS Global Strategic Framework], we
similarly take the pleasure sharing our views. It appeared that the first 35 contributors generally
shared bits about varying institutional mechanisms, capacity building/development, knowledge
management, models or best practices at the community and national levels, food systems including
markets. Appreciated was the contribution from Mr. Abdul Razak Ayazi from the Afghanistan
Embassy Rome, Italy, which this contribution may follow suit in terms of developing the GSF paper.
Notwithstanding the objective of gathering feedback for the preparation of the GSF, the
circulated/posted GSF for the e-forum should have been the first draft for comments than in the
“how to or what to write” form/zero draft form. While in any working paper/technical paper, rationale,
purpose, functions, etc., may be the regular contents, the paper is still presenting the “processes,” i.e.,
in item 3. In order to fulfill its objectives, GSF may: e.g., first bullet, “Identify key challenges and
opportunities. . . as if the stakeholders would still undertake the SWOT analysis approach. Hence, the
paper should straightforward present the current state of global food security [wherein countries would
see the issues at the global context].
There has to be a clear conceptual/policy framework indicating which would lead to what [logic
framework] than espousing a thematic approach of presenting an argument with an already too broad
an issue, like food security. It is understandable though that food security is a specific theme that is
intuitively woven with facet of sustainable development. We understood what Robynne Anderson of
the International Agri-Food Network, Canada wanted to imply. What is rather critical is building
consensus at the different tiers of governance.
Striking was the comments of some contributors about participation, e.g., Roderick Valones of the
Save the Children International, Philippines. We might as well put our minds together on what we
could perhaps start working at, where the obvious concerns are. It is indeed pathetic that food is
produced abundantly in some parts of the globe but hindered in transporting to the most vulnerable [to
hunger] countries. This might be a too simplistic remark but for the longest time, not given sufficient
43
Proceedings | 44
thought and action. But it is as well easy to comprehend that at the country level, food produced from
the remote communities could hardly reach the market due to poor infrastructure.
Following are some views on requested points:
Background
The document being prepared aims to address a universal value [food security] with an ever growing
demand for a clearer framework addressing the multi-faceted issues attached with food security and
nutrition. A brief introduction on what the CFS is all about provides every reader an understanding
where the policy advocacy of global importance is coming from. Part of it perhaps would be a short
explanation on the final version of the 35th Session Reform of the Committee on World Food Security.
Presenting briefly what the Five Rome Principles are and the other significant elements which the
GSF is founded would make things explicit. This would help the readers to understand the GSF and
saves time doing a heavy review of previous documents. Moreover, information on the most recent
consultations held for the preparation of the GSF provides a crispy background and a segue to the
rationale of the GSF.
Statement of Rationale, Purpose and Function
A little bit of setting whom the framers of the document seek to influence would help improving the
format. Even if food security requires broad stakeholders encompassing the three domains of
governance [state, private sector and the CSO], a visual presentation of the hierarchy of goals at the
onset of the GSF document would help every stakeholder comprehend where the point of
coordination or mode of participation happens at what level. Another challenge indeed is how the
emerging aid architecture shapes countries’ policy development, vice versa, would be incorporated in
the GSF.
The tall order of making the results on food security happen make the advocacy lost to the myriad of
envisioned mechanisms. At the end of the day, accountability is likewise melted with the term
“voluntary.” The GSF shall bring a strong command for commitment among the stakeholders for what
results they would pledge to contribute, e.g., on Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance
of Land Tenure and other Natural Resources. How this particular agenda comes in within the agenda
on the implementation of the CFS Reform? Understanding the document alone is indeed a big
homework to do for all agencies mandated to promote agrarian reform, agriculture and as a whole
sustainable rural development.
Long term Challenges and structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition, additional
issues relevant to the GSF
A fresh update illustrating the magnitude of the food insecurity and malnutrition versus the current
performance and slippages would help any reader understand the context of the GSF. The lingering
discussions on the structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition is already trivialized which
many would rather look at what have been the best practices and the lessons learned that many
countries may consider as worthwhile customizing for adaptation. Noteworthy quoting from the Global
Donor Platform for Rural Development,
“Identify best practice in current methodologies to track, measure and report on donor financing and
the extent to which this provides the basis for review, planning and analysis at the country level, in
line with the intentions of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and Accra Agenda for Action
Review the extent to which available information is the basis for development of a mutual
accountability framework and draw lessons for the design of an internationally agreed framework.”
44
Proceedings | 45
Presenting the varying efforts at different levels how institutions are addressing the issues would
facilitate bringing up where the bottlenecks are happening, hence enable framers improve food
security and nutrition governance. The WB Hunger Clock is sufficient to move us from our comfort
zones of doing business. Whatever happens to the Global Food Crisis Response Program in May
2008 may as well help constructing the GSF defining how the harmonization, alignment and
effectiveness would be achieved via the CFS-High Level Panel of Experts and the UNs’ High Level
Task Force on the Global Food Crisis.
As an implementing agency, the practitioners are eager to share and learn how else the policy
arguments on “competitive and sustainable agriculture” [Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016] be
made more effectively addressing climate change as an embedded element in other critical specific
themes such as various enterprise development initiatives using value chain approach, how young
talents could be recruited to agriculture sector, striking balance between obvious emerging energy
requirements to the seemingly opposing but lucrative options to utilize agricultural land for other
equally important development needs/goals [biofuels, housing, industrialization, etc].
The Department of Agrarian Reform-Philippines do subscribed with the conclusions and implications
drawn from the document [Aid to Agriculture, Rural Development and Food Security. Promoting the
National Convergence Initiative in the Philippines is viewed to be the “blue ocean” in the overall
political debates towards improving institutional effectiveness, harmonization and alignment in
agriculture sector. This would be one of the enduring development challenges in the country beyond
2014.
The 37th Session will be held on 17-22 October 2011, how would the CFS link its agenda to the
forthcoming HLF4-Busan, Korea on 29 November-December 1, 2011? The dialogue from Rome
should as well be continued in Korea connecting the principles of Managing for Development Results
and those that were already incorporated in the Accra Agenda for Action with the agenda set forth
based from the principles which the GSF is pursuing.
Policy Options
The GSF is explicit about its targets eradicating hunger by 2025 in Latin America and the Carribean
and the CAADP, how would the GSF likewise animate or link with the same goals set, “for a broad,
democratic, inclusive, and participatory process that will strive to ensure the voices of all relevant
stakeholders – particularly those most affected by hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition – are
heard,” in Asia Pacific Region?
What would be the mechanisms where the discussions from the recently concluded International
Conference on Asian Food Security, 10-12 August 2011 in Singapore be an input to the GSF? [See
the web for the presentations, e.g., Shenggen Fan, Director General of the International Food Policy
Research Institute on Asian Food Security in a Global Context; Fr. Francis Lucas, Chair of the Asian
NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development on Food Security, Livelihoods and the
Rural Poor. Many other excellent literature from the ICAFS 2011 may be considered for the GSF
inputs for the CFS-led plenary review until July 2012, before a final document is presented to the CFS
38th Session. The GSF should be able to show how the abstract [arguments] be transformed into
specific actions.
Monitoring Progress Towards Objectives at Country Level
Progress monitoring on food security and nutrition shall follow the design and framework [GSF
performance indicators]. The challenge would be identifying common indicators based on common
issues and drawing up the global food security results chain. However, unless consensus is built at
45
Proceedings | 46
the global level on which platform countries may look as a common line of sight, tracking system
could hardly be established, hence, the aim towards evidence-based policy making is a distant goal.
The GSF therefore must be following that direction being a global social construct on food security
that is able to bring tangible results.
In a very disinterested manner, at the ministerial level, how the Department of Agrarian Reform
integrates the agenda on food security and nutrition within the goals towards a national convergence
on sustainable rural development through 2014 requires further policy development. The biggest,
most enduring challenge indeed is winning for the National Land Use Act which food security is
already at stake. This might be a unique country-specific policy need but may contribute in bringing
theory and practice together as we design the GSF.
Temporarily inverting the logic framework provides for a quick summation of how we see the GSF
weaves that common dream being translated via program implementation at the country level [where
much of the work is done]. As a follow up on the AAA, how will the GSF help accelerate
“strengthening country ownership over development?” Furthermore, the Philippines is one of the
fifteen member-countries to the Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific
[CIRDAP], an intergovernmental organization established in 1979 under the aegis of the U.N. FAO,
but unfortunately barely noticed at the regional and global policy fora. The CIRDAP and the CAADP
are potent regional bodies, which could equally shape the GSF and gain benefits from it.
H.E., Virgilio R. De Los Reyes, Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform, Philippines
42) Kaisa Karttunen, Senior Agriculture Consultant, from Finland
Dear Moderator,
The development of the Global Strategic Framework is an important but also challenging endeavor.
The Framework needs to cover a multitude of factors that have an impact on food security and still be
built upon and add value to existing frameworks. What is missing from the draft outline to some extent
is the identification and concretization of the contacting surface between the existing frameworks and
the GSF. This has implications both on the contents of the Framework and its monitoring procedures.
The roles and responsibilities in launching and follow-up of the GSF could be more clearly stated in
the outline in order, for example, to assess the adequacy of existing structures and resources. To my
view, the existing mechanisms could be utilized and if necessary revised to better respond to the new
needs, instead of establishing entirely new ones. Definition of the role of the CFS vis-à-vis other
bodies is essential as it has direct conseque1
nces on the CFS resource requirements.
As regards the structural causes of food insecurity, the emphasis of the outline is on the supply side.
I think it should better reflect also the access-related problems, i.a. links between poverty and food
insecurity.
When discussing the priority issues, climate change as an overarching threat to future food security
deserves its own chapter instead of discussing it under environmental sustainability. This applies also
to discussion on policy options, where environmental questions in general and climate change in
particular should be included.
Thank you.
46
Proceedings | 47
Kaisa Karttunen
Senior Agriculture Consultant, Finland
43) Hanefi Isselmou, Alliance contre la Faim en Mauritanie, Mauritania
English translation
In relation to question (2) (Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition as well as
other long term challenges that need to be taken into account? In your opinion, which ones are the
most important?)
We think that in addition to the demographic variations: anarchic urbanization and massive rural
exodus and their impact over population growth are increasingly disproportionate, outside all
mechanisms of control. To this is added the states’ inability to measure the risks in order to better
prevent the damage that could be caused in the future by the negative effect brought about by the
impact of these factors on the quality of sustenance in our populations. This rather careless or even
unconscious posture of our governments in relation to new global cataclysms, which worsens the
inexorable advance of hunger and malnutrition, originates in the lack of the conception of a program
of coherent and realistic planning arising from the demographic, economic and social evolution of our
countries. Of course governance also plays an important part in the rational management of our
natural resources, social justice and the relevance of the main economic elements of our countries, in
particular, those related to decentralization and to efficient agricultural reforms. Likewise, we ought to
mention the insufficient involvement of the various local participants in the fight against hunger and
malnutrition in our countries. Theoretically, everyone agrees over the soundness of that fight, but not
everyone marches at the same rhythm, not to say the same willingness. The AAHM, the CFS and
others must increase pressure on poor countries to put in motion a new dynamism in both state and
private sector, civil society being always in the lead, other things being equal. Finally, on the moraljudicial level a growing phenomenon must be noted in our countries, which is economic slavery. In
fact, bad governance has given birth to a middle class without faith or law that controls the key
aspects of the economy and steers the people towards more underdevelopment in order to maintain
its advantage .Lack of education and ignorance are also structural problems that create a favorable
environment for the increase of hunger and malnutrition. Indeed, all these factors constitute
challenges in the long term.
French original
Par rapport à la question (2) (Existe t-il des causes structurelles de l’insécurité alimentaire et de la
malnutrition ainsi que d’autres défis à long terme à prendre en compte ? D’après vous, quels sont les
plus importants ? ) Nous pensons qu’en plus des variations démographiques: de plus en plus
disproportionnées, hors de tous mécanismes de contrôles et leurs impacts sur la croissance de la
population, l’urbanisation anarchique et les exodes ruraux massifs. Vient s’ajouter l’incompétence des
états pour mesurer les risques afin de mieux prévenir les dégâts qui pourront êtres causés à l’avenir
par l’effet négatif induit du concours de ces facteurs sur la qualité de vie alimentaire de nos
populations. Ce comportement peu soucieux ou même inconscient de nos états à ces nouveaux
cataclysmes mondiaux qui exacerbe l avancée inexorable de la faim et la malnutrition réside dans le
manque de la conception de programme de planifications cohérentes et réalistes qu’s’inspirent de l
évolution démographique, économiques et sociales de nos Pays. Bien entendu que la gouvernance
47
Proceedings | 48
aussi joue un rôle important dans la gestion rationnelle de nos ressources naturelles, la justice sociale
et la pertinence des grands économiques de nos Pays en particuliers ceux liés à la décentralisations
et aux reformes agraires efficaces. Aussi, devrions-nous évoquer les écarts d implications des
différents acteurs locaux dans la lutte contre la faim et la malnutrition dans nos Pays. Théoriquement
tous sont d accord sur le bien fondé d’un tel combat mais tous ne vont pas avec le même rythme pour
ne pas dire la même volonté. L’ACFM le CSA et les autres doivent accentuer la pression sur les Pays
pauvres pour enclencher une nouvelle dynamique aux niveaux des états et du secteur privé la société
civile étant toujours en avant en pareille circonstances. Enfin sur le plan juridico-moral il faut noter un
phénomène montant dans nos Pays c est l’esclavage économique. En effet la mauvaise gestion des
états à donner naissance a une bourgeoisie sans foi ni loi qui contrôle l essentiel de l économie et
oriente la société vers plus de sous développement pour maintenir son avantage. La faillite de l
éducation est l ignorance sont aussi des problèmes structurelles qui crées un environnement
favorable pour l expansion de la faim et de la malnutrition. A contrario, tous ces facteurs constituent
des défis à long terme.
44) George Kent , University of Hawaii, United States of America
Greetings,
In his second update on the online consultation, facilitator Francesco Sarmento concluded by calling
for specific suggestions on how the Global Strategic Framework and the Committee on World Food
Security might address the issues. There are many good ideas for specific lines of action. I believe
there is a need to step back from the specifics, and we should devise institutional arrangements and
processes that can handle the ideas over the long term. In doing this, it will be useful to recognize that
rapid development of local Food Policy Councils in several different parts of the world. These can be
viewed as basic building blocks for the new arrangements. The concluding chapter of my recent book
on Ending Hunger Worldwide calls for a system of multi-level, multi-party strategic planning. This is
already foreshadowed in the present consultation. We should look at possibilities for refining the
current process and extending it over space and time. In my view a new permanent global
arrangement for collaboration with regard to food and nutrition issues should be grounded in the
principle of subsidiarity. In essence, this means that nothing should be done at a higher level that
could be done as well or better at a lower level. These ideas can be joined together in a layered
system of food policy councils. There could be small food policy councils in local jurisdictions such as
cities, towns, and villages, medium-sized one for sub-national jurisdictions such as provinces, and
larger ones at the national levels. Regional food policy councils could be established as well, perhaps
with bases in appropriate regional organizations. There should be a food policy council at the global
level, not as an apex authority of some sort, but as a facilitator and service bureau for all the other
food policy councils. It could be created from a re- envisioned Committee on World Food Security,
perhaps drawing in some elements of the current mandates of the United Nations System Standing
Committee on Nutrition and other global agencies. Working out the specific roles of the food policy
councils at each level would take some time. The central body should go beyond coordination and
facilitate serious strategic planning to deal with large-scale nutrition issues. Its approach should
include those who are most affected by malnutrition and who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of
the planning exercise. The inclusion of representatives from all levels would help to ensure that
strategic planning is a significant educational and capacity building exercise for all who are involved.
Multi-level planning could help to overcome the disjunction between rich and poor, and it could
facilitate capacity building for all, through mutual learning. The food policy councils at different levels
48
Proceedings | 49
would work differently, but with good coordination among them they could complement and support
one another. Those at higher levels should not direct those at the lower levels, but should provide
support such as technical advice and services according to the wishes of the lower level NPCs. The
ones at lower levels could provide information and recommendations to those at higher levels. Some
sort of comprehensive multi-party, multi-level system is needed if we are to effectively address food
and nutrition problems in all their forms over the long term. The current consultation gives us a good
start, but we need to carry it further, based on the understanding that we need permanent
consultation.
Aloha,
George
45) Carlos Villan Duran, Spanish Association for International Law and Human Rights,
Spain
English translation
Dear Mr. Sarmento
According to the Spanish Society for the Advancement of International Human Rights Law (AEDIDH),
which I chair, the FAO member States must show real political will to combat the scourge of hunger
once and for all. It is an ethical, political and legal imperative that civil society is claiming from every
region around the world, as an essential requirement for peace and fundamental rights.
We understand States have to assume more precise legal commitments from the development of
Article 11 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the General
Comment 12 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
Such legal commitments should take the form of an Optional Protocol (2) to ICCPR to develop the
aforementioned Article 11, establishing binding legal rules for States Members. We insist: General
Comment 12 provides a wide range of standards that must be urgently upgraded to the category of
conventional rules which specific legal obligations for States.
It is also necessary that the Optional Protocol foresees to attribute to the CESCR the ability to monitor
its implementation through the review of periodic reports from States and the reception of individual
complaints under the Optional Protocol 1 of the ICCPR, that all FAO Member States should ratify.
Best regards
Spanish original
Estimado Sr. Sarmiento,
En opinion de la AEDIDH que presido, los Estados miembros de la FAO deben mostrar voluntad
politica real para combatir el flagelo del hambre de una vez por todas. Es un imperativo etico, politico
y juridico que la sociedad civil reclama desde todas las regiones del mundo, porque es un requisito
49
Proceedings | 50
esencial para alcanzar la paz y el disfrute de derechos fundamentales. Entendemos que los Estados
deben asumir compromisos juridicos mas precisos a partir del desarrollo del Art. 11 del PIDESC y de
la Observacion general 12 del Comite DESC.
Tales compromisos juridicos deben adoptar la forma de un protocolo facultativo (2) al PIDESC que
desarrolle el citado Art. 11, estableciendo normas juridicas de obligado cumplimiento para los
Estados parte. Insistimos: la OG 12 proporciona una amplia gama de normas que deben ser
trasladadas con sentido de urgencia a la categoria de normas convencionales de las que se deriven
obligaciones juridicas precisas para los Estados. Es necesario ademas que el protocolo facultativo
prevea atribuir al Comite DESC la facultad de supervisar su aplicacion a traves del estudio de los
informes periodicos de los Estados y de la recepcion de quejas individuales, conforme al PF1 del
PIDESC que todos los Estados miembros de la FAO debieran ratificar.
Cordiales saludos
46) Atef Abdel Meguid Mohamed Al Reeqi, Sudan
English translation
I thank you for taking this action even if it came a bit late as communication has been available
through the internet since a while. Regarding the GSF that is now open of discussion amid the current
situation at the local, regional and international levels, there is no doubt that it requires great efforts
and above all strong and sincere will from all stakeholders in compliance with the outcome of
international summits, conferences and fora. Now after the elapse of 15 years of the Food summit
held in Rome that also participated in the NGO Forum held parallel to the Summit, the situation has
aggravated. Financial and food crisis, climate change, increased internal and external immigration
rates in the developing countries, increase in un-employment and in the number of people living under
poverty line, the unbalance in development in the developing countries as a result of exploitation of
privatization systems, economic restructuring and market liberalization along with the stumbling of the
Doha Agreement on Trade of Agricultural Products and the replacement of the WTO, cooperation
between the north and south and the Group of 70 in addition to China, the emergence of the Group of
20 after the Group of 8 and the economic blocs affecting international economy – all of this resulted
naturally in inevitable paradox that we currently experience regarding the great difference between
theory, principles and application. This makes the idea of developing a global strategy for food
security a complicated task but not an impossible one. Within this framework, I intend to provide you
before the set deadline, with an integrated vision on the guidelines for a strategy that lead to
mainstreaming realistic launch of the GSF.
Arabic original
. ‫ ح يث ال توا صل ع بر االن ترن ت م تاح م نذ ف ترة الب أس ب ها‬, ‫ن ش كرك م ع لى هذه ال خطوة وان جاءت م تأخرة ن وعا ما‬
‫اف ة ال م س توي ات ب خ صوص اال س ترات يج ية ال عال م ية ل المن ال غذائ ى ال مطروحة ل ل ن قاش ف ى ظل ال واق ع ال م عاش ع لى ك‬
‫ وق بل هذا وذاك ارادة صادق ة وجادة من ك اف ة‬, ‫ال مح ل ية واالق ل يم بة وال دول ية هى ب ال شك أمر ي تط لب مجهودات ك ب يرة‬
‫ واالن وب عد م ضى ن حو‬. ‫ال جهات ذات ال ص لة ف ى االل تزام ب مخرجات ال قمم ال عال م ية وال مؤت مرات وال م ن تدي ات ذات ال ص لة‬
‫ وال تى شارك ت ب ال م ن تدى ال مواز ل ل قمة وال خاص ب ال م نظمات غ ير ع قد ون صف من ال زمان ع لى ان ع قاد ق مة‬, ‫ال غذاء ب روما‬
‫ وما االزم ات ال مال ية وال غذائ ية وال ت غ ير ال م ناخ ى ون زاي د معدالت ال هجرة‬, ‫ ي ال شك ان ال و ضع ق د زاد ت فاق ما‬, ‫ال ح كوم ية‬
‫ط ال ف قر واالخ ت الل ال ت نموى ال داخ ل ية وال خارج ية ب ال دول ال نام ية وارت فاع م عدالت ال بطال ة وال ذي ن ي ع ي شون دون خ‬
, ‫ب ال دول ال نام ية ن ت يجة اال س ت غ الل ال سىء ل ف ل س فة ال خ صخ صة واعادة ال ه ي ك لة االق ت صادي ة وت حري ر اال سواق‬
‫ وا س ت عا ضة عن‬, ‫ت كامال مع ت ع ثر ات فاق ية ال دوحة ل تجارة ال م تجات ال زراع ية ف ى اطار م نظمة ال تجارة ال عال م ية‬
50
Proceedings | 51
‫ ومج‬, ‫ وال ت ك ت الت ال ت عاون ب ين دول ال شمال وال ج نوب‬, ‫ ن شوء مجموعة ال ع شري ن ب عد ال ثمان ية‬, ‫ ال ص بن‬+ 07‫موعة ال‬
‫ ك ل ذل ك ك ان ن تاجه ال ط ب ي غى ال م فارق ة ال ح تم ية ال تى ن ع ب شها ال يوم‬, ‫االق ت صادي ة ال مؤث رة ف ى االق ت صاد ال دول ى‬
‫ وهو ماي ج عل ر سم ا س ترات يج ية عال م ية ل المن ال غذائ‬. ‫ى امرا ب ال غ ل ل بون ال شاي ع ب ين ال نظري ة وال م بادىء وال تط ب يق‬
‫ وف ى هذا االط ار سأعمد ق بل ال تاري خ ال محدد ل مدك م ب رؤي ة م ت كام لة حول ال خطوط‬, ‫ال ت ع ق يد ول ك نه ل يس م س تح ي ال‬
‫ال توج يه ية ال س ترات يج ية ت ف ضى ل تر س يخ ق واعد ان ط الق واق ع ية ل المن ال غذائ ى ال عال مى‬
47) Cirilo Antonio Otero, Centro de Iniciativas de Politicas Ambientales CIPA, Nicaragua
English translation
The CFS has to insist on the need to change the vision rich countries have with respect to food as a
“good”. Food must be seen as a human need and a human right, never as a commodity to become
immeasurably rich. Time is running out, we must become more human.
Spanish original
En lo que debe insistir el CFS es en la necesidad de cambiar la visión de los paises ricos con
respecto a la mercancia : alimentos. Los alimnetos deben verse como una necesidad humana y un
derecho humano, nunca como una mercancia para enrriquecerse desmesuradamente. El tiempo se
está terminando, debemos humanizarnos.
48) Kwesi Atta-Krah, Bioversity International, Italy
The Global Strategic Framework (GSF) aims to be a document that will guide CFS in its deliberations,
actions and strategies for dealing with the scourges of hunger and malnutrition globally. It is intended
to “guide synchronized action by a wide range of stakeholders in support of global, regional and
country-led actions to prevent future food crises, eliminate hunger and ensure food security and
nutrition for all human beings.” Bioversity International shares in these goals.
The GSF supports and in fact adopts the “twin-track approach” which includes a combination of
dealing with immediate and short term challenges (such as actions that contribute to the immediate
needs of vulnerable people) combined with dealing with the long-term challenges of food insecurity
and malnutrition. Both dimensions of this twin track strategy are important; the point therefore needs
to be made early in the document that the focus is on both dimensions. As the document presently
stands, the first mention of this twin-track approach does not appear until page 5 (Section IV – Policy
Options). There is also no section of the paper that deals with the immediate short-term measures
and policies in support of vulnerable people, as the document launches immediately into the LongTerm Challenges (Section II, page 2). Having made the point above, I also wish to underline the
fundamental importance of dealing with the long term challenges, as this is what will ensure the long
term solutions to the problem.
The other duality in the GSF document relates to the twin issues of food security and nutrition
security. This is addressed in various sections of the outline document. However, I would like to see a
strong point made that these two elements need to be treated together, and that it is not possible to
have true Food Security in the absence of Nutrition Security. This is why it has been suggested in
certain circles (including within some sessions of CFS), that perhaps we need to aggregate the two
51
Proceedings | 52
concepts into one single entity, and therefore talk in terms of Food and Nutrition Security. In the
Definition of Terms (section VI), I propose that we add this new concept as a term on its own, to
combine the elements of Food Security and Nutrition Security. It is proposed that CFS takes the
necessary steps for the eventual endorsement of the combined term (Food and Nutrition Security).
The issue of importance of nutrition is very well made in the document. Item 5 (page 3), for instance
talks of “the need to meet increased global demand for sufficient and appropriately nutritious food …”
In the same section, the document also talks on the need for “broadening the food basket and the
diversity of plants and animals used in making food (dietary diversity)”. This point on dietary diversity
is such a vital point, that it needs to be teased out and given greater visibility in the document. I share
some thoughts on this subject, below:
Hunger can indeed be solved by yield increases and overall productivity gains (coupled with access
and availability). Malnutrition on the other hand can still be a problem even where overall productivity
has increased, “food” is available in adequate quantities, and with adequate access. Malnutrition
depends on the quality of food; this is what has led to the Hidden Hunger debacle – a situation where
there is abundant quantity of food, but inadequate quality in terms of vitamins, minerals, micronutrients needed by the body.
The document will need to emphasize what makes dietary diversity so vital for achieving food security
(source of vitamins, minerals, local tastes, food sovereignty, etc). Even more important, it will need to
address the point – Where does dietary diversity come from? It doesn’t just happen; it needs to be
produced on farms, for it to be able to show up in markets, and eventually show up on the dinner
plates. The problem is that agricultural systems have tended to move in the direction of oversimplification, especially in relation to species and varieties grown as food. Current agricultural
policies are designed to support very few crops (influenced by globalization, world trade and changing
life styles). Consequently, it is known that 4 “global” crops (rice, maize, wheat and potatoes) supply
over 50% of the world’s energy needs, and 30 crops provide more than 90% of the world caloric
intake. It is on these ‘special crops’ that policy attention, research attention, and markets attention is
focused. This is against the backdrop of thousands of plant species that are useable as food. The
world of food species is therefore divided into two: the favored Major Staples vs the Neglected and
Underutilized species. The latter category is also variously described aptly as ‘minor’ species or
‘orphan’ species, and yet they are the Cinderella species, when it comes to nutrition. They are indeed
potential “opportunity” crops for nutrition, climate change adaptation, etc.
So, the question is: where is the dietary diversification going to come from? It needs to begin from the
farm in terms of increased agricultural biodiversity; and it needs to begin with smallholder farmers.
Policies are needed to support this trend towards genetic and species diversity on farms. More needs
to be done to support cultivation of local crops, minor crops and species. It is therefore proposed that
under section III “Priority Issues to be addressed”, one of the priority issues of concern, should be
the increasing over-simplification of agriculture, especially with regard to agrobiodiversity on farms.
Also in section IV (page 5) “Policy Options” needs to include a specific mention of policies to support
and promote agrobiodiversity on farms and dietary diversity in the plates. These policies should also
include policies to promote research on these species.
There should be more targeted research on the hundreds of neglected and underutilized species that
are useful as food, but are currently under-developed and under-supported. These include the crops
and species that are important to local communities and to smallholders, and that also have a
52
Proceedings | 53
potential to improve the nutrition and health base of populations, both urban and rural. Such research
must cover the entire value chain for these commodities – production, marketing, consumption, etc.
Such initiatives are not intended to replace the efforts with the major staples; they are only intended to
bring more diversity into the system and into diets, thereby enhancing food and nutrition security.
I propose that these issues be addressed and highlighted in the GSF document as key elements of
Food and Nutrition Security.
49)Abdou Yahouza, CLUSA/projet sécurité alimentaire ARZIKI, Niger
English translation
In relation to the strategic approaches to ensure food security for humanity, it is necessary to think of
the balance of power between currencies as well as world pricesfor acquisition of staple cereals, other
basic supplies, inputs and agricultural equipment, technologies. The ideal is to reduce the differences
of exchange rates between the currencies. The rural citizen of a poor country with "poor" currency,
with an income of less than one USD dollar per day, will never be able to acquire enough to produce
and live. There is a great gap between his currency and the Euro or the Dollar, which are the
currencies of the big industrial, producer and exporter countries. I do not know what the monetary
economists think. Therefore, it is necessary to revalue poor currencies (Naira,FCFA, Cedi, Ouguiya,
etc.) or devalue the Euro and the Dollar.
If the economy of China is growing it is because it is much less expensive to have access to the
Chinese markets than to access the western markets (EU or USA), because the Chinese yen (RMB)
is not too strong in relation to the poor currencies. The devaluation of the FCFA and the SAP
(Structural adjustment programmes) have contributed to food insecurity of the countries in the Franc
zone, because the value of the FCFA has been dismantled in comparison to the Euro and the Dollar
via the French Franc, so that at one stroke the value of exchangeable assets and commodities of
these poor french-speaking countries were quashed, leading to the flight of capital, under-investment
in agriculture and livestock, the inevitable recourse to indebtedness and to natural resources with the
consequent increasing increasing environmental degradation, droughts, low production and
insufficient food which has become multifaceted and almost structural. More than 60% of the
populations of these countries are today poor, so faced with food insecurity even in a normal year.
Therefore, thinking about currency strategy and rapid technology transfer at reasonable prices, in the
name of the right to food and to life, could contribute to raising earnings and production, and reducing
food insecurity in the planet.
Thank you all and good luck!
French original
Concernant les axes stratégiques pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire de l'humanité, il faut penser aux
rapports des forces entre les monnaies ainsi que les prix mondiaux d'accès aux céréales de base,
aux produits de premières nécessité, aux intrants et matériels agricoles, aux technologies. L'idéal
c'est de réduire les écarts de taux de change entre les monnaies. Le citoyen rural des pays pauvres
aux monnaies "pauvres", avec moins d'1 Dollar de revenu par jour ne pourra jamais acquérir
suffisamment ce dont il à besoin pour produire et vivre. Car il ya un grand écart entre sa monnaie et
l'Euro ou le Dollar qui sont les monnaies des pays grands industriels, producteurs et exportateurs. Je
53
Proceedings | 54
ne sais pas ce que pensent les économistes monétaires. Donc il faut réhausser la valeur des
monnaies pauvres ( Naira, FCFA, cedis, Ougia, etc.) ou dévaluer l'Euro et le Dollar.
Si l'économie de la Chine populaire est ascendante c'est parcequ'il est plus moins cher d'accéder aux
marchés chninois que d'accéder aux marchés Occidentaux (UE, USA), car le yen (RMB)chinois n'est
pas trop fort par rapport aux monnaies pauvres. La dévaluation du FCFA et le PAS (Programme
d'Ajustement Structurel) ont contribué à l'insécurité alimentaire des pays de la zone franc, car la
valeur du FCFA a été cassée face à l'Euro et au Dollar par l'intermédiaire du FFrançais, du coût la
valeur des avoirs et biens échangeables de ces pays francophones pauvres fut cassée, d'où la
décapitalisation, le sous investissement dans l'agriculture et l'Elevage, le recours incontournable aux
dettes, aux ressources naturelles avec accélération de la dégradation de l'environnement, des
sécheresses, des faibles rendements et insuffisance de nourriture devenue multifactorielle et quasi
structurelle. Plus de 60% des populations de ces pays sont aujourd'hui pauvres donc dans l'insécurité
alimentaire même en année normale.
Donc pensez à la stratégie monnaie et au transfert rapide des technologies à des prix accessibles au
nom du droit à l'alimentation et à la vie pourrait contribuer à rehauser les revenus la poduction et
réduire l'insécurité alimentaire de la planète.
Mes salutations et bon courage à tous.
50) Alex Mokori, Centre for Nutrition Education and Technology, Uganda
This is a good framework which if when executed and owned at all levels will significantly contribute to
improved nutrition outcomes through agriculture led interventions. However, the following should be
considered: (a) Nutrition outcome indicators should be designed and applied to measure agricultural
interventions. Most of the time we assume increased agricultural productivity, better policies,
marketing, etc automatically lead to improvement in nutrition outcomes. (b) Mechanisms of holding
the government at national, regional, district and community levels accountable for nutrition outcomes
and agricultural investment should be included in the framework. (c) Integration of social behaviour
change communication based on well designed and executed operational research should be
included in all agricultural interventions proposed in the framework. We cannot improve nutrition
outcomes without empowering agriculturalists with the necessary nutrition, health, hygiene and
sanitation, knowledge, attitudes, practices and behaviours.
51) Edward Mutandwa , RDA, Rwanda
Dear FSN Moderator,
The proposed framework comes at an opportune time in which global food security is at the mercy of a myriad of
social, economic and policy issues. I would like to take an example to what is happening in the horn of Africa
where droughts have created environmental refugees. It is however surprising that other areas in the world
actually have surpluses. This reflects distributional issues and a dearth of guidelines on what should be done in
such scenarios. I therefore find this document as a good initiative if it is going to address the fundamental issues
of food insecurity. The main objective looks grand and all encompassing. It indicates that it will “build upon other
frameworks….” but the question is how this is going to be done. The structural challenges to food insecurity are
also comprehensive. However, governance issues are shown as a priority area but not indicated as one of the
policy options. I think that the committee can be influential in terms of lobbying and advocacy on governance
issues and creating clear parameters which could be used to monitor the process.
54
Proceedings | 55
Thanking you,
Edward Mutandwa
RDA, Rwanda
52) Buka Mupungu Nathanael , Confederation paysanne du Congo [ copaco] membre de
la propac et de la via campesina, Democratic Republic of the Congo
English translation
I am very happy with the final outcome, although I believe that the main work on food security or of
theCFS must focus on the relevance of its vision at individualcountry levels. It is at the national level
where often the involvement of civil society stakeholders is considered as something to be avoided.
If we want the mission of the CFS to succeed, the organizations of small producers at national level
can not remain mere onlookers in the process of formulation and evaluation of programs of food
security, just putting them into practice.
The OPP (Organization de paysans producteurs: smallholding farmers organization) should be
informed about the CFS at national level. We are ignorant of the national strategic food structure:
Who is involved and how is it constituted. The problem of the adoption of all the programs of food
security by the organizations of small producers is found at this level. At COPACO (Confédération
Paysanne du Congo: Farmers Confederation of Congo) level, we havejust put in place a programto
monitor and capitalize initiatives in favor of food security and sovereignty of farmers (PSCISA:
programme de suivi et capitalisation des initiatives en faveur de la sécurité et la souveraineté
alimentaire des paysans). It will allow the reduction of missed opportunities for the Democratic
Republic of the Congo to attain the first objective of the millenniumdevelopment project. Thus we
support and will continue supporting the CFS for the success of its mission.
NATHANAEL BUKA MUPUNGU
National spokeperson for WECAFC focal point of RAPDA-DRC (Réseau africain pour le droit à
l’alimentation (African network for the right to food) of the Democratic Republic of the Congo)
French original
Je suis très satisfait du résultat final mais je crois que le grand travail de la sécurité alimentaire ou du
CSA doit beaucoup se focaliser sur l'applicabilité de sa vision au niveau des pays. C'est au niveau
national ou souvent l'implication des acteurs de la société civile sont considérés comme des
personnes à éviter.
Si nous voulons la réussite de la mission du CSA, les organisations des petits producteurs au niveau
national ne peuvent plus être des figurants dans le processus de formulation et de l'évaluation des
programmes de sécurité alimentaire en passant par la mise en œuvre.
Les OPP (Organisation des Petits Producteurs) doivent être informés du CSA au niveau national.
Nous sommes ignorants des cadres stratégiques alimentaires nationaux. Qui sont la et comment cela
est constitue. La problématique de l'appropriation de tous les programmes de sécurité alimentaires
par les organisations des petits producteurs se trouve à ce niveau. Au niveau de la COPACO, nous
venons de mettre en place un programme de suivi et capitalisation des initiatives en faveur de la
sécurité et la souveraineté alimentaire des paysans [PSCISA].Ceci permettra de réduire les occasions
55
Proceedings | 56
manquées pour que la RDC atteigne le premier objectif du millénaire pour le développement. Ainsi
soutenons et soutiendront le CSA pour la réussite de sa mission.
NATHANAEL BUKA MUPUNGU
Porte-parole national de la COPACO Point focal du RAPDA (Réseau Africain pour le Droit à
l'Alimentation )-RDC
53) Renato Carvalheira do Nascimento, Ciência e Tecnologia da CAPES - Ministério da
Educação, Brazil
English translation
Dear Colleagues,
About the GLOBAL STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION
document, I think that part IV. (POLICY OPTIONS) could include something about participation in
public policy. The Brazilian example deserves attention, please consult the publication: « Construction
of the System and Food Security and Nutrition Policy: the Brazilian experience”.
(Http://www4.planalto.gov.br/consea/publicacoes).
I also believe that in the same part, on the section on Research & Development, education should be
mentioned in the sense of emancipatory education (as noted by Paulo Freire) for those suffering from
hunger. Education is an important way out of poverty and not just to "increase productivity".
Best regards,
Carvalheira Renato do Nascimento
Master in Sociology
Former FAO Brazil and RLC consultant
Former Unesco consultant
PhD Candidate CPDA / UFRRJ on the experience of the National Food and Nutrition Security
Council- Consea
Science and Technology Analyst in CAPES - Ministry of Education
Spanish original
Estimados colegas, Sobre el documento Marco estratégico mundial para la seguridad alimentaria y la
nutrición creo que en la parte IV. opciones en materia de políticas se podría incluir algo sobre la
participación en las políticas públicas. El ejemplo brasileño merece atención, por favor consultar la
publicación: Construcción del Sistema y de la Política de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional: la
experiencia brasileña. (http://www4.planalto.gov.br/consea/publicacoes). Yo creo también que en el
misma parte, en el punto Investigación y Desarrollo, cabe mencionar la educación con el sentido de
una educación emancipatoria (como ha señalado Paulo Freire) para aquellos que sufren el fenómeno
del hambre. La educación es una vía importante para salir de la pobreza y no solamente para
"aumento de la productividad".
56
Proceedings | 57
Cordiales saludos,
Renato Carvalheira do Nascimento
Mestre em Sociologia Ex-consultor FAO Brasil e RLC Ex-consultor Unesco Doutorando
CPDA/UFRRJ sobre a experiência do Conselho Nacional de Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional Consea Analista em Ciência e Tecnologia da CAPES - Ministério da Educação.
54) Peggy Pascal, Solidarites International, France
Dear FSN moderator
You will find below, comments from the FS advisors of Solidarites International Regarding the chapter
II: “Long term challenges and structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition“,
we believe that the importance of acces to safe water, proper sanitation services, hygiene and proper
health structures should be raised in point 4 and 6. It could also be mentioned in the chapter 3 (point
8). It is now acknowledged that access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene are of the utmost
importance for fighting hunger and malnutrition. According to the WHO (2008), “Childhood
malnutrition causes about 35% of all deaths of children under the age of fi ve years worldwide; it is
estimated that 50% of childhood malnutrition is associated with repeated diarrhea or intestinal
nematode infections as a result of unsafe water, inadequate sanitation or insufficient hygiene”. (UN
water Glass 2010 report). Post harvest management and crop / food storage contribute often to food
insecurity. A large part of the food produced is lost due to poor storage or inexistent food processing
capacities. This aspect should be highlighted in the document since an improvement of crop/ food
storage and food process could improve food security. The document mentions the importance of
agricultural research institutions in developing local and global solutions. We agree with that.
However, we would like to stress that the contribution of the civil society (farmer’s groups, federation
and other field based organizations) are also an imperative. New methods based on the recognition of
the value of field practices (like Farm field school) for instance should be encouraged in the future.
The importance of the safety nets/ social protection is mentioned in the document. It might be
important to stress out that these approaches should be valued as interesting exit strategies.
55) Marcelo Huarte , Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA)/Asociación
Latinoamericana de la Papa (ALAP), Argentina
A critical structural cause to food insecurity and malnutrition is the concentration of resource poor
households in the outskirts of large cities, ousted from their rural environment by the lack of work
opportunities and household subdivision. Three main strategies need to be implemnted
simultaneously: 1.- Local territorial development strategies are needed to maintain the rural
population in their land. 2.- Relocation programs with modern and attractive incentives to return to
rural life are needed and 3.- Development of integrated farming and food processing skills in rural and
periurban areas. Many countries in which food insecurity may be an issue (Argentina is surprisingly
one of them) have contradictory policies on biofuels versus food crops and cattle farming. A
discussion on this topic in the GSF is needed at a global level to come up with a "food/fuel equation"
for a sustainable land use and food supply.
57
Proceedings | 58
56) Benone Pasarin, The University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine
Iasi, Romania
Dear FSN moderator!!!!
Food security notions along with the human safe nutritional elements are quite a complete system in
preventing global issues on mankind feeding.
I have some annotations/suggestions on some chapters of the outlined form of the GSF for food
security and nutrition:
• chapter III – Priority issues to be addressed: one of the key elements involved in food security is the
qualified human resources – eventually to add a paragraph referring to this valuable resource – young
farmers with specialty studies, veterinarians, researchers, people which reconverted their profession
toward agriculture, long-life learning programs etc.
As practical approach, there should be designed and implemented some supportive governmental
programs for the young specialists which would like to establish in the rural area, to contribute to
agricultural development, touching all its sides (sustainability, land management, research and
development, technological transfers, agricultural workers training). The support for the young
professionals could consist in: assistance in buying/building a house in the specific area,
transportation deduction, free trainings etc. These specialists once established in the countryside, will
be able to provide their technical expertise to the small and medium-size farmers, to give them
consultancy in elaborating projects and financial proposal and so on.
• chapter VI - Definition of terms: It should be reasoned well on the differences and similarities
between the terms food security – food safety - nutrition security. Very often, the terms security and
safety are confused by many people, even including specialists.
Thank you and best regards!
Prof. Benone PASARIN, Ph.D.
DEAN
The University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Iasi
Faculty of Animal Sciences
Iasi, Romania
57) Francisco Pérez Trejo, FAO - Regional Office for Latin America and the
Caribbean, Chile
The ambitious aims of the Global Strategic Framework (GSF) that will be adopted by the CFS will
require close coordination and coherence with the FAO Regional Strategic Frameworks that are being
prepared by the five Regions of the Organization. In this context, I strongly suggest that the CFS
Secretariat work closely with the Regional Conferences in their new role as governing bodies of FAO
in order to ensure that the outcomes of the upcoming CFS in October provides guidance and clear
58
Proceedings | 59
directives for the debate that will take place during the Regional Conferences on priorities and key
strategic areas that the Regional Strategic Frameworks should consider. This is particularly relevant
to the strategic priorities that Regional Offices could include in their work in order to develop and
strengthen regional-level policies that the GSF would require to address the significant regional
dimensions of food security. To be specific, the regional dimensions of food security include, among
others, the institutional network (government and non-governmental) which is unique in each region,
the conditions for regional-level policies and programmes regarding food security such as regional
trade agreements, South-South cooperation, information exchange and transparency, research and
scientific cooperation. A key factor for ensuring that a global strategy on food security can be effective
is to make the essential linkages with regional strategies in a coherent way. We hope these
comments will stimulate the debate on how to address these important challenges regarding the
regional dimension of food security.
58) Lizzy Igbine, (NIWAAFA) Nigerian Women Agro Allied Farmers Association, Nigeria
Food security is an important topic and a serious toll of Governance in the 21st century. it is surprising
that with all the awareness creation on the need for countries to be food secured, We still have gaps
of underfunding the Agric sector, underdevelopment of Agric infrastructure and hunger in African
countries. In this new dispensation I am suggesting that we structure topics with relevance to current
situations in Africa, our own level of understanding and community adherence to Agriculture, food
production and Government policies. We will make impact also by using the farmers group, to
address issues of ignorance on the part of farmers and incompetence of administrators in execution
of policies and most importantly we need to address the issue of policy summersault and instability of
Government. It is my opinion that this topics will emerge as a course of our discussions We will
suggest topics as you involve us in subsequent discussions.
59) Switzerland’s comments, received through the Permanent Representation of
Switzerland to FAO, IFAD and WFP, Italy
Switzerland would like to make the following comments.
Response to question 1 related to “Statement of Rationale, Purpose and Function”
In general terms, Chapter I of the draft outline meets our expectations. However, we would like to
emphasize the importance to make clear to all stakeholders the rationale for the GSF and the value
added expected from the latter with respect to already existing documents such as the “Updated
Comprehensive Framework for Action”, among others.
The last two bullet points need however redrafting. Similarly “promote international credibility” (2nd
bullet point) is not self-explanatory.
Response to question 2 related to “Long-term Challenges and Structural Causes of Food Insecurity
and Malnutrition”
In our view, the GSF process should not rewrite the substance of many existing reports, diagnoses
and assessments. One way to handle this would be to make references to the existing -- or
forthcoming -- body of knowledge related to the issues which have to be addressed.
59
Proceedings | 60
The GSF should further identify knowledge and policy gaps that could be referred to HLPE (taking
into account the limited capacity of the latter).
The distinction between “structural causes” and “issues” is not clear and the draft outline does not
indicate if they are considered jointly or in a distinctive manner.
Response to question 3 related to “additional issues to be considered”
The following additional issues are to be considered.






We expect “water” (water for food and water for people) to be addressed in the GSF among
key structural causes of food insecurity and nutrition.
The provision of rural advisory services should be put at par with “technology development,
transfer and R&D”.
Food waste should be addressed in the GSF as an issue of global relevance in various
contexts (developing countries, emerging economies, industrialized countries).
The health consequences of mal/undernutrition or not well balanced diets, especially for
vulnerable groups (children, mothers, chronically ill persons such as people leaving with
HIV/AIDS) should be pointed out.
When relevant at global, regional and national levels, access to market, advisory services,
inputs (fertilizer, seeds, etc.) but also access to credit and risk management systems need to
be addressed.
We expect the GSF to help advance in the setting-up of the “Global Partnership for
Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition” which was promoted in recent outcome documents
of international conferences and summits.
Response to question 4 related to “Policy options”
As far as the title of Chapter IV is concerned we would suggest to speak of “policy responses”, which
need to be evidence-based, instead of “policy options”.
The current content of this chapter is not conceptually convincing. It does not facilitate the
understanding of the cross-cutting nature of various policy options/responses considered. As an
overall framework, it is suggested to take on board the agenda promoted in IFAD’s Rural Poverty
Report 2011 (“a more systemic approach to growth for rural poverty reduction” and “a market-oriented
and sustainable agricultural intensification”, pp. 218-223). The transformative impact of such policies
on the sector also needs to be highlighted.
The issue of biodiversity for food, agriculture and nutrition, which is becoming increasingly important
for smallholders and rural populations on marginal land (pastoralists, indigenous peoples, etc.) also
needs to be considered.
The current drafting needs furthermore to be updated (e.g. on “VG Land” process and CFS-led RAI
consultation process).
Response to question 5 related to “Monitoring Progress towards Objectives at Country Level”
60
Proceedings | 61
An innovative monitoring and accountability framework will be doubtless an added value, if it is
actually innovative and flexible. It should not only consider CFS Member States as targets, but it
should also accommodate the role and specificities of other stakeholders.
The improvement of statistics and of reliable and transparent information systems related to food
security and especially the need for strengthening capacities in this field in developing countries also
deserve careful attention in the GSF.
Building a monitoring process for the GSF within the CFS should also be informed of and feed into
international monitoring frameworks initiated in other policy fora, conferences and networks (e.g. in
the Rio + 20 process, among others). It is also desirable to include MDG3 and MDG7 into the
monitoring framework. More generally, the GSF cannot be limited to agriculture, food security and
nutrition frameworks: It is of utmost importance to connect it to international discussions in other policy
sectors or to global transversal issues (sustainable development, “green economy”, climate change,
to mention just a few ).
In addition to that, we would like to suggest that the definition of terms appear in an annex.
60) Abdoul Nasser Ibrahim, FAO, Burkina Faso
C’est avec un réel plaisir que je vais partager mes réflexions avec le forum. Je tiens à préciser mes
propos n’engage que moi et ne reflètent que ma perception actuelle de cette problématique.
La première étape pour moi consiste à d’abord à distinguer entre multiples stratégies à savoir la
stratégie de lutte contre la pauvreté, les stratégies de lutte contre la faim et les stratégies de sécurité
alimentaires et nutritionnelles. Dans mon entendement à chaque stratégie correspond des activités
bien spécifiques mais la réalité du terrain fait apparaitre qu’il existe une réelle confusion au niveau
des pays dans le choix de ses stratégies. Aucune des ces trois stratégies à elle seule ne pourra
résoudre le problème d’où la nécessité des les combiner dans une approche inclusive avec tous les
ministères publics, le privé et les ONG et Association. Hélas trop souvent le mandat de la sécurité
alimentaire est logé dans deux ou trois ministères alors que la problématique va au-delà des
cloisonnements ministériels.
En résumé il s'agira de Combiner les stratégies de lutte contre la pauvreté, stratégie de lutte contre la
faim et stratégie de sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle pour atteindre la Sécurité alimentaire au sens
global c'est à dire y inclut la nutrition.
Cordialement
Abdoul Nasser Ibrahim
Associate Professional Food Security Officer
FAO, Burkina Faso
61) Xavier Meignien, Institut International du Froid / International Institute of
Refrigeration, France
61
Proceedings | 62
(La version française est après le texte anglais/ The French version follows the English version).
It is widely agreed that whilst speculation can make prices more volatile, such volatility usually occurs
when there is a mismatch between supply and demand. This mismatch can arise when there is an
overall surplus or shortage, and it is important to bear in mind that in the current context, the reduction
of post-harvest losses is a key objective that is just as important as a means of raising production
(investments, research…). FAO recently published a quantitative study on this issue, and the IIR has
also expressed its views on several occasions in the past. It should also be noted that post-harvest
losses worsen economic and geopolitical tension with respect to resources (land, water, energy…),
given that some of these resources are used to produce foodstuffs that are subsequently lost.
Mismatches also arise where products exist but are not available where and when they are required,
simply because suitably structured logistics are unavailable. In developing countries, most postharvest losses occur prior to purchase by the end-consumer, at the level of the warehouse or retail
outlet, or during transport. The problem is particularly acute in the case of fresh products (livestock
foods, fish, fruit and vegetables….) which are highly nutritional but fragile: it is not unusual to find that
a certain category of product is plentiful at production or fishing sites, but are luxury or even
unavailable items some distance away. Global demand for these products is likely to increase along
with rising living standards, and is likely to increase faster than overall demand for food. Such a
situation is damaging in terms of food security and economic development: losses weigh heavily on
the entire production and distribution chain in one way or another, and not only affect the endconsumers; in certain cases, foreseeable, prohibitive losses discourage the raising of production
beyond a level which can be sold immediately in the production area, and this in turn tends to
maintain an overall shortage. Conversely, by improving logistics in general and cold-chain logistics in
particular, jobs would be created in high-value-added, highly nutritional food production and supply
chains. Such an approach would thus exert positive effects on the fight against poverty and
malnutrition, and wealth and job creation. The development of logistics should be undertaken in
coordination with the usual agricultural developmental actions (research, training, investment in
irrigation and other tangible and intangible investments) and not in an isolated manner: suitable
logistics are required in order to market products, and production must be sufficient to offset the cost
of such logistics. Such an approach requires public and private stakeholders. In some regions
distribution groups handle agricultural developmental actions addressing the needs of producers:
provision of inputs, loans, technical advice, and even guaranteed remunerative prices, and it is in the
interests of distributors to ensure that producers have incentives to raise production and are able to
handle such increases. In the shorter term, it is in the interests of intermediaries to reduce losses
during transport and storage; even without sophisticated tools, simple measures can be implemented
for certain foodstuffs in order to reduce losses. The private sector also has a role to play in the
development of new refrigeration systems: some technologies that are not so commonly used in
temperate countries would be more valuable in hot countries, and more particularly in hot and dry
countries (solar refrigeration, thermal storage and evaporative cooling in particular). The availability of
electrical power and maintenance issues are other factors to be taken into consideration. Finally, the
control issue should be mentioned: for obvious reasons — not just from a food-safety point of view but
also in terms of fair trading and end-consumer trust — well-organized control systems are required:
indeed, the purchaser who buys products from a careless stakeholder can not necessarily detect
spoilage of foodstuffs that have not been kept at the right temperature. Temperature recorders and
time-temperature integrators are helpful and undergoing research on an ongoing basis.
French Version:
Il est communément admis que si la spéculation peut amplifier la volatilité des prix, celle-ci a d’abord
son origine dans un décalage entre l’offre et la demande. Ce décalage peut consister en un excédent
62
Proceedings | 63
ou un déficit global ; à ce sujet, il est utile de rappeler que dans le contexte actuel, la réduction des
pertes après récolte devrait être un objectif majeur au même titre que les différents moyens
d’augmenter la production (investissement, recherche…). La FAO a récemment encore produit une
étude quantitative sur ce problème sur lequel l’IIF s’est à plusieurs reprises exprimé dans le passé.
On peut noter également que les pertes après récolte aggravent aussi les tensions économiques et
géopolitiques sur les ressources (foncier, eau, énergie…) puisque une partie de ces ressources sert à
produire des aliments qui sont finalement perdus. Ce décalage peut aussi résider dans le fait que les
produits existent mais ne sont pas disponibles quand il faut, où il faut, pour satisfaire la demande,
faute d’une logistique suffisamment structurée. Dans les pays en développement, l’essentiel des
pertes après récolte intervient avant que les produits arrivent au consommateur final : pertes en
entrepôt, en magasin ou en cours de transport. Le problème est particulièrement important dans le
cas des produits frais (produits de l’élevage ou de la pêche, fruits et légumes….) qui sont des produits
à haute valeur nutritionnelle mais fragiles : il n’est pas rare qu’une catégorie de produits soit
disponible en abondance sur les lieux de production ou de capture, et soit un luxe (ou même, soit
introuvable) à quelque distance de là. Or, la demande mondiale pour ces produits devrait augmenter
avec l’élévation du niveau de vie, plus vite que la demande totale de nourriture. Une telle situation est
préjudiciable en termes de sécurité alimentaire mais aussi de développement économique : les pertes
pèsent d’une façon ou d’une autre sur la chaîne de production et de distribution dans son ensemble,
et pas seulement sur les consommateurs finaux ; dans certains cas, le taux de pertes prévisible est
prohibitif et décourage toute augmentation de la production au-delà de ce qui peut être vendu tout de
suite et sur place, ce qui contribue à maintenir le déficit global. A contrario, l’amélioration de la
logistique, et notamment de la logistique du froid, permettrait de créer des emplois dans la production
et la distribution d’aliments à forte valeur ajoutée et à forte valeur nutritionnelle. Une telle action aurait
donc des effets positifs à la fois dans la lutte contre la pauvreté et la malnutrition, et sur la création de
richesse et d’emplois. Le développement de la logistique devrait être engagé non pas de façon
indépendante, mais en coordination avec les actions de développement agricole habituellement
menées (recherche, formation, irrigation et autres investissements matériels et immatériels) : en effet,
s’il faut une logistique adaptée pour que les produits soient mis en marché, il faut aussi une
production suffisante pour rentabiliser la logistique. Une telle approche est l’affaire des acteurs
publics mais aussi des acteurs privés : on voit d’ailleurs, dans certaines régions, des groupes de
distribution mener des actions de développement agricole auprès des producteurs : fourniture
d’intrants, de prêts, de conseils techniques, et même prix garantis et rémunérateurs, car c’est leur
intérêt que les agriculteurs soient incités à produire davantage, et aient la capacité de le faire. De
façon plus immédiate, c’est aussi l’intérêt des intermédiaires de veiller à réduire les pertes pendant le
transport et pendant l’entreposage ; sans attendre des outils sophistiqués, il existe pour un certain
nombre de produits des mesures simples pour réduire les pertes. Le secteur privé a aussi un rôle à
jouer dans le développement de nouveaux systèmes frigorifiques : certains dispositifs qui ne sont pas
tellement utilisés dans les pays tempérés sont beaucoup plus intéressants dans les pays chauds et
notamment dans les pays chauds et secs (froid solaire, stockage de froid et rafraichissement
évaporatif notamment); la disponibilité de l’énergie électrique et la question de la maintenance sont
aussi à prendre en compte. Enfin, la question des contrôles doit être évoquée : pour des raisons
évidentes non seulement de sécurité sanitaire, mais aussi de loyauté des échanges commerciaux et
de confiance des consommateurs, il est nécessaire d’avoir une bonne organisation des systèmes de
contrôle : en effet, les altérations des produits qui ne sont pas conservés à la bonne température ne
sont pas toujours visibles pour celui qui achète les produits d’un acteur négligent ; un complément
utile peut être apporté par les enregistreurs de température et les intégrateurs temps-température, qui
sont l’objet de recherches actives.
63
Proceedings | 64
The contribution of the HLTF Coordination Team to the consultation on the GSF builds upon the
Updated Comprehensive Framework for Action (UCFA) and in particular on the ten key principles1 for
action of the UCFA summary version.
62) Mahdy El Qaissy
‫ ال ت نم ية ف ي ال رئ ي س ية ال محددات من ت عد ال م ياه ان م ع لوم ط ي بة ت ح ية‬،‫س ل با س يؤث ر ال م ياه شح ف ان ل ذا ال زراع ية‬
‫ال غذائ ي االم ن ت ح ق يق ع لى‬. ‫ اي رادات ها ف ي م ش ترك ة ال ب لدان اغ لب ان وب ما‬،‫ع لى س تؤث ر ال شراك ة هذه ف ان ل ذا ال مائ ية‬
‫ال م ن بع ب دول م قارن ة ال صب دول ف ي خا صة ال زراعي ل ل قطاع ال م ياه ت وف ير‬. ‫ال م شاط ئة ال دول ب ين ال ع الق ة ت نظ يم ان‬
‫ل غذاءا ت وف ير وب ال تال ي ال مائ ي االح ت ياج ل ت ل ب ية ا سا س ية مهمة ي ع ت بر ال مائ ية اي رادت ها ف ي وال م ش ترك ة‬. ‫ن رى ل ذا‬
‫ال دول ب ين ال ع الق ة ل ت نظ يم ب ناءة ا سس و ضع ف ي وف عال اي جاب ي ال دول ية وال زراعة االغ ذي ة م نظمة دور ي كون ان‬
‫وال مهم ال ح يوي ال مو ضوع هذا ف ي ت وازن ل تح ق يق ال مائ ية مواردها ف ي ال ش ترك ة‬. ‫ال ت غذوي ال وعي ل زي ادة وان ك ما‬
‫ ت بذي ر دون ال حاجة وف ق ال م نا سب ال غذاء ت ناول ف ي مهم دور ل لمواطن‬،‫ال قدرات ب ناء ع لى ال ترك يز ال مط لوب ل ذا وهدر‬
‫ال نام ية ال دول وخا صة ل ل ش عوب ال غذائ ي االم ن ت طور ت ح ق يق و سائ ل ت بادل ي شمل وال ذي‬.
English Translation:
Regards,
Needless to say that water is a key determinant in agricultural development. Accordingly, water
scarcity will have a negative impact on achievement of food security. Since most countries share their
water resources, this partnership will affect the availability of water supply for the agricultural sector,
especially in the downstream countries compared to the upstream countries. That is why regulating
the relationship between the riparian states sharing their water resources is a critical task in order to
meet water demand, and, thus, make food available. Accordingly, we believe that, in order strike a
balance in this critical issue, the role of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) should be a
positive and effective one in the development of constructive bases for the regulation of the
relationship between riparian states sharing water resources. Moreover, raising awareness of the
public about nutrition has an important role to play in having a proper diet as needed without excess
or wastage. So, there is a need for focusing on capacity building, which includes exchange and
development of means to achieve food security for people, especially in developing countries.
Dr. Mahdy El Qaissy
63) Pradip Dey, Indian Society of Soil Salinity and Water Quality, India
Dear FSN Members,
1
Ten key principles of the UCFA summary: Twin-tracks to food and nutrition security; the need for a
comprehensive approach; smallholders, particularly women, at the centre of actions; increased focus
on resilience of household livelihoods; more and better investments in food and nutrition security;
importance of open and well-functioning markets and trade; the value of multi-stakeholder and multisectoral partnerships; sustained political commitment and good governance; strategies led by
countries with regional support; accountability for results.
64
Proceedings | 65
Good Day!
It’s my pleasure to put forth the following points for consideration regarding the Online Consultation on
the CFS Global Strategic Framework strictly in my personal capacity and not in Official capacity:





Agriculture inmarginal environments need immediate attention.
Water will be a major constraint and with more and more use of poor quality waters, area
under salinity and waterlogging will continue to increase. We, therefore, need to develop
cheaper and eco-friendly options for use of urban/peri-urban waste waters.
Promoting multi-tier perennial based system for enhancing productivity, increasing carbon
sequestration and maintaining soil quality.
We need to evolve suitable varieties of crops to suit the changing climate.
Also I do feel that we need to create a sound social framework to address food vulnerability
which will ultimate help check the price volatility.
With warm regards,
Sincerely,
Pradip Dey
64) Per Mogstad, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway
Please find below comments from Norway:
1.Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific
changes would you suggest?
The overall purpose in our view is good – a good GSF will be a dynamic instrument to enhance the
role of the CFS. We find the mandate clearly formulated and find that the main strategic issues are
covered. The relationship to other framework is also quite clear.
2.Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term
challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
The long term challenge for CFS is also correct in our view- to meet increased global demand for
sufficient and appropriate nutritious food in the face of decreasing availability and quality of natural
resources. The relationship between food security and energy is a challenge that should be
discussed. Investments should also be included and nutrition given a more clear space. The text is
quite detailed, to avoid including everything one might consider to aim at a more general level.
3.Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant for
the GSF to include?
As mentioned earlier, energy will be vital. The description of subsidies could have been formulated in
a more neutral manner.
65
Proceedings | 66
We support the list of priority issues however fisheries seems to be omitted from the text and
should be included. Fisheries is an important sector for close to 1 billion people and a major protein
source. Fish contribute a significant amount of animal protein to the diets of people worldwide. It is
estimated that between 15 and 20 percent of all animal proteins come from aquatic animals. Fish is
highly nutritious and serves as a valuable supplement in diets lacking essential vitamins and minerals.
In addition, the harvest, sale and processing of fish contribute indirectly to food security by increasing
purchasing power at individual or household level, and also regionally, and nationally.
Concerning the policy options the Fishery sector is also omitted but most policy options are relevant
for fisheries as well, so adding the word fisheries to agriculture would cover some of the policy needs
for the sector. Specific policy options for the fisheries sector should be included like for example
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Making poverty and food security goals explicit in fisheries and aquaculture sector policy
Land and sea/water tenure reform
Fisheries and aquaculture management and development
Ecosystem approach to fisheries
Reduction of IUU (illegal, unreported and unregulated) fishing
Reduction of post-harvest losses
4.Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy options do
you think are most relevant for the GSF to include?
We believe the national level is well covered regarding policy options. It could be considered to add
more on regional and global levels.
5.Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels
(national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
One should include other multilateral organisations, private sector and civil society.
Regards
Per Mogstad
65) Private Sector Statement
Below the comments from the private sector on the Global Strategic Framework
1) Safety nets, social protection and nutrition
a) More attention must be paid to the immediate needs of those who lack the necessary purchasing
power to meet their food and nutrition requirements, especially women and children.
b) Social protection and safety nets to reduce vulnerability should not only meet immediate needs,
often arising from natural disasters or conflicts, but also contribute to reducing uncertainty and
improve agricultural productivity.
c) Agriculture is in desperate need of capital investment, especially to feed 10 billion people in 2050.
Price caps will fundamentally destroy that investment, so it is important food security should be
dealt with in social safety net structures.
2) Increasing investment
66
Proceedings | 67
a) Prioritize specific value chains or regions for increased public-private investment and access to
credit, including micro-credit.
b) Remove barriers to investment, particularly through innovative financing mechanisms (catalytic
finance, patient capital, credit guarantees and insurance).
c) Develop intellectual property protection policies, where they are currently lacking.
d) Strengthen the capacity of smallholder farmers (particularly women) through extension, financing,
information access, organizing support, and property rights.
3) Improving markets
a) Improve trade policies at global and national levels, including finalising the WTO Doha Round and
prohibiting export bans.
b) Establish emergency reserves to ensure availability for the most vulnerable.
c) Establish transparent monitoring and data-sharing on availability, stocks, demand, price and
quality of agricultural commodities.
d) Improve smallholder farmers’ access to markets through investments in transport and storage
infrastructure, refrigerated storage as well as information access.
4) Expanding technology access and R&D
a) Develop public-private partnerships for technology R&D and for expanding technology access.
b) Encourage consistent, well formulated government policies to incentivize on technology
approvals, regulation, R&D and safety.
c) Strengthen agriculture and nutrition science in developing-country institutions.
5) Ensuring environmental sustainability
a) Encourage sharing of best practices and technologies for environmentally sustainable agriculture.
b) Improve water resource management through increased public-private collaboration to strengthen
water management strategies and technologies.
c) Scale up sustainable supply-chain management for specific commodities, through effective
policies.
d) Reduce post-harvest losses and food waste by improving transport, storage, energy efficiency,
and waste recycling along the value chain; and reduce consumer food waste.
e) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, through policy and financing incentives
including the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
6) Meeting nutritional needs
a)
Increase availability of nutritional foods through R&D, improved distribution, and integrated
production strategies linking agriculture, nutrition and health goals.
b) Support the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) programme.
c) Encourage consumers to choose diets that offer a healthy nutritional balance as well as
environmental efficiency.
67
Proceedings | 68
Please see the full document here:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/Private_Sector_Statement_on_CFS_is
sues.doc
66) Dyno Keatinge, AVRDC - The World Vegetable Center, Taiwan
AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center strongly endorses the new title explicitly mentioning both food
and nutritional security. In addition, it supports the need for further investment in small-scale
agriculture and the need for nutrition sensitive performance indicators. Keep up the good work.
Regards, Dr. Dyno Keatinge
67) Vincenzo Lo Scalzo, Agora Ambrosiana, Italy
(Page numeration refers to the annotated outline)
P. 1 TO P.3
NO COMMENTS TO THIS TEXT.
P.4 – LONG TERM...
Paragraph 4 – Note 1 – Definition of Food insecurity, malnutrition and other terms to BE
IMPLEMENTED INTO AA DRAFT WITH SCOPE TO IMPROVE ITS CONTRIBUTION TO GFS
P.5 – LONG TERM...
Paragraph 5 – Note 2 – Structural causes:
Policy making -nn
Investment decline in agriculture -.nn
Access to land (Short chapter in AA DRAFT).
Suggested new references: Project FIAN International Flavio Luis Schieck
Valente, Martin Wolpold-Bosien, Maarten Immink, Lea Winter
P.5 – IN THE LONGER TERM...
Paragraph 5 – Note 3 – Global demand
Assessment is given a pretty well defined scheme of debates in AA DRAFT.
Demand criteria gathering or confirmation require a critical data assumption whose
complexity factors updating is important.
Positive factors which influence resources of food in the longer term are
requested...and welcome.
P.5 – IN THE LONGER TERM...
Paragraph 6 - Note 4 Number of issues...
List of factors of GSF draft is well detailed. AA DRAFTY might provide more
background info to updating technologies.
P.5 – PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 7– Note 5 – Price volatility
Drivers/issues to be explored in debates and comments of past debates
Drivers/issues to be extended and confirmed in debates
68
Proceedings | 69
Presentations and comments of past debates to be proposed again to identify
updating opportunities
P.5 – PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 7– Note 6 – Price volatility .
Countermeasures to follow in parallel to
Adoption and its results
Innovation and expected results
P.6 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 7 – Price volatility .
Environmentally...
AA DRAFT and CFS need to focus appropriately “how” to build up the proposed
strategic alternatives.
Debates have been partially listed and shall be taken in dynamic continuous survey
progress of implementation with reflections on first results and effective indications.
P.6 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 8 – Women status .
Challenges... Women status: the issue looks adequately presented
P.6 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 9 – Role of producers .
The role... Small producers: the issue looks adequately presented... Positive results
might be validated in the initial territory and suggested to other communities as
imitative developing projects
P.6 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 10 – Security .
Assessment of validity of security: the issue looks adequately presented... that might
be validated in the initial territory and suggested to other communities
P.6 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 11 – Price volatility .
Necessary to choose the strategy trend of alternative plans. AA has experience of
efficiency of buffer stocks creation for specific case histories (Natural Rubber) in
addition to G20 road map approached in June at Paris.
P. 7 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 12 – Vulnerability
Vulnerability cases (historical, ongoing, probable)... How positive could be a
prevention plan...
P. 7 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 13 – Investment in agriculture
Industry and associations protagonist. International/intercontinental as well as
national and local could or are ready to cooperate.
69
Proceedings | 70
P. 7 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 14 – Improving governance...
Same as Note 13. –
Industry and associations protagonist. International/intercontinental as well as
national and local could or are ready to cooperate
P. 7 - PRIORITY ISSUES...
Paragraph 8– Note 15 – Subsidies uniformity...
Debate in occasion of events such as EXPO or other conventions might help the
stimulus to local solution of the problems with niche intervention of other large communities
P. 7 – POLICY OPTIONS
Paragraph 9 – Note 16 – GSF GROUND
AA Draft scope is limited to a plan of open and specialized debated to cover the
scenario of the Policy Options. The attempt has been to show a potential application to the ongoing
policy endorsed by G 20 –FAO.
P. 7 – POLICY OPTIONS
Paragraph 10 – Note 17 – Policy Response
The comment to this chapter is added as opportunity of debates for
Large open (LO), medium on invitation (MI) and specialised debate (SP).
P. 8 and 9 – POLICY ISSUES – INDICATIVE SIGNS FOR ISSUE
P. 9 – MONITORING PROGRESS
Paragraph 11 – Note 18 – AA second the proposal. See comments to 11 – Suman, India
P. 9 – MONITORING PROGRESS
Paragraph 12 – Note 19 –
DEBATES COORDINATED BY FAO GFS AND A GLOBAL IMPLEMENTATION OF
DYNAMIC PLAN OF ACTIKON IS COMPLEMENTARY TO SUCCESS
P. 9 – MONITORING PROGRESS
Paragraph 13 – Note 20 –
GUIDANCE: SAME CONCEPT AS ABOVE NOTE 19.
A DYNAMIC UPDATED PLAN OF DEBATES TO BE CLOSELY PLANNED
AND MONITORED FOR A MINIMUM PERIOD OF 3 YEARS TO HELP
REGULAR YEARLY UPDATED EDITIONS OF EFFICIENT AND JOINTLY
ACCEPTED PROGRESS.
P. 9 – DEFINITION OF TERMS
Paragraph 14 – Note 20 – DRAFT AA TO ADAPT AND ADOPT THE AGREED DEFINITION
OF TERMS
For further comments on previous contributions received, please see this document
Sincerely,
Vincenzo Lo Scalzo – AA – AgoraAmbrosiana
70
Proceedings | 71
68) Jean-Robert Nchekoua Tchoumba, UN Public Administration Network, Cameroon
English Translation
Confronted by the challenges encountered by agriculture in terms of quantity (to reach a better rate of
self-sufficiency), and of quality (to contain the health risks, and to produce goods fit for consumption),
the stakeholders in agricultural development are involved in the evolution of new approaches which
require them to master new concepts and capabilities, such as the “value chain"concept of the sector,
or otherwise put, the process of production and commercialization. Within the framework of
agricultural development policies, we can,for example, develop a capacity-building approach by
cascade from the world of agriculture in order to support the creation of competitive value chains of
the different sectors, while at the same time contributing to an integrated approach to the fight against
poverty.
French Original
Face aux défis que rencontr l'agriculture en trmes de quantité (atteindre un meilleur taux
d'autosuffisance), et de qualité (limiter les risques sanitaires, produire des produits propres à la
consommation), les acteurs du développement agricole participent au développement de nouvelles
approches qui les conduit à devoir maîtriser des concepts et des compétences nouvelles, tels que la
notion de "chaîne de valeur" de filiière ou bien de processus de production et de commercialisation.
Dans le cadre des politiques de développement agricole, nous pouvons par exemple développer une
approche de renforcement de capacités en cascade des opérateurs du monde agricole, pour appuyer
la mise en place de chaînes de valeur compétitives des différentes filières tout en contribuant à une
approche intégrée de lutte contre la pauvreté
69) Gisele Henriques, CIDSE, Belgium
Consultation on the Outline of the Global Strategic Framework – CIDSE Contribution
1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific
changes would you suggest?
The Global Strategic Framework affords us an opportunity to eradicate hunger by addressing the
structural causes of food insecurity; its significance cannot be emphasized enough. As the first
section of the outline captures the rationale, purpose and function of the document, it is imperative
that very early on it states that the framework shall be grounded in a rights based approach,
which is ethical, participatory and integrated into other initiatives to ensure coherence and
effectiveness. Currently the outline deserves to strengthen the rights based foundation of the
document. Additionally, we recommend that the UN special Rapporteur for the Right to Food be
given a role in the development of the document.
71
Proceedings | 72
One of the added values of the framework is the consultative and inclusive nature in which it is
being developed. Part of the rationale to develop the framework should then be an explicit
willingness to preserve the commitment to engage a broad range of stakeholders, including social
movements and civil society organizations. This means recognizing the process as well as the
output and guaranteeing mechanisms and funding to enable this. Meaningful participation means
going beyond e-consultations.
Included in the already cited functions of the framework should be its role in helping synchronize
actions at the regional and international levels. Such actions should not only be to coordinate and
respond in a time of crisis (such as price spikes) but also be preventive in nature. Practical
linkages between food assistance and other food security initiatives need to be considered.
We believe that the GSF should set criteria for policy makers, civil society, financial institutions, UN
agencies and all other actors. Recommendations geared to international actions should
provide an enabling environment for states to uphold their responsibilities to support the
realization of the right to food. The focus of all policies developed within the GSF must be the
people, especially those most affected by hunger and malnutrition.
The outline must clearly state the intended purpose of the GSF. We believe that the
framework should define positions and harmonize various initiatives and bring the CFS
to the center in terms of global food governance. A strong GSF will in turn strengthen
the CFS. Given the failures of the last 30 years there is ample evidence to demonstrate
that the fragmentation of the global food system has led to a high jacking of
agricultural policies in favour of economic growth and the interests of private
agribusiness corporations rather than the right to food. This trend must be reversed
and will not be possible unless the policies and institutions that have espoused this
divestment are challenged. The GSF therefore, has an arbitration role to play between
the different stakeholders.
More specifically the GSF should:
 Develop a strategy on how to operationalize and make the GSF visible in national
contexts.
 Provide clarity on what kind of policies must be adopted to strengthen small food
producers and their respective areas of concern, including cooperation with the private
sector where clearly of mutual benefit.
 Stress the universality and indivisibility of human rights and the centrality of nondiscrimination and consider marginalized communities irrespective of whether they are
producers or not, this through environmentally sound systems of production that protect
future generations. The GSF will thus set the strategy for the realization of the right to
adequate food
 Critique current models of consumption and production, as well as public-private for profit
partnerships and their incoherencies.
 Revitalize the role of the public sector and of the State in really addressing the causes of
hunger and malnutrition.
 Denounce unequal trade relations as a potential contributor to the causes of malnutrition
and highlight difference between free trade and fair trade.
72
Proceedings | 73


Clearly define the new governance of food security and nutrition along the lines of the
new principles that the GSF will be adopting.
Explicitly address the rights for women including their right to breastfeed and related labor
rights if employed in the formal sector and women’s land tenure and inheritance rights.
Equally, address the rights of the child related to their nutritional security
2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term
challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
Structural Causes and Long Term Challenges:
We believe that hunger is a product of policy failures by states to meet their human rights
obligations. Increasingly, global decisions on food, nutrition and agricultural policy, are being taken
by private sector actors, with States abdicating their responsibility. This is leading to a situation
where unsustainable models of industrial agriculture are taking precedence over agro-ecological
systems of agriculture. This increasing financialisation of the food, nutrition and agricultural sectors
is leading to the continued perpetration of injustice not just for food producers, but also for
consumers who end up paying more for increasingly unhealthy foods. The destruction of livelihoods
which is linked to the continuation of non-sustainable agriculture jeopardizes local economies and
prevents all people from having access to sufficient, safe and healthy food produced in ecologically
sustainable ways.
As noted in the outline, a systemic analysis of the structural causes of the problem is
necessary. The role of liberalized trade systems is not sufficiently explored in the outline. The
systemic lack of safety nets and how this perpetuates a cycle of poverty and vulnerability
among the poorest is also an issue that is not explored enough in this section.
We welcome the mentioning of post harvest losses in the outline. The point about changing
patterns in consumption is also of paramount importance as is the point about needing to
improve dietary diversity. But a sound analysis of how hunger affects different constituencies
is missing in the outline. Additionally, the need to improve productivity and resilience,
especially in light of population growth and climate change, is well taken. However, this will
get us no closer to food security if access and distribution issues are not dealt with.
In the long term climate change will become increasingly important. About 30% of global
emissions leading to climate change are attributed to agricultural activities; mainly a result of
agroindustrial models of production. Climate change is likely to lead to an increase in the
frequency and severity of sudden disasters and physical water scarcity, triggering an increase
in short-term, internal and regional displacements.
Priority Issues:

Industrial production models are capturing and destroying local markets, the
livelihoods of small scale food providers and the diverse ecosystems upon which
sustainable, low energy intensive production depends. This industrial model pushes
monocultures, as well as the use of food crops and land for agrofuel production rather
than to feed people. This industrial model of production leads to the consolidation of
the market power of transnational corporations throughout the entire food chain from
production to distribution, thereby weakening the poverty reducing potential of
agricultural policies.
73
Proceedings | 74



The privatization of land, water and other natural resources is one of the biggest
obstacles to equitable access to territories. This strongly contributes to the violation of
the right to access and use land and other natural resources.
Women’s role remains largely invisible and little investment is made to support their
production systems. They are particularly marginalized with the industrialization of
agricultural practices in developing countries
Contributing to the problem of food insecurity is the use of emergency aid dumped on
local markets. The failure to make resources available for effective and adequate
post-emergency rehabilitation must be addressed.
3. Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant for the
GSF to include?
The section on trading systems in Section IV is of concern. The opening of markets has often
increased the vulnerability of developing countries to import surges. It has directly or indirectly
subsidized agricultural imports with harmful impacts both on incomes and the right to food of
smallholders but also overall domestic food production and availability. The demand of developing
countries for more policy spaces to protect sectors and products sensitive to food security must be
taken into account in the chapter on trading systems.
The commodification of food and agriculture and the financialization of natural resources in general
are central to the problem and yet the outline does not seem to recognize this. Neither does
paragraph 8 mention excessive speculation on futures markets as one of the important reasons for
increased price volatility in spite of the extensive work been conducted by the HLPE of the CFS on
this issue.
There is also currently nothing on the role of the private sector, agribusiness, supermarkets…
Missing from the text is also an analysis of how an economic model based on growth is
entrenching inequalities and the impact that this has on aggravating food insecurity and
vulnerability in general
Additional issues to be considered
 Waste as a result of overproduction and distribution/ access failures
 Food and retail chain concentration
 The increasing disinterest in agriculture among youth is worrying and an important
issue to consider.
 The coherence between relief interventions and development ones (Linking Relief
Rehabilitation and Development) needs to be addressed
 New ways to cost agriculture and food which take into consideration the true costs of
industrial production models that degrade the natural resource base
 Re-localization of agro-food systems in favor of local economic development
 Urban solutions – healthy food options for urban poor and innovative production
solutions to complement urban food security
 Role of energy on food (biofuels, fossil fuel intensive production systems)
 Water
 The links between production/consumptions systems in the North and how they
influence the poorest is not explored enough. The production and consumption
74
Proceedings | 75
models of the developed countries are certainly making their way south with troubling
results which have ecological, nutritional and economic implications.
4. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy options do you
think are most relevant for the GSF to include?
In recommending policy options it is important to emphasize that any successful approach will need
to recognize the multifunctionality of agriculture as well as the various benefits (economic, social,
environmental, cultural…) it provides. Policy options should not only target ministries of agriculture
and health but also finance, infrastructure… as only a coordinated and holistic effort can truly
address the problem. It is imperative to remember the importance of the agricultural sector to
poverty alleviation.
Policy options should try to maximize synergies between the different aspects of
food/nutrition/agriculture. For instance, stimulating production through strengthening local markets
by procuring locally or, supporting small scale farmers who invest in ecologically sustainable
agricultural practices which strengthen resilience to climate change…
Policy option in support of research and development are welcome, however, the kind of R&D is
important. The IAASTD report shows that knowledge intensive, farmer led R&D goes much further
to realizing the right to food. Fundamental to successful R&D is also how it is disseminated.
Extension services are critical as is the need to focus research on food security crops (and orphan
crops).
The policy option of investment in agriculture is very important, but again, the kind of
investment needs to be critically considered. Government budget allocations to the sector are
not enough; it is also important that actual expenditures are aligned with the fundamental
values espoused in the GSF such as sustainability and policy coherence.
Also, entrenching farmers in debt is not the solution. All over the world the impact of an
industrial approach to boosting crop yields has increased pressure on famers to become
economically viable. With limited resources to invest, many farmers depend on borrowed
money to purchase seeds and other inputs. Many give the titles to their land as collateral.
Unviable financial returns means farmers cannot pay their debts. Farmer suicide rates have
increased in staggering rates2. Data from developing and developed countries alike indicate
that farmer suicide rates are double to that of the non-farming population much of the despair
related to financial indebtedness.
A thorough evidence based analysis of how trade has often de-stabilized food security is needed
before any recommendation on trade policy is formulated in the GSF.
Specific policy options we would like to highlight for the GSF are the following:
Support, investment and protection of small-holder production
Srijit Mishra “Risks, Framer’s suicides and agrarian crisis in India: Is there a way out”? Indian
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 63 (1): 38-54, 2008
2
75
Proceedings | 76
Access to and control over productive resources at the hands of small scale food producers with
special attention to women
Policies should support people to improve the resilience of their food production systems against
climate change.
Support for a food system that recognizes and values the true costs of food production with
the intent of producing affordable food not just cheap food
Strengthening of local food markets and protection against dumping, speculation and low priceimports.
The use of Human Rights impact assessments in trade negotiations should be considered:
Support the decentralised models of community and public food reserves
Industrial agro-fuel production has to be stopped.
Women have to be recognized as producers and in their role as gate keepers of nutritional security.
Women’s rights to equal-access, control and ownership of the entire agriculture chain from production
to consumption must be ensured.
Specific policies are needed to guarantee access to adequate food and to the further basic needs of
all children. In the case of infants, care needs to be taken that enabling provisions exist to enable
women to exclusively breastfeed their infants for the first six months.
Security of jobs, provisioning of decent wages and adequate conditions for wage workers and
agricultural workers, as well as workplace safety are needed.
Universal social security nets and food safety and nutrition without commercial sponsorship or
influence are vital elements in helping vulnerable people to cope with emergencies.
In conflict situations, priority must be accorded to the protection and restoration of livelihoods that are
at risk to ensure an adequate transition from emergency to development.
Support for urban food production is crucial, as well as ensuring access and purchasing power for
non-food producers. Development of stronger links between producers and urban dwellers (i.e.
Community Supported Agriculture) is to be encouraged.
Urbanization plans must consider the drastic reduction of land available for agriculture and the impact
it can have on food production and food producers
Stop land grabbing. Regulation at the global level is urgently needed. Land tenure must be ensured in
coherence with the voluntary guidelines on responsible governance of land, fisheries and forests.
Nutrition security needs to be re-emphasised with greater focus on the key social determinants of
malnutrition including universal access to potable drinking water, maternal and child care, sanitation
and quality health care.
76
Proceedings | 77
All markets linked to food, nutrition and agriculture should be controlled by farmers, not processors
and other intermediaries
There is a continued need to transition from emergency responses to more resilient food systems. All
emergency responses must lay the basis for longer-term solutions to food security and sustainable
livelihoods.
There is an urgent need to control the unbridled influence of financial markets in the food, nutrition
and agricultural sectors. Governments must impose an immediate and indefinite moratorium on the
participation of hedge funds, options and futures trading, and other derivative trading in the food,
nutrition and agricultural sector.
5. Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels
(national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
The issue of monitoring is critical if the GSF is to reach its intended goal. Certainly, accountability
lies at the heart of its success and defining appropriate indicators is of paramount importance.
The emphasis on macro-level growth oriented indicators is part of the problem and inhibits how
we evaluate success in the sector. Quantitative and qualitative indicators are necessary. As is the
need for process indicators which capture how we are achieving our objectives.
Accountability and monitoring must be listed as priority issue in the GSF and not relegated to a
separate chapter. Special emphasis must be laid on examining the coherence of all policies that
impact food security, such as international policies on key issues including agro-fuels,
speculation, IFIs, FTAs, land grabbing, also CFA, CAADP, G-8, GPAFSN, Food Facility and Extra
Territorial Obligations. The Food Aid Convention, the only existing treaty framing global food
assistance, has to be coherent to the GSF to ensure that food or food-related transfers strengthen
long-term strategies for food security and food sovereignty, not undermine them.
Accountability and monitoring must be enforced at international and national level and beyond a
rights-based approach must include other mechanism of control such as effective communication
in the media and the effective the use of democratic institutions. Strengthening social
organizations and protecting their actions against repression and criminalization should be a key
component of a strategy to increase accountability and monitoring of governments, institutions
and the private sector.
The rights-based approach is a central part of the accountability and monitoring mechanism and a
clear identification is to be insisted upon of the roles and obligations of the duty bearers (including
both State and non-State actors) and rights / claims holders. The GSF must refer to human rights
principles and standards, as well as, already established standards including the Voluntary
Guidelines on the Right to Food and General Comment 12.
With regards to adherence to the GSF, an independent body appointed by the CFS (e.g.,similar to
the HLPE) should be entrusted with the task of holding to account and monitoring both State and
non-State actors including TNCs and IFIs. Through this mechanism, positive and best
experiences regarding public policies and those of CSOs will be exchanged to allow for shared
learning. The participation of civil society in such mechanisms has to be ensured.
All member-States of the CFS should file a regular compliance report and civil society
organizations should be provided the opportunity to file parallel reports that challenge or support
official claims on the fulfillment of State obligations and GSF implementation.
At the national level, the GSF must have clear accountability mechanisms which enable rights
77
Proceedings | 78
holders to claim their rights. National level bodies and structures that are set-up for monitoring
must have the participation of local communities with clearly defined methods to measure
outcomes, benchmarks of progressive realization and targets. In the long run, at both national and
international levels, effective complaint mechanisms need to be developed and established to
prevent the repetition and the impunity of violations of the right to adequate food and other rights.
Some recommendations of how this section can be strengthened include:
 Enabling community self determination by allowing those who are most affected
by hunger and food insecurity to play a role in the monitoring process. This can
be done through extension services and/or using local CSOs.
 Degree with which the GSF is being integrated into national plans
 Degree of coherence between agricultural policies and other national level
policies
 Development of a reporting format based on the principles developed in the
Voluntary Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of the Right to
Adequate Food in the Context of national Food Security.”
 Learning spaces should be developed so that best practices can be shared
 Targets and benchmarks should be set in the various areas that relate to food
security and nutrition
 Considerations should be given to accountability and transparency. Both of which
can be measured using proxies and community assessments
70) Rahul Soman, INDOCERT, India
1. Popularization of Organic and Good Agriculture Practices among farming communities; Provision of
interest free loans to the farming communities for crop production, animal rearing, pest management,
harvesting, post harvest handling, storage and distribution; Financial assistance in terms of interest
free loans for setting up of small holder groups for farming, storage, post harvest management, pest
management and distribution; Provision of training to farmers on modern trends in crop production,
crop protection, ware housing and storage, primary and secondary processing of agricultural produce
etc; Insurance schemes to small holder groups, seed banks, crops and produce etc on natural or
man-made calamities; Provision of local/ regional cold storage/ ware house facilities for storage of
produce till sale on subsidized rate; insurance coverage to the same produce on hold; Single window
assistance mechanism for loans, disbursement of seeds, inputs, equipments and associated
amenities; Setting up of local/regional level market like storage/ware houses where farming
communities can sell their produce to primary/secondary/tertiary level processors.
2. Setting up of database for traditional knowledge bank regarding farming practices, pest
management, post harvest management and its dissemination.
3. Provision of grants for projects aimed at improving the condition of the farming communities by
providing novel techniques on farming practices/ pest management, input usage, post harvest
handling and use of renewable energy in primary/secondary/tertiary processing.
4. Incentives to countries adopting programmes which substantially improve the food security at
local/regional level; Penalty for those countries where surplus produce gets spoiled/deteriorated under
negligence; whose actions cause damage to the food security of their own people or other states.
78
Proceedings | 79
5. Setting up of International/National/Regional/Local level Farm-Field Schools for promoting
sustainable farming using latest techniques.
6. Medical incentive to farming communities and their families.
7. Special Financial support for setting up of industries in food processing and allied fields; Financial
assistance in providing training in food safety, food security etc.
8. Establishment of D-Malnutrition programme in which countries has to contribute some percentage
of amounts they budget for their annual defense programme which will get diverted to the fund
intended for eradicating malnutrition in those regions of their choice.
71) Hirunya Srasom, Sub-Committee on Food Security of Thailand, Thailand
We mostly agree on GSF Strategic Framework, which covers various issues involve Food Security.
However, the following should be considered: I. Statement of rational, purpose and function: should
be determined by national or region level II. Long-term challenges and structural causes of food
insecurity and malnutrition: we think another structural cause that should be discussed in this strategy
is:
(1) the tendency of large-scale acquisitions by private sector trying to control food supply and used it
for profit and political purposes. It directly impacts people livelihood and their food security.
(2) Besides, labor shortage also critical issues because now many countries are entering “aging
society”. A new generation has not been promoted aggressively. With lower income return, a lot of
new generation struggle for better income by migrate to other sectors such as industrial and service
sector. It make agriculture sector gradually face risk of labor shortage crisis.
(3) Moreover, the increasing of elderly farmers link to changing dietary need by concerning healthy
food, paying attention to nutrition and specific food. So, it required more intensive care in producing
process.
(4) trend of higher agricultural input’s price including fertilizer, agro-chemical, seed, feed stock as well
as higher of oil price, lead to lack of incentive in agricultural investment
(5) Relationship between food security and energy policy could be addressed under the broad
umbrella of climate change issue as one of the long-term challenges. Many countries have adopted
policies and measures to support more usage of bio-mass fuels such as bio-diesel and ethanol to
replace fossil fuels as a means to combat climate change. These alternative energy sources, whilst
beneficial to the atmosphere, however, could have impacts on level of food supplies at national and
global levels as arable land might be allocated less for food crop plantation and diverted to grow more
energy crops. As such, it might be useful for GSF to have policy guidance on appropriate balance
between food and energy crops and land usage including factors that should be considered in making
such policy decisions, policy tools that could be employed (eg., zoning, crops rotation, farmers and
land registration, etc.), and other best practices have been implemented in any countries
(6) In order to achieve food security, the demand side of food should be paid more attention. As
known every year, there have huge amount of food waste in some countries. So, campaign to reduce
food waste can also contribute world food security III. Priority issues to be addressed: (1)
Environmental sustainable food and agricultural production slightly addressed climate change. We
think the issue of climate change should be addressed as one of the main issues because there are
tremendous affect food security as many aspects. One of them is the changing of cropping patterns to
79
Proceedings | 80
suit and adapt to the area and environmental that has been changed. Due to Changing pattern of food
consumption, many Government, International organizations and relevant agencies paid attention to
the impact of climate change, including FAO. So, it would be appropriate to separate to a new dot.
Another issue is the policy that focuses on the most profitable crops (such as gasohol, synthetic
fabrics, industrial crops, etc) which competitive resource use for food crops and causing loss of
biodiversity. These issues may be includes under the description of “Environmentally sustainable food
and agricultural production” they are not declared clearly and emphatically. (2) Investment in
agriculture: (2.1) the paragraph on investment in agriculture could highlight the importance of logistics
in agriculture and food industries. Efficient logistics would help ensure that food is delivered faster and
cheaper while still retains its full nutrition to consumers. Therefore, investment to improve or expand
logistics networks and facilities in food production and consumption chains particularly in developing
and LDCs should be encouraged. (2.2) Another issue that should be emphasized on investment in
agriculture is that investors should not only consider transfer of technology in these areas for the longterm benefits of recipient countries but also should be mindful of environmental impacts that their
investment might create and hence should ensure that their investment activities or endeavors are
environment-friendly. (2.3) Relations between investment and trade in agriculture and food : it should
be recognized that keeping the trading system open for agriculture and food products will have
positive impacts on food security as it guarantees flows of food amongst countries and across
continents. As such, attention should be placed on reducing barriers in trade in agriculture and food
products. IV. Policy Option: We would like to add (1) Gender Mainstreaming in development policy at
all level and (2) “responsible agricultural investment” in Investment in agriculture (3) Strengthened
trading systems, this paragraph should address rising negative impacts from unnecessary or
unjustifiable non-tariff measures in agriculture and food such as overly strict SPS requirements and
suggest how developing countries can effectively deal with these measures. While the WTO system
recognizes each country’s ability to use SPS measures to protect human, plant and animal’s lives in
its territory, there is a worrying trend that these measures have been used in a manner that could be
construed as disguised protectionist trade measures rather than for their original purposes. These
new non-tariff barriers (NTBs) could have serious effects on food security because they could hamper
flows of agricultural products and food supplies. Also, developing and least-developed countries do
not have sufficient expertise and scientific capacity to deal with these measures effectively in the longterm. As a result, the issue of NTBs in agriculture and food should be duly addressed under the GSF.
(4) Conservation and protection the element of input to achieve food security such as plants, animals,
water resource etc.
72) Michel Buisson, Groupe SA, France
English Translation
CONTRIBUTION TO THE CFS STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
This contribution, drafted in the spirit of the annotated outline “intended to stimulate discussion and
debate”, comprises two main points:
A. Comments throughout the text,
B. General propositions.
A. Comments throughout the text: (the numbers are those of the text)
80
Proceedings | 81
- 2 Shouldn’t it be necessary to take into account the goal of food sovereignty on a wider
spectrum, in order to facilitate the implementation and definition of “clear orientations and
recommendations” concerning food security? (see B)
- 3 The various proposals “to carry out the objectives” seem to rest on a reality free of
contradictions or at least of differences that are difficult to overcome. For example, the aim of
“promoting convergent points of view in favour of certain strategies” risks running against opposing
strategies and needs. Is it not necessary, in order to come to a satisfactory convergence, to broaden
the foundations on which the consensus stands by further explaining the asymmetries, discrepancies
and contradictions and exploring another paradigm (that of food sovereignty) capable of federating to
a larger scale the countries and victims of food insecurity and thus achieving better results regarding
both security and development?
- 4 It is necessary to specify the term “coherence”, given the diversity and oppositions that
exist among the core components of the global food system. A precise description of the strategies of
the global food system and of the main players seems to be necessary in order to avoid a false
consensus on ineffective or counter-productive measures. Lack of coherence and governability are
usually deemed guilty for these inefficiencies when, in fact, the true perpetrators are the strong
players that impose these measures thereby blocking any propositions set forth by weaker players.
- 5 The goals of “increase in yields” and of “achieving productivity gains” need to be specified,
given that the reference to a “greener agriculture” is insufficient for two reasons. First, the goal of
achieving productivity gains (here measured by ha, it seems) is not virtuous in itself: what is the
modality of this gain and the production factor? Second, how could it be guaranteed that any
production gain will be beneficial for both producers and consumers? These specifications and their
translation into policies are even more important as the current driving logic of the global food system
is not the desirable one. To achieve food security, it is necessary to integrate a series of favourable
measures in order to obtain desirable productivity gains, while at the same time countering the
strategies and practices that are not desirable.
- 6 Although the list seems fair, it is still excessively neutral; should we not, for some of the
points listed, be more precise about the cause and reality of underlying phenomena in order to touch
upon the players and economic forces involved in this process?; this would be necessary in particular
when considering the changing consumption patterns, trade, research and technology transfer.
- 8 In the first subparagraph –“sustainable production (to specify)”- is the main objective and
therefore is more important than a priority; thus, the priorities regarding agriculture (women, small
farmers, land security, investments) and other (not mentioned: training, distribution, organizations,
among others) should be defined and mobilised toward this objective. Likewise, it would be more
useful if the propositions and diagnostic information were better organized into a hierarchy according
to their status (general considerations, normative statements, advices) and the bodies referred to
(international fore, members of CFS, States, among others).
- The category “small operator” lacks precision, given the situation, because its
current ambiguity allows it to hide the multiple potential answers to their much needed development in
terms of revenue, production capacity and sustainability.
- The phrase about international investments is still ambiguous for two reasons: (1)
due to the inaccuracy of the term "advantage" that does not point to anything specific in terms of
recipients or results; and (2) due to the negative consequences of the “national treatment” rule (not
mentioned).
- The idea about the “improvement of governance” presents the problem as it is, once
the definition of term “governance" is accepted. However, more important than in other issues, the
“disregard” toward the unequal power relations between representatives and countries frustrates all
intentions and makes any further discussion pointless (see B).
81
Proceedings | 82
- yes, it is necessary to take into account the effects of subsidies and, better still,
integrate this issue into a much larger assessment of the commercial rules and policies (see B).
-9 Similarly, efforts should be directed towards improving the conditions (legal, institutional,
economic) for a more effective right to food, including the evolution of food sovereignty, so that each
State can have “the necessary political space to adopt the measures that contribute to the
progression of the right to food within their jurisdiction” while at the same time “not imposing
obligations that undermine the right to food” (special rapporteur on the right to food, 25 June 2008,
p5).
- 10 The rights-based approach could easily take into consideration other rights that need to
be conquered such as food sovereignty, rights of farmers and environmental law.
- To advocate “small farmers adaptability to the expanding demand” is not virtuous
and, in many cases is contrary to it, given that this demand is determined by the firms of this sector
and cannot stand on its own.
- The recommendations in terms of R&D are not precise enough to answer the needs
of farmers, biodiversity conservation and environmental protection. On the same subject, it is
necessary to clarify the priorities in terms of agronomy type and insist on the need of the Association
of Social Sciences for these R&D programs.
- Strengthening of trading systems cannot be a goal in itself without having previously
clarified the conditions of this trade (see B);
- In terms of investment, the term “non-automatic advantages” of international
investments is ridiculous, even when contracts are mentioned. Is it really necessary for the CFS to
conduct a “consultation process regarding agricultural investments” that would open opportunities to
promote food security?
B. General propositions: Expand the range of rights taking into account the demand for food
sovereignty.
The mismatch between current policies and human needs is evident in two points: inability to
regulate at short and long term food and agricultural produce exchange; inability to answer the needs
of most countries and their people, specifically in terms enforcement of right to food and in terms of
resources. Thus, in this context:
 Recent developments have considerably worsened the consequences of not taking into
account agriculture and markets’ structural characteristics (instability, asymmetry among
players), as well as creating a competition between different agricultural systems.
 Liberalization only favours some groups and countries in particular and goes against the
goals of the international community.
In this situation, it is necessary to link to three levels -international, national and local- several
new or strengthened policies and instruments on the basis of food security and the involvement of
other rights (right to food, right of farmers and environmental law). It is necessary as well to combine
these rights with other laws regarding contract management and other policies.
In order to move forward, it is necessary to clarify the content given to food security. For
example, the definition of Via Campesina in 2003 (“food sovereignty is the right of peoples, their
countries and unions to define their agricultural and food policy, without dumping in relation to other
countries”) can be completed as: “thanks to an effective international law, every country or group of
countries has, in compliance with other international laws, the chance to meet their food needs as
they see fit in terms of agriculture and other aspects, but taking care of never disrupting international
trades and other countries".
82
Proceedings | 83
For this definition to be feasible, it must be translated into global laws compatible with national
and local policies defined by the States, and trade must abide to this choice, together with a real
market organization, restrictive laws for firms and preservation of the planet. These policies, chosen
by each entity in accordance to international rules, should seek autonomy for farmers, promote family
farming, and prevent industrial agriculture and development of agribusiness firms. This way, these
policies must contribute to the full effectiveness of the right to food and the right to development.
The challenge is to promote worldwide and in each country or entity the emergence of a
cooperative food system based on other agricultural production systems and trade systems.
In conclusion, it is necessary to integrate into the CFS Strategic Framework efforts towards
food security. At different aspects and levels, food security is an element that will help to structure and
improve the efficiency of agriculture and food policies: give a structure to the set of tools to be
mobilized and achieve efficiency thanks to its mobilizing content, so that new policies can be put in
place at different levels.
French Original
CONTRIBUTION AU CADRE STRATEGIQUE DU CSA Cette contribution, rédigée dans l'esprit du
schéma annoté dont "le but est de stimuler la réflexion et le débat" (iv, p 1) comporte deux points A.
Remarques au fil du texte, B. Proposition générale. A. Remarques au fil du texte : (les N° sont ceux
du texte) - 2, ne faut-il pas, pour faciliter la définition et la mise en œuvre, "des orientations et des
recommandations claires" concernant la sécurité alimentaire, prendre en compte l'objectif de
souveraineté alimentaire, dans un ensemble plus vaste ? (voir B) - 3 La proposition des différents
axes "pour remplir les objectifs" semble reposer (ou faire semblant de) sur une réalité exempte de
contradictions ou tout au moins de divergences difficilement surmontables. Par exemple, l'objectif de
"promouvoir la convergence de vue en faveur de certaines stratégies" ne risque-t-il pas de butter sur
des besoins et des stratégies opposées. Ne faut-il pas, pour aboutir à une convergence satisfaisante
élargir les bases de la construction du consensus en explicitant davantage, les asymétries, les
divergences et les contradictions et explorer un autre paradigme (celui de la souveraineté alimentaire)
capable de fédérer plus largement les pays et les acteurs victimes des causes de l'insécurité
alimentaire et par là même d'aboutir à de biens meilleurs résultats en termes à la fois de sécurité et
de développement ? - 4 Le contenu du terme de "cohérence" mériterait d'être précisé, en fonction
notamment de la diversité et des oppositions au sein des composantes du système alimentaire
mondial (SAM). Une description précise de ce SAM et de la stratégie des principaux acteurs semble
nécessaire pour sortir d'un faux consensus sur des mesures inefficaces ou contre productives,
souvent impliquées à tord à des défauts de cohérence et de gouvernance, alors qu'il s'agit de choix
imposés par les acteurs dominants, imposant dans le même temps le blocage des propositions des
acteurs dominés ou plus faibles. - 5 L'objectif de "l'accroissement des rendements" et "de l'obtention
de gains de productivité", mériterait d'être précisé, la référence au contexte "d'une agriculture verte"
étant sans doute insuffisante pour au moins deux raisons : l'objectif de gain de productivité (ici à l'ha
semble-t-il) n'est pas vertueux en lui-même : quelle modalité de ce gain et sur quel facteur de
production d'une part, comment garantir que ce gain bénéficie bien aux producteurs et aux
consommateurs d'autre part. Ces précisions et leur traduction en mesures de politique sont d'autant
plus nécessaires que la logique dominante au sein du SAM, n'est pas celle souhaitable. Pour
atteindre la sécurité alimentaire il faut prendre un ensemble de mesures favorables aux formes
souhaitables des gains de productivité, tout en contrant les stratégies et les pratiques non
souhaitables. - 6 Si la liste apparaît juste, elle reste cependant d'une excessive neutralité ; ne faut-il
pas pour certains des points listés, être d'emblée plus précis sur la réalité et la cause des
83
Proceedings | 84
phénomènes sous-jacents, pour évoquer notamment les acteurs et forces économiques à l'œuvre
dans ces processus ; cela serait particulièrement nécessaire pour l'évolution des schémas de
consommation, le commerce, la recherche et le transfert de technologie … - 8 le premier alinéa sur
"la production … durable (à préciser)"est "la" question centrale donc beaucoup plus qu'une des
questions prioritaires ; ainsi les actions prioritaires évoquées concernant l'agriculture (femmes, petits
paysans, insécurité foncière, investissements) et d'autres (non citées : formation, diffusion,
organisations …) devraient être définies et mobilisées en fonction de cet objectif. De même il
semblerait utile de mieux hiérarchiser les éléments de diagnostic et de proposition en fonction de leur
statut (réflexion générale, propositions normatives, conseils) et des instances visées (instances
internationales membres du CSA, Etats…). - la catégorie "petits exploitants" mériterait d'être précisée
en fonction des situations car dans le flou actuel elle permet de cacher la diversité des réponses
possibles à leurs besoins et à leur nécessaire évolution en termes de revenu, de capacité productive,
de pérennité. - la phrase concernant les investissements internationaux reste très ambigüe, à cause
d'une part de l'imprécision du terme "avantage" non référé à quelque chose de précis en termes ni de
bénéficiaires ni de résultat, des méfaits de la règle du "traitement national" (non évoquée), d'autre
part. - le point sur "l'amélioration de la gouvernance" pose bien l'ensemble de la problématique, une
fois accepté le terme de "gouvernance". Mais ici, encore davantage que pour d'autres questions,
"l'oubli" de l'inégalité des rapports de force entre agents et des situations entre pays rend le propos
assez vain, si ce n'est dangereux par masquage (voir B). - oui, il faut prendre en compte les effets
des subventions et, mieux encore, intégrer cette question dans une révision beaucoup plus large des
règles et politiques commerciales (voir B). -9 Il faudrait également travailler à l'amélioration des
conditions (judicaires, institutionnelles, économiques) d'une meilleure effectivité du droit à
l'alimentation, y compris à travers une évolution vers la souveraineté alimentaire pour redonner à
chaque Etat "l'espace politique nécessaire pour adopter les mesures contribuant à la réalisation
progressive du droit à l'alimentation dans leur juridiction" en plus "en s'abstenant d'imposer des
obligations qui portent atteinte au droit à l'alimentation" (rapporteur spécial sur le droit à l'alimentation,
25 juin 2008 , p 5). - 10 L'approche fondée sur les droits pourrait utilement prendre en compte des
droits à conquérir traduisant la souveraineté alimentaire, le droit des paysans, le droit de
l'environnement. - prôner "l'adaptation des petits paysans à l'évolution de la demande" alors que
celle-ci est souvent déterminée par les firmes du secteur, n'est pas vertueux en soit, au contraire
dans de nombreux cas. - la préconisation en matière de recherche et de développement n'est pas
assez précise pour répondre aux besoins des paysans et de la conservation de la biodiversité, plus
largement de protection de l'environnement. Il faut également préciser les priorités en matière de type
d'agronomie et rappeler le besoin d'association des sciences sociales à ces programmes de
recherche et de développement. - le renforcement des systèmes commerciaux ne peut être un
objectif en soit sans avoir clarifié les conditions de ce commerce (voir B) ; - en matière
d'investissement, les termes "d'avantages non automatiques" pour les investissements
internationaux, font pour le moins sourire, y compris lorsque sont évoqués des contrats. Est-il
vraiment nécessaire que le CSA conduise un "processus de consultation sur les investissements
agricoles" permettant de promouvoir la sécurité alimentaire ? B. Proposition générale : élargir la
palette des droits en prenant en compte la revendication de souveraineté alimentaire (SA).
L'inadéquation aux besoins de l'humanité et de la planète des politiques actuelles, se manifeste
particulièrement sur deux points : incapacité de réguler à court et à long terme les échanges des
produits agricoles et alimentaires ; incapacité à répondre aux besoins de la majorité des pays et de
leurs populations, notamment dans l'application du droit à l'alimentation et dans le respect des
ressources. Ainsi, dans ce contexte :  les évolutions récentes aggravent considérablement les
conséquences de la non prise en compte des caractéristiques structurelles de l'agriculture et des
marchés (instabilité, asymétrie des acteurs), de la mise en concurrence de systèmes agricoles fort
84
Proceedings | 85
différents ;  la libéralisation, favorise certains groupes et pays et va à l'encontre des objectifs de la
communauté internationale. Dans cette situation, il y a nécessité d'articuler, aux trois niveaux
international, national et local, plusieurs politiques et instruments, renforcés ou nouveaux, sur la base
de la SA et en associant d'autres droits (droit à l’alimentation, droits des paysans et droit de
l’environnement). IL faut aussi combiner ces droits avec d'autres règles en matière de gestion des
marchés et d'autres politiques. Pour progresser il faut préciser le contenu à donner à la SA. Par
exemple, la définition de la Via Campesina en 2003 (« la souveraineté alimentaire désigne le droit
des populations, de leurs pays ou unions, à définir leur politique agricole et alimentaire, sans dumping
vis-à-vis des autres pays "), peut être ainsi complétée : grâce à un ensemble de droits internationaux
effectifs, chaque pays ou groupe de pays, a, dans le respect des autres règles internationales, la
possibilité de satisfaire ses besoins alimentaires de la façon qui lui paraît la plus appropriée en
matière agricole et autres, mais sans perturber les échanges internationaux et les autres pays ». Pour
être opératoire, cette définition doit être traduites en règles internationales permettant des politiques
nationales et locales définies par les Etats et des échanges conformes à ces choix, avec une réelle
organisation des marchés, un droit restrictif vis-à-vis des firmes et la sauvegarde de la planète. Ces
politiques, choisies par chaque entité en conformité avec les règles internationales, doivent viser
l'autonomie des paysans, favoriser l'agriculture familiale, empêcher l'agriculture industrielle et le
développement des firmes de l'agrobusiness. Ainsi ces politiques doivent concourir à la pleine
effectivité du droit à l'alimentation et au droit au développement. L'enjeu est de favoriser, à l'échelle
mondiale et de chaque pays ou entité, l'émergence d'un système alimentaire coopératif reposant sur
d'autres systèmes de production agricole et d'échange. En conclusion, il y a nécessité d'intégrer au
cadre stratégique du CSA, l'engagement d'un travail d'élaboration concernant la SA qui, dans ses
différents aspects et niveaux, constitue un élément de structuration et d'efficacité pour les politiques
en faveur des agricultures et des alimentations : structuration de l'ensemble des outils à mobiliser,
efficacité par son contenu mobilisateur pour les nouvelles politiques à mettre en place aux différents
niveaux.
73) Christophe Golay & Michaela Büschi, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian
Law and Human Rights, Switzerland
We welcome the opportunity to send our comments on the Annoted Outline of the Global Strategic
Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GFS). Overall, the Annoted Outline gives a broad
overview of the long-term challenges and structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition.
However, important challenges are missing. These include many forms of discrimination, for example
against indigenous people, internally displaced persons or refugees, and social, political and cultural
exclusion experienced by most of the victims of food insecurity and malnutrition. Human rights
violations (such as lack of free elections, inadequate access to justice or violations of labour rights or
of the rights to free expression, association and assembly, in particular for peasants’ organizations)
are also missing as one of the key causes of food insecurity and malnutrition. The Annoted Outline
should also put a stronger emphasis on the right to adequate food and human rights based approach
to food insecurity and malnutrition. The right to adequate food occupies a special place in the history
of the FAO. In the 1960’s, the FAO Director General successfully lobbied at the UN General Assembly
for the inclusion of the right to adequate food and the fundamental right to be free from hunger in the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights . In the World Food Summits of 1996
and 2002, the right to food has been recognized as one of the key elements to halve the number of
undernourished people by 2015. This was followed by the adoption of the Voluntary Guidelines to
85
Proceedings | 86
support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food
security by unanimity at the Committee on Food Security and the FAO Council in 2004. And in the
Declaration of the World Summit on Food Security, States agreed to “collectively accelerate steps (…)
to set the world on a path to achieving the progressive realisation of the right to adequate food in the
context of national food security”. It is also important to remember that the UN Secretary General, Ban
Ki-moon, at a high-level meeting on food security for all in Madrid on 27 January 2009, proposed to
add the right to food as a third track to fight food insecurity and malnutrition: For the UN Secretary
General: “We must continue to meet urgent hunger and humanitarian needs by providing food and
nutrition assistance and safety nets, while focusing on improving food production and smallholder
agriculture. This is the twin-track approach taken in the Comprehensive Framework for Action. We
should be ready to add a third track, the right to food, as a basis for analysis, action and
accountability.” It is therefore difficult to understand why the right to adequate food has only been
mentioned in the part IV of the Annoted Outline. The main elements of the right to adequate food and
human rights based approach to food insecurity and malnutrition should be incorporated in all parts of
the Annoted Outline. Building on the appeal made by the UN Secretary General, they should be
integrated in parts I and II for analysis, in parts III and IV for action and in part V for accountability.
The following human rights principles should also be included in the different parts of the GFS:
Participation, Accountability, Non-Discrimination, Empowerment, Transparency, Human Dignity,
Empowerment and Rule of Law (PANTHER). Following these preliminary remarks, we will give the
following responses to the questions put forward by the online consultation on the Annoted Outline of
the GSF: 1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific
changes would you suggest? The rationale, purpose and function of the GSF should make references
to the right to adequate food and human rights based approach to food insecurity and malnutrition. In
paragraph 2, the existing framework focused on the right to food should be explicitly mentioned (from
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 to the Voluntary Guidelines of 2004). In paragraph
3, strategies, policies and programmes related to the right to adequate food should be mentioned and
the core elements of strategies, action plans and commitments on the right to adequate food that
could be adopted by stakeholders at global, regional and country levels should be described. In the
same paragraph, good practices in implementing the right to adequate food should be highlighted and
the mechanisms to monitor the right to adequate food described. The need to increase accountability
of duty bearers and empowerment of rights holders, including through the establishment of new
monitoring mechanisms, should be clearly mentioned as one of the key purposes and functions of the
GFS. 2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term
challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant? In paragraph 4,
among the structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition the following are missing:
discrimination, for example against indigenous people, internally displaced persons or refugees;
social, political and cultural exclusion experienced by most of the victims of food insecurity and
malnutrition; and human rights violations (such as lack of free elections, inadequate access to justice
or violations of labour rights or of the rights to free expression, association and assembly, in particular
for peasants’ organizations). In the words of Josué Castro, Chairman of the FAO Executive
Committee from 1952 to 1956, “Hunger is exclusion: exclusion from the land, income, jobs, wages, life
and citizenship. When a person gets to the point of not having anything to eat, it is because all the
rest has been denied. This is a modern form of exile. It is death in life.” This exclusion should be
explicitly mentioned. Among the issues affecting long-term trends in agriculture and food security, the
following should also receive priority attention in the GSF: poverty and increasing inequalities; urban
bias; and the financialization of natural resources. 3. Are there additional issues to be considered, and
which do you think are most relevant for the GSF to include? In paragraph 8, discrimination against
women should be explicitly mentioned among the key challenges faced by women. The paragraph 10
86
Proceedings | 87
of the Annoted Outline clearly states that women are facing discrimination. This should also be made
explicit in paragraph 8. Social, political and cultural exclusion being one of the main structural causes
of food insecurity and malnutrition, social, political and cultural inclusion of the most vulnerable people
to food insecurity and malnutrition should be explicitly mentioned among the priority issues requiring a
response at the global, regional and national levels. In paragraph 8 of the Annoted Outline, economic
inclusion is mentioned in relation to the role of smallholder producers, but not social, political and
cultural inclusion. This should be added. Under vulnerability, smallholder producers, landless workers,
fisherfolk, hunters and gatherers should also be mentioned, with women and young children, as they
represent 80% of the world’s hungry. The inadequate wages, social insurances and labour conditions
of agricultural workers should be mentioned here, as well as the situation of the urban poor suffering
from food insecurity and malnutrition, representing 20% of the world’s hungry. In describing the need
to improve governance of food security and nutrition at all levels in paragraph 8, explicit mentions
should be made to the right to food and human rights based approach to food insecurity and
malnutrition. The principle of participation is described in this section but references to the principles
of accountability, non-discrimination, transparency, human dignity, empowerment and the rule of law
should be added. The example of the National Council on Food Security and Nutrition in Brazil
(CONSEA) should be presented here and it should be explained that the different components of the
Government should be included in the fight against food insecurity and malnutrition, together with the
Ministry of Agriculture. 4. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which
policy options do you think are most relevant for the GSF to include? At the end of paragraph 9, which
presents the right to adequate food and human rights principles, together with the twin-track approach
based on food assistance and food security, a reference to the appeal of the UN Secretary General to
use the right to adequate food as a third track for analysis, action and accountability should be
mentioned explicitly. In paragraph 10, mentions should also be made to the possibility and need to
adopt national strategies for the realization of the right to food, not only to the need to incorporate
right to food principles in the design and implementation of food security strategies. In the same
paragraph, in reference to the trading systems, it is important to mention bilateral free trade
agreements together with multilateral free trade negotiations and it is important to include the need to
conduct human rights impact assessments of trade policies and agreements, in order to ensure that
trade negotiations and agreements will not have negative but positive impacts on the realization of the
right to adequate food and therefore on food security and nutrition. 5. Regarding monitoring progress
towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels (national, regional, global), what kind of
guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom? The GSF should mention other fora in which food
security and nutrition objectives are monitored, including international, regional and national human
rights monitoring bodies, such as the Human Rights Council, the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, regional human rights commissions and courts, national courts and national human
rights institutions. The GSF should not only provide guidance to countries in monitoring and reporting
their own progress, it should ask countries to do so and create an independent mechanism to monitor
their progress towards common international objectives. At the end of paragraph 13, explicit
references should be made to the indicators on the right to adequate food developed by the Office of
the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN document HRI/MC/2006/7), as well as to the
possibilities of using indicators, benchmarks, scoping and assessment when monitoring progress
towards the realization of the right to adequate food. As a final remark, it may be said that the
definition of terms should include a definition of the right to adequate food. Two definitions have been
used by most contributors in the last 10 years: According to the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights: “The right to adequate food is realized when every man, woman and child, alone or in
community with others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for
its procurement. The core content of the right to adequate food implies (...) the availability of food in a
87
Proceedings | 88
quantity and quality sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals, free from adverse substances,
and acceptable within a given culture (and) the accessibility of such food in ways that are sustainable
and that do not interfere with the enjoyment of other human rights.” (UN document E/C.12/1999/5,
paragraphs 6-8) According to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food: “The right to food is
the right to have regular, permanent and free access, either directly or by means of financial
purchases, to quantitatively and qualitatively adequate and sufficient food corresponding to the
cultural traditions of the people to which the consumer belongs, and which ensures a physical and
mental, individual and collective, fulfilling and dignified life free of fear.” (UN document
E/CN.4/2001/53, paragraph 14)
74) Frédéric Paré, Coalition pour la souveraineté alimentaire, Canada
Le présent document présente les positions de la Coalition relatives au « schéma annoté », c’est-àdire le projet de « cadre stratégique mondial pour la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition » actuellement
en consultation par la FAO. Commentaires relatifs à la mise en contexte du «schéma annoté» Avant
d’entamer la réponse aux questions, quelques commentaires s’imposent au sujet de la mise en
contexte présentée dans le « schéma annoté ». Dans cette mise en contexte, il est affirmé que le
cadre stratégique mondial pour la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition (CSM) doit s’appuyer sur les
cadres existants et qu’il ne les remplacera pas, qu’il cherchera plutôt à les harmoniser, « en conférant
à l’ensemble une nouvelle dimension inclusive, mondiale et holistique ». Cette contrainte est
importante et pas nécessairement acceptable. Elle risque de rendre l’exercice et les efforts du Comité
sur la sécurité alimentaire improductifs. Selon notre Coalition, il faudrait s’en tenir à rappeler
l’existence de cadres préalables que le CSA pourrait éventuellement utiliser, analyser ou questionner,
à la lumière des nouvelles problématiques contemporaines. Sans vouloir tomber dans la sémantique,
le 4ième picot de la rubrique ii) parle du CSM comme d’un document fondamental en évolution
constante. Il nous semble que la formulation devrait être revue à la lumière de la réelle intention du
CSM. Pour la Coalition, un document fondamental évolue que très rarement et affirme plutôt les
prémisses de base, ce qui ne change pas (ex. : la primauté des conventions internationales pour les
droits de l’homme sur tous autres accords internationaux, primauté consacrée dans la convention de
Vienne, la convention sur les règles impératives (jus cogens)). L’autre commentaire qu’il importe de
formuler concerne le picot 5 de la rubrique ii) où il est dit que l’adoption et l’approbation, par les
parties prenantes du CSM, ne peuvent être juridiquement contraignantes. La Coalition ne conteste
pas cette affirmation, qui rappelle le caractère politique plutôt que juridique du CSA de la FAO. Mais
cette information est importante, car pour certains, dont la Coalition, l’heure est à l’émergence de
règles justement contraignantes. La Coalition ne nie pas l’intérêt du travail du CSA, mais rappelle le
manque de droit contraignant en matière de droit à l’alimentation.
Réponses aux questions
1. La raison d’être, le but et la fonction du CSA sont-ils clairement établis? Si votre réponse est
négative, quels changements spécifiques suggérez-vous? Les éléments constitutifs du CSM ne sont
pas clairement établis. Il semble y avoir une sorte de confusion entre les mots « objectif », « but » et «
raison d’être ». Pour la Coalition, la raison d’être doit préciser le problème à résoudre, l’enjeu auquel
le Cadre s’adresse, la situation à changer, dans ce cas, la faim, sans aucun doute. Mais le texte du
schéma annoté parle de l’ « objectif d’éradiquer la faim », mais ne précise pas sa raison d’être. Puis,
on peut lire aussitôt après que selon le Bureau du CSA, « l’objectif du CSM vise à fournir un
instrument dynamique qui permet de renforcer le rôle du CSA ». Habituellement, on parle d’un objectif
88
Proceedings | 89
comme d’un indicateur mesurable. Cet objectif pourrait permettre de mesurer soit les moyens mis en
place par le CSM (objectif de moyen) ou de mesurer son effet sur la faim (objectif de résultat). D’autre
part, la formulation d’objectif proposée nous paraît dangereuse, créant une boucle où le Cadre nourrit
le CSA et le CSA nourrit le Cadre. Il faut rappeler que le CSA et son cadre sont des moyens de
coordination pour éradiquer la faim, à l’échelle de la gouvernance internationale. La notion de but
pourrait d’ailleurs convenir à cette fonction de coordination, le but du Cadre devant être de mobiliser
les parties au cadre autour d’objectifs clairs. Ces commentaires relèvent davantage de la sémantique,
mais ils sont importants, car ils permettent d’être compris.
2. Existe-t-il des causes structurelles de l’insécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition ainsi que d’autres
défis à long terme à prendre en compte? D’après vous, quels sont les plus importants? Nous ne
saurions être plus en accord avec le tout début du paragraphe 4 du document, où il est précisé
qu’une analyse systématique des causes structurelles de l’insécurité alimentaire est nécessaire afin
d’identifier et de sérier les problèmes de la sécurité alimentaire. Les quelques éléments de réponse
qui suivent cet énoncé nous conviennent également. Toutefois, pour la Coalition, le manque de
cohérence des politiques, le déclin des investissements et l’insécurité persistante des régimes
fonciers, résultent : • de l’entrechoquement des intérêts privés et publics en cause; • du statut
marchand consacré aux aliments et aux ressources productives (terres, semences) par les États et
les conventions commerciales multi ou bilatérales qu’ils peaufinent et paraphent, conception qui mine
leurs propres capacités d’intervention; • de la mise en concurrence des fermes nonobstant les
conditions physiques incontrôlables et les conditions sociales historiques qui déterminent pourtant
profondément leur coût de production et leur rendement (productivité); • de l’absence de cadre
international contraignant ou d’utilisation de ceux qui existent déjà (ex. : Convention de Vienne)
permettant aux pays d’exercer pleinement leurs rôles de respect, de protection et de promotion des
droits de l’homme impliqués par le fonctionnement des systèmes alimentaires (à l’alimentation, à la
santé, au travail décent, à un environnement sain, au développement, etc.); • de l’hégémonie
historique de l’approche occidentale d’aide alimentaire d’urgence comme moyen de coopération
internationale d’éradication de la faim, approche qui ne questionne pas les marchés libres, la position
occidentale sur ces marchés, ni le productivisme; Le paragraphe 5 du schéma annoté nomme le défi
de suffire à une demande alimentaire croissante et changeante. Le texte pose notamment la question
de l’évolution des régimes alimentaires comme une sorte de fatalité, alors que pour la Coalition, il
s’agit plutôt d’une conséquence de choix politiques de laisser au marché le soin d’arbitrer les
échanges. Le même paragraphe fait aussi un raccourci surprenant en affirmant que l’augmentation
de l’offre devra venir d’une augmentation de la productivité agricole (la courbe des taux de croissance
des rendements, actuellement en baisse, devra être inversée…). Pour y parvenir, il est suggéré que
la recherche agronomique soit mise à l’avant-plan. Pour la Coalition, cette approche n’est pas la
bonne. Il faut plutôt protéger et mettre en valeur les savoir-faire séculaires et les marchés
domestiques où les aliments locaux se retrouveront de façon privilégiée. Un marché réglementé (prix
et quantités produites) pour les aliments de base doit comporter l’essentiel de la rémunération des
paysans et des alimentations nationales. Plusieurs des questions nommées par le schéma annoté au
paragraphe 6, comme ayant une influence à long terme sur l’agriculture et la sécurité alimentaire
apparaissent à la Coalition comme des conséquences de choix politiques faits jusqu’à présent. La
manière dont ces sujets ou questions sont présentés dans le schéma annoté laisse entendre qu’au
contraire, ce seraient des nouvelles tendances apparues spontanément. La Coalition est d’avis que le
principal défi à relever est politique, avant d’être technique. Qu’il consiste à soutenir et permettre à
toutes les nations du monde, par un nouveau cadre juridiquement contraignant, à recouvrer librement
(une liberté collective reliée au droit à l’autodétermination des peuples) leur capacité politique et leur
contrôle sur leur système alimentaire national, à déterminer et mettre en œuvre un niveau et des
89
Proceedings | 90
moyens d’augmenter leur autonomie alimentaire, et à modifier substantiellement les principes et
modes d’opération de l’accord sur l’agriculture de l’OMC de manière à protéger les pays qui
souhaiteront élaborer et mettre en œuvre de telles politiques d’autonomie alimentaire.
3. Existe-t-il des questions complémentaires à prendre en compte? D’après vous, lesquelles devraient
être incluses dans le GSF? Le début du paragraphe 7 affirme que l’instabilité des prix proviendrait de
problèmes structurels profonds qui compromettent le fonctionnement des marchés. Cette position est
complètement inacceptable pour notre coalition, car elle consacre le marché en tant que solution à la
faim. Nous l’avons déjà dit, si le marché n’est pas fortement et franchement régulé, il fait plutôt partie
du problème que de la solution. Nous partageons complètement l’objectif de l’élimination des
programmes de subvention à l’exportation, les nouveaux comme les anciens. Mais l’idée plus globale
d’un marché équitable pour les aliments, libéré d’interventions politiques pour les aliments et
l’agriculture, ne se défend pas, pour des raisons intrinsèquement reliées à la nature même des
aliments et de l’agriculture et pour la raison fondamentale du droit des peuples à faire leurs choix
collectifs. Il n’est pas plus acceptable de pointer du doigt les pays qui ont imposé des taxes à
l’exportation pour assurer leur propre sécurité alimentaire, au moment de la flambée du prix des
denrées alimentaires de base en 2008, alors que ces États se sont engagés en vertu du PIDESC à
mettre en œuvre des politiques aptes à assurer leur sécurité alimentaire. La gouvernance mondiale
ne doit en aucun cas miner la gouvernance nationale, du moins celle qui se destine clairement au
bien commun (ici, l’accès pour tous et en tout temps, à des aliments sains et à des revenus décents,
par la régulation des échanges privés, ou au besoin, par la réalisation des activités économiques
productives par les États eux-mêmes). Qualifier certains investissements étrangers ayant découlé
d’une augmentation du prix des produits de base, comme n’étant pas toujours avantageux pour les
pays bénéficiaires, est un euphémisme. Ces investissements sont voués à positionner les entreprises
qui les font de façon plus concurrentielle sur des marchés de plus en plus mondialisés ou à sécuriser
l’approvisionnement alimentaire, dans le cas des investissements d’État. À propos du rôle des petits
exploitants, la Coalition croit que le défi n’est pas dans un premier temps d’augmenter leur
productivité, à moins de les imaginer dans un marché ouvert, en concurrence avec d’autres
agricultures nationales ou régionales. Pour la Coalition, le premier défi est de sécuriser ces
agricultures vivrières, moteurs économiques des pays en développement, en sécurisant clairement la
vente de ces productions dans les marchés domestiques et en réglementant leurs prix et les
quantités produites, et au besoin, en contrôlant les marges bénéficiaires des acheteurs, souvent des
transnationales. Les questions sous-jacentes proposées par le schéma annoté sont pertinentes. Mais
la description qui en est faite dans le document est tendancieuse et semble globalement reléguer
l’État à un rôle marginal et ténu. C’est par exemple le cas en ce qui concerne la question de
l’instabilité des prix où la transparence des transactions et un fonctionnement plus fluide des marchés
semblent encore conçus comme la panacée. Ce problème d’orientation « a priori » favorable aux
marchés se manifeste aussi lorsqu’il est question de gouvernance. Si la coordination peut sans doute
être améliorée, et c’est là la valeur du Comité sur la sécurité alimentaire, l’absence de hiérarchie
effective entre les divers instruments de gouvernance de la sécurité alimentaire doit être clairement
nommée et évoquée au Cadre stratégique mondial, d’autant qu’elle existe légalement et légitiment,
par la Convention de Vienne (ou des règles impératives).
4. Existe-t-il des options de politiques à prendre en compte? D’après vous, lesquelles devraient être
incluses dans le GSF? La Coalition partage entièrement l’idée de fonder l’approche sur le droit. Pour
renforcer cette approche, nous vous proposons d’utiliser des citations éclairantes qui ont la
pertinence et la justesse de réhabiliter le rôle du politique, de l’État. • Entre le fort et le faible, entre le
riche et le pauvre, entre le maître et le serviteur, c’est la liberté qui opprime, c’est la loi qui affranchit.
90
Proceedings | 91
(Henri Lacordaire, 1802-1861, prêtre et dominicain français); • Il n’y a que la force de l’État qui fasse
la liberté de ses membres. (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1712-1778, écrivain et philosophe genevois) Le
texte présentant l’agriculture en tant que moteur du développement est important, mais il ne doit pas
faire ressortir une prétendue nécessité d’appuyer l’adaptation des petits exploitants à l’évolution de la
demande. Cette formulation est un autre exemple de l’idéologie qui semble se dégager du schéma
annoté. Il faut plutôt, nous l’avons déjà écrit, réserver l’approvisionnement domestique à ces paysans,
puis, dans un deuxième temps, les soutenir en renforçant leur savoir-faire et en fournissant les
infrastructures requises à l’acheminement efficace des aliments vers les centres urbains. Nous ne
saurions répéter assez fortement le danger de décliner la question des systèmes commerciaux sans
faire référence à leur nécessaire subordination par les États nationaux et par un ou des instruments
de gouvernance internationaux contraignants. Le texte qui décrit le chantier relatif au commerce ne
nous convient pas, sauf en ce qui concerne les subventions à l’exportation. Les mesures de soutien à
l’agriculture sont parfaitement légitimes et souhaitables si les aliments et agriculteurs qui en profitent
sont dédiés au marché domestique. Cette nuance est fondamentale.
Frédéric Paré
Coordonnateur Coalition pour la souveraineté alimentaire
Le 27 septembre 2011
English translation
Before dealing with the answers to the questions, here are some comments related to setting context
in the «annotated outline». In this context setting, it is said that the Global Strategic Framework for
Food Security and Nutrition (GSF) will build on existing frameworks and will not replace, but rather
look to harmonize them, "by providing and inclusive, global and holistic perspective." This constraint
is important and not necessarily acceptable. It could make the operation and efforts of the Committee
for food security unproductive. According to our Coalition, it is necessary to remember the existence
of previous frameworks that the CFS could possibly use, analyze or question, in the light of new
current issues Without wishing to fall into semantics, the fourth bullet of Section ii) mentions GSF as a
living document to be updated periodically. We think that the description should be revised in the light
of GSF´s real intention. For the Coalition, a fundamental document very rarely evolves and tends
rather to confirm the basic premises, that do not change (e.g.: the primacy of international
conventions on human rights over all other international agreements, a primacy consecrated by the
Vienna Convention, under the convention on mandatory rules of law (jus cogens)). The other
important comment concerns the fifth bullet of Section ii) where it is said that neither approval nor
endorsement will be legally binding for the participants in the GSF. The Coalition does not question
this assertion, which shows the political rather that legal character of the CFS within FAO. But this
information is important because, for some, among whom the Coalition, time has come for the
appearance of fairly binding rules. The Coalition does not deny the interest of the work of the CFS,
but recalls the lack of binding law concerning the right to food.
Answers to the questions:
1. The essential elements of the GSF are not clearly established. There seems to be a kind of
confusion between the words "objective," "purpose" and "rationale." For the Coalition, the rationale
must exactly define the problem to be resolved, the challenge to be addressed by the Framework, the
situation that needs to be changed, in this case: hunger, beyond any doubt. However, the text of the
Annotated Outline mentions "the objective to eradicate hunger," without mentioning its rationale.
91
Proceedings | 92
Thus, one can read immediately below that according to the CFS Bureau, “the overall purpose of the
GSF is to provide a dynamic instrument to enhance the role of the CFS." Normally, an objective is
seen as a measurable indicator. This objective could help to measure the means used in 3 by the
GSF (means objective) or to measure its effect on hunger (outcome objective). On the other hand,
the proposed formulation of objectives seems to us to be dangerous, creating a circle where the
Framework feeds the CFS and the CFS feeds the Framework. It is important to remember that the
CFS and its framework are means of coordination for eradicating hunger, at international governance
level. The notion of purpose could lend itself to this coordination function, the purpose of the
Framework being to mobilize the participants around clear objectives. These comments arise
principally from semantics, but they are important since they enhance understanding.
2. We cannot agree more with the very beginning of paragraph 4 of the document, where it is said
that systematic analysis of the structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition is required to
identify and prioritize challenges affecting the realization of food security. Equally, we agree with
several elements of the response that follow this statement. However, for the Coalition, the lack of
coherent policies, the decline in investments and the persistence of insecurity of land tenure, result
from:
The conflict between private and public interests in question;
The commercial status given to food and productive resources (land, seeds) by the States and the
commercial multi or bilateral conventions, which they refine and endorse, a concept that undermines
their own capacity for intervention;
The competition between farms despite uncontrollable variations in physical conditions and historical
social conditions which profoundly affect the costs of production and their productivity;
The lack of a binding international framework or the use of those already in existence (e.g. : Vienna
Convention) allowing countries to fully exercise their roles of respect, protection and promotion of
human rights implied by the functioning of food supply systems (right to food, health, decent work, a
healthy environment, development, etc.);
the historical hegemony of the Western approach to emergency food aid as a means of international
cooperation to eradicate hunger, an approach that does not question the free market, the Western
stance on these markets, nor the pursuit of productivity; The 5th paragraph of the Annotated Outline
mentions the challenge of providing for a growing and changing food demand. The text particularly
raises the question of the evolution of food diets as a kind of inevitable outcome, although for the
Coalition, it is rather more a consequence of political choices allowing the market to arbitrate trade.
The same paragraph makes a surprising shortcut by affirming that meeting the challenge calls for
yield increases and overall productivity gains in food and agricultural production (the curve of growth
in production, actually in decline, must be reversed...) For this to come about, it has been suggested
that agricultural research must be prioritized. For the Coalition, this is not the right approach. It
would be better to protect and exploit practical know-how and the domestic markets where priority will
be given to local food. A regulated market (prices and quantities produced) for basic food products
must bring the basic requirements of remuneration for the producing farmers and food for national
consumption. Many of the questions mentioned in paragraph 6 of the Annotated Outline as having a
long term influence on agriculture and food security appear to the Coalition as consequences of
political choices made up to the present. The way in which these topics on the questions are
presented on the Annotated Outline imply that quite the opposite; these would be new trends
appearing spontaneously.
The Coalition believes that the most important challenge is political, more than technical.
That it is about sustaining and allowing all nations in the world, by a new legally binding framework, to
recover freely (a collective freedom related to the right to self-determination of the people) their
92
Proceedings | 93
political capacity and their control over their national food system, to determine and put in place a
level of, and means to increase their food self-sufficiency and to modify substantially the principles
and working practices of the Agreement on Agriculture of the WTO, in a way that protects the
countries wishing to elaborate and put in place such policies of food self-sufficiency.
3. At the beginning of paragraph 7 it is said that price volatility is the result of deep structural problems
in the functioning of markets. This position is totally unacceptable for our coalition, because it
consecrates the market as the solution to hunger. We have said it already, if the market is not
strongly and firmly regulated, it will be more part of the problem than the solution. We entirely share
the objective of eliminating programs for subsidizing exports, the new as well as the old ones. But the
more global idea of a fair market for food, free from political interventions on food and agriculture, is
not warranted for reasons intrinsically related to the very nature of food and agriculture and for the
fundamental reason of the right of people to make their collective choices. It is not acceptable to point
at the countries imposing taxes on exports to ensure their own food security, at the moment when the
prices of basic foodstuffs rocketed in 2008, since these countries have pledged to ICESCR to put in
place politics that will ensure their food security. World governance must not undermine national
governance, at least the one committed clearly with the common good (in this case, access for all at
all times to healthy food and decent incomes, by the regulation of private exchanges, or if required,
by the productive economic activities of the states themselves). To qualify some foreign investments
resulting from price increases of basic products, as not having been always favorable for the recipient
countries, is a euphemism. These investments are deemed to position the investing businesses more
competitively on markets which are more and more globalized or to ensure food supply, in the case of
State investments. Regarding the role of small farmers, the Coalition believes that the challenge is
not initially to increase their productivity, unless in an open market, competing with other national or
regional farmers. For the Coalition, the first challenge is to safeguard these food-producing farmers,
which are economic driving forces of developing countries, by ensuring transparently the sale of these
productions in the domestic markets and regulating their prices and the quantities produced, and if
required, controlling the profit margins of the buyers, which are often transnational companies. The
underlying questions proposed by the Annotated Outline are relevant. But the description set out in
the document is biased and appears globally to consign the State to a marginal and unimportant role.
It is, for example, the case when dealing with the question of price volatility or the transparence of
transactions and a more fluid operation of the markets seem still to be seen as the panacea. This
problem of “a prior” favorable orientation for the markets shows up also regarding the question of
governance. Whereas coordination can undoubtedly be improved, and this is the merit the
Committee for food security, the lack of effective hierarchy between the different administrative
instruments for food security governance must be clearly identified and addressed in the Global
Strategic Framework, all the more as they exist legally and lawfully under the Vienna Convention (or
mandatory rules).
4. The Coalition totally shares the idea that the approach should be based on law. To reinforce this
approach, we suggest that you use clarifying declarations which rightly rehabilitate the role of politics,
that is, of the State.
slave it is freedom which oppresses and the law that sets free. (Henri Lacordaire, 1802-1861,
French Dominican preacher);
Only the strength of the State can free its citizens. (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1712-1778, Genevan
writer and philosopher)
93
Proceedings | 94
The text that presents agriculture as the driver of development is important, but it must not focus on
an alleged necessity to support the adaptation of small producing farmers to the changing demand.
This interpretation is another example of ideology that seems to emerge from the Annotated Outline.
It is preferable, as we have already said; to give these small farmers the responsibility for domestic
supply, then at a later stage support them by reinforcing their knowledge and by providing the
infrastructures required for efficient transport of food to urban centers.
We must insist on the danger of addressing the question of commercial systems without making
reference to their necessary control by the national states and by one or more international binding
instruments. We do not agree with the text that describes the work related to commerce, except
where it is related to export subsidies. The measures that support agriculture are perfectly legitimate
and desirable if the benefited food products and farmers are dedicated to the domestic market. This
is a fundamental attribute.
75) Rosario Alurralde, Bolivia
Distinguido Fransisco Sarmento:
Deseo realizar algunos aportes sobre las reformas del CSF y el Marco Estratégico Mundial para la
seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición.
Con respecto a la organización, apoyo plenamente la propuesta, sin embargo es necesario poner
mayor participación también de los afectados o sea los desnutridos y los que tienen sobrepeso u
obesidad o poblaciones con inseguridad alimentaria a fin de que expresen también sus necesidades
y no solo se vea desde el punto de vista técnico- profesional, de organizaciones civiles u otros y
quizá hasta hacerlo mediante canales de participación social.
Asimismo, a tiempo de estar de acuerdo con lo propuesto, doy respuesta a las preguntas:
1. ¿Existen causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y desafíos
adicionales a largo plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta, y cuáles cree que son los más
relevantes?
Además de las mencionadas deseo hacer hincapié en que en Bolivia hemos avanzado aunque no
lo suficiente. La Constitución Política del Estado prioriza la seguridad alimentaria y el acceso al
agua y la alimentación, sin embargo no existen normas complementarias, pero se pregona la
necesidad y tenemos como puntal el Programa Nacional de Desnutrición Cero, sin embargo los
índices de pobreza, desnutrición e inseguridad alimentaria prevalecen con oscilaciones de
reducción muy pequeñas. Propongo que en el Derecho Internacional se incluya la defensa no solo
al derecho a la alimentación en forma propositiva sino también a nivel coercitivo con dejación de
mandato o algo así para los violadores de este derecho.
2. ¿Existen cuestiones adicionales que deben ser consideradas, y cuales cree que son las más
importantes para ser incluidas por el GSF?
94
Proceedings | 95
Inclusión de los productores y comercializadores de alimentos en el conocimiento y difusión de los
productos alimentarios que producen y comercializan con reales y efectivas contribuciones hacia
una alimentación y nutrición saludable.
Recuperación del valor nutritivo de muchos alimentos originarios que no se encuentran analizados
en las Tablas de Composición de Alimentos, pero la gente pobre se alimenta de los mismos.
Rescate de tecnologías ancestrales para almacenamiento y conservación de los alimentos.
Promoción de Elaboración y difusión de Dietas de Costo Mínimo en las poblaciones más pobres y
como identificar un alimento sano e inocuo.
3. ¿Hay opciones adicionales de políticas que deben ser tomadas en cuenta, y cuáles de
ellas cree que deben ser incluidas por el GSF?
Considero que la primera tarea es hacer una política de sinergia entre Derecho a la Alimentación,
Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición. Lo cual debe ser puntal de la toma de decisiones en forma
conexa e inseparable en Ministerios mas modernos que no realicen estas labores en forma
separada o solo coordinada.
También considero que el derecho a la alimentación debe ser coercitivo e implacable con los
violadores, para lo cual la norma legal debe cambiar hacia la protección y defensa de la vida de un
ser humano. A lo cual además se debe incluir la protección de la nutrición de los grupos
vulnerables con normas impositivas y no permitir la reincidencia después de la recuperación del
desnutrido y luego nuevamente el desmedro sea bajo la protección de los padres, tutores o el
Estado. Incluir a los economistas a mostrar no solo el comportamiento económico sino mas bien el
beneficio social.
4. En relación al seguimiento del progreso hacia los objetivos de seguridad alimentaria y
nutrición a todos los niveles (nacional, regional, mundial), ¿qué tipo de orientación
debería aportar el GSF, y a quién?
Considero que la orientación del GSF debe ser la de un líder mundial, recolector de ideas e
información e investigación y otros como promotor de las directrices para la elaboración de políticas
públicas e institucionales, su labor es muy importante. Pero necesita un sistema de información mas
preciso con indicadores nuevos para ver el verdadero progreso de sus metas y hacer intervenciones
mas precisas a nivel de los gobiernos, con operatividad casi inmediata a través de una red social que
genere información, comunicación y participación activa inmediata y/o poder de acción. Por ejemplo
con esta comunicación de FAO, hace que la inclusión sea participativa y masiva por lo cual en este
amplio espectro “diría que más cabezas aportan más a la solución de los problemas comunes”.
Considero que si trabajan en el marco participativo de amplia comunicación y difusión, tendremos
mejores logros a soluciones comunes.
Los objetivos deberían están en torno a como captar información mas precisa e inmediata y debe
estar en capacidad de hacerlo a todo nivel.
Felicitándolos por la iniciativa de esta nueva forma de participación, saludo a usted con las
atenciones mas distinguidas.
Rosario Alurralde
La Paz, Bolivia
95
Proceedings | 96
English translation
Distinguished Francisco Sarmento,
I would like to make some contributions regarding the CFS and the Global Strategic Framework for
Food Security and Nutrition reforms
With respect to the organization, I completely support the proposal. However, it is necessary to
increase the participation of the affected population (i.e. the malnourished), and those who are
overweight or obese, and of food insecure populations, so that they can also express their needs maybe even through social participation channels-, ensuring that the proposal is not only conceived
from the technical-professional, civil organizations or others point of view.
Additionally, whilst agreeing with what has been proposed, I answer the questions:
1. Besides the above mentioned, I would like to highlight that progress has been made in Bolivia,
although not enough. The State Political Constitution gives priority to food security and access to
water and food and their need is proclaimed, but there are no additional rules. We have the Zero
Malnutrition National Programme as a key support; however poverty, malnutrition and food insecurity
rates remain practically constant, with minimum reductions. I suggest that the international law
includes the defence of the right to food, not just as a proposal but also with a coercive approach for
those who fail to comply with this right.
2. Getting producers and food traders to know and promote what they produce and sell, with real and
effective contributions towards healthy food and nutrition.
Recovering the nutritional value of many native foods that poor people use but are not analysed in the
Food Composition Tables.
Rescuing ancestral technologies for food storage and preservation.
Promoting elaboration and circulation of minimum cost diets amongst poorer populations and
procedures to identify healthy and safe food.
3. The first task is to apply a policy of synergy between Right to Food, Food Security and Nutrition. It
should be a key support for related and inseparable decision making in the more modern ministries,
places where this issues are not approached in a separate or simply coordinated way.
I also believe that the Right to Food must be coercive and merciless with those who fail to comply with
it. For this purpose, the law should be modified targeting the protection and defence of the human
being life. Additionally, nutrition of vulnerable groups should be protected with enforceable rules,
impeding recidivism after recovery of the malnourished and subsequent deterioration, either under the
protection of parents, tutors or the state. Economists should focus not just in the economic behaviour
but rather in the social benefit.
4. I believe that the GSF approach should correspond to that of a world leader, collecting ideas,
information and research and promoting the development of guidelines for public and institutional
policies. Its work is very important. However, the GSF requires a more accurate information system
with new indicators to assess the real progress of its goals and make more precise governmental
interventions, with almost immediate operation capacity through a social network that generates
information, communication, immediate active participation and/or power to take action. For example
96
Proceedings | 97
this FAO communication allows a participatory and massive approach, with “more brains contributing
to a greater extent to the solution of common problems".
I think that if work is undertaken within a participatory frame of broad communication and
broadcasting, a better outcome for common solutions will be achieved.
The objectives should be focused in gathering more accurate and immediate information at all levels.
Congratulations for the initiative of this new form of participation and best regards,
Rosario Alurralde
La Paz, Bolivia
76) Radha Holla Bhar, International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) Asia, India
In a strategic framework for nutrition there is no mention at all of the first food for infants- breast milk.
Infants can get this food ONLY if the mother has support to breastfeed - she gets adequate food and
nutrition throughout her pregnancy and lactation period; she gets adequate amount of paid
leave/financial support to take enable her to stay with the baby for at least the first six months in order
to breastfeed on demand; there are child care support systems such as creches in the community and
work places, run by trained people who can support her to breastfeed including giving her counseling
support, and the international Code for Marketing of Breastmilk substitutes as well as the relevant
World Health Assembly Resolutions are strictly enforced by countries. Not acknowledging this first
food of all humans is denying the food rights of infants, and should not be done by a strategic
framework that is meant to ensure the rights of ALL humans to food.
77) Campaña Derecho a la alimentación. Urgente, Spain
Comentarios de la campaña “Derecho a la alimentación. Urgente” al esquema comentado del Marco
Estratégico Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y la Nutrición (MEM)
“Ni la aprobación ni la ratificación [del MEM] serán jurídicamente vinculantes”
La evolución de las cifras del hambre nos confronta con la terrible realidad de que, a la fecha
presente, estamos en una situación mucho peor de la que teníamos en 1996 cuando la comunidad
internacional, reunida en la Cumbre Mundial de la Alimentación, se comprometió a reducir a la mitad
el número de personas hambrientas. El refuerzo de la atención de la comunidad internacional sobre
la lucha contra el hambre que se ha producido a partir de la crisis alimentaria de 2008, con la puesta
en marcha del HLTF, con los grandes encuentros internacionales celebrados –la Conferencia de Alto
Nivel sobre Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial celebrada en Roma en junio 2008, la Reunión de Alto
Nivel sobre Seguridad Alimentaria celebrada en Madrid en enero 2009, la Cumbre Mundial sobre la
Seguridad Alimentaria (WSFS) celebrada en Roma en noviembre 2009-, con las iniciativas de aporte
de recursos – compromiso de L’Aquila…- no se ha traducido en una disminución del número de
personas hambrientas.
Las diversas iniciativas supranacionales de lucha contra el hambre que se han producido en los
últimos años, unas con amplios respaldos y otras a iniciativa de grupos más reducidos de países, así
97
Proceedings | 98
como los compromisos establecidos en las reuniones y cumbres internacionales, no son vinculantes;
no hay una instancia multilateral que haga seguimiento del cumplimiento por parte de cada una de
las partes implicadas, de cada uno de los Estados que lo suscriben.
Frente a esta situación:

Sería importante clarificar el panorama y el alcance de las diferentes iniciativas así como
articularlas o aglutinarlas en el marco de la actividad del CSA reformado, de manera que sea
más fácil hacer seguimiento y se mejore al máximo la eficiencia.

Será fundamental que el MEM incorpore un seguimiento periódico de los diferentes
compromisos, aún cuando éstos no tengan carácter vinculante

El MEM debería incorporar algún sistema que, aún cuando no pueda tener exigibilidad
jurídica, fortalezca el liderazgo del CSA para impulsar el cumplimiento de compromisos;
debería favorecerse al menos una situación de exigibilidad “ética” de loscompromisos.
Análisis sistemático de las causas estructurales del hambre
Es importante que, al orientar el trabajo de análisis causal del hambre, el MEM adopte un
planteamiento más profundo que responda a la multicausalidad del problema abordando tanto los
factores que afectan a la producción agrícola como otros factores que influyen, y no de una menor
manera, en la inseguridad alimentaria: la inequitativa distribución de recursos, la insuficiencia de
sistemas de protección social, la débil protección de los/as trabajadores/as agrícolas, el predominio
de sistemas agrícolas que privilegian las grandes explotaciones tanto intensivas como extensivas, el
injusto sistema de comercio internacional, la especulación financiera con productos agrícolas, la
desigualdad en el consumo energético, la extensión de monocultivos no alimenticios (fibras,
biodiesel, etc.), la existencia de subsidios y ayudas que, en la realidad, favorecen mucho más a los
grandes productores que a los pequeños, la corrupción, desigualdad de género en la gestión de
tierras y alimentos, el impacto del cambio climático, etc.
¿Qué papel va a tener el CSA reformado en el seguimiento de políticas comerciales, energéticas,
financieras, medioambientales… que tienen gran impacto en la seguridad alimentaria mundial? El
MEM debería intentar responder esta pregunta y aportar propuestas concretas. Si no, corremos el
riesgo de que no se pueda atacar el problema en algunas de sus principales causas.
Enfoque de derechos
El derecho humano a la alimentación ha sido ampliamente estudiado, definido y delimitado a través
del trabajo del Comité de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales de Naciones Unidas (a través
de la Observación General nº 12), del trabajo de la relatoría especial para el derecho humano a la
alimentación (a través de numerosos informes producidos desde su creación en 2000), de la
aprobación por parte del Consejo de la FAO de las directrices voluntarias para la realización efectiva
del derecho humano a la alimentación en el marco de la seguridad alimentaria nacional, del trabajo
realizado en los últimos años por la Unidad del Derecho a la Alimentación de la FAO, así como por la
reflexión y análisis de multitud de organizaciones y redes de la sociedad civil. Hay ya ejemplos de
plasmación constitucional y legal de este derecho, así como de la integración de este enfoque de
derechos en la formulación de estrategias nacionales de seguridad alimentaria y nutricional, o incluso
98
Proceedings | 99
de resoluciones judiciales al respecto. El MEM debería aprovechar todo este bagaje para asentarse
muy firmemente en el enfoque de derechos.
Desde el punto de vista de la campaña “Derecho a la alimentación. Urgente” el enfoque más
adecuado para afrontar la gobernanza de la seguridad alimentaria es el enfoque de derechos
humanos. Todas las personas, independientemente de su nacionalidad, raza, credo, sexo, ideas
políticas, etc. tienen derecho a una alimentación adecuada y suficiente. Los Estados, al menos
aquellos que son partes del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Económicos Sociales y
Culturales, tienen las obligaciones de respetar –no tomar ninguna decisión o adoptar ninguna actitud
que implique limitar o impedir el derecho a la alimentación de las personas-, de proteger – adoptar
las medidas adecuadas para evitar que ningún tercero, ya sea persona particular, colectivo o
empresa, impida o limite el derecho a la alimentación de ninguna persona en su territorio- y de
garantizar –desarrollar acciones que faciliten la realización del derecho a la alimentación de sus
ciudadanía y, para el caso de aquellas personas que están en tanta vulnerabilidad que no pueden
acceder a alimentos por ninguna otra vía, deben facilitarles el alimento.
La búsqueda de coherencia en la gobernanza de la seguridad alimentaria mundial debería
construirse en torno al derecho humano a la alimentación: qué acciones son coherentes con el
derecho humano a la alimentación y cuáles no, qué políticas son coherentes y cuáles no, qué
acuerdos internacionales son coherentes y cuáles no. El derecho humano a la alimentación debería
dotar de mayor consistencia y solidez a la gobernanza de la seguridad alimentaria en los niveles
mundial, regional, nacional y familiar.
¿Cuál es la estrategia del Marco Estratégico?
Establecer una estrategia supone elegir entre las posibles soluciones aquella que parezca más
adecuada. Para hacer más efectiva la lucha contra el hambre también se requiere hacer opciones
estratégicas. El principal problema no es la producción de alimentos –siendo importante- sino la
distribución y el acceso.
Conviene tener presente en este documento que el 70 % de las personas que viven en situación de
pobreza viven en el medio rural, son campesinos y campesinas. La economía y modo de vida
campesina se ha desvalorizado en el modelo de desarrollo capitalistaconsumista. Por eso, el hambre
y la inseguridad alimentaria afectan tanto a los campesinos (agricultores a pequeña escala).
El modelo que se debe impulsar para ser más efectivos en la lucha contra el hambre no es el modelo
agroindustrial, que en los últimos 25 años lo que ha hecho ha sido empeorar la situación de estas
poblaciones, limitando su acceso a recursos productivos y a mercados. La opción es la agricultura
familiar con una clara orientación agroecológica, que pone en primer plano la alimentación de las
familias campesinas. Esta opción estratégica debería quedar clara y contundentemente expresada
en el MEM.
La lucha contra el hambre requiere dar prioridad a la atención a pequeños agricultores, pescadores
artesanales, mujeres y otros grupos vulnerables. En este sentido, tal como se señala en las
directrices voluntarias para la realización progresiva del derecho humano a la alimentación
adecuada, concretamente en la directriz 8, es muy importante el acceso a los recursos necesarios
para la producción de una forma sostenible, segura y no discriminatoria.
Esta directriz aporta interesantes ideas sobre la importancia del acceso a recursos, en especial,
sobre el acceso al empleo, a la tierra, al agua, sobre la defensa de los recursos genéticos para la
alimentación y la agricultura, sobre el enfoque de sostenibilidad ecológico que los Estados deberían
impulsar y sobre el acceso a servicios para la población campesina (investigación, extensión,
formación/capacitación, microcrédito, energía, comercialización…)
99
Proceedings | 10
0
Diferentes niveles de seguridad alimentaria
La realidad global de la crisis alimentaria puede llevar a un análisis macro, a nivel mundial, tanto de
las causas como de las consecuencias, que es muy importante y necesario. Además, en el esquema
comentado del MEM se hacen algunos apuntes sobre la importancia de trabajar en el nivel nacional,
proporcionando orientación a los países para una gobernanza eficaz de la seguridad alimentaria
nacional.
Es muy importante que la preocupación de fondo no sea solamente la seguridad alimentaria
nacional, es decir, que el promedio de calorías disponibles a nivel nacional por habitante y día esté
por encima de los mínimos establecidos, sino la seguridad alimentaria familiar, preocupándose por
tanto no por los promedios nacionales sino por la situación concreta de cada una de las poblaciones
en situación de vulnerabilidad. Nos parece clave que desde el MEM se den orientaciones para que
los Estados trabajen en la identificación de las causas de la vulnerabilidad de las personas y/o
colectivos que han empeorado su seguridad alimentaria por la crisis o están en serio riesgo de
hacerlo. Es necesario identificar quiénes son los hambrientos y por qué lo son, y ello tanto en los
niveles de seguridad alimentaria nacional como seguridad alimentaria familiar, y remover las
condiciones que generan la vulnerabilidad. A la hora de descender a lo operativo y de ganarle terreno
al hambre reduciendo las cifras de personas hambrientas palmo a palmo, es necesaria una visión
contextualizada en la realidad local, en las especificidades de diferentes regiones y provincias, de
diferentes poblaciones y etnias, identificando para cada caso cuáles son las causas principales de su
situación de inseguridad alimentaria y diseñando en función de ello las estrategias más adecuadas a
medio y largo plazo. Las oficinas o delegaciones nacionales de los organismos especializados de
Naciones Unidas, especialmente de la FAO, deberían prestar una importante colaboración a cada
Estado que lo necesite para este trabajo de diagnóstico y estrategia.
Será también importante que desde el MEM se promueva que los diagnósticos que se realicen en los
ámbitos nacional, provincial y local estén fácilmente disponibles para el conjunto de agentes de
desarrollo, incluidas las organizaciones de la sociedad civil, de manera que puedan hacer converger
sus actuaciones con las necesidades y problemáticas identificadas. La preocupación por la nutrición,
que también aparece en el MEM, orienta de una determinada manera el enfoque de seguridad
alimentaria que se adopta, e implica ir más allá del acceso a alimentos, y preocuparse también por
las condiciones de vida, por el acceso a agua, saneamiento, servicios de salud, entorno saludable.
Este enfoque multisectorial debería complementarse con el impulso de líneas de formación en
nutrición, salud, saneamiento… con los colectivos prioritarios, más afectados por la situación de
desnutrición: pequeños agricultores, asalariados, mujeres rurales, etc.
Agrocombustibles
La producción de agrocombustibles y el establecimiento de cuotas de los mismos dentro de la
producción energética, deberían analizarse con muchísima cautela no sólo para ver en qué casos su
producción es positiva desde un punto de vista de eficiencia energética (algunos estudios han
establecido que, en determinados casos, la producción de biocombustibles consume más energía
que la que luego aportan) o desde un punto de vista ambiental (que realmente supongan un aporte
positivo en la reducción de emisiones y que no provoquen un deterioro de las tierras) sino también
desde un punto de vista social (que no tengan un impacto negativo en el derecho a la alimentación y
en la seguridad alimentaria de las poblaciones más vulnerables).
100
Proceedings | 10
1
En ningún caso, el porcentaje energético cubierto por agrocombustibles debe poner en peligro la
garantía del derecho a la alimentación, tanto en países productores como demandantes; este es uno
de los puntos sobre los que se debería alcanzar un consenso internacional.
Los países que actualmente demandan los agrocombustibles no pueden abstraerse de las
consecuencias que su demanda tiene en la competencia por los recursos productivos especialmente tierra y agua- en países en desarrollo. La producción de agrocombustibles, tal y como
se viene planteando, no va a traducirse en una autonomía energética de los países que proporcionan
la materia prima y, al mismo tiempo, va a tener un negativo impacto en la seguridad alimentaria de
poblaciones vulnerables.
El MEM también debería poner en el punto de mira esta cuestión, como una de las posibles causas
de la crisis alimentaria.
Comercio y especulación finanziera
La experiencia de la crisis alimentaria de 2007-2008 nos ha enseñado que los alimentos no son una
mercancía cualquiera; en primer lugar son el medio para garantizar el derecho humano a la
alimentación, para satisfacer una necesidad básica para la vida de los seres humanos. Debido a esta
función clave, su comercio y las inversiones financieras relacionadas deben tener una regulación
especial, que anteponga la garantía de la seguridad alimentaria a la búsqueda de beneficios
económicos. La crisis de 2007-2008 ha demostrado que el mercado no es una institución adecuada
para regular de forma totalmente automática el comercio de alimentos.
Un gran problema del mercado de productos agrícolas es que la volatilidad de los precios depende
de unos pocos productos interesantes, no por su parte alimentaria sino por su capacidad de
industrialización. Este interés mercantil de ciertos cultivos hace que se produzca un desplazamiento
de los cultivos que podrían cubrir las necesidades alimentarias de la población de los países en
desarrollo y mejorar la dieta de las personas que pasan hambre. De este modo se desacopla el
binomio agricultura-alimentación, creándose el de agriculturaindustria y dejando en un segundo plano
a las personas.
El MEM debe tener en cuenta los aspectos comerciales y financieros de la inseguridad
alimentaria.
English transation
Comments from the campaign "Right to Food. Urgent” (“Derecho a la alimentación.Urgente”) to the
Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GFS) scheme.
"Neither the approval or ratification [of the GSF] will be legally binding".
The evolution of hunger statistics confronts us with a terrible reality. Currently, the situation is much
worse than in 1996, when the international community, gathered at the World Food Summit,
committed itself to halving the number of hungry people.
From the 2008 food crisis, the attention paid by the international community to the fight against
hunger has been strengthened, with the HLTF launch, the celebration of major international meetings
–High-Level Conference on World Food Security held in Rome in June 2008, High-Level Meeting on
Food Security held in Madrid in January 2009, the World Summit on Food Security (WSFS) held in
101
Proceedings | 10
2
Rome in November 2009- and initiatives focused in the provision of resources - L'Aquila commitment
– although this consolidation has not reduced the number of hungry people
The various supranational initiatives to fight hunger of recent years, some with broad support and
others based on smaller groups of countries’ initiative, and the commitments made in international
summits and meetings, are not binding; there is no multilateral agency to monitor the compliance of
each of the parties involved (i.e. each of the States that subscribe them).
With this situation:
• It would be important to clarify the scope and outlook of the various initiatives as well as formulating
and merging them within the reformed CFS framework, facilitating monitoring and optimizing the
efficiency as a result.
• It will be essential that the GSF includes regular monitoring of the different commitments, even if
they are non-binding.
• The GSF should include some system, even without legal enforceability, to strengthen the CFS
leadership for fostering the compliance with commitments; a situation of “ethical” enforceability for the
commitments should be at least targeted.
Systematic analysis of the structural causes of hunger
When guiding the causal analysis of hunger, it is important that the GSF adopts a deeper approach
that tackles the multiple causes of the problem, addressing both the factors that affect agricultural
production and other factors that influence, not in an insignificant way, food insecurity: the inequitable
distribution of resources, the inadequacy of social protection systems, the weak protection of
agricultural workers, the predominance of agricultural systems that favour large farms, both intensive
and extensive, the unfair international trade system, the financial speculation with agricultural
commodities, the unequal energetic consumption, the extent of non-food monocultures (fibres,
biodiesel, etc..), the existence of subsidies and incentives that, in reality, are much more useful to
large producers than to small ones, corruption, gender inequality in land and food management, the
impact of climate change, etc.
What role will the reformed CFS play in monitoring trade, energetic, financial and environmental
policies, that have a great impact in global food security? The GSF should try to answer this question
and provide concrete proposals. Otherwise, there is the risk of not addressing some of the main
causes of the problem.
Rights approach
The human right to food has been extensively studied, defined and delimited through the work of the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of the United Nations (via General Comment No.
12), the work of the special rapporteur for the human right to food (via numerous reports since its
establishment in 2000), the approval by the FAO Council of the Volunteer Guidelines for the effective
implementation of the human right to food in the context of national food security, the work completed
in recent years by the FAO Right to Food Unit, as well as the reflection and analysis of many
organizations and civil society networks. There are already examples of the constitutional and legal
implementation of this right, as well as of the integration of this approach into the formulation of food
102
Proceedings | 10
3
and nutrition security national strategies, or even of related court decisions. The GSF should use all
this background to consolidate the rights approach.
From the "Right to Food. Urgent" campaign point of view, the most adequate approach to address
food security governance is the human rights one. All people, regardless of their nationality, race,
creed, gender, political ideas, etc. have the right to adequate and sufficient food. The States, at least
those who are parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, are
obliged to respect - not taking any decision or adopting any attitude that implies restricting or
impeding the right to food - , to protect - taking appropriate measures to prevent any third party, either
a private individual, a group or a business, from impeding or restricting the right to food of any person
in its territory- and to guarantee – acting to facilitate the realization of the right to food of their citizens
and, for vulnerable population that cannot access to food by any other means, the food supply.
The search for coherence in the governance of global food security should be based on the human
right to food: which actions are consistent with the human right to food and which not, which policies
are coherent and which not, which international agreements are coherent and which not. The human
right to food should bring more consistency and soundness to the governance of food security at
global, regional, national and household levels.
What is the strategy of the Strategic Framework?
Establishing a strategy means choosing the option that seems more suitable between alternative
solutions. To make fight against hunger more effective, strategic options are also required. Although
being important, the main problem is not food production but distribution and access.
It should be noted in this document that 70% of poor people live in rural areas and are farmers. The
farmer’s economy and way of life has been devalued in the capitalist-consumerist development
model. This is why hunger and food insecurity have such significant impact on farmers (small-scale
farmers).
The model that should be promoted to increase the effectiveness of the fight against hunger is not the
agro-industrial model, which has worsened the status of these populations in the last 25 years,
limiting their access to productive resources and markets. The alternative is smallholder farming, with
a clear agro-ecological approach that gives priority to farmer families feeding. This strategic choice
should be reflected clearly and decidedly in the GSF.
The fight against hunger requires giving priority to the attention to smallholder farmers and fishermen,
women and other vulnerable groups. In this sense, as noted in the Voluntary Guidelines for the
progressive realization of human right to adequate food, specifically Guideline 8, the access to the
necessary resources for a sustainable, safe and non discriminatory production is very important. This
guideline provides interesting ideas about the importance of access to resources, especially regarding
the access to employment, land, and water, the protection of genetic resources for food and
agriculture, the ecological sustainability approach that States should foster and the access to services
for rural population (research, extension, education/training, microcredit, energy, marketing ...).
Different food security levels
The global reality of the food crisis can lead to a worldwide macro-analysis – very important and
necessary - of both causes and consequences. In addition, in the GSF annotated outline several
103
Proceedings | 10
4
observations are included regarding the importance of working at the national level, providing
guidance to countries for effective national food security governance.
It is very important that the basic concern is not limited to national food security, that is, trying to
ensure that average available calories per capita per day is above the minimum level, but also
involves household food security, taking care of the concrete situation of each vulnerable population
group rather than national averages. It is essential that the GSF guides the States in the identification
of the causes of vulnerability of people and /or groups who have worsened, or are in serious risk of
worsening, their food security due to the crisis. We need to identify who are the hungry and why, both
at national and household food security levels, and remove the conditions that generate the
vulnerability.
At the operational level and when working to reduce the number of hungry persons step by step, a
contextualized perspective of the local reality and specificities of different regions, provinces,
populations and ethnic groups, is required, identifying in each case the main causes of their food
insecurity and designing accordingly the most appropriate medium and long term strategies. The
national offices or branches of UN specialized agencies, especially FAO, should be an important
partner for each State that requires this diagnosis and strategy work.
The GSF should also promote that diagnoses made at national, provincial and local levels are readily
available for all development agencies, including civil society organizations, so that their activities can
converge with the needs and problems that have been identified. The concern about nutrition, which
is also featured in the GSF, directs the food security approach adopted in a certain way, and involves
going beyond access to food, and also worrying about the life conditions, access to water, sanitation,
health services, and healthy environment. This multisectoral approach should be complemented by
the promotion of nutrition, health, sanitation, etc. education guidelines for priority groups, those most
affected by malnutrition: small farmers, agricultural workers, rural women, etc.
Agrofuels
The production of agrofuels and the introduction of energetic production shares should be analyzed
with utmost caution, not only to see when are they positive from a energetic efficiency point of view
(some studies have concluded that, in certain cases, the production of biofuels consumes more
energy than it generates) or an environmental perspective (really contributing to emissions reduction
and not causing land degradation), but also from a social point of view (no negative impact on the
right to food and food security of vulnerable populations).
Under no circumstance should the energetic percentage provided by biofuels jeopardize the
guarantee of the right to food, both in producers and importing countries; this is one of the aspects for
which an international consensus should be reached.
Countries that currently require biofuels cannot ignore the consequences that their demand has on
the competition for productive resources, especially land and water in developing countries. In its
current form, the production of biofuels will not result in the energetic independence of those countries
that provide feedstock and, at the same time, will have a negative impact on food security of
vulnerable populations. The GSF should also put the spotlight on this issue, as one of the possible
causes of the food crisis.
Trade and financial speculation
104
Proceedings | 10
5
The experience of the 2007-2008 food crisis has shown that food is not an ordinary commodity. First,
it is the mean to guarantee the human right to food, to satisfy a basic need for human life. Due to this
key role, its trade and related financial investments should be subject to a special regulation that puts
the guarantee of food security before the pursuit of economic profit. The 2007-2008 crisis has shown
that the market is not an adequate institution to automatically regulate food trade.
A major problem of the agricultural commodities market is the dependency of price volatility on a few
key products, not due to its nutritional characteristics but to its industrial capacity. This commercial
interest displaces certain crops that could meet the food needs of the developing countries population
and improve the diet of hungry people. This way, the pair agriculture-food is uncoupled, creating a
new relationship agriculture-industry and leaving people behind.
The GSF should take into account the trade and financial aspects of food insecurity.
78) Aruna Sharm, National Human Rights Commission, India
Having worked in the sector for long, would like to put the following issues in the Global Strategic
Framework:
1. The focus to be on what and how to do for each of the country: enhancing the productivity of small
and marginal farmers, intervention for mal-nutrition.
2. Mal-nutrition to be major focus as the intervention is not just food alone, hence just food security is
not the solution, it needs systematic efforts.
3. A holistic approach: convergence of catching adolascent girl on her health, nutrition related issue,
child birth and monitoring child at early 5-10 years. That requires converging no just food secruity
issue but also convergence with health interventions.
4. Time has come to devote a complete chapter on micro-level plan than just macro level policies.
I will be happy to offer draft chapter on point 4 if so agreed upon.
Regards,
Dr Aruna Sharma
79) Aftab Alam Khan, ActionAid International
Overall this is a good outline as it includes various key issues ActionAid and other CSOs are working
on. The key areas that need improvements improvements are; a) bringing in the issues and options
faced by sectors/groups like fisherfolks, indigenous peoples, forest dwellers, agricultural laborers,
consumers etc b) lack of coherence in the document ..it mentions environmental sustainable
agriculture, role of women etc but such important points are not reflected well in investment in
agriculture, research and development etc c) the role of donors and governments is very weak
regarding investment in agriculture d) the role of regional institutions/blocks is not reflected properly
105
Proceedings | 10
6
for such an important framework. The annotated outline of the Global Strategic Framework is
comprised of six sections in addition to a page on background. This seven-page document is a good
beginning of process on GSF. However, there are numerous areas that need to be incorporated
under respective sections.
1. RATIONALE, PURPOSE AND FUNCTION The purpose of the GSF should be clearly linked to
regional bodies, donors and a stronger mandate. Hence should add a) prioritization of food security
and related matters in the regional blocks and forums b) alignment of donor governments and
agencies and c) a stronger mandate for GSF implementation compared to just ‘encourage the
adoptation’.
2. LONGTERM CHALLENGES AND STRUCTURAL CAUSES The 2nd section on challenges the
document should add other issues that are linked to food insecurity and malnutrition such as a)
biofuel b) speculation c) inequitable food distribution at household level. The outline mainly focuses
on agronomic activities and some mention of livestock but completely missed out other crucial sectors
such as pastoralists, fisherfolks, indigenous people, forest dwellers, and agricultural workers. The
issues and problems of these sectors should also be added to the outline.
3. PRIORITY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED This section highlights the following nine areas as priority
issues. Under investment in agriculture …the following points should be added. The issues of lack of
investment in sustainable smallholder agriculture. Lack of focus on women agriculture through
reorientation of research, extension, credit banks, academic and other relevant institutions. Uniformity
in agricultural subsidies .. This point should be changed to unjust/inappropriate trade agreements to
include the wider impacts of trade agreements and trade policies. This section should add other
important matters into PRIORITY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED areas such as; a) climate change
impact on food security..including impacts of floods, droughts, erratic rains and extreme weather, b)
biofuels, speculation, c) lack of investment in rural development, d) lack of the participation of
vulnerable stakeholders in the policy making and implementation process. The section should also
add the problems faced by pastoralists, indigenous people, livestock farmers, fisherfolks. Forest
dwellers etc. It should also include insufficient funds available from donor countries /institutions to
enhance food security.
4. POLICY OPTIONS
This section refers to Voluntary Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of the Right to
Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security, The FAO Anti- Hunger Programme etc for
guidance for the GSF. We suggest to include other important treaties like International Treaty on Plant
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture etc for guiding GSF. The section needs addition of
following points under policy responses in the GSF: 1. A rights-based approach This point needs
further clarity. Instead of keeping it open there should be tangible and legally binding policy changes
and institutional development at regional and national level based on peoples right to food. 2.
Research and development This point should add a focus on sustainable agriculture and a research
and development and extension focus on smallholder women needs. 3. Strengthened trading systems
This should be changed to appropriate and just trade agreements at international, regional and
bilateral levels. Such agreements should respect the vulnerabilities of poor countries. 4. Investment in
agriculture It states that majority of the investment will come form farmers themselves. Farmers
despite limited resources will contribute to the production but donors and governments have to take a
much bigger share particularly when we are talking about agrarian reforms, research and
development and extension, rural development and infrastructure and developing climate resilient
106
Proceedings | 10
7
sustainable agriculture system. Hence the role of donors and government in investment should be
highlighted. The investment agriculture should be focused on smallholder sustainable agriculture.
Besides following policy options should be added to the GSF outline. • At national level governments
should enshrine right to food in their constitutions followed by relevant policies and institutions that
coordinate the food security related matters with other departments and ministries. • Strengthening
the capacities of vulnerable groups creating spaces for them to participate in policymaking and
implementation processes. • Specific policy changes for other sectors/groups like consumers,
fisherfolks, pastoralists, and indigenous people, forest dwellers. • The role of regional bodies such as
CAADP, SAARC, ASEAN, MERCOSUR etc should be enhanced for regional food security plans. •
Food reserves at regional and national level should be promoted to address the issues of food
insecurity
5. MONITORING PROGRESS TOWARDS OBJECTIVES AT COUNTRY LEVEL Instead of restricting
monitoring at country level it should be applied at all levels. The CFS should develop all-inclusive
mechanism for such monitoring at international, regional and national level.
80) Cecilia Murcia G., Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, Colombia
Good morning: One of the things to keep in mind the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), is a
policy of protection of fertile land threatened by mining, expansion of the urban frontier and production
practices without control and protection. These economic activities burning and felling trees, are
destroying greats extentions of forests , therefore this exposure of the soil to rain and sun is being
desertified the soil . Another problem of this economics practices is the use of toxics that integrated
into food chains that are a dangerous for the food security and health of communities.
Good work
Cecilia Murcia G.
Docente
81) Dr. Aruna Sharma, Government of Madhya Pradesh, India
Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition Online Consultation on the CFS Global Strategic
Framework 26th of August to the 15th of October 2011 Comments from Dr Aruna Sharma Principal
Secretary, Rural Development, Govt. Of Madhya Pradesh, India The debate and the focus on food
security and nutrition need to have paradigm shift on management of food available than drift to
productivity. Production and increase in productivity is of course very important but what is painful that
the food available itself is not properly reaching who need it most. India that contributes a high
percentage to children with malnutrition and poverty, if the access is increased that may have better
impact and visible change. Thus, my argument is CFS Global Strategic Framework focus on ‘gaining
access’ than ‘having access’. To distinguish the two, food grains, health care, knowledge, awareness
is being available i.e. technically the vulnerable groups do have access but there are definitely some
barriers that prevent them in gaining that access. Thus, the focus of the Global Strategic Framework
is to be how to ensure ‘gaining of access’ by the vulnerable groups. This can turn to a reality by
following the following steps meticulously
107
Proceedings | 10
8
1. Listing out mechanism to identify the barriers that prevent gaining access to the food, health care
that is already available. As underutilization of provisioning done is more a challenge than creating
more and more provisioning. The study for a country is therefore to list out the barriers. It could be in
terms of social behavioural patterns in terms of the way the food is cooked that lessens nutrition
content to that of psychological barriers in change of practices like breast feeding of child immediately
after birth. These are just two illustrations. The focus of strategy to be in first of all complete utilization
of food and health care that is available.
2. The second step is then to converge all the interventions listed to ensure to come out of
malnutrition trap. Technically, it not being a one shot intervention makes it all the more important that
the micro level plan and monitoring is important factor of the global strategy. That would require
catching women right from the adolescent stage to the time she marries, gives child birth, and child is
above the age of 10years. Even here in the micro level planning is important to handhold every case
than macro statistics. In Global strategy if we mean business then the need is to identify reasons for
high level of anaemia among adolescent girls, and then each area and if need be individual to be
shifted from ‘having’ to ‘gaining’ access to the interventions.
3. If debated and agreed upon I can attempt a full chapter on the issue that can be a part of the CFS
Global Strategic Framework as in macro listing detailing gets lost and the result of the provisioning
already made is not optimal. Thus, I would strongly argue for focusing on optimization of provisioning
already made and available and not just on adding more and more of provisioning in terms of finance
and food.
82) Mike Brady, Baby Milk Action - UK member of the International Baby Food Action
Network, United Kingdom
As a general comment, I am surprised to find nothing in the GSF regarding the importance of
breastfeeding, the need to ensure breastmilk substitutes are marketed appropriately and the
appropriate introduction of complementary foods and hope this can be addressed. I hope the
following information will be useful for this purpose. There is no food that is more sustainable and
environmentally friendly than breastmilk. Its method of delivery involves zero food miles and pollution.
Breastmilk is medicinal as well as nutritional, protecting the infant against infection. A child that is not
breastfed is up to 25 times more likely to die during its first months of life according to WHO.
Improving breastfeeding is THE most effective preventative health intervention for preventing under-5
deaths, according to a Lancet/WHO analysis. Breastfeeding also reduces health inequalities as during
the first 6 months when a child needs no other food than breastmilk, the infant can receive optimum
nutrition, whether the child of a millionaire or of a slum dweller. At the same time breastfeeding is
under attack by highly resourced transnational corporations that are seeking to grow the market for
breastmilk substitutes. The International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) monitors the industry
around the world and documents systematic violations by the leadging companies. Although there
has been much progress in introducing legislation to prevent aggressive marketing, this is far from
universal and that in place is under threat. Industry analysts Euromonitor commented in its 2008
assessment of the global industry “There are significant international variations in the regulations
governing the marketing of milk formula, which are reflected in sales differences across countries.”
and “The industry is fighting a rearguard action against regulation on a country-by-country basis.”
See: http://info.babymilkaction.org/update/update42page6 The Lancet Child Survival series stated in
its paper “How many child deaths can we prevent this year?” that improved breastfeeding practices
108
Proceedings | 10
9
could prevent 13% of under-5 deaths in the 42 countries where most of these occur, making
breastfeeding the most effective preventative health intervention (above universal provision of
adequate sanitation and safe water, for example) and 6% of under-5 deaths could be prevented by
appropriate introduction of complementary foods. This is available on the WHO site at:
http://www.who.int/child_adolescent_health/documents/pdfs/lancet_child_survival_prevent_deaths.pdf
The Global Strategy on Infant and Young Child Feeding - which should surely be referenced by the
GSF - states: "Breastfeeding is an unequalled way of providing ideal food for the healthy growth and
development of infants; it is also an integral part of the reproductive process with important
implications for the health of mothers. As a global public health recommendation, infants should be
exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life to achieve optimal growth, development and health.
Thereafter, to meet their evolving nutritional requirements, infants should receive nutritionally
adequate and safe complementary foods while breastfeeding continues for up to two years of age or
beyond. Exclusive breastfeeding from birth is possible except for a few medical conditions, and
unrestricted exclusive breastfeeding results in ample milk production." Inappropriate marketing of
breastmilk substitutes, feeding bottles and teats, and complementary foods, is a key obstacle to
improving breastfeeding rates. UNICEF has stated: “Improved breastfeeding practices and reduction
of artificial feeding could save an estimated 1.5 million children a year." To protect breastfeeding and
to ensure breastmilk substitutes are used safely when needed, the World Health Assembly introduced
the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in 1981, and has adopted subsequent
relevant Resolutions addressing changes in scientific knowledge and marketing practices and
addressing questions of interpretation. The International Code and Resolutions should also surely be
referenced as part of the GSF and consideration given to including independent monitoring of the
state of implementation of these measures and adherence to them by the baby food and bottle and
teat industries. The International Code states in Article 11.3 that: “Independently of any other
measures taken for implementation of this Code, manufacturers and distributors of products within the
scope of this Code should regard themselves as responsible for monitoring their marketing practices
according to the principles and aim of this Code, and for taking steps to ensure that their conduct at
every level conforms to them.” At an international level, much more needs to be done to provide
protection when national measures have not been put in place and to encourage national action and
this is perhaps something that can be considered within the GSF. The UN Global Compact and the
OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises have both been proven to be ineffective when
complaints have been made regarding violations of their principles/guidelines, which are relevant to
the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. Detailed proposals for a more effective
framework is contained in a book produced by a Task Force of the UN System Standing Committee
on Nutrition looking at Global Obligations for the Right to Food (for which I authored the chapter on
Holding Corporations Accountable):
http://www.rowmanlittlefield.com/Catalog/Flyer2.shtml?SKU=0742560627 As the GSF is taking a
rights-based approach, it is relevant to recall that breastfeeding is specifically mentioned in Article 24
of the Conventions of the Rights of the Child and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has
called in many of its reports on government compliance with the Convention for the International Code
and Resolutions to be implemented in national measures where this has not yet been done or not
been done fully. As a final consideration, attention needs to be given in the GSF to conflicts of interest
to ensure that policies and programmes are developed with health having priority. A coalition of over
140 civil society organisations and networks has developed a statement on conflicts of interest, which
is available at: http://coicoalition.blogspot.com/2011/09/coi-coalition-statement.html This includes the
following: “The policy development stage should be free from industry involvement to ensure a “health
in all policies” approach, which is not compromised by the obvious conflicts of interests associated
with food, alcohol, beverage and other industries, that are primarily answerable to shareholders.
109
Proceedings | 11
0
“These industries should, of course, be kept informed about policy development, through stakeholder
briefings for example, but should not be in an influencing position when it comes to setting policy and
strategies for addressing public health issues, such as Non-Communicable Disease prevention and
control. “While it is important for these industries to be in dialogue during the policy development
process, this should be as a means of informing the process relating to practical issues rather than as
members of the policy development team.” Many thanks for the opportunity to comment and my
apologies for not framing the above points more directly as responses to the numbered questions.
However, I hope they can be considered so that the importance of the protection, promotion and
support of breastfeeding can run through the different sections of the document. The issue of conflicts
of interest, the independence of policy formation and the need to reform or replace the UN Global
Compact and OECD Guidelines is particularly relevance to the section on "Improving governance of
food security and nutrition at all levels".
Mike Brady
Campaigns and Networking Coordinator
Baby Milk Action
83) Wenche Barth Eide, University of Oslo/International Project on the Right to Food in
Development (IPRFD), Norway
On the final day open for comments to the Annotated Outline for the CFS Global Strategic Framework
for Food Security and Nutrition, I shall focus on the call for specific contributions regarding the use of
"the right to food as a framework for the design, implementation and evaluation of national laws,
policies and programmes be included in the GSF, particularly examples from the local level". A brief
review of the proceedings of the on-line consultation shows that only a limited numbers of
commentators have referred to the right to food and rights based approaches to food security and
nutrition as a basis for the CFS Strategy, and an even smaller number has dealt with this in any detail
(see especially contributions 69 and 73). To me this in part reflects that we are still a long way from a
common awareness and knowledge about what a human rights approach is and how it can be applied
in food security/dietary/nutrition strategies and policies, as well as, not least, social mobilization and
change efforts at the grassroots. This is not so surprising taking into account the long and
cumbersome path over the last 20-30 years to bring human rights to the development agenda and in
particular the rights to food, water, and health. This work is still in the making when it comes to getting
human rights considerations, beyond rhetoric, into some of the various global reports and strategies
dealing with food, nutrition and related themes these days. We see a large variation here, and the
CFS should therefore be commended to give it an opening that now needs to be filled with more
details. I therefore endorse those (few) contributions to this online consultation that have brought it up
and in particular those mentioned above which provide detailed suggestions for what could be
included and where in the document. Here I wish to underline two aspects: one regarding the urgent
need for both specialist and broader capacity building in the field of economic, social and cultural
rights as the basis for economic, social and human development; the other on the need to establish
mechanisms for accountability assessments, which should be at the core of human rights based
approaches to development especially in States that have ratified the relevant international human
rights binding conventions, which are now the majority. Capacity building Personal experience from
many years both in academic training and research on the matter and from having been involved with
various other hats as well over the years (governmental/advisory, UN and CSO/NGO) in the
promotion of the right to adequate food as a human right, has confirmed that developing capacity for
110
Proceedings | 11
1
dealing with human rights instruments and tools need a focused willingness to learn the basic
language of human rights. This is not an insurmountable task, and not least FAO has contributed
significantly to making that language available to anyone interested through its introductory,
interactive web-based course on the right to food, besides offering a comprehensive Right to Food
Toolbox. The GSF should highlight this; e.g. even a footnote reference should be feasible and useful,
and could as desirable also add other resources for knowledge about human rights/right to food to
help those who are committed to explore human rights as a basis for the strategy and specific policies
but who lack knowledge about what would be implied. As an academic I would also urge universities
where new knowledge tends to be “legitimized”, to broaden their agricultural/food security/nutrition
relevant training programmes to include basic training in human rights/the right to food and the right to
health. Such institutions produce those who will engage in policymaking and implementation of the
plans and actions that should follow from the GSF! As an example, in Norway two academic
institutions together with two African universities are currently trying out a two year master degree
model combining “Nutrition, Human Rights and Governance”. So far the responses of the participants
have been very positive as they recognize the opportunity to think and address differently their earlier
and future work, in the public sector or otherwise, and we urge other higher learning institutions to
embark on similar ventures. Accountability mechanisms My second point takes its most recent
inspiration from another global strategy: the Global Strategy on Women’s and Children’s Health which
was launched by the UN Secretary General in New York in September 2010. It is very relevant to the
work with the CFS Global Strategy Framework: not only is it clearly nutrition-focused where relevant,
is has also explicit references to human rights, and herein the need for specific attention to
accountability. Its recommendation for the establishment of a Commission on Accountability for
Women’s and Children’s Health was implemented in January 2011, when also two working groups
were set up – one on “accountability for results” and on “accountability for resources”. Their reports
were digested and combined in the full Commission’s report in April 2011, which represents a
breakthrough in the efforts to put accountability on the development agenda. Its recommendations
should be tabled and discussed by the CFS as a model that can, with the necessary adjustments,
equally well serve the GSF in its further deliberations based on human rights norms, principles and
procedures. It may even move the further work with the SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition) Document and
Roadmap to finally see a human rights based approach to nutrition strategies and policies as an
opportunity, rather than being something that still, in 2011, tends to be undermined by some
international actors, such as the World Bank and maybe some country signatories to it A last note: I
particularly appreciate the definitions at the end of the outline, of food security and nutrition security,
respectively. Am glad to see that ‘social’ has now been included in the nuancing of ‘access’ in the
former (an advancement from the WFS 1996’s definition), furthermore the definition of nutrition
security here makes up for the deplorable omission of a similar proposed text in the introductory basic
premises for General Comment No 12 on The Right to Adequate Food in 1999. It makes it easier for
all to see the linkages between ‘food’ and ‘nutrition’, especially through the intermediaries of ‘dietary
diversity’ as eloquently highlighted from Bioversity (contribution 48), which also facilitates the linkages
to environmental and climate changes as determinants in changing food security conditions and their
implications for nutritional health. The announced fuller glossary could perhaps give rise to further
stakeholder discussions (online?) on other nuances that could be given an uplift by the CFS.
84) Michael Appleby, World Society for the Protection of Animals , United Kingdom
The World Society for Protection of Animals (which has offices worldwide and member societies in
over 150 countries) would like to contribute to the consultation on the CFS Global Strategic
111
Proceedings | 11
2
Framework for Food Security and Nutrition by commenting that it needs to give careful consideration
to the strategies adopted within agriculture for food provision. In particular, for both food security and
other aspects of sustainability, an appropriate balance is needed between livestock and arable
farming, and appropriate methods are needed for both, adjusted to the needs of the countries and
people concerned, the environment and the animals. This issue is perhaps most readily included
under Question 3 on additional issues to be considered. However, agricultural strategies (including
allocation of resources, support for different sectors, and movement of food nationally and
internationally) are clearly also relevant to Question 2 on structural causes of food insecurity and to
Question 4 on policy options that should be considered. One of the key issues in food security is, of
course, availability of protein. As part of that, meat and animal products are important in people’s
diets. However, that does not mean that either the current, rapid increase in animal production, or the
methods being used to accomplish this, are ideal or even beneficial for reduction of hunger and
poverty or achievement of food security. Animal production is an inefficient method for feeding people
compared to crops, in use of energy, water, land and other resources. However, livestock may be a
good use for marginal land and vegetation that cannot be used for arable production. Yet much of the
current increase in animal production, in many countries, is in large, intensive farms. These do not
usually contribute to food security: the meat they produce is too expensive for the really poor and
hungry, and such giant farms destroy the job structure and social stability of agriculture-based
societies. Food-poor countries should also be wary of donations or exports of ‘cheap food’ from
developed countries (only apparently cheap, because of subsidies), that undermine the ability of local
farmers to feed their own country’s people. Food security is best achieved by growing food on a local
basis. For example, if people in rural areas are short of food, it is beneficial in the long-term to
promote food production in those areas rather than elsewhere with transport required. If farms are
fairly small, complex infrastructure is not needed and people can be helped to look after their animals
well and productively, feeding themselves and their communities and also earning some income.
Intergovernmental organisations are recognising the contributions of animal care and animal welfare
to economics and to poverty and hunger reduction, as well as to environmental sustainability. For
example, the International Finance Corporation, part of the World Bank Group, has issued two
relevant publications: Creating business opportunity through improved animal welfare and Animal
welfare in livestock operations. Livestock contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gas production
(as indicated by FAO), so the current acceleration in meat and milk production cannot continue
unchecked. For sustainable agriculture, livestock numbers will have to be restricted and efficiency will
have to be increased in all countries. This is not saying that poor or malnourished people should be
further disadvantaged. It is often the case that a modest increase in consumption of animal products
by the poorest people is the best way to improve their nutrition. Where this is true, it should be
facilitated, and offset by greater reductions in consumption by those better off and better fed.
Research is urgently needed to enable design of policies that reduce (or slow the increase in) meat
consumption by people who consume more than others, while not causing hardship to poor or
malnourished people in either developed or developing countries. Livestock have an important part to
play in food security and nutrition for people in all countries. However, serious planning is needed to
determine the appropriate prioritisation of protein production from animal and other sources, and to
develop sustainable methods to achieve that.
85) Shah-I-Mobin Jinnah, Community Development Association, Bangladesh
Greetings from Community Development Association.
112
Proceedings | 11
3
We would like to thank CFS by taking these initiatives and to giving us opportunity to send our
comments. We believe that CFS shall become successful in this mission to achieving world food
security and nutrition.
We agree with the purpose, rationale and function of the GSF and we desire that should be
implemented by national level.
We think another structural cause that should be discussed in this strategy is:



The mass of the land is still in the hands of a few rich people and they are not related with
agriculture directly. But the role of rural poor farmers in agriculture is enormous. The poor
farmers in the rural areas have no land in their own and also they cannot fight food insecurity
on their own. The tendency of rich people is to control poor farmers and make more profit
from them. This issue is directly impact food security.
Besides, women less participation also vital issue. Agriculture policy is not favorable for
women in developing countries. Women are neglected, deprived and victim of inequality. It is
very important to equal participation otherwise agriculture sector never provide food security.
Also the free market system which is controlled by the control of commercialize group, profit
oriented multinational companies, lack of employment guarantee, Irregular & uncertainty in
the social sefetynets, lack of planning in the eyes of economic human rights, lack of income
possibility, are the structural weaknesses regarding both nutrition and food security also.
CFS should give attention on sustainable agriculture as it is very much connected with food security.
The food security agenda should focus on sustainable agriculture system where community people
optimize the use of resources using traditional and modern science for their own food security and
enhance quality of life for present and future generations. CFS should take initiative to promote
sustainable agricultural practices, preservation of traditional wisdom and knowledge, promotion of
biodiversity, protection of farmers from unfair market competition which effect food security to a great
extent.
Legal system and social practice need to be focus to ensure food security to women. Land property is
the best resource to ensure food security. Land is the best alternatives for women. Women are
depriving from land rights in socially and family level because of the mistake of these so called
traditional development strategy.GSF should give priority to make a significant change by providing
equal rights to women so that women also can access to the agriculture system and ensure food
security and nutrition.
Food security is not only to meet the nutritional need, but also have to ensure a healthy life. At the
moment the world’s food supply is in a very critical situation. Multinational companies are interested
for the establishment of their crop diversification, agricultural pricing policy and its distributive
implications. They want to capture market by their product. Multinational companies are promoting
Chemical Agriculture Method in developing countries. They are importing high yielding variety (HYV),
pesticides and other agricultural inputs. The modern method known as the "Green Revolution
Strategy" came into developing countries as a package deal consisting of high yielding seeds,
chemical fertilizers, and different types of pesticides and irrigation. And because the term "HYV" mean
a "miracle" boom of production, the government conducted a massive campaign promoting the HYV
technology among the farmers, believing that this could be the solving way that would remove food
insufficiency. In this way the multinational companies control over the developing countries. The use
of chemical fertilizer is not sustainable because it has negative effects on the people and
113
Proceedings | 11
4
environment. But food security means when we provide healthy food for the people. But
commercialization of agriculture never ensures peoples sufficient, safe and healthy life. GSF should
provide guidance about this matter to the Government.
I hope the participation prove helpful to the framework.
Best Regards
Community Development Association
Dinajpur
Bangladesh
86) Secretaria Nacional de Planificacion y Desarrollo del Ecuador Desarrollo del
Ecuador, SENPLADES, Ecuador
Introducción: En apego a las funciones del Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria (CFS), se pretende
enriquecer sus objetivos y planes de acción hasta la reunión que se llevara a cabo en octubre de
2012. La Secretaria Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo, en el marco de sus competencias,
elaboró un Plan Nacional de Desarrollo, donde alineado a lo que determina la Constitución, recoge
varios factores que intervienen en garantizar la soberanía alimentaria y nutrición del pueblo
ecuatoriano. El análisis planteado en los objetivos del PNBV 2009 – 2013 trata de acercar al Ecuador
al desarrollo pleno y sustentable, de su pueblo y economía. Y busca gestionar algunos problemas
sociales, ambientales, económicos y estructurales que impiden el pleno goce de los derechos de
soberanía alimentaria y nutrición del país. En consecución la Constitución del Ecuador y el PNBV
2009 – 2013 se acercan a los lineamientos de los tratados internacionales y Objetivos del Milenio.
Que garantice el acceso universal a alimentos inocuos, disminución de barreras género, etarios,
movilidad y económicos a los alimentos, como garantías y bases para la construcción de un estado
mas incluyente, equitativo y democrático.
1.¿Están claramente definidos el fundamento, objetivos y función del GSF, y en caso contrario, que
cambios específicos sugiere?
Es importante que las recomendaciones que se desprendan de la GSF, se enmarquen con el Marco
Normativo de más alto rango de jerarquía de los países miembros. Tarea ardua para el CFS, pero lo
más importante y como resultado a esto, la coordinación entre los estados para ejecutar planes de
acción entre países bajo un mismo sesgo o tipo de problema de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición
puede mejorar significativamente el aporte del GSF, contemplar en sus políticas y proyectos el apoyo
a países que comparten el mismo tipo de amenaza. Aunque la intención del CSF es dar fuerza a los
tratados internacionales de alimentación y desarrollo rural; es necesario que se de la fuerza
suficiente a las recomendaciones del CSF para que los estudios, investigaciones y propuestas del
GSF se puedan efectivizar en las políticas y programas de cada país. 1. Erradicación sostenible del
hambre y malnutrición.- “El Estado promoverá la soberanía alimentaria1” por ejemplo con la
promoción de tecnologías limpias o energías alternativas, sin poner en riesgo la soberanía
alimentaria en consecución de la soberanía y desarrollo energético. Además de prohibir varias
practicas de producción contaminante y comercialización de organismos que atenten a la producción
de alimentos inocuos. El CSF debe impulsar sus políticas desde las enmarcadas en el constituir a la
soberanía alimentaria como un objetivo estratégico y obligación del Estado para garantizar la
114
Proceedings | 11
5
autosuficiencia de alimentos sanos y culturalmente apropiados. Dentro de cómo lo estipula los
lineamientos del CSF hacerlo bajo los marco existentes coherentes y respetando los planes propios y
acuerdos internacionales suscritos.
2.¿Existen causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y desafíos adicionales
a largo plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta y cuáles cree que son los más relevantes?
Los desafíos más importantes a los que se enfrenta la seguridad alimentaria mundial son la
producción y transformación de agroalimentaria inocua. Por lo que los estados deben prestar
atención al desarrollo de sus sectores agrícolas, pero como lo plantea el PNBV del Ecuador con una
visión de economía social y solidaria. La información que se maneje, traspaso y acceso, entre los
países de los diferentes programas nacionales e impulsados por la FAO en el sector de la agricultura
y alimentos, es vital para enfrentar los desafíos, generar oportunidades y obtener los resultados, que
en los objetivos del GSF se establece. Sin duda el manejo que se le de a la información permitirá
generar un marco metodológico común para desarrollar políticas que converjan entre sí y con los
Objetivos del Milenios y enfoques de igualdad y derechos humanos que la ONU promueve. Las
causas para la falta de una garantía nacional o mundial de la soberanía alimentaria y acceso a
alimentos de calidad han sido varias veces debatidas en las reuniones de la FAO, incluso se ha
llegado a topar temas como las energías renovables como una de las causantes del alza de precios
en los alimentos como consecuencia a un cambio de uso de suelo desmedido y poco sustentable.
Los lineamientos y propuestas por parte del CSF sobre derechos de propiedad, institucionalidad
eficiente e inclusiva y diversificación de medios de producción pueden ser de gran ayuda para los
estados al momento de referir sus políticas y actualizar sus normativas e instituciones. Pero también
es importante desarrollar mecanismos que acerquen a los mercados locales a los centros urbanos y
de comercio nacionales. Para generar una demanda interna de los estados que impulse sus propios
productos agrícolas, bajo principios de equidad y respeto a las diversas identidades y tradiciones
culturales gastronómicas. Además de Generar sistemas justos y solidarios de distribución y
comercialización de alimentos. Con el fin de impedir prácticas monopólicas y el efecto dumping en las
economías más vulnerables El tema de distribución y acceso a los recursos es importante para
garantizar la sustentabilidad de la producción agrícola saludable, con un efecto cadena, si se da
internacionalmente un impulso al manejo y producción de las tierras a las mujeres. Algunas veces
son comunidades donde por problemas sociales los hombres han debido desplazarse a las grandes
ciudades o incluso a otros países, pero sin dejar a las mujeres el poder de decidir, participar e
innovar en la producción de sus tierras. Desde un enfoque de género, etario y de inclusión se podría
abordar la viabilidad en la resolución de problemas de desnutrición infantil, impactos ambientales,
abandono de tierras, baja de productividad agrícola. La coordinación entre las diferentes políticas,
agrícolas, sociales, ambientales, económicas y de infraestructura, bajo la participación social es una
herramienta para desarrollar una Gobernanza de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición mundial
coherente y eficiente. Es importante que la participación del CSF en el comercio y producción de
alimentos mundial no se limite a lineamientos y recomendaciones, es importante crear espacios de
debate mayores e impulsar programas e ideas que generen condiciones de competencia perfecta,
minimizando el impacto que genera el dumping en las economías rurales y en el comercio de
alimentos de los países. Es decir cómo se establece en los documentos de la FAO impulsar la
producción de alimentos a razón de la competitividad y ventajas comparativas propias de cada
región.
115
Proceedings | 11
6
3.¿Existen cuestiones adicionales que deben ser consideradas, y cuáles cree que son las más
importantes para ser incluidas por el GSF? 4. ¿Hay opciones adicionales de políticas que deben ser
tomadas en cuenta, y cuáles de ellas cree que deben ser incluidas por el GSF?
Los temas adicionales que el GSF podría considerar, van ligadas a las políticas adicionales a ser
tomadas en cuenta. Como se dijo el enfoque de género y programas antidiscriminatorias para el
acceso a las tierras, tratar de cambiar los hábitos mundiales de consumo de alimentos, no podemos
definir a la soberanía alimentaria el acceso a alimentos y su diversidad cuando existen cierto tipo de
cultivos estacionales, a los que no podemos tener acceso durante todo el año. De aquí debe surgir a
debate la idea de la función social y ambiental de la tierra, no solo como un input productivo que
como a de lugar maximice el beneficio del terrateniente y sean solo las parcelas, tierras marginales o
de difícil acceso las que calmen de alguna la sed de equidad y bienestar económico de los
campesinos. Los instrumentos, ideas, recomendaciones del CSF que enriquezcan las políticas y
programas de manejo de los sistemas de riego de los países, puede ser bajo una visión holística, que
sea un manejo sustentable, integral, no discriminatorio y anteponiendo el consumo humano ante
cualquier otro uso alterno del recurso hídrico, para asegurar su disponibilidad en cantidad y calidad
para garantizar la soberanía alimentaria. El cambio climático es un tema que está en la mesa en la
mayoría de los gobiernos del mundo, se busca mecanismos que ayuden adaptar la producción de
alimentos a la serie de fenómenos climáticos que causan la perdida de grandes volúmenes de
producción agrícola, especulación y el incremento de los precios de los alimentos. El GSF podría
recopilar experiencias, posiciones y estudios que impulsen programas de adaptación a las
alteraciones climáticas, con énfasis en aquellos vinculadas con la soberanía alimentaria.
5. En relación al seguimiento del progreso hacia los objetivos de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición a
todos los niveles (nacional, regional, mundial), ¿qué tipo de orientación debería aportar el GSF, y a
quién? El aporte del CSF a través del GSF, al ser parte de u organismo internacional se esperaría
que llegue de manera directa a los gobiernos nacionales, para generar programas con los gobiernos
locales para las comunidades rurales y sectores vulnerables. Para asumir el reto de crear un Marco
Estratégico Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición, se deben evaluar y desarrollar
condiciones productivas necesarias, por ejemplo fomentar la pesca artesanal, protección de las
reservas de alimentos, recuperación de ecosistemas, conversión monocultivos dirigidos a la
exportación a cultivos para la producción y comercio interno, potencializar las capacidades
productivas y diversidad de alimentos sustentables. Como mecanismos y fin propio que alcanzaría la
reducción de la vulnerabilidad producida por la dependencia externa alimentaria y energética. Sin
dejar de lado la participación de los estados y la manera de buscar respaldo financiero para estos
proyectos, sea de manera interna o con organismos internacionales, sería de gran ayuda contar con
el respaldo de la FAO o del CSF para analizar la viabilidad de cada uno de los programas y su forma
de financiamiento. La atención que se brinde a las pequeñas economías, las políticas y programas
para el cambio de patrones de consumo, el traspaso de tecnología y conocimiento, deben reflejar la
innovación de los mercados, el acceso justo y equitativo a capital fresco que dinamice la producción
agrícola, el desarrollo de tecnologías limpias, que consolide a la agricultura como un motor de
desarrollo y mejore la calidad de vida rural. De la mano con las políticas sociales de cada país para el
abastecimiento de redes de seguridad y protección social que reduzcan la vulnerabilidades a corto y
largo plazo. Por último, creo que la función y objetivos del CSF a través del GSF sería el de
constituirse como una guía y generar procesos que enriquezcan las políticas internas de los países a
garantizar sus soberanía alimentaria sin el detraimiento del impulso de otros países por garantizar su
propia soberanía y seguridad alimentaria. El CSF podría destinar sus acciones a asegurar el
desarrollo de la investigación científica y de la innovación tecnológica apropiada para garantizar la
116
Proceedings | 11
7
soberanía alimentaria. RECOMENDACIONES Y OBSERVACIONES: Definición: Se sugiere tomar en
cuentos estos dos conceptos, con el objeto que los Estados puedan desarrollar sus propias
potencialidades endógenas para generar políticas acordes con sus necesidades. o Soberanía
Alimentaria: Esto es la facultad que tiene un Estado a la definición de sus políticas alimentarias y
agrarias de acuerdo a sus objetivos de desarrollo sostenible. Esto conlleva a la protección de los
productos endógenos contra productos más económicos comercializados internacionalmente.
Adicionalmente, está en contra de la venta por debajo de los costos de producción (dumping). La
constitución de esta medida deja sin efecto la actual propuesta de los mercados agrícolas puesta en
práctica por la OMC. La Constitución del Ecuador: Art. 13.- Las personas y colectividades tienen
derecho al acceso seguro y permanente a alimentos sanos, suficientes y nutritivos; preferentemente
producidos a nivel local y en correspondencia con sus diversas identidades y tradiciones culturales.
“El Estado ecuatoriano promoverá la soberanía alimentaria” De la misma manera el Plan Nacional
para el Buen Vivir 2009-2013; hace referencia como política 1.1. Garantizar los derechos del Buen
Vivir para la superación de todas las desigualdades (en especial salud, educación, alimentación,
agua y vivienda). c. Impulsar el acceso seguro y permanente a alimentos sanos, suficientes y
nutritivos, preferentemente producidos a nivel local, en correspondencia con sus diversas identidades
y tradiciones culturales, promoviendo la educación para la nutrición y la soberanía alimentaria. o
Seguridad Alimentaria: Este concepto radica en el hecho de que todas las personas tienen acceso
físico, social y económico a los alimentos suficientes, inocuos y nutritivos que satisfagan sus
necesidades energéticas. El acceso de alimentos nutritivos y suficientes para la población, se debe
centrar en actividades alternativas a la extracción de recursos naturales, generando actividades
cíclicas y renovables por medio de la producción agroecológica, acuícola etc. El abastecimiento del
mercado con productos cultivados en la misma región/país, generará contrarrestar la dependencia y
vulnerabilidad en lo concerniente a los productos de consumo. La no privatización de grandes
extensiones de suelos por las empresas transnacionales, mismas que pueden conllevar a un
inmenso impacto de desabastecimiento alimenticio (producción de caña de azúcar y maíz para la
producción de biocombustibles). Adicionalmente a esto la Constitución especifica la “prohibición de
latifundios y la concentración de la tierra, así como el acaparamiento o privatización del agua y sus
fuentes “ La contribución de un Estado fuerte y soberano, radica en el control de lo público en
recursos agrarios, infraestructuras estratégicas y fundamentales esto deriva como fuente de riqueza
social. Para Latinoamérica y Africa, es de vital importancia tener una transferencia de tecnología
apropiado a las necesidades internas. Un modelo de cooperación, el cual no ligue la cooperación a
sus propias empresas para su ejecución. En la sección V sobre el Seguimiento del Progreso hacia
los Objetivos a Nivel de País, es importante considerar llegar a un nivel de nutrición por encima del
promedio es así; que el PNBV establece en la Política 2.1. Asegurar una alimentación sana, nutritiva,
natural y con productos del medio para disminuir drásticamente las deficiencias nutricionales. Literal
g. Fortalecer los programas educativos dirigidos a toda la población, relacionados con la calidad
nutricional para fomentar el consumo equilibrado de alimentos sanos y nutritivos. Es importante
señalar quienes serán las instituciones gubernamentales o no, que realizarán el seguimiento y la
evaluación de la estrategia, considerando éste punto, es un indicativo para la rendición de cuentas
que será presenta a la comunidad internacional. La particularidad del Ecuador y el acceso de la
población a los alimentos; radica en el incremento de los precios por parte de los intermediarios, que
encarecen en gran medida los productos primarios. Es importante considerar un manejo más
expedito para realizar el expendio de los productos sin tercearizarlo, esto a llevarse a cabo en los
mercados centrales del país, lo cual reducirá costos y el consumidor final podrá disponer de los
alimentos acorde a sus necesidades a un precio justo.
Atentamente, SENPLADES
117
Proceedings | 11
8
English translation
Introduction: In compliance with the functions of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), the
aim is to enhance its objectives and action plans before the meeting that will be held in October 2012.
The National Secretariat of Planning and Development, within its jurisdiction, developed a National
Development Plan, aligned with the Constitution and containing several factors that ensure the food
sovereignty and nutrition of the Ecuadorians. The analysis is based on the objectives of the PNBV
2009 - 2013 and aims to bring full sustainable development, to Ecuador, to its citizens and to its
economy. And it seeks managing several social, environmental, economic and structural problems
that impede the full enjoyment of food sovereignty and nutrition rights of the country. Therefore, the
Constitution of Ecuador and the PNBV 2009 - 2013 have similar guidelines as international treaties
and the Millennium Goals. Ensuring universal access to safe food, eradicating gender, age, mobility
and economic barriers to food, as guarantees and foundations for building a more inclusive, equitable
and democratic State.
1. It is important that the GSF recommendations are framed within the policy framework of highest
hierarchic range in the member countries. An arduous task for the CFS, but more importantly and as a
consequence of this, the coordination between states to implement the action plans between the
countries with similar food security and nutrition problems can significantly improve the contribution of
the GSF, including the support to countries that share the same type in its policies and projects.
Although the CFS intention is strengthening the international treaties on food and rural development,
CFS recommendations should be provided with sufficient strength so that GSF studies, research and
proposals can be implemented in the policies and programs of each country. 1. Sustainable
eradication of hunger and malnutrition. - "The State will foster food sovereignty" for example with the
promotion of clean technologies or alternative energies, without compromising food sovereignty in
pursuit of sovereignty and energetic development. Additionally, several polluting production and
marketing practices of agencies that endanger the production of safe food will be banned. The CFS
must promote its policies, establishing food sovereignty as a strategic objective and State obligation
to ensure healthy and culturally appropriate self-sufficiency. Following the CSF guidelines, this should
be undertaken within the existing coherent frameworks and in compliance with own plans and
international agreements.
2 The most important challenges that global food security faces are safe agrifood production and
processing. Therefore the states should pay attention to the development of their agricultural sectors,
but with a supportive and social economic approach as suggested by the PNBV of Ecuador. The
information from different national programs exchanged between countries and promoted by FAO in
the food and agriculture field, is vital to address challenges, create opportunities and obtain results as
established in the GSF objectives. The information management will allow generating a common
methodological framework to develop policies that converge with each other, with the Millennium
Development Goals and with the equality and human rights approaches that the UN promote. The
reasons behind the lack of a national or global guarantee of food sovereignty and access to quality
food have been repeatedly discussed in FAO meetings. Even topics like the effect of the renewable
energies in rising food prices due to an excessive and non sustainable change in land use are
addressed.
The CFS guidelines and proposals regarding property rights, efficient and inclusive institutionalization
and diversification of means of production may be helpful to the States when referring their policies
118
Proceedings | 11
9
and updating their regulations and institutions. But it is also important to develop mechanisms that
bring local markets to urban and national trade centers. To generate domestic demand that boosts
the national agricultural products, under equity and respect principles for different identities and
gastronomic cultural traditions, in addition to fair and supportive food distribution and marketing
systems. In order to prevent monopolistic practices and dumping effects on the most vulnerable
economies, distribution and access to resources are important to guarantee the sustainability of
healthy agricultural production, with a ripple effect if women participation in land management and
production is internationally fostered. Sometimes in these communities social problems have forced
men to move to big cities or even to other countries, but without transferring to women the power to
decide, participate and innovate in their lands production. From a gender, age and inclusion
approach, the viability in the resolution of child malnutrition, environmental, land abandonment and
low agricultural productivity problems could be addressed. Coordination between the different
agricultural, social, environmental, economic and infrastructure policies is a tool to develop a
consistent and efficient World Food Security and Nutrition Governance. It is important that the CFS
participation in trade and global food production is not restricted to guidelines and recommendations.
Additionally, it is important to create greater opportunities for debate and promote programs and ideas
that generate perfect competence conditions, minimizing the impact of dumping in rural economies
and food trade in countries. That is, how to boost food production taking into account the
competitiveness and comparative advantages of each region, as set out in FAO documents.
3. The additional topics that the GSF could consider are linked to additional policies to be taken into
account. As previously stated, the gender approach and antidiscrimination programs for access to
land, attempting to change the global patterns of food consumption, food access and diversity cannot
be defined to food sovereignty when there are certain seasonal crops which are not available all year
round. The idea of the social and environmental role of land, not only as a productive input to
maximize the landowner’s benefit, should emerge from here for debate. Plots, marginal lands or
parcels with difficult access should not be the only source for fulfilling the equity and economic welfare
that farmers wish. The CFS instruments, ideas and recommendations that enrich national irrigation
policies and management programs may be subject to a holistic approach. Management might be
sustainable, integral, and non-discriminatory, putting human consumption before any other alternative
use of water resources, to ensure its quality and quantity availability to guarantee food sovereignty.
Climate change is another topic that is being discussed by most governments around the world.
Mechanisms to adapt food production to weather events causing loss of large volumes of agricultural
production, speculation and increases in food prices are being sought. The GSF could gather
experiences, opinions and studies that promote adaptation programs to climatic changes, with special
emphasis on those related to food sovereignty.
5. It is expected that, being part of an international organization, the CFS contribution through the
GSF reaches the national governments directly, in order to create programs with local governments
for rural communities and vulnerable sectors. To meet the challenge of creating a Global Strategic
Framework for Food Security and Nutrition, required productive conditions should be assessed and
developed. For example, promotion of artisanal fisheries, protection of food stocks, ecosystem
restoration, conversion of export-oriented monoculture crops for production and internal trade,
enhancement of productive capacities and sustainable food diversity. These should constitute
mechanisms and goals for reducing vulnerability caused by food and energy external dependency.
Without neglecting the participation of States and the financial support search -either internal or
involving international organizations- for these projects, it would be helpful to have the support of FAO
119
Proceedings | 12
0
or CFS to analyze the viability and financial sources of each program. The attention given to small
economies, the policies and programs targeting changes in the consumption and the technology and
knowledge transfer should reflect the markets innovations, the fair and equitable access to new
capital that invigorates agricultural production, and the development of clean technologies, all of them
consolidating agriculture as a development driver and improving the quality of rural life. And along
with national social policies that provide safety nets and social protection to reduce vulnerabilities in
the short and long term. Finally, I believe that the role and objectives of the CFS through the GSF
would be to establish itself as a guide and to generate processes that enrich the domestic policies to
ensure food sovereignty, notwithstanding the efforts of other countries to guarantee their own
sovereignty and food security. The CFS could act to ensure the development of appropriate scientific
research and technological innovation to ensure food sovereignty. RECOMMENDATIONS AND
COMMENTS: Definition: These two concepts should be taken into account, so that States can
develop their own endogenous potential to formulate policies consistent with their needs. Food
Sovereignty: This is the power of a State to define its food and agricultural policies according to its
sustainable development goals. This leads to the protection of endogenous products against cheaper
products internationally traded. Additionally, food sovereignty is against selling below the production
cost (dumping). This measure supersedes the current proposal from the agricultural markets
implemented by the WTO. Ecuador's Constitution: Article 13 .- Individuals and communities have the
right to safe and permanent access to healthy, sufficient and nutritious food, preferably locally
produced and respectful with the diverse cultural identities and traditions. "The Ecuadorian State will
promote food sovereignty". Just as the National Welfare Plan 2009-2013 refers to 1.1 Guarantee the
rights of welfare to overcome all inequalities (particularly health, education, food, water and housing).
c. Promote safe and permanent access to healthy, sufficient and nutritious food, preferably locally
produced and respectful with the diverse cultural identities and traditions, promoting nutrition
education and food sovereignty. Food Security: This concept is based in the fact that all people have
physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their energy
needs. The access to safe and nutritious food should focus on alternative activities to the extraction of
natural resources, developing cyclical and renewable activities through agro-ecological production,
aquaculture, etc. Supplying the market with products grown in the same region /country will
counteract consumer products dependency and vulnerability. Avoiding privatization of large plots of
land by transnational corporations that may lead to food shortages of immense impact (production of
sugar cane and maize for biofuels). In addition, the Constitution establishes the "prohibition of estates
and land concentration, as well as grabbing or privatization of water and its sources". The contribution
of a strong and sovereign State relies in the control of public land resources, key strategic
infrastructures that constitute a source of social wealth. Having a technology transfer appropriate for
domestic needs is of key importance for Latin America and Africa. As well as a model of cooperation
that does not link cooperation to private companies for its implementation. In Section V of the
Monitoring of Progress towards the Goals at Country Level, it is important to reach nutrition level
above the average, as established by the PNBV in policy 2.1. Ensuring a healthy, nutritious, natural
and locally-based diet to dramatically reduce the nutritional deficiencies. Literal g. Strengthening
educational programs for all the population, related to nutritional quality, to encourage balanced
consumption of healthy and nutritious food. It is important to indicate who will be the government
institutions that will monitor and evaluate the strategy, as this aspect will show the accountability to
the international community. The increase in price due to intermediaries that affects commodity prices
is a special feature of Ecuador and its population’s access to food. It is important to expedite handling
to improve products retailing. This should take place in the country's central markets, reducing costs
and enabling the final consumer to choose between food that meets its needs at a fair price.
120
Proceedings | 12
1
Yours faithfully, SENPLADES
87) Dania Tondini, AVSI Foundation, Italy
1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific changes
would you suggest?
It is clear
2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term challenges
that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
Energy is without doubt among the most important structural causes for food insecurity: The use of
crop for energy production has negative impacts on food availability and on the level of food prices.
On the other side, the issue of energy shortage makes things worse for poor people. “Domestic
biofuels” is another sensitive issue: the domestic use of charcoal for cooking, as an example, causes
cut of plants, deforestation and impact on environment and health (severe respiratory diseases, eye
problems, etc.). More than 1 million people - mostly women and children - die every year because of
the smoke caused by combustion of wood. Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do
you think are most relevant for the GSF to include? AVSI believes that the issue of education needs
to be carefully considered. In our experience, malnutrition is always linked to human and affective,
relational poverty. Malnutrition is caused not only by lack of food but also by the conditions of the
mothers (who are often very young): ignorance about the principles of right nutrition, lack of attention
to the children, lack of self-esteem. Besides, some studies show that lack of attention in the early
childhood affects the growth of the child worse than lack of food. Investment in education should
promote not only school attendance and vocational training but also the promotion of human dignity
and the development of human beings within their society (family/village). In this context, we believe
that it is vital to centralize the role of family in the society (not only women and children). In rural
contexts the family is the base of the society and the main source of knowledge. The rural family is
not only a work model, but a model of living and a concrete expression of solidarity, in which the
essential role of women is confirmed. Family can safeguard and promote tradition that means also
biodiversity. In fact rural family business produces a wide range of products, while industrial
monoculture produces only one or very few items. Development policies should promote the role of
smallholder producers: land grabbing and big estates pauperize the rural culture, biodiversity, local
food production, causing migrations to cities.
3. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy options do you think
are most relevant for the GSF to include?
On point 10 Ensuring that women and children are the focus of action for food security and nutrition, it
is important to consider also the boosting of breast feeding, according our experience (for instance in
Haiti). As studies show that it makes babies stronger and more resistant to various diseases. We
suggest adding the following points: • Empowering local traditions according to a local community
based approach. It is important to transmit to new generations agriculture and food traditions ,
combining with the use of new technologies. Technology has to go hand in hand with local tradition in
order not to dismantle rural societies. Contamination between these two factors can produce
environment protection, work and food security. This proposal concerns both smallholder producers
121
Proceedings | 12
2
(issues, point 8) and research development (policy options, point 10). • Strengthening the producer-tomarket chain. Based on our experience in Argentina on the creation of consortia between subjects
working at different level of the supply chain, AVSI firmly believes that strengthening the chain
benefits each stakeholder. On the contrary, the fragmentation of the supply chain from producer to
final consumer brings conflicts between the different level of the chain. • According to our experience
in Burundi, Rwanda, Brazil, Nigeria, Mexico, policies against food insecurity must include programs of
nutrition education, including also community based canteens, safety nets (this issue relates also to
the point: safety nets, social protection and nutrition). • According to our experience in Haiti, Uganda,
DR Congo policies against food insecurity must include training programs, especially following models
such as farmers’ field schools.
4. Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels (national,
regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
About the monitoring, besides international institutions as well as national and regional authorities, it
is important to take into account the role of civil society, for instance by focus group or other forms of
discussions.
88) Australian Government
Committee on World Food Security (CFS): Online Consultation on the Global Strategic Framework
Australian Government Comments
General Comments
Australia welcomes the CFS’s online consultation process and supports the establishment of a Global
Strategic Framework (GSF) as a dynamic, flexible document that reflects action priorities of the CFS
without developing binding commitments.
In general, the annotated outline provides a good summary of long-term challenges and structural
causes of food insecurity, and identifies many of the key priority issues to be addressed. Australia has
some additional comments on these areas below.
Response to CFS ‘guiding questions’
1.
Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific
changes would you suggest?
The rationale, purpose and function of the GSF are clearly stated. Australia approves of the
actions described to fulfil the objectives of the GSF, although we caution that the Framework
should remain as practical and strategic as possible. In particular, where the GSF proposes to
‘describe principles and options for government’ these should be practical, not ideological.
Australia supports the GSF as one of the key priorities of the CFS for 2012. However the CFS
should recognise the workload that the GSF entails and make sure the scope contemplated for
the framework is realistic. Australia recommends the GSF focus on identifying long-term
challenges and priority issues, rather than attempting to extensively monitor progress.
2.
Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term
challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
Another key challenge is recognising the importance of trade reform in helping to overcome food
insecurity.
122
Proceedings | 12
3
Australia recommends inclusion of: “appropriate economic and trade policies at the global,
regional and national levels, together with good governance” and ‘fostering a more fair, open and
transparent trading system to ensure adequate access to food’ as some of the key means to
meet challenges associated with food demand and supply.
In point 6, we query the combination of ‘trade in food and agricultural commodities, food quality
and safety, nutrition, and the implications for food security and nutrition’. These are all extremely
valid points and we recommended that these be highlighted in individual points as the rest of the
list appears to be.
Australia supports the list of priority issues to be addressed and considers the following are most
relevant:
 The role of smallholder producers (noting that a key component of this is infrastructure
and investment to support smallholders and effectively link them to markets)
 Sustainable food and agricultural production
 Increasing investment in agriculture
 Appropriate economic and trade policies at the global, regional and national levels,
 Improving governance of food security and nutrition at all levels
In each of the above, attention should be paid to the challenges or impacts on women, and
the role of both men and women in overcoming these.
3.
Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most relevant for the
GSF to include?
Australia recommends that, the last dot point ‘uniformity in agricultural subsidies’ be changed to
cover the important role of open, fair and transparent trade generally:
 Fostering a more open, fair and predictable trading system: Transparency, openness
and predictability in trade at all levels (global, national and local) will promote sustainable
agricultural production, improve access to food, enhance income distribution and
improve domestic market infrastructure.
We also suggest adding an additional point to highlight the importance of addressing market
distorting measures:
 Reducing trade distorting agricultural subsidies and trade barriers will increase
opportunities and incentives for developing country farmers to lift their food output and
supply more food to domestic and world markets
4.
Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and which policy options do you
think are most relevant for the GSF to include?
Australia recommends that all policy options be focused on practical, strategic suggestions. In
particular, although Australia recognises the importance of human rights, we query the
practicality of suggesting a ‘rights-based approach’ as a tangible policy response, especially
before key approaches such as: support for smallholder agriculture, investment in agriculture,
social protection and safety nets, and strengthened trading systems. Australia recognises that
agriculture is the most distorted sector of world trade, but is concerned that the “rights-based
approach” is not the most practical way to improve food security.
Australia strongly supports ‘research and development’ as a practical policy response. We
encourage this to be expanded to include ‘extension’ of existing research, to increase agricultural
productivity through implementation of research outcomes and uptake of new technologies.
123
Proceedings | 12
4
We also recognise that agricultural research and development needs to be complemented by
access to financial services and a market-enabling environment. Social protection measures
such as safety nets are also needed to achieve food security.
5.
Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels
(national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
The GSF should focus on enhancing the role of the CFS and providing a framework to improve
coordination and prioritise issues for action, rather than providing guidance on monitoring
progress. Australia is concerned that this kind of guidance will be time-consuming and difficult to
provide and may prevent focus on other areas of priority for the CFS.
If the GSF is going to provide monitoring guidance this should be limited to succinct, strategic,
practical and flexible suggestions that can be adopted by a range of stakeholders. It should not
attempt to be overly prescriptive.
89) Government of Canada
Dear Moderator,
Please find below the Government of Canada's input on the CFS Global Strategic Framework.
Apologies for the late response. Government of Canada Comments on the GSF Annotated Outline P.3, #5, p.6 paragraph 3: When discussing "the role of agricultural research institutions in developing
local and global solutions", it should be noted that governments and donors should place additional
emphasis on improving the capacity of developing country actors to contribute to research and
development, and to ensure that research is demand driven (i.e. considers the needs of smallholder
farmers, particularly women). - P.5, #5: agricultural subsidies in developed countries are wellunderstood for having a negative impact on smallholder farmers. Therefore, it is unclear what valueadded the GSF or CFS could offer by hosting a discussion on trade subsidies. Neither instrument nor
platform seems appropriate for such discussion. - P.5, #9: how will the GSF "propose actions that
contribute to the immediate needs of vulnerable people" in a timely and efficient manner if its advice
and recommendations must be endorsed by a large number of stakeholders? How would the GSF link
to with AMIS and the Rapid Response Forum? These mechanisms are designed to provide fastpaced technical and policy responses, thus, building coherence between these processes should be
considered. - P. 6, paragraph 1: nutrition and gender concerns should be discussed and highlighted
separately in order to give them balanced importance - P.6, paragraph 2: the GSF should offer a
balanced assessment of determining the extent to which farm and non-farm sector employment can
contribute to household food security and nutrition outcomes (i.e. production vs. Income) - P.7, #12:
As an indicator in the CFS Results-based framework, the CFS should evaluate the impact of the GSF
in improving coordination and synchronized action by measuring the number of crises or issues the
GSF considered during a specified time. - P. 9, #12: "The objectives to be monitored are likely to
include the MDGs, particularly MDG1, and regionally agreed targets such as the eradication of hunger
by 2025 in Latin America and the Caribbean, and CAADP." The MDGs, and frameworks such as
CAADP, have their own set of indicators. The GSF would not serve any purpose to monitor or
evaluate their progress, and in general, should refrain from working on areas that are already covered
through other multilateral fora. - The GSF Annotated Outline adopts a „women and development‟
approach instead of a „gender and development‟ approach. The Outline should acknowledge and
reinforce the importance of equality between women AND men, and not solely focus on women‟s
empowerment. Building towards the development of the First Draft of the GSF in 2012 requires better
124
Proceedings | 12
5
gender analysis and input. - Canada believes that the CFS should effectively demonstrate how the
GSF will provide timely direction for food security and nutrition policy prior to moving forward with
subsequent consultations and mobilizing further resources. The CFS should also share the budget
associated to the development and implementation of the GSF with its members in order to assess
the value-added for this instrument.
Best, Umesha de Silva Analyste politique, sécurité alimentaire | Food Security Policy Analyst
Direction des politiques thématiques et sectorielles | Thematic and Sectoral Policy Directorate
Direction générale des politiques stratégiques et rendement | Strategic Policy and Performance
Branch Agence canadienne de développment international (ACDI) | Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA)
90) Julio Prudencio, Bolivia
En primer lugar, quiero enfatizar que el Marco Estratégico Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y
Nutricional debe apoyarse/fundamentarse y entrelazarse más con lo estipulado en el “Derecho
Humano a la Alimentación Adecuada” que tiene una dimensión mundial y que constituye el Marco
Global para todo
En segundo lugar, quiero resaltar que el problema del hambre no es un aspecto meramente técnico.
Es “necesaria la voluntad política de los gobernantes” por enfrentar el problema y por resolverlo, lo
cual debe traducirse en la voluntad en hechos concretos que se encaminen hacia la
autodeterminación de los pueblos; en el control sobre el propio sistema alimentario para lograr la
soberanía alimentaria nacional. Y eso también debe traducirse en recursos financieros para
proyectos y programas adecuados de desarrollo.
Preguntas orientativas
1.¿Están claramente definidos el fundamento, objetivos y función del GSF, y en caso contrario, que
cambios específicos sugiere?
En el documento de referencia, no están muy claros los objetivos del GSF. Pienso que se debe hacer
más énfasis en las causas estructurales que generan el Hambre y la pobreza, y no solamente
enfatizar en resolver o erradicar el hambre.
2.¿Existen causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y desafíos adicionales
a largo plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta y cuáles cree que son los más relevantes?
Hay causas estructurales que generan la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición como por ejemplo:
la imposición a los países pobres de los Programas de Ajuste Estructural que privatizaron los
principales medios de producción y desmantelaron el apoyo y protección del Estado a la estructura
agraria y alimentaria de los países atrasados (es decir a la producción campesina y a la industria
manufacturera de transformación de alimentos).
El incentivo a una agricultura de exportación de materias primas para los mercados externos en base
a un extractivismo basado en el uso intensivo de agroquímicos, las semillas transgénicas y el
acaparamiento de tierras por parte de inversores extranjeros.
La exclusión y marginalización del sistema productivo nacional de la población rural que en su
mayoría tiene como principal actividad la producción agrícola, lo que se manifiesta en una baja
125
Proceedings | 12
6
productividad, bajos ingresos económicos que no les permite cubrir ni el mínimo diario establecido
internacionalmente, empleos inestables, carencia de mercados para vender su productos, bajos
precios por los productos agrícolas que no les permite cubrir sus costos de producción ni generar
ingresos, carencia de tierras adecuadas lo que es impedido por la fuerte concentración de tierras
(latifundios),acceso difícil a mercados internos y externos por la carencia de infraestructura y
carreteras, y sobre todo por la elevada intermediación de comerciantes entre otros; reducida
inversión pública de los gobiernos departamentales, regionales, municipales; la carencia de acceso al
crédito/capital; a la capacitación y asistencia técnica; a la educación alimentaria nutricional; a la
tecnología e insumos naturales entre otros.
Debe haber un replanteamiento a la política del comercio exterior. Ya no se puede seguir apostando
en solucionar los problemas del hambre a través del mercado internacional que permite las
importaciones subsidiadas de alimentos y materias primas de los países desarrollados que compiten
deslealmente con la producción agrícola y la industria nacional de alimentos. Forman parte de esto el
contrabando de alimentos así como las donaciones de alimentos (+ semillas transgénicas y
agroquímicos).El mercado no es la solución al problema del hambre, es más bien la causa para la
generación de la crisis de alimentos pues el mercado es manejado por las grandes empresas
internacionales que hacen que suban o bajen los precios de los alimentos (commodities)
3.En relación al seguimiento del progreso hacia los objetivos de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición a
todos los niveles (nacional, regional, mundial), ¿qué tipo de orientación debería aportar el GSF, y a
quién?
Debe aportar capacitación – en el tema - a los responsables de las instituciones del Estado
(Ministerios del ramo, gobiernos municipales y regionales) como a las instituciones de la sociedad
civil que trabajan en el tema.
De forma paralela y también de manera fundamental, debe apoyarse la conformación de un sistema
de recolección de información actualizada (que es muy débil en nuestros países) que luego permita
estructurar un mecanismo de monitoreo y seguimiento de los objetivos planteados, lo que a su vez
servirá para la elaboración de políticas y programas/propuestas adecuadas para el logro de la
seguridad alimentaria y nutricional de las poblaciones vulnerables.
English translation
First, I want to emphasize that the Global Strategic Framework for Food and Nutrition Security should
be supported/based and be more intertwined with the terms of the "Human Right to Adequate Food",
which has a global dimension and is the Global Framework for everything.
Second, I want to stress that the problem of hunger is not a purely technical aspect. "the political will
of leaders is necessary" to address and solve the problem, which should result in concrete actions
aimed at the self-determination of people and the control over their own food system to achieve
national food sovereignty. And that should also translate into funding for projects and programs
suitable for development.
Guiding questions
1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific
changes would you suggest?
126
Proceedings | 12
7
In the document, the objectives of the GSF are not very clear. I think more emphasis has to be placed
on the structural causes of hunger and poverty, and not only emphasize on solving or eradicating
hunger.
2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term
challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
There are structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition, such as:
Imposing on poor countries Structural Adjustment Programs that privatize the major means of
production and dismantle the state support and protection to agriculture and food structure of poor
countries (ie farmer production and food processing industry).
The incentive to an export-oriented agriculture to foreign markets based on intensive use of
agrochemicals, transgenic seeds and land grabbing by foreign investors.
The exclusion and marginalization from the national productive system of the rural population, mostly
engaged primarily in agricultural production. This result in low productivity and low incomes that don’t
allow them to cover even their minimum daily requirements internationally established, unstable
employment, lack of markets to sell their products and low prices of agricultural products that do not
cover production costs and do not generate incomes. There is also a lack of suitable land due to large
states, difficult access to domestic and foreign markets because of lacking infrastructure and roads,
and especially the intermediation of traders. We should add the reduced public investment in
provincial, regional and municipal, governments and the lack of access to credit/capital, training and
technical assistance, nutrition education, technology and natural inputs.
There must be a rethinking of foreign trade policy. You can’t count any longer in solving the problems
of hunger through an international market that allows subsidized imports of food and raw materials
from developed countries. Countries that compete unfairly with the national agricultural production
and food industry. Included in this is the smuggling of food and food donations (+ transgenic seeds
and agrochemicals). Market is not the solution to the problem of hunger, it is rather the cause that
generates the food crisis, as this market is managed by large international corporations that drive up
or down the prices of food commodities)
3- Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition objectives at all levels
(national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
It should provide training to those responsible for State institutions (ministries, local and regional
governments) as well as civil society institutions working in this field.
In parallel and basically, the creation of an updated information collection system (which is very weak
in our countries) should be supported. System that can structure a mechanism for monitoring and
tracking objectives. This in turn will help the development of policies and programs/proposals suitable
for the achievement of food and nutrition security of vulnerable populations.
91) Delisle Hélèbe, University of Montreal - Nutrition, Canada
1) Amalgamating food security and nutrition may not be a productive strategy. At all levels, food
issues are handled by the agriculture sector and nutrition issues by the health sector. Having these
127
Proceedings | 12
8
sectors work together in an intersectoral approach may be easier if each one is aware of its
boundaries.
2) Food security's qualitative dimension (dietary diversity) is key to understand that food insecurity
may result in obesity as well as undernutrition and micronutrient malnutrition.
3) Diet-related chronic diseases are a growing concern - a recent high level meeting at the UN dealt
with the problem. Nutrition should be more vocal and have a higher profile on this issue, beyond food
security. I attach a note that was prepared by TRANSNUT, WHO Collaborating Centre on Nutrition
changes and development, for the Consultation prior to the High Level Meeting.
4) Consideration should also be given to distinguishing NGOs and academic institutions, which are
often clustered together as entities of the civil society, but with considerable differences in profile and
mandate.
92) Dr K V Peter Kuruppacharil, World Noni Research Foundation, Chennai , India
There are unreached and never reached communities in every part of the globe who are deprived of
entitlements of food, shelter and clothing. The mobile technology is making inroads. There are no tv to
know what is happening outside and not to speak about primary education and expected personnel
hygiene. So far the focus of discussion is on literate urbanites and periurbanites. It is in the best
interest of human civilization that this inaccessible segment is covered by food security. Food alone
may not keep people happy and well. Mental and spiritual happiness is also equally important. The
need for a special forum on unreached and never reached communities is emphasized.
93) Zakir Md. Hossain Zakir, Krisoker Sor (Farmers' Voice), Bangladesh
Conventional approaches towards food security have been failed so far in a large scale. Here food
security is not only the question of price, buying capacity, nutrition etc. solely. But production styles,
processing, transportation, stress on nature and ecology, contamination, storage, preparation,
consumption, happiness and recycling as well. Only seeking financial benefit and growth is one of the
most important factors. In fact the whole Human community has been thrown to food insecurity. May
be time has come to redefine "Foods Securities" and redesign our foods systems those will be free
from corporate control as much as possible. As a tiny Farmers’ Research Institute at a very local level
of Bangladesh, we are forwarding the following points to be incorporated into Global Strategic
Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF): 1. Paradigm should be shifted from “Food Security”
to “Foods Securities”. 2. Local people should be incorporated as a stakeholder in policy formulation to
policy implementation. 3. Rural should be developed as “Rural”, not “Urban like”. So there is a need
for a new definition of rural development. 4. Lands (especially crop land) must not be a commodity to
sell. 5. Research should be more people oriented, not profit oriented. (In Bangladesh- we have
shortage of course rice, as we- the poor prefer it. Because it stays longer period in guts than fine one
and obviously provide more nutrients. But both policy and research are reluctant to the issue.
Moreover they are pushing farmers to cultivate fine rice). 6. Various development initiatives are to be
scrutinized carefully for not destroying local agricultural systems. 7. In-situ conservation and
development of local traits must be enhanced. 8. Farmers’ rights of genetic resources must be
accelerated. 9. Existing production systems must be respected, carefully examined and keep intact as
128
Proceedings | 12
9
much as possible while intervening any new technological commodity. 10. Farming in developing
country should be labour intensive- not chemical or machinery intensive. 11. Local ecosystem should
not be altered in any means.
94) Schaltenbrand Hans, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Swiss College of
Agriculture SHL, Switzerland
My comment refers to all guiding questions: GFS should say more about key approaches to achieve
the strategic goal, particularly when addressing remote or upland areas where smallholders face
much more difficulties to get access to markets, production resources, knowledge and skills sharing.
Even if “WTO wants to prohibit new subsidies” as stated in your document, it is today a proven fact
that remote and upland areas need more specific support to compete with those areas closer to
markets and with a higher attraction by private investors. Without multi-stakeholder- and innovative
knowledge sharing-oriented advisory services such areas and its local people remain handicapped
and problems unsolved. Same can be said on approaches to improve applied research and health
(e.g. food safety) for such particular areas. At operational level I see two outcomes towards improving
this situation: 1. The since years blocked WTO has changed its strategy towards above mentioned
areas and accept other new and innovative ways. This also includes specific subsidies. If WTO will
not change, it will further lose ground and influence in this domain. 2. A dual advisory/extension
strategy (national-local) is in place, one for remote areas and one for close-to-market-areas. This will
more effectively respond to the most handicapped smallholder areas and raise their productivity more
efficiently.
95) Griselda Alfaro, Accion por los Derechos del Noroesste (ADN), Docente de la Facultad
de Derecho y Cinecias Sociales, UNT, Argentina
1. ¿Están claramente definidos el fundamento, objetivos y función del GSF, y en caso contrario, que
cambios específicos sugiere? Coincido con Julio Prudencia de Bolivia en que en el documento de
referencia, no están claros los objetivos del GSF. Asimismo, es ensencial enfatizar en las causas
estructurales que generan el Hambre y la pobreza porque de lo contrario muchas veces las
soluciones son parciales y no modifican la realidad. En Argentina, consecuencia de la crisis
economica, social y economica del 2001, demostro que no habia un debate serio sobre el derecho a
la alimenatcion y el diseño de politicas publicas. El diario La Nacion publico en una nota hace unos
años: “Sobran las palabras y aún faltan hechos concretos que permitieren augurar una solución a
corto plazo para el estigma de la desnutrición infantil, que ya ha segado las vidas de varias criaturas.
Las autoridades entrerrianas están hondamente preocupadas por la situación provincial; pues bien,
sería menester que en Entre Ríos y, también, en el resto de nuestro vasto territorio esa preocupación
se tradujese en acciones inmediatas para prestarles atención médica a todos los niños desnutridos y,
asimismo, en la realización de urgentes campañas educativas, a fin de que las familias de esa niñez
ultrajada por el hambre conozcan cómo atenderlos y cuáles son los recursos que podrían tener a la
mano para empezar a nutrirlos aunque más no fuere en forma rudimentaria.” (Nota Editorial II “Niños
entrerrianos desnutridos”, 15/1/2003 disponible en: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/466252-ninosentrerrianos-desnutridos) Cabe destacar que, el derecho a la alimentación reconoce que la
alimentación debe ser adecuada, de calidad y cantidad suficiente conforme la etapa de desarrollo de
la persona, inocua y respetar las diferentes pautas culturales. Para satisfacer el piso mínimo del
129
Proceedings | 13
0
derecho a la alimentación no basta con la ingesta de un conjunto de calorías y mucho menos que
sea rudimentaria y para ello, Los Estados tienen la obligación de motorizar las políticas públicas para
crear las condiciones que posibiliten a las personas sujetos de derecho ejercerlos. 2. ¿Existen
causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y desafíos adicionales a largo
plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta y cuáles cree que son los más relevantes? Hay causas
estructurales que generan la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición como por ejemplo: Considero
que un tema a debatir en la actualidad es el incremento de la obesidad en las poblaciones, en
especial en niños, niñas y adolescentes, y no por ello significa que esten bien nutridos y alimentados.
Esta situacion, sobre todo en sectores vulnerables es tambien una vulneracion del derecho a la
alimentacion.
English translation
1. Is the rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific
changes would you suggest?
I agree with Julio Prudencio from Bolivia in that the reference document is not clear about the
objectives of the GSF. It is also essential to emphasize the structural causes that generate hunger
and poverty, because otherwise the solutions are often incomplete and do not change the reality. In
Argentina, the social and economic crisis in 2001 showed there was no serious debate about the right
to food and a public policy design.
The newspaper La Nacion published in an article some years ago: "Too much has been said and
concrete actions are still missing which allows to foresee a short-term solution to the stigma of child
malnutrition, which has claimed the lives of several children. The authorities of Entre Ríos are deeply
concerned about the provincial situation. Well, it would be necessary in Entre Rios (and also in the
rest of our vast territory) to translate this concern into immediate action to provide medical care to all
malnourished children. And also, in carrying out urgent education campaigns, so that the families of
the children suffering hunger know how to take care of them, and what are the resources at hand to
start an adequate nutrition, if only in rudimentary form. "(Editorial Note II" Entre Ríos malnourished
children, "15/1/2003 available at: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/466252-ninos-entrerrianos-desnutridos
We can stress that the Right to food recognizes that food should be adequate, in sufficient quantity,
and quality to meet the dietary needs of individuals along the different stages through the life cycle,
safe and respectful of the different cultural patterns. To meet the minimum level of the Right to food,
the intake of a group of calories is not enough, much less if rudimentary. To this end, States have an
obligation to promote public policies to create conditions that enable right holders to exercise it.
2 - Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional long-term challenges
that must be taken into account and which you think are the most relevant?
There are structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition. I consider that a topic to discuss today
is the increase of obesity in populations, especially in children and adolescents, and this does not
mean they are well nourished and fed. This situation, particularly in vulnerable sectors is also a
violation of the Right to food.
130
Proceedings | 13
1
96) Hanefi Isselmou, Allinace Mauritanienne "Agissons contre la faim et la Malnutrition en
Mauritanie, Mauritania
COMITÉ DE LA SÉCURITÉ ALIMENTAIRE MONDIALE Trente-cinquième session Rome, 14, 15 et
17 octobre 2009
Observations sur le Point III de l’ordre du jour
La RÉFORME DU COMITÉ DE LA SÉCURITÉ ALIMENTAIRE
MONDIALE ( volet contexte)
Tout d’abord quelques remarques sur le contenu du contexte l’objectif du Sommet mondial de
l'alimentation de 1996 et les objectifs du Millénaire pour le développement (OMD) n’ont jamais été
atteints que dans l esprit de ceux qui les ont en théorie imaginer et imposer en dépit des sommes
faramineuses injectées pour leurs réalisations. Pourquoi en est-on arrivé là ? La réponse est toute
simple. Les dirigeants du monde d’aujourd’hui (G-20) qui initient et conçoivent les grandes politiques
de développement à suivre en particulier par les pays du tiers monde et ceux de l’Afrique tout
spécialement, traitent le plus souvent avec des gouvernements ou des états sans réelle assise
démocratique pour ne pas dire des régimes dictatoriaux. Ce qui implique que toutes les palettes des
politiques entreprises jusque-là pour changer, reformer, restructurer ect… n’ont apporté strictement
rien, pour la simple raison qu’elles n’ont pas l’adhésion du peuple, bien mieux l Afrique va de mal en
pis pires et la faim gagnera sous peu les cotes nord de la méditerranée si rien n est fait dans les plus
brefs délais. Il n’est pas étonnant dans ce cas que des milliers d’immigrés trouvent la mort en haute
mer manière très récurrentes. Alors que d’autres préfèrent mourir sur place chez eux à défaut de
mieux. Je pense que toute politique de sécurité alimentaire qui se veut pérenne et cohérente doit
prendre en compte tout d’abord:
-Plaider en faveur de l’instauration d’une batterie de mesures de rétorsions à l encontre des états non
démocratiques et contre-productif
-Imposer la participation de la société civile dans les processus de prise de décision nationaux
régionaux ou internationaux
-Mettre en place de nouveaux mécanismes de suivi et d’évaluation au niveau de l application des
engagements des états par rapport à la lutte contre la faim et la malnutrition dans leurs Pays
respectifs
-Favoriser la croissance interne des ACFM dans leurs Pays et s’assurer de l adhésion des états et du
secteur privé aux objectifs de celle-ci (Nous disons cela pour éviter que la politique ne s'interférent
dans le travail de l’humanitaire. Ainsi bien des parties dans certains Pays ne trouvent aucun intérêt de
lutter contre la faim ne serait-ce que pour maintenir leurs populations dans la dépendance pour qu il
puisse les gouverner aisément)
Nous pensons en tant que société civile responsable et avertie que l heure a sonné pour que tous
nous convergeons vers les mêmes objectifs et les mêmes idéaux que partagent en commun l
humanité. E particulier, quant il s'agit de rétablir des citoyens dans un Pays x ou y dans leurs droits le
plus élémentaires celui de manger non pas pour vivre mais, plutôt pour survivre dans un monde ou
les valeurs ne cessent de reculer et les ressources se raréfies
Hanefi Isselmou Président ACFM Nouakchott Mauritanie
131
Proceedings | 13
2
English translation
COMITTEE ON WORLD FOOD SECURITY, thirty fifth session, Rome 14, 15 and 17 October 2009
Comments on item III of the Agenda
The Reform of the Committee on World Food Security
(referring to context).
To start, some comments on the content of the context. The objectives of the World Food Summit
(1996) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have never been reached, except in the
minds of those who have imagined and imposed them in theory, despite the enormous sums injected
for their achievement. Why has this happened? The answer is very simple. Today´s world leaders
(G20), who initiate and conceive the broad development policies that the third world in particular and
especially African countries must follow, usually deal with Governments or States with no firm
democratic base, not to say, dictatorial regimes. This means that all the range of policies undertaken
so far to change, reform, restructure, etc., strictly speaking have not brought about anything, for the
simple reason that they do not have the support of the people. Worse still, Africa is going from bad to
worse and hunger will soon reach the northern coast on the Mediterranean if nothing is done as soon
as possible. It is no wonder in these circumstances that thousands of immigrants repeatedly die at
sea, while others prefer to die at home for lack of anything better. I think that any food security policy
that seeks to be long lasting and coherent must take into account first of all:
- Advocacy for the establishment of a range of arm-twisting measures that can deal with nondemocratic and counter-productive states.
- Imposition of the participation of civil society in the decision making process, be it national, regional
or international.
- Introduction of new follow up and evaluation mechanisms at states’ commitment implementation
level in the fight against hunger and malnutrition in their respective countries.
-Fostering the domestic growth of AAHM in their own countries and ensuring the commitment of the
state and private sector to these objectives (we say this to avoid politics interfering with humanitarian
work. In certain countries, some parties do not have any interest in the fight against hunger, probably
to maintain their people dependent and, therefore, keep them easily under control)
We, as responsible and aware members of civil society, think that the time is ripe to come together
around the same objectives and ideals that humanity has in common. In particular, when it is a matter
of restoring the most elementary rights of the citizens of a particular country, like the right to eat, not to
live but rather to survive in a world where values are forever declining and resources are becoming
scarce.
Hanefi Isselmou, President of AAHM, Nouakchott Mauritania
97) Interministerial Chamber for Food and Nutritional Security, Brazil
132
Proceedings | 13
3
Dear FSN Moderator and GSF Electronic Consultation Faciliator, Please find attached the contribution
by the Brazilian government to the GSF Electronic Consultation, in Spanish. This contribution was
prepared officially by Brazil's Interministerial Chamber for Food and Nutritional Security. Best
Regards, Renato Domith Godinho Alternate Representative of Brazil to FAO, IFAD and WFP
Please see the full document here:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/Brazil.doc
98) Bongolo Gatien Clotaire, Cercle de Protection de l'Environnement(CPE), Congo
Pour bien lutter il faut : 1 Liberté 2 Droits 3 justice soient respecter par tous... Tant que les humains
serons insensibles aux douleurs des autres rien ne marchera. A cet effet il faut mener un combat nonviolent,pour ce faire il faut une bonne éducation une bonne santé et un travail digne...
English transation
To fight successfully, one has to ensure that: 1 Freedom 2 Rights 3 Justice, are respected by all...
While humans are not sensitive to the suffering of others, nothing will work. To that end, it is
necessary to conduct a non-violent combat and for this one must have a good education, good health
and a decent job.
99) Kodjo Dokodjo, Direction des Statistiques Agricoles, Togo
Dear Moderators of the Forum, My contribution to this important online consultation on the CFS
Global Strategic Framework is late because of my health due to the car accident I got in august. The
rationale, purpose and function carried in the Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and
Nutrition (GSF) is a worth initiative to address hunger and poverty worldwide. This strategy, if
implemented and monitored will lead achieve most of the objectives contained in the Millennium
Development Goals. . The main problem to be addressed is how to implement successfully the
strategy. However, several similar programmes in the past heve been conceived and implemented in
some countries, sub-regions and regions. Most of these programmes did not reach the objectives
assigned to them. In most of the cases, the failure was due to funding (as the strategy was only at
country, sub-regional or regional level), monitoring and lack of firm voluntary to eradicate hunger and
poverty. In the case of the GSF, I think all the conditions to make it successful are combined. The joint
statement on Global Food Security of the L’Aquila Food Security Initiative is one of the basic pillar for
the success of the GSF. Meanwhile, a particular attention must be paid to some components of the
process, especially the factors of agricultural production such as lands. However, highlights have
been put earlier on human pressures on the environment combined with the encroachment of urban
construction on arable lands. Though, these problems cannot be addressed at the implementation
stage of the GSF, but in the long term specifics solutions must be found to conquer more lands for
development of agriculture. Monitoring the Strategy also remains very important for the sustainability
of the Framework. There must be specific tools along the process to monitor every component of the
strategy, from the agricultural production process to the consumption including the distribution
connections bottlenecks.
Best regards Kodjo Dokodjo
133
Proceedings | 13
4
100) UN High Level Task Force on Global Food Security (HLTF)
HLTF Contribution to the online consultation on the CFS Global Strategic Framework (GSF) The
contribution of the HLTF Coordination Team to the consultation on the GSF builds upon the Updated
Comprehensive Framework for Action (UCFA) and in particular on the ten key principles* for action of
the UCFA summary version. Identify a set of key principles as a common starting-point The
experience of the HLTF in the past years has shown that it is helpful to identify principles which define
a common way of working for all stakeholders. The GSF will contribute to the goal of improving food
and nutrition security. It might be useful for it to start by setting out some key principles which inform
the starting-point for the GSF. In the GSF outline, Section IV “Policy options” consists of a mix of
policy options, approaches and principles. Perhaps there could be a separate section at the beginning
of the document on “Principles and approaches” highlighting the principles and approaches that are
shared across the CFS. Some of the key principles developed in the UCFA are also reflected in the
outline of the GSF (twin-track approach, more and better investments in food and nutrition security).
We encourage the CFS to consider other possible principles that, we think, are supported by its
members: - Comprehensive approach: Experience has shown that all dimensions of food and nutrition
security (availability, access, utilization, stability) and its full spectrum (sustainable agricultural
production, procurement and distribution of food, strong safety-nets) must be addressed. Crosscutting issues such as human rights, gender equity, nutrition and the environment need to be
integrated into a multi-sectoral engagement that is focused on achieving sustainable outcomes. For
this reason the need of a comprehensive approach could be emphasized in the form of a guiding
principle. - A principle stating the central role of smallholders, especially women, at the centre of
action could perhaps be developed, consistent with the conclusions of the World Summit on Food
Security 2009 as well as L’Aquila Food Security Initiative. As a key link between food security and
nutrition, rural poverty reduction and sustainable agriculture, the role of smallholders – and women in
particular – could be reinforced throughout the outline. - The value of multi-stakeholder partnerships
for food and nutrition security might be included as a guiding principle. Partnerships which are
grounded in respect for human rights enable different stakeholders to amplify their contribution to food
and nutrition security. It would be appropriate for the CFS, an inclusive international and
intergovernmental platform for a range of stakeholders, to produce a GSF that mirrors this approach
and seeks to enhance multi-stakeholder partnerships. - Country leadership with regional support: As
stated in the Five Rome Principles, food security is a national responsibility. This implies that any
strategic framework for food and nutrition security should emphasise that country-led and regionsupported actions are key and national authorities should take responsibility for coordinating
development partners. The GSF should encourage and acknowledge the issue of country leadership
as one of its common principles. - The importance of strengthening the resilience of household
livelihoods (and the institutions on which they depend) could be given greater emphasis and might be
formulated as a principle. By strengthening their resilience, households are better able to withstand
shocks and can do more to ensure the food and nutrition security of their members – particularly
pregnant women, young children, older people and those who are disabled or ill. Strengthening
resilience of households and reinforcing resilience of institutions should be a cross-cutting principle of
action to meet immediate needs, support early recovery and foster long-term development. Policies
should contribute to the resilience of livelihoods – including insurance against risks to production
storage or marketing, social protection systems that are accessible to vulnerable communities and
individuals, and other approaches to risk management. - The importance of open and well-functioning
markets and trade could be underlined as a principle. The focus on agricultural subsidies in section III,
Priority Issues to be Addressed, could focus instead on the agreement among all WTO members to
134
Proceedings | 13
5
work towards a more level playing field in agriculture, contributing to food and nutrition security for all
through more efficient participation by smallholder farmers. - Accountability for results is also crucial,
as those countries and bodies making greatest progress on food and nutrition security are those with
a strong political and financial commitment which is open and transparent to all stakeholders. Inputs
on nutrition and the nexus between food and other issues Nutrition sensitive development is
considered in the outline’s policy options section on women and children. However, the issue of
nutritional outcomes might deserve a more prominent role and could be given a separate section,
given the substantial impact of malnutrition on people’s productive capacity and long-term health. The
High Level Task Force, chaired by the UN Secretary-General, has encouraged its member
organizations to “connect the dots” between issues such as food insecurity, climate change, energy
shortage and water scarcity. This is to ensure that development strategies are sustainable. To this
end, the GSF might widen its scope and consider the nexus between food, water, land, climate and
energy. To meet the upcoming challenges arising from all of these related issues, whole-ofgovernment policies need to be implemented across sectors. Definitions There would be value in the
GSF including a definition of agriculture, stressing the full range of agricultural activities (crops,
livestock, fisheries and forests). The link between agriculture and food security does not exclusively
focus on crops: the outline, at present, contains no reference to livestock farming systems (especially
pastoralism), fisheries and forest management. With regard to the on-going discussion in the CFS
about the definition of food security and nutrition security, the CFS might be interested to see the
combined definition of food and nutrition security agreed on by the HLTF: “Food and nutrition security
exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and
nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. Food
and nutrition security therefore covers availability, access, utilization and stability issues, and –
because of its focus on the attributes of individuals – also embraces their energy, protein and nutrient
needs for life, activity, pregnancy, growth and long-term capabilities. Food and nutrition security is a
precondition for the full enjoyment of the right to food.” Results framework Just as the GSF highlights
the importance of accountability of governments and bodies to stakeholders, the inclusion of a results
framework in the GSF could contribute to collective accountability which is essential for demonstrating
progress – by all members of the CFS – in relation to the Committee’s mandate. * Ten key principles
of the UCFA summary: Twin-tracks to food and nutrition security; the need for a comprehensive
approach; smallholders, particularly women, at the centre of actions; increased focus on resilience of
household livelihoods; more and better investments in food and nutrition security; importance of open
and well-functioning markets and trade; the value of multi-stakeholder and multi-sectoral partnerships;
sustained political commitment and good governance; strategies led by countries with regional
support; accountability for results.
Please see the full document here:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/HLTF_-_contribution_to_the_GSF.pdf
101) Charles Gimose, Excel Kenya, Kenya
Kenya like some modern states has just promulgated a new constitution with a provission covering
the Right to Food as a fundamental concept to fight hunger and promote the nutritional values
envisaged in the Millenium Dwvelopment Goals and the 2030 Vision Program. I am a firm believer in
the Right to Food ideals. For now more concentration should be be placed on how to assist the
citizens to enforce that right. Governments are fond of legislating but retain the power to enforce
those legislations which they oftenly dont. It is incumbent upon citizens to realize that the right to food
135
Proceedings | 13
6
is a human rights virtue and approach it from that perspective because hunger is more crude than a
grenade. Enforceability of the right to food legislations must take center stage and be actionable
against governments.
102) Aruna Sharma, Government of Madhya Pradesh, India
Dear Francisco You have consolidated focus extremely precise, I am glad that focus on 'Nutrition' and
'Management' is added. If agreed upon I would be glad to contribute to draft the chapter on as part of
task team. The Global Strategic Framework should recognize the need to improve "Global
Governance for Food Security and Nutrition" which means considering linkages between the CFS and
other relevant actors at national and regional levels, to strengthen inter-sectorial efforts towards
improving food security. The focus I propose wll be more on management of the issue, as intersectoral needs to be precise role of everyone and most important their sequence and theie synergy.
Regards Dr Aruna Sharma
103) Government of Canada
Please find below additional input on the CFS Global Strategic Framework on behalf of the
Government of Canada.
1) Canada wishes to draw attention to the incorrect reference to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture
on page 5 of the GSF outline (3rd bullet): “The WTO Agreement on Agriculture prohibits new
subsidies but allows existing subsidies to continue. This problem has to be solved especially if
smallholder agriculture is to become more productive.” One of the key objectives of the WTO
Agreement on Agriculture is to discipline and to reduce domestic support while at the same time,
leaving scope for governments to design domestic agricultural policies that reflect the specific
circumstances of individual countries and individual agricultural sectors. The Agreement includes
specific provisions for developing countries such as exempting certain developmental measures from
reduction commitments. It is incorrect to identify the WTO Agreement on Agriculture as an obstacle to
achieving greater food security.
2) If the GSF is to examine trade-related measures and food security, we would suggest that the GSF
consider all trade-related measures, including protectionist measures, and their possible impacts on
food security. As identified in the Ministerial Declaration and Action Plan on Food Price Volatility and
Agriculture at the June 2011 Meeting of G20 Agriculture Ministers, agricultural trade that is stable,
predictable and distortion free can contribute to food security. This includes efforts to improve market
access through trade liberalization, as well as reducing distortions caused by other policies such as
subsidies or trade restrictions. If the GSF is to identify priority issues that require a response at the
global, regional and national levels, a more comprehensive view of the role of trade could be
considered G20 Agricultural Ministerial Declaration, Para 37. We recognize the important role that
international trade can play in improving food security and in addressing the issue of food price
volatility. Open and well functioning markets are essential to allow more investment in agriculture.
This is critical to ensure an increase in agricultural production and productivity to meet growing
demand in the coming years. A stable, predictable, distortion free and transparent system for trade
allows the unrestricted flow of food and agricultural commodities, contributing to food security. This
requires further cooperation in strengthening international governance of agricultural trade in favour of
136
Proceedings | 13
7
open, rules-based and well functioning global markets for agricultural products, through the WTO and
its agreements, such as the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures,
and its rules based on scientific standards and recommendations developed by the relevant
international standard setting bodies (Codex, OIE and IPPC)
104) Government of Spain
English translation
General comments
We congratulate the CSF for their work, a certainly concise document that classifies the existing
frameworks gathering principles, approaches and key issues from documents like the Updated
Comprehensive Framework for Action (UCFA).

Food security and nutrition are not precisely lacking strategic or policy documents, but rather
the opposite. Therefore, the Global Strategic Framework (GSF) is basically called upon
to provide coherence and converge in a document the global guidelines related to food
security and nutrition that have been agreed in recent years in different international
and regional fields.

The GSF constitutes an excellent opportunity to give consistency to existing
frameworks, establish principles and guidelines of convergence, and extract those
issues that can be outsourced in the proceedings related to food security and
nutrition.

The Government of Spain considers important that the GSF, as reflected in the reform
document and the concept note, is based on existing documents, sharing the idea that the
CFA, the voluntary guidelines or the CAADP "framework for African Food Security” have
different nature and purposes. However, its contents can be used to determine the overall
strategic framework. Just as other documents not mentioned, like the 1996 World Food
Summit Plan of Action or the Scaling-up Nutrition approved in June 2010.

The voluntary guidelines for the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the
context of national food security constitute an essential reference for the design of policies
based on the right to food that address the structural factors that contribute to food security.
Therefore, an approach based on rights, on the right to food, should support the strategic
framework.

The main added value of the GSF with respect to other documents is that it will be
validated and approved by the CFS as recorded textually in the reform document "[The
CFS] shall constitute the main international and intergovernmental platform for a wide range
of stakeholders committed to work together and coordinated to support of country-led
processes to eradicate hunger and guarantee food security and nutrition for all human
beings".
137
Proceedings | 13
8

In addition, working together in the definition of priority action areas will contribute to provide
recommendations on the various instruments and policies to address them. The process will
facilitate the understanding of what actions should be undertaken in each of the different
levels (national, regional and global), and what role should/could the various stakeholders
play.

Overall the structure of the document seems adequate. However, it is essential that the
GSF maintains its purpose and does not derive (or reopen) into a process of political
debate. Although the CFS would be responsible, the GSF would have no competence.
During the drafting process, GSF should avoid yielding a very specific document that might
be, paradoxically, of little practical use.
Past experiences as the 1996 World Food Summit Plan of Action call for caution regarding
the type of recommendations and their level of detail for global action.

The GSF pays special attention to women in specific sections. However, the crosscutting
inclusion of the gender approach throughout the document is recommended, taking into
account the specific issues identified as structural causes, challenges or policy priorities for
men and women as appropriate.

On the other hand, we have a specific comment on the outline of the Strategic Framework
(CFS document: 2011/Inf13), and more specifically on section III related to priority issues to
be addressed. There are certain inaccuracies in the subsection "Uniformity in agricultural
subsidies" that should be corrected, replacing this terminology with "trade-distorting aid and
measures”, as these aid forms are not always considered distorting within the World Trade
Organization, and therefore no generalization can be made. For example, the European
Union has redirected much of its aid to non-distorting forms. Additionally, it is not true that the
WTO does not allow new aid but there are limits for distorting aid that must be respected.
Similarly, the section does not include adequately the trade-distorting measures, like export
bans, that have had so much influence in the recent episodes of price volatility.
1.
Are the rationale, objectives and role of the GSF clearly defined, and if not, what
specific changes are suggested?
• The rationale and objectives of the GSF were clearly defined at the 36th session of the
Committee on World Food Security, developing the approach included in the CFS reform
document approved in 2009.
However, drawing the attention on some issues that should be references during the
document drafting process is considered appropriate. It is understood that that GSF is called
to contribute to the functions established for the CFS with respect to:
- Global coordination to “offer a platform for discussion and coordination to strengthen
a collaborative action among stakeholders".
- Policy convergence: to promote greater policy and coordination convergence.
- Promoting accountability and sharing of best practices at all levels.

The Five Rome Principles for sustainable agriculture and food security should be the
conceptual basis for the GSF. The GSF should be a summary document that clearly
138
Proceedings | 13
9
and precisely identifies the common guidelines of existing frameworks that respond to
the Rome Principles.
Similarly, attention is drawn on the actions proposed for achieving the goals. In the process
(and contents) the GSF should avoid where possible opening or reopening discussions on
topics for which CFS is not ultimately responsible.
In this sense, we want to draw attention on the need of clarifying the required level of detail
and specificity.
2.
Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and additional longterm challenges that should be taken into account and which are the most relevant?
The document includes the main structural causes and challenges of food insecurity and nutrition.
However the following aspects should be considered:
• 3 out of 4 food-insecure people live in rural areas. In these areas, food security and nutrition are
hardly decoupled from the fight against poverty. Most of these people are small farmers and
agricultural workers.
Food security and nutrition in the 21st century inevitably involve improving the situation of
small farmers, their production and productivity, access and control of resources, access
to markets, participation in the value chain, access to information and improved
management of the intrinsic risks of the activities undertaken, as well as participation in
decision-making processes regarding
agriculture and food security policies and
strategies that affect them.

One of the structural causes of food insecurity is the inequality between men and
women, not only with respect to nutrition, as indicated in paragraph 9, but regarding structural
issues of agriculture and food security like the access to higher education and training,
access and control over productive resources (especially land, credit and technology),
participation in the processes of policy decision making, etc. The elimination of the "gender
gap" mentioned in the SOFA report 2010-2011 is a key challenge to overcome food
insecurity and malnutrition.
• With respect to nutrition, a structural cause or challenge that should be
included is
a more comprehensive approach, not limited to a health-care or health perspective. ScalingUp Nutrition should be considered as a reference.
• Among the challenges that should be taken into account, all of them are within the global one
of feeding a world population that grows geometrically, with changes in the dietary habits
and geographical distribution.
• Regarding investment in agriculture, the following aspects should be highlighted:
- The need to mobilize resources for research + development + innovation
- Climate change, which could affect agriculture and, at the same time, agriculture could play
a key role in its mitigation.
- Pressure on natural resources like land, water and biodiversity amongst others.
139
Proceedings | 14
0
3.
Are there additional issues that must be considered, and what are the most important
ones to be included by the GSF?
• One of the issues related to food security that should be addressed or, at least, taken into
account, is the discrepancy between the root causes of food insecurity and the sources for
response, being dealt in many cases in non-competent spheres. In this way, issues that are
decided in trade or international economy forums would be addressed by agriculture and/or
development cooperation.
• With respect to "insecure land and other natural resources tenure" only land issues are
mentioned, leaving aside the protection of biodiversity as an essential raw material of
agriculture and food security and nutrition. In addition, drawing attention on the pertinence
of including water, water rights, as a critical and priority issue for food security and
nutrition is intended. This purpose is also featured in the voluntary guidelines for the
progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security.
• Another priority issue on which work is already underway in spheres like the G20 is the
participation and the role of the private sector and the new alliances in food security and
nutrition.
3.
Are there additional policy options to be considered, and which should be included by
the GSF?
• Paragraph 9 determines the principles that will lay the GSF foundations. It is suggested to
include gender equality as one of the principles on which the document must be based
in all of its sections, as outlined in the beginning of this document.
• Regarding research and development, using the terminology “research for development”
as part of the strategies of research + development + innovation is suggested.
4.

Regarding monitoring progress towards the goals of food security and nutrition at all
levels (national, regional and global), what type of guidance should GSF provide, and
to whom?
The GSF should refer to existing monitoring systems. Although it would be convenient to
harmonize the progress measurement system and the food security and nutrition indicators,
there are doubts about GSF competence in this regard. That is without prejudicing that CFS
can assume this task as a continuation of the work currently undertaken regarding food
security measurement and, in the case of nutrition, of the work developed by the World Health
Organization (WHO) and the Standing Committee on Nutrition (SCN).
Please see the full English document here:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/Comentarios_GSF_MAECMARM_EN.doc
Spanish orignial
Comentarios generales
140
Proceedings | 14
1

Felicitamos al CSA por el trabajo realizado un trabajo, ciertamente se trata de un
documento conciso que sistematiza los marcos existentes recopilando principios,
enfoque y cuestiones clave de documentos como el Updated Comprehensive Framework
for Action (UCFA).

La seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición no están precisamente carentes de documentos
estratégicos o documentos políticos, sino más bien al contrario. Por ello, el Global Strategic
Framework (GSF) está llamado a dar coherencia y converger en un documento los
lineamientos globales que en materia de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición se han
acordado los últimos años en diferentes ámbitos internacionales y regionales,
fundamentalmente.

El GSF constituye una oportunidad excelente para otorgar coherencia a los marcos
existentes, establecer principios y lineamientos de convergencia, extraer aquellas
cuestiones que pueden ser deslocalizables en las actuaciones en seguridad
alimentaria y nutrición.

El Gobierno de España considera que es importante que el GSF, tal y como se recoge en el
documento de reforma y en la nota conceptual, se fundamente en documentos ya existentes
compartiendo la idea de que el CFA; las directrices voluntarias o el “framework for African
Food Security” del CAADP tiene naturaleza y finalidades diferentes. No obstante sus
contenidos sí pueden ser aprovechados para establecer este marco estratégico global. Al
igual que otros que no se citan como el Plan de Acción de la Cumbre Mundial de la
Alimentación de 1996 o el Scaling-up Nutrition aprobado en junio de 2010.

Las directrices voluntarias para la realización progresiva del derecho a una alimentación
adecuada en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria nacional constituyen un referente
esencial para el diseño de políticas de seguridad alimentaría basadas en el derecho a la
alimentación y que aborden los factores estructurales que contribuyen a la seguridad
alimentaria. Por ello, debe ser el enfoque de derechos, de derecho a la alimentación, el
que debe sostener el marco estratégico.

El principal valor añadido del GSF respecto al resto de documentos radica en que será
validado y aprobado por el CSA que según recoge textualmente el documento de reforma
“[El CSA] constituirá la principal plataforma internacional e intergubernamental incluyente
para una amplia gama de partes interesadas comprometidas en trabajar de manera conjunta
y coordinada en apoyo de los procesos dirigidos por los países encaminados a eliminar el
hambre y a garantizar la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional para todos los seres humanos”.

Además, el hecho de trabajar en conjunto en la definición de las áreas de acción prioritarias,
contribuirá a proporcionar recomendaciones sobre los distintos instrumentos y políticas para
abordarlas. El proceso facilitará la comprensión sobre qué acciones han de llevarse a cabo
en cada uno de los distintos niveles (nacional, regional y global), y qué papel deben o pueden
jugar los distintos agentes implicados .

En términos generales la estructura del documento parece adecuada. No obstante, se
considera esencial que se mantenga el GSF mantenga su propósito y no derive (o
141
Proceedings | 14
2
reabra) en un proceso de debate político, que si bien es competencia del CSA, no lo sería
del GSF. Debe evitarse que el GSF pudiera orientarse durante el proceso de elaboración en
un documento demasiado concreto y que, paradójicamente, no tenga utilidad práctica.
Experiencias del pasado como el Plan de Acción de la Cumbre Mundial de la Alimentación de
1996 llaman a la prudencia en cuanto al tipo y concreción de recomendaciones de acción
globales.


5.
El GSF contempla en apartados concretos a la mujer como objeto de atención especial. Sin
embargo, se recomienda la incorporación del enfoque de género de manera transversal
en todo el documento, contemplando las especificidades que las cuestiones que se señalan
como causas estructurales, desafíos o prioridades políticas tienen para los hombres y las
mujeres según el caso.
Por otro lado, tenemos un comentario específico sobre el esquema anotado del Marco
Estratégico (documento CFS:2011/Inf13), y más concretamente sobre el apartado III del
mismo relativo a las cuestiones prioritarias que se deben abordar. Se trata en efecto del
punto “Uniformidad en las subvenciones agrícolas”, y es que existen ciertas incorrecciones
que deben subsanarse, ya que debería sustituirse esa terminología por “Ayudas
distorsionantes y medidas distorsionantes del comercio”, puesto que no todas las ayudas son
consideradas como distorsionantes en el seno de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, y
por ello no se puede generalizar. Por ejemplo, la Unión Europea ha reorientado gran parte de
sus ayudas hacia formas no distorsionantes. Además, tampoco es cierto que la OMC no
permita nuevas ayudas sino que existen unos límites para la ayuda distorsionante que deben
respetarse. De igual forma, el apartado no recoge adecuadamente las medidas
distorsionantes del comercio, como son las prohibiciones a la exportación, que tanto han
influido en los recientes episodios de volatilidad de precios.
¿Están claramente definidos el fundamento, objetivos y función del GSF, y en caso
contrario, qué cambios específicos sugiere?

El fundamento y los objetivos del GSF fueron claramente definidos en la 36ª sesión del
Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria, desarrollando el planteamiento recogido en el documento
de reforma del CSA aprobado en 2009.
No obstante se considera oportuno llamar la atención sobre algunas cuestiones que deberían
situarse como referentes durante el proceso de elaboración del documento. Se entiende que
el GSF está llamado a contribuir a las funciones establecidas para el CSA en cuanto a:
coordinación en el plano mundial para “ofrecer una plataforma para el debate y la
coordinación a fin de fortalecer una actuación en colaboración entre partes
interesadas”.
Convergencia de las políticas: promover una mayor convergencia de las políticas y
coordinación.
Promover la rendición de cuantas y compartir las mejores prácticas a todos los
niveles.

Se considera que la base conceptual del GFS deben ser los cinco principios de Roma
para una agricultura y seguridad alimentaria sostenible. El GSF debe ser un documento
sintético que identifique de forma clara y precisa los lineamientos comunes de los
marcos vigentes que responden a los principios de Roma.
142
Proceedings | 14
3

6.
Igualmente, se llama la atención sobre las acciones planteadas para el cumplimiento de los
objetivos. En el proceso (y contenidos) el GSF debe evitar en lo posible abrir o reabrir
debates sobre temáticas cuya responsabilidad no recae en última instancia en el Comité de
Seguridad Alimentaria.
En este sentido se quiere llamar la atención sobre la necesidad de clarificar el nivel de detalle
y concreción que se otorgará.
¿Existen causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y
desafíos adicionales a largo plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta y cuáles cree que
son los más relevantes?
Se considera que el documento recoge las principales causas estructurales y desafíos de la
inseguridad alimentaria y la nutrición. No obstante se sugiere tomar en consideración los
siguientes aspectos:
 3 de cada 4 personas en inseguridad alimentaria viven en el medio rural. La seguridad
alimentaria y la nutrición son difícilmente separables de la lucha contra la pobreza en el
medio rural. La mayoría de estas personas son pequeños agricultores y trabajadores
agrarios.
La seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición del siglo XXI pasa irremediablemente por
mejorar la situación de los pequeños agricultores, su producción y productividad, su
acceso y control de los recursos, su acceso a los mercados, su participación en la
cadena de valor, el acceso a la información y mejora en la gestión de los riesgos
intrínsecos a la actividad que desarrollan, así como la participación en los procesos de
toma de decisiones de las políticas y estrategias de agricultura y seguridad alimentaria
que les afectan.

Una de las causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria es la desigualdad entre
hombres y mujeres, no sólo en relación con la nutrición, como se apunta en el párrafo 9,
sino en cuestiones estructurales de la agricultura y la seguridad alimentaria como son el
acceso a educación y formación superior, el acceso y control de los recursos productivos
(especialmente la tierra, el crédito y la tecnología), la participación en los procesos de toma
de decisiones políticas, etc. La supresión del “gender gap” del que habla el informe SOFA
2010-2011 es un desafío clave para superar la inseguridad alimentaria y la
malnutrición.

En lo que respecta a la nutrición, una causa estructura o desafío que debe incorporarse
es el abordaje desde una perspectiva más integral y no meramente asistencial o sanitaria.
Una referencia a tomar en consideración es el Scaling-Up Nutrition.

Entre los desafíos que deben tomarse en cuenta todos los que se citen se sitúan bajo uno
global que es de alimentar a una población mundial en crecimiento geométrico, con
cambios en los hábitos alimenticios y con cambios en su distribución geográfica.

Dentro de la inversión en agricultura cabría destacar:
la necesidad de movilizar recursos para la investigación+desarrollo+innovación
143
Proceedings | 14
4
-
7.
el cambio climático, el cual podría afectar a la agricultura, a la vez que la agricultura
podría convertirse en actor clave para su mitigación,
la presión sobre los recursos naturales, como la tierra , el agua y la biodiversidad
entre otros.
¿Existen cuestiones adicionales que deben ser consideradas, y cuáles cree que son
las más importantes para ser incluidas por el GSF?

Una de las cuestiones que se deben abordar o, al menos, tomar en consideración la
seguridad alimentaria es la discordancia entre el origen de las causas de la inseguridad
alimentaria y las fuentes de respuestas, abordándose en muchas ocasiones en ámbitos no
competentes. Así pues se estaría respondiendo desde la agricultura y/o la cooperación al
desarrollo a cuestiones sobre las que se decide en foros de comercio o economía
internacional.

En lo que respecta a la “tenencia insegura de la tierra y otros recursos naturales” solo se cita
la cuestión de la tierra quedando fuera la protección de la biodiversidad como materia
prima esencial de la agricultura y la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición. Asimismo, se
quiere llamar la atención sobre la pertinencia de incorporar el agua, el derecho al agua,
como una cuestión crítica y prioritaria para la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición,
recogida también en las directrices voluntarias para la realización progresiva del derecho a
una alimentación adecuada en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria nacional.

Otra cuestión prioritaria sobre la que ya se está trabajando en ámbitos como el G20 es la
participación y el papel del sector privado y las nuevas alianzas en la seguridad alimentaria
y la nutrición.
8.
¿Hay opciones adicionales de políticas que deben ser tomadas en cuenta, y cuáles de
ellas cree que deben ser incluidas por el GSF?

El párrafo 9 determina los principios sobre los que se fundará el GSF, se sugiere añadir la
igualdad de género como uno de los principios en que se debe fundar el documento en
todos sus apartados, tal y como se ha señalado al inicio de este documento.

En cuanto a la investigación y desarrollo se sugiere la utilización de la terminología
“investigación
para
el
desarrollo”
como
parte
de
las
estrategias
de
investigación+desarrollo+innovación.
9.
En relación al seguimiento del progreso hacia los objetivos de seguridad alimentaria y
nutrición a todos los niveles (nacional, regional y mundial), ¿qué tipo de orientación
debería aportar el GSF, y a quién?

El GSF debería referir a los sistemas existentes de seguimiento. Si bien es cierto que sería
oportuno armonizar los sistemas de medición de progresos, de indicadores de seguridad
alimentaria y nutrición, cabrían dudas respecto a la competencia del GSF al respecto. Ello sin
menoscabo de que el CSA asuma esta tarea como continuación del trabajo que ya se viene
144
Proceedings | 14
5
realizando sobre la medición de la seguridad alimentaria y, en el caso de la nutrición la labor
de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y el Standing Commitee on Nutrition SCN).
Please see the full Spanish document here:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/Comentarios_GSF_MAEC-MARM.doc
105) Melanie Sommerville, University of British Columbia, Canada
Thank you for the opportunity to offer this feedback on the Committee on World Food Security’s
(CFS’) new Global Strategic Framework on Food Security and Nutrition (GSF). Below, I address the
specific ‘guiding questions’ brought forward for consideration in the consultation in turn: 1. Is the
rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF clearly stated, and if not, what specific changes would you
suggest? Purpose The preliminary statement of purpose for the GSF, given at point 1, is unclear.
Since the purpose statement is likely to be one of the first things readers will encounter in the final
GSF document, it is important to ensure that it is straightforward and coherent. Editing and
simplification would help to clarify the preliminary purpose statement, for example: “The GSF is a
dynamic instrument that will improve coordination amongst and guide synchronized action by diverse
stakeholders through global, regional, and national actions to prevent future food crises, eliminate
hunger, and ensure food security and nutrition for all.” Alternately, the statement given at point 2 is
also clearer and stronger than the preliminary draft, and with some small modifications would seem to
capture the purpose of the GSF: “The GSF will offer clear guidelines and recommendations for
coherent action on food insecurity and malnutrition at the global, regional, and national levels,
supported by the full range of CFS stakeholders and with the endorsement of the HLPE, while
respecting country-ownership of programs.” Rationale A short summary of the history of the CFS and
of the GSF would assist those readers who may be unfamiliar with the Committee’s work. It will also
be important to clarify the structure of the CFS and of its role relative to other organizations involved in
the governance of food security and nutrition. Functions The list of functions or activities proposed for
the CFS is clear and well written. 2. Are there structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition and
additional long-term challenges that should be considered, which do you think are the most relevant?
The short list of structural causes of food insecurity provided at point 4 is not especially robust and
could easily be expanded. At present, the omission of poverty from the list is an especially glaring
absence. In terms of the long-term trends affecting agriculture and food security listed in point 6,
changes in labour markets and in the global and national economies (recession, inflation, etc.) would
be relevant to add. 3. Are there additional issues to be considered, and which do you think are most
relevant for the GSF to include? 4. Are there additional policy options that should be considered, and
which policy options do you think are most relevant for the GSF to include? Although it seems
appropriate that sections III and IV should remain distinct within the final GSF document, I have
addressed them together here because there is substantive overlap between them, and any revisions
of or additions to one of the sections may therefore necessitate changes to the second. While it
seems that the current lists have effectively captured both the main priority issues and the policy
options for responding to them, it is difficult to rank which amongst these are most ‘relevant’ given the
complex interactions between the various factors. Several of the entries on the issues and policy lists
could be expanded to include additional points: -The increasingly complex connection of agriculture
with other natural resources, most particularly water, could be noted, potentially under the section on
‘Environmentally sustainable food and agricultural production’. -Responding to the particular position
and vulnerabilities of indigenous peoples, pastoralists, gatherers and fisherfolk with respect to food
145
Proceedings | 14
6
security and nutrition might be noted, if not within the list of priority issues, certainly as a factor that
guides policy options. -Under the section on ‘The role of smallholder producers’, it is not just linkages
to markets, but also ensuring that those markets are transparent to smallholders, that is important
(i.e., knowledge is a key part of functioning markets). -The need for appropriate extension services
could be noted, possibly under ‘Research and Development’. -The need to integrate both scientific
and traditional knowledge could similarly be noted in this section. As well, there are some topics that
are given little to no coverage within the issues and policy lists, but which have an important
conditioning effect on food security and nutrition and thus deserve mention in the GSF document: The GSF puts a heavy emphasis on increasing productivity, but says very little about the challenges
of waste in contemporary agro-food systems. -Issues related to storage and infrastructure have a very
significant impact on food security and nutrition and require further attention in the document. -The
presence and appropriate role of agri-business and supermarkets -While speculation gets some
attention under the sections on price volatility, the role of financiers and the finance sector more
generally is under explored. In some countries, farm debt is becoming very significant. -Labour
challenges (e.g. the rise of significant unemployment in developing countries and labour shortages in
developed countries) go almost unaddressed in the GSF. -While the emphasis on women and
children’s particular food security and nutritional needs is welcome and absolutely necessary, other
forms of social differentiation and power relations are similarly important, and this could be better
recognized in the GSF. 5. Regarding monitoring progress towards food security and nutrition
objectives at all levels (national, regional, global), what kind of guidance should the GSF provide, and
to whom? As noted in the CFS reform document, developing a common set of indicators is a key area
where the CFS could support country-level monitoring processes. Overall, I found the GSF to be a
well thought out and balanced platform and document. Thank you again for the opportunity to
participate in its further shaping. Sincerely, Melanie Sommerville PhD Student Department of
Geography University of British Columbia Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
106) Isabel Cristina Marín Arriola, Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico
Reciban un saludo cordial!
En respuesta a su convocatoria, quiero humildemente enviar mi opinión y sugerencia. Yo soy
catedrática universitaria aqui en México, en donde la SAN está tomando dimensiones de Seguridad
Nacional, aunque las autoridades no lo reconocen de esa manera. Desde mi opinión, precisamente
un buen esfuerzo puede ser hecho a través de las universidades, la sensibilización e incorporación
en los planes de estudio y trabajos de investigación es necesario; para esto se necesita de crear
fondos para investigación y proyectos enn SAN a los que tanto estudiantes de países en desarrollo
como desarrollados puedan concursar y proveer de soluciones que emanen de la juventud que serán
los futuros gobernantes e impulsores de desarrollo en el Mundo.
Por otra parte, considero importante que se ejerza presión a nivel de compromiso mundial de los
países sobre el marco legal de la SAN en cada país... y desarrollar leyes que permitan volver a los
campos y encontrar incentivos económicos en él ó el simple y libre derecho a una Soberanía
Alimentaria. Ejercer presión sobre las empresas transnacionales para que no continuen controlando
económicamente los alimentos y el derecho a semillas originarias de cada continente. Crear redes de
Actores de la SAN, en donde se incluya a las poblaciones afectadas, muchas veces las ideas de
solución inmediata y media están concentradas en la vivencia o cultura de las personas afectadas
por la pobreza o desnutrición.
146
Proceedings | 14
7
La experiencia de los ODM, nos ha permitido ver que:
1. no todos los países avanzan a un mismo ritmo,
2. todos pueden hacer esfuerzos cuando el compromiso es a nivel mundial...
3. que esto no es una carrera, sino saber llegar... por lo tanto, considero que se debe establecer un
nuevo plazo para que los que vienen atrás alcancen sus metas lo más rápido posible conla ayuda y
apoyo de un país padrino que sí haya logrado entre el 80 y 100% de sus metas al 2015 ... hasta
lograr ver un mundo más parejo, Y sólo y hasta que se vea así enunciar nuevos retos... porque sino
solamente haremos más profunda la brecha... pues los que van adelante quieren seguir corriendo y
los que vienen atrás se sienten tan lejos que se pueden desmotivar a continuar.
Sin más por el momento me suscribo a sus respetables órdenes, deséandoles muchos éxitos en
estas iniciativas.
Isabel Cristina Marín Arriola Prof. de Asignatura de Lic. en Nutrición Centro Universitario del Sur
Universidad de Guadalajara
English translation
In response to your call, I humbly submit my opinion and suggestion. I am a University professor here
in Mexico, where food and nutrition security is taking a national security dimension, although the
authorities do not recognize that.
In my opinion, a good effort can be made through the universities: it is necessary to raise awareness
and incorporate the topic into curricula and research. This requires the establishment of funds for
research and food and nutrition security projects to which both students of developing and developed
countries can compete and provide solutions emanating from the youth, who are the future leaders
and drivers of development in the world.
On the other hand, I consider it’s important to put pressure at the level of global commitment of the
countries on the legal framework for food and nutrition security in each country ... and develop
legislation to allow going back to the fields and find economic incentives in agriculture, or the simple
and free Right to food sovereignty. We need to put pressure on transnational corporations to stop
their economic control on food and the right to seeds originating from every continent. Create
networks of actors in food and nutrition security, including the affected populations. Very often the
urgent and medium term solutions ideas are concentrated in the experience or culture of the people
suffering poverty or malnutrition.
The experience of the MDGs, has allowed us to see that:
1. not all countries are moving at the same rate,
2. all can make efforts when the commitment is global ...
3. this is not a race, what matters is to be able to get there…
Therefore, I believe we should establish a new deadline for those who lag behind to reach their goals
as quickly as possible, with the help and support from a sponsor country that has achieved between
80 and 100% of his targets by 2015. .. in order to achieve a more equitable world. Because otherwise
we will only deepen the gap ...as those who are forward want to continue running and the ones
lagging behind can be discouraged to continue.
147
Proceedings | 14
8
Nothing more for now. I remain at your disposal, wishing you many successes in these initiatives.
Prof. Isabel Cristina Marin Arriola, Nutrition, Centro Universitario del Sur, Guadalajara University
107) Marta Andrich, Argentina
Estimado Francisco Sarmento:
Respondo a la Consulta para el Marco Global estratégico del Comité para la seguridad alimentaria
Coincido en tomar como punto de partida el objetivo de erradicar el hambre en un mundo
globalizado, que tiene alimentos suficientes; en él se prevé un aumento de la demanda por previsible
incremento de la población, por una apetencia a mejorar la calidad de vida y en el que se comienza a
tener noción de que nos está afectando un cambio climático. Como se describe en el Executive
Summary de Sofi 2011: Food prices are rising, water tables are falling, corruption and organized
crime are increasing, environmental viability for our life support is diminishing, debt and economic
insecurity are increasing, climate change continues, and the gap between the rich and poor continues
to widen dangerously. Afirmamos la premisa de que las normas y las políticas pueden actuar
efectivamente sobre la realidad, aunque es necesario prever efectos indeseados. Hay soluciones y
esto nos debe impulsar con apremio, a corregir la enorme inequidad del hambre.
Deseo destacar la importancia del Principio 3 de la Declaración de Roma al que hay que dar
desarrollo adecuado. Es necesario destacar, como dicen las Directrices voluntarias para el derecho a
la alimentación en la directiva 15, que: La ayuda alimentaria tendría que proporcionarse con una
clara estrategia para ponerle fin y evitar la creación de dependencia. Deseo recordar también el
principio 3 que lo expresa con estas palabras al destacar el necesario planteamiento dual, Principio
3: Fomentar un planteamiento dual amplio de la seguridad alimentaria que comprenda: i) medidas
directas destinadas a las personas más vulnerables para hacer frente inmediatamente al hambre y ii)
programas sostenibles a medio y largo plazo sobre agricultura, seguridad alimentaria, nutrición y
desarrollo rural a fin de eliminar las causas fundamentales del hambre y la pobreza, entre otros
medios a través de la realización progresiva del derecho a una alimentación adecuada. Respecto de
las causas estructurales:
1) Hay que buscar un mayor equilibrio entre la tecnología y los agricultores. Citando al Informe del
Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la alimentación, 23 de julio de 2009. Ante la A.G. de Naciones
Unidas: Con la profesionalización de la producción de semillas y su separación de las actividades
agrícolas, ha surgido un sistema comercial de semillas paralelo a los sistemas de semillas de los
agricultores a través de los cuales éstos, tradicionalmente, conservan, intercambian y venden
semillas, con frecuencia al margen de los cauces oficiales. Este cambio ha hecho que se concedan a
los productores de semillas y los titulares de patentes privilegios de monopolio temporal a través de
los instrumentos de propiedad intelectual. (El subrayado es mío). Es posible mejorar el sistema de
reparto de los beneficios y el reconocimiento de los saberes tradicionales, sin dejar de estimular la
investigación y el avance de la tecnología.
2) es necesario corregir la matriz energética global. Lo que se puede comenzar a hacer a nivel local y
regional. La mayor parte de los alimentos se comercializan, lo que significa: transporte y gasto de
energía. Cualquier análisis del ciclo vital de un alimento suma todas las veces que desde el inicio de
la producción hasta el consumo y disposición final se utiliza el transporte. Un uso de energías baratas
y no contaminantes haría más accesible el precio de los alimentos. En Opciones de política
3) Llegar a un consenso para implementar la tasa Tobin, lo que daría recursos para que millones de
hambrientos se pudieran alimentar y acceder al derecho al alimento.
Celebro la iniciativa y lo saludo atte. Marta Andrich Buenos Aires. Argentina
148
Proceedings | 14
9
English translation
Dear Francisco Sarmento:
I answer to the Consultation on the CFS Global Strategic Framework for Food Security. I agree on
taking as its starting point the goal of eradicating hunger in a globalized world that has sufficient food.
There is an expected increase in demand because of the population growth and a desire to improve
the quality of life, at a time when we start to realize that climate change is affecting us. As described
in the Executive Summary of SOFI 2011: "Food prices are rising, water tables are falling, corruption
and organized crime are increasing, environmental viability for our life support is diminishing, debt and
economic insecurity are increasing, climate change continues, and the gap between the rich and poor
continues to widen dangerously. " We affirm the premise that the rules and policies can act effectively
on reality, although it is necessary to foresee unwanted effects. There are solutions, and this should
impel us urgently to correct the enormous inequality of hunger.
I want to emphasize the importance of Principle 3 of the Rome Declaration, that needs proper
development. It should be noted, as the Voluntary Guidelines on the Right to Food states in Guideline
15: “Food aid should be provided with a clear exit strategy and avoid the creation of dependency”. I
want to mention also the Principle 3 that uses these words when highlighting the necessary dual
approach, Principle 3: Strive for a comprehensive twin-track approach to food security that consists of:
i) direct action to immediately tackle hunger for the most vulnerable and ii) medium and long-term
sustainable agricultural, food security, nutrition and rural development programmes to eliminate the
root causes of hunger and poverty, including through the progressive realization of the right to
adequate food
Regarding the structural causes:
1) We must find a better balance between technology and farmers. Citing the report of the Special
Rapporteur on the Right to Food, July 23, 2009, in the G.A. of the. United Nations: “The
professionalization of breeding and its separation from farming leads to the emergence of a
commercial seed system, alongside the farmers’ seed systems through which farmers traditionally
save, exchange and sell seeds, often informally. This shift has led to grant temporary monopoly
privileges to plant breeders and patent-holders through the tools of intellectual property”.(underlined
text is mine). It is possible to improve the system of benefit sharing and recognition of traditional
knowledge, while encouraging research and the advancement of technology.
2) we need to correct the global energy matrix. What you can start making at local and regional level.
Most food is traded, which means: transportation and energy use. Any analysis of the life cycle of
food adds up all the times that transport is used, from the start of production to final consumption and
disposal. The use of cheap and clean energy would make the price of food more accessible. Policy
Options
3) Reaching a consensus to implement the Tobin tax, which would liberate resources for millions of
hungry people to feed themselves and have access to the Right to food.
I welcome the initiative. Best regards. Marta Andrich. Buenos Aires, Argentina
108) Civil Society Mechanism
Dear Colleagues, We would like to point your attention to the document facilitated by the Civil
Society Mechanism working group on the GSF. This document does not represent an official
149
Proceedings | 15
0
position of the CSM, or of all members of the CSM, but the consensus built among the participating in
the process up to now. It has been sent to us in endorsement by:
FIAN Ecuador
DanChurchAid, Denmark
Centre for Sustainable Development and Environment (CENESTA), Iran
The World Forum Of Fish Harvesters & Fish Workers, Uganda
Please see the full document here:
http://typo3.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/CFS_consultation/doc/CSM_Draft_Statement_on_GSF_28_S
ept_en.pdf
FSN Forum Team
109) Fabio Franco Giraldo, Corposan, Colombia
Cordial saludo.
Retomo la iniciativa de trabajar en pro de la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional. Son varios los
esquemas que tradicionalmente se han ofrecido para abordar la seguridad alimentaria, pero son
muchos los esfuerzo que se pierden por falta de un pensamiento colectivo frente al desarrollo
sostenible y el esfuerzo necesario para la transversalización de la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional
en los diferentes sectores de la dimensión política en cada país; ha sido muy focalizado el tema y con
demasiada aplicación desde propuestas frente al acceso en cantidad y calidad de alimentos pero con
el gran faltante del concepto de la alimentación y la nutrición como un derecho de todo ser humano.
Sumado a esto se encuentra el débil apoyo a los productores rurales, que como es el caso
colombiano, prefiere migrar a los centros urbanos que quedarse en medio de un conflicto de causal
viciado y que involucra al sector agroindustrial. Por tanto es necesario reforzar los conceptos de
soberanía alimentaria y el derecho a la alimentación, optando por alternativas integradoras
(sectoriales e interdisciplinarias) tendientes al desarrollo sostenible y basadas en las comunidades y
los ecosistemas; de tal manera que se considere un aprovechamiento biológico final de los alimentos
en medio de una población social, política, cultural y económicamente sostenibles. Lamentablemente
grandes iniciativas se centran en la disponibilidad y el abastecimiento de los alimentos, ignorando
que condiciones prioritarias y causales estructurales de la seguridad alimentaria no pueden ser
atendidas; es así como el círculo vicioso de la desnutrición se sostiene en medio de un mundo
desigual. Atender la población rural y de bajos recursos es prioritario en medio además de un entorno
afectado por condiciones climáticas adversas que exigen adaptación y criterios innovadores de
mitigación. Deben incluirse indicadores frente al manejo del riesgo del acceso a los alimentos y a la
capacidad de producción de los mismos. No limitar los indicadores a la simple cobertura de
poblaciones "vulnerables", sino además de la capacidad de desarrollo instalado y del conocimiento
aplicado con relación al engranaje de la cadena alimentaria. Igualmente debe medirse el riesgo de
factores económicos, sociales, culturales y políticos que inciden en dicho eslabón alimentario y que
diezman la capacidad productiva, de acceso y de consumo. Incluir indicadores valiosos frente a la
sostenibilidad del recurso humano para la asistencia técnica y seguimiento de los canales
productivos de alimentos a nivel local y aquellos desde lo nutricional que miden no solo el
crecimiento pondo estatural sino también el nivel de aprovechamiento de los nutrientes y la calidad
de éstos en los alimentos, en una misma línea de producción de alimentos limpios y con bajas
emisiones de GEI.
150
Proceedings | 15
1
Atentamente,
Fabio Franco Giraldo ND, MSc Alimentación y Nutrición Humana. Director CORPOSAN
(www.corposan.org) Colombia
English translation
I retake the initiative to work for Food Security and Nutrition. Several schemes have traditionally been
offered to address food security, but many efforts are lost for lacking a collective approach to
sustainable development and the effort required for mainstreaming food and nutrition security in the
different sectors of the political dimension in each country. This topic has been extensively studied
and too many proposals on access in quantity and quality of food have been applied, but the concept
of food and nutrition as a right of every human being is still missing.
In addition to this we have the weak support for rural producers, who, as is the case in Colombia,
prefer to migrate to urban centers rather than staying in the middle of a flawed conflict involving the
agribusiness sector. It is therefore necessary to strengthen the concepts of food sovereignty and the
right to food, opting for integrating alternatives (sectorial and interdisciplinary) towards sustainable
development and ecosystems and community-based, in order to consider a final biological use of food
amidst a social, political, cultural and economically sustainable population. Unfortunately major
initiatives focus on the availability and supply of food, ignoring that priority conditions and structural
causes of food security can not be met. Thus the vicious cycle of malnutrition stands in the middle of
an unequal world. Assisting rural and low income population is a priority in the midst of an
environment affected by adverse weather conditions, that require adaptation and innovative
approaches to mitigation. Indicators should be included to address the risk management of access to
food and their production capacity. Indicators shouldn’t be limited to the simple coverage of
"vulnerable” population, but used for the developing capacity installed and applied knowledge
regarding the mechanism of the food chain. We should also measure the risk of economic, social,
cultural and political factors that influence in this food link and that decimate production, access and
consumption capacity. We have to include valuable indicators for the sustainability of human
resources for technical assistance and monitoring of food production channels locally and those that
measure not only staturo-ponderal growth but also the level of utilization of nutrients and the quality of
them in food, in line with a clean food production and low GHG emissions.
Sincerely yours,
Fabio Franco Giraldo ND, MSc Food and Human Nutrition. Director CORPOSAN (www.corposan.org)
Colombia
110) Daniela Alfaro, CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers,
France
While agreeing on the whole with the highlights of the facilitator, I would like to add one final comment
regarding the role of the Global Strategic Framework (GSF) and the Committee on World Food
Security (CFS). The CFS is the most inclusive platform covering world food security issues and as
such, the GSF should give greater emphasis to their role in promoting stronger coherence,
151
Proceedings | 15
2
coordination and cooperation between the different initiatives related to food security. The CFS has
the potential, as a coordinating mechanism, to create synergies and avoid overlaps and duplications
in the efforts of all the institutions (either public or private) that are working towards these goals. The
CGIAR has 40 years of experience in coordinating the research efforts of its fifteen centers dedicated
to international agriculture research. The collective actions of these centers are intended to reduce
poverty and malnutrition by providing international public goods with focus on small rural producers in
developing countries. Recently, the CGIAR has defined a portfolio of CGIAR Research Programs
(CRPs) aimed, among other objectives, to achieve a significant improvement in world food security.
These programs are an important mechanism around which better coordination and collaboration of
research efforts can be organized, including the initiatives of the CFS. A large number of developed
and developing countries research centers and partners are already participating in these CRPs and
we invite others to join in these efforts.
111) HSI Farm Animal Welfare, Humane Society International, United States of America
Food security is often incorrectly used as a justification for the inhumane confinement of animals on
industrial farm animal production facilities, while in reality, the industrialization of animal agriculture
jeopardizes food security by degrading the environment, threatening human health, and diminishing
income-earning opportunities in rural areas. Humane Society International (HSI) advocates for a new
Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF) that encourages governments and
international agencies to support humane and sustainable agricultural systems, which will in turn
improve food security and nutritional outcomes throughout the developing world. We have structured
our submission so that each number below responds to the identically numbered point in the final
comment by the facilitator.
1)
HSI supports the general consensus that the annotated outline needs to link the structural
causes more clearly with possible recommended solutions. For example, policies and financing at
the national and international levels that support the industrialization of farm animal production
threaten the food security of poor households by pushing small farmers out of the market, removing
jobs from rural areas, polluting the environment, exploiting scarce agricultural resources, and
jeopardizing human health. HSI expects that the GSF will result in a closer evaluation of the role of
national agricultural policies and financing from international banks and finance institutions in creating
inequities in the food system, causing environmental damage, and jeopardizing human health.
2)
HSI also agrees that various aspects related to nutrition should be strengthened, specifically
the ability of agricultural policy to improve nutritional outcomes for malnourished groups without
creating an epidemic of obesity and overweight in rapidly urbanizing developing countries. Given the
growing burden of overweight and obesity in developing countries, HSI asks that the GSF guide
governments and financial institutions in targeting assistance in the farm animal sector towards small
holders, pastoralists, and other food insecure households in rural areas, instead of supporting
massive industrial farm animal production facilities, which, in the past, havenot significantly improved
the nutritional status of those most in need.
3)
HSI agrees with the general consensus that the GSF should recognize the need to improve
“Global Governance for Food Security and Nutrition,” which means considering linkages between the
CFS and other relevant actors at national and regional levels. Specifically, HSI asks that the strategic
framework encourage policies and finance at the local, national, and international levels that support
152
Proceedings | 15
3
environmentally sustainable and animal welfare-friendly agricultural systems led by small farmers, and
work to ensure that this framework is integrated across these levels and institutions.
4)
While HSI agrees that specific definitions for small-holder agriculture should be countryspecific, the global strategic framework should lay out broad guidelines to prevent the term from being
mis-used by industrial agribusiness interests. Specifically, HSI asks that the strategic framework
include guidelines that ensure that financial and policy supports intended for small-scale farmers, and
for employing environmentally sustainable and animal welfare-friendly pasture-based or mixed
farming systems, are not diverted to industrial farm animal production facilities (such as those meeting
the definition of medium or large Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), as defined by
the US Environmental Protection Agency).
5)
HSI also supports the general consensus that problems related to water scarcity and its
hidden market (via the international grain trade) should be mentioned in the GSF. It should be noted
that the animal agriculture sector also encompasses significant amounts of animal feed production,
which requires substantial inputs of water,[i] land,[ii] and energy.[iii] The growth in farm animal
production is projected to increase strain on water resources, particularly due to the high water
demands involved in growing animal feed.[iv] Not only are water supplies shrinking, the farm animal
sector is increasingly polluting the available water. According to the FAO, “The livestock sector…is
probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, ‘dead’ zones in
coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance
and many others.”[v] HSI asks that the GSF encourage policies and finance in the farm animal sector
that support \agroecological zones where extensive, pasture-based farm animal production is the
most sustainable form of agriculture, and discourage the expansion of industrial farm animal
production and the feed grain industry that supports it.
6)
HSI is in agreement with the general consensus that GSF should establish criteria for
monitoring international organizations. Despite the failure of industrial animal agriculture to promote
and sustain food security, development agencies and finance institutions, along with governments in
developed and developing countries, have played an integral role in supporting private industry’s
efforts to spread industrial farm animal production in the developing world. Examples of industrial farm
animal production facilities recently or currently supported by development institutions include the
International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) support Muyuan Foodstuff Co.Ltd, one of the largest hog
producers in China with an annual production capacity of around 500,000 hogs and breeders.[vi] The
IFC will be supporting further expansion of this industrial farm animal production facility in China,[vii] a
country with a growing obesity epidemic[viii] and a heavy reliance on soy-based feed from
deforestation-plagued Brazil to support its pig population.[ix] Interventions by USAID[x] and EBRD[xi]
in Eastern Europe supported the U.S.-based corporation Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer
in the world,[xii] and has come under fire from local communities suffering from pollutants emanating
from the industrial pig production facilities.[xiii] HSI asks the GSF to guide international development
and finance institutions away from their support of industrial animal agribusiness, and instead develop
innovative ways of financing small-scale farmers in the developing world practicing environmentally
sustainable and animal-welfare friendly agriculture.
112) UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Switzerland
153
Proceedings | 15
4
OHCHR has provided inputs to the GFS through the contribution by the HLTF on the Global Food
Security Crisis. In addition to this collective inputs, OHCHR wishes to add the following individual
contributions. • OHCHR welcomes and strongly supports building the GFS grounded on the Voluntary
Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of the Right to Adequate Food in the Context of
National Food Security (para 9 of the outline). OHCHR also welcomes and supports the explicit
application of a rights-based approach (para 10 of the outline). • One of the consistent approaches
adopted in the responses to the global food crisis since 2008 and recent efforts to achieve the world
food and nutrition security is the recognition and strong focus on the role of smallhold food producers,
especially women, as the centre of action. The GFS could further strengthen its focus on respect,
protection and fulfilment of human rights of smallholders throughout its strategy. In addition to the
focus of smallholders, the GFS also addresses the protection of rights of waged agricultural workers
and other landless farmers (e.g. sharecroppers), which amount to 20% of the rural hungry, as well as
the increasing risk of food insecurity for the urban poor (also linked with rural-urban migration due to
rural food insecurity). • The GFS would benefit from a stronger emphasis on the active role of women
and the need for elimination of discrimination against them. Women’s right to active, free and
meaningful participation in decision-making in food and nutrition security as well as in rural
development should be recognized and promoted in the GFS. Reference to the need of “involvement”
of women (e.g. p.6 of the outline) is insufficient. Likewise, while OHCHR welcomes reference to the
elimination of discrimination against women in the outline (p.6), there could be more prominent focus
on the impact and the need for elimination of discrimination against women in the context of food and
nutrition security, including in access to productive resources and services and markets, but also in
education, health care and employment. (e.g. Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against
Women Art. 14. Also see the HLTF on Global Food Security Crisis, “the Updated Comprehensive
Framework for Action” outcome 2.2) • OHCHR welcomes reference to the need for legislative and
policy frameworks to encourage investment conductive to food security and reduction of hunger and
malnutrition (page 7 of the outline). While the private sector will play a crucial role in achieving world
as well as national food and nutrition security, it would be important that their activities as well as laws
and policies which regulate their activities are in line with international human rights norms and
standards. In this regard, OHCHR recommends that the GFS will take into consideration
responsibilities of States as well as business enterprises on human rights, as elaborated in the
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
(http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/BusinessIndex.aspx). • With regards to the
reference to “Strengthening trading systems” (p.6 of the outline), the role of trade could be further
elaborated. For example, see the description of the role of trade in the UCFA; “open and wellfunctioning local, regional and international markets and trade policies are fundamental to food and
nutrition security. They should be characterized by price predictability and transparency, function in a
stable, transparent and integrated manner and contribute to the realization of internationally agreed
human rights. Interventions which support the functioning of international, regional and local markets
should be consistent with the goal of achieving food and nutrition security for all and of encouraging
efficient and competitive production by smallholders.” (see, p. 15 of the summary of UCFA, http://unfoodsecurity.org/sites/default/files/SUMMARY%20UCFA_EN.pdf) • The GFS could further benefit
from strengthening its reference to accountability, including accountability of CFS Member States to
discharge their human rights obligations in the context of achieving food and nutrition security. In
order to link the implementation of the GFS and the implementation of the right to food, the GFS could
consider adopting use of human rights indicators. The GFS could consider developing “common
indicators” based on the methodology on human rights indicators and a set of illustrative indicators on
the right to food developed by OHCHR
(http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx. This methodology is also
154
Proceedings | 15
5
adopted in the UCFA. See the full text of the UCFA, Topic Box 18, p. 57), together with the monitoring
methods on the right to food developed by FAO (e.g. “Methods to Monitor the Human Right to
Adequate Food”).
113) CAB International (CABI), Kenya
CABI welcomes the opportunity of commenting on the proposed Global Strategic Framework for Food
Security and Nutrition.
Statement of rationale, purpose, and function
The rationale, purpose, and function of the GSF is clearly stated. CABI is of the view that one of the
key activities involved in fulfilling the objectives of the GSF will be that listed fourth: to ‘encourage the
adoption of national strategies combining short and long-term objectives and identify ways by which
the international community can support countries in investing in the transition from short term to long
term.’
Long-term challenges and structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition
To the list of long-term challenges and structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition, we think it
is vital to add pre-harvest crops losses. Current estimates are that farmers worldwide lose an average
of 40% of what they grow to pests and diseases.
We would also like to see greater emphasis given to the importance of delivering knowledge to
farmers in a way that is easy to understand and apply. You state that ‘the role of agricultural research
institutions in developing local and global solutions will be critical’. We support this but would point out
that the local and global solutions will be ineffective if not communicated properly to people involved
in agriculture on the ground.
Priority issues to be addressed
We endorse the list of priority issues to be addressed, particularly the priority being given to women
and to smallholder producers. As is stated, ‘smallholder farmers produce the bulk of food, while at the
same time being the main victims of poverty.’
We agree also that agriculture should be recognised as an engine for development, and that there is
a need to support smallholder adaptation to changes in food demand and the challenges posed by
evolving technology and sustainability requirements.
Investment in agricultural research must be matched by investment in extension work. In our opinion,
research is important but only if it is communicated effectively to the people who need to make use of
it – the smallholder farmers.
In addition, we need to make sure that the voices of the farmers are heard at least as strongly as the
voices of other stakeholders. They are the people on the ground, who are experiencing the effects of
155
Proceedings | 15
6
climate change, who know which the new pests and diseases are because they are encountering
them on their crops, etc.
Are there additional policy options
While recognising that many of the challenges to ensuring food security are long-term intractable
problems, the issue of reducing crop losses due to pre-harvest, invasive species (pests, diseases and
weeds) is more straightforward. We have existing knowledge to avoid or mitigate many, if not all, of
the major causes of crop loss due to invasive species, both in field and post-harvest, yet there
appears to be a fundamental lack of political will towards implementing these readily-available
solutions.
CABI urges stakeholders to place less emphasis on increasing the range of ‘policy options’ and more
emphasis on ‘translating existing policy into action’ and actually overseeing the implementation
recommended science-policy based actions on the ground.
What kind of policy guidance should the GSF provide, and to whom?
In our opinion, the gap between international regulatory frameworks and smallholder farmers is wide
and is increasing in size on an almost daily basis. Even the knowledge gap between national policies
and action on the ground undertaken to assist smallholder farmers is unacceptably wide. So, while we
appreciate efforts by the CFS to “Develop a Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and
Nutrition in order to improve coordination and guide synchronized action by a wide range of
stakeholders...’, CABI would also welcome guidance on ‘bridging the gaps’ and facilitating policy
linkages at different scales i.e. loca, national, regional and international, to ensure effective and
consistent implementation of CSF policies.
Sarah Simons, PhD
Director, International Liaison
CABI
114) Jean François Belieres and Marie Aude Even from FAO, Italy
Nos commentaires sont organisés en deux parties, résumées ci-dessous et reprises en détail par la
suite :
-
A. Des suggestions sur les options et des approches qu’il faudrait plus mettre en valeur : (i)
approche systémique, (ii) contextualisée localement / territorialement (l’échelle nationale est
importante mais est insuffisante dans des pays où il existe une diversité des systèmes de
production), (iii) différenciées selon différentes formes d’unités de production (intégrant du
non agricole), privilégiant la « petite agriculture » mais intégrant d’autres paramètres (i.e.
emploi-travail salarié, revenu etc…) pour cibler les formes les plus pertinentes en terme de
réduction de la pauvreté et autres ; (iv) des approches institutionnelles (gouvernance)
permettant de réduire les asymétries entre les différents acteurs, veillant par exemple à
appuyer par exemple les OP pour participer au dialogue politique et améliorant l’accès de
differents acteurs à des diagnostics partagés
156
Proceedings | 15
7
-
B. Des questions et suggestions sur le diagnostic de fonds (parties II III) : importance des
investissements non agricoles, mettre plus d’accent sur l’accès au lieu de limiter à la simple
production alimentaire, mettre en avant les enjeux liés aux transformations structurelles de
l’agriculture et du secteur agro-alimentaire et leurs répercussions, en lien avec des enjeux
démographiques qui sont différents selon les zones et porteurs d’enjeux forts en termes
d’emploi et de migration dans certaines régions
A. Ce cadre est très intéressant mais ne met pas assez en valeur certains aspects qui nous
semblent clés pour présenter les options liées aux enjeux de la sécurité alimentaire et qui
devraient ressortir à la fois dans les parties diagnostic II et III et dans la partie options en point
IV ; certains points apparaissent dans seulement une des parties (la cohérence entre les
différentes parties du document serait à améliorer)
- Approches systémique et multisectorielles qui permettent d’intégrer les différents aspects
de la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle et pour mieux comprendre le fonctionnement des
économies locales, les inter-relations entre enjeux et apprécier les effets des politiques sur la
sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle. Cette approche systémique (centrée sur les relations
entre les variables plutôt que sur les seules variables sectorielles), serait axée sur les
différentes formes d’organisation de l’activité agricole, leurs dynamiques et leur contribution
au développement durable.
- Approches localisées et contextualisées, prenant également en compte des territoires
à enjeux différents: les défis, enjeux et questionnements prioritaires sont différents, non
seulement selon les pays mais aussi au sein des pays, selon contexte. Il nous semble que
cette diversité et spécificités locale est insuffisamment mise en valeur, ainsi que la nécessité
d’un minimum de décentralisation / adaptation aux enjeux locaux
- Approches ciblées et différenciées selon les différentes formes d’organisation de la
production, supposant une meilleure comprehension des unités de base que sont les
exploitations agricoles (et où sont prises les décision de production) qui sont aussi, pour les
exploitations familiales, des unités de consommation. Il faut pouvoir apprécier les effets de
politiques menées au niveau de ces unités en recherchant les interrelations.
- Le ciblage préférentiel de la petite agriculture (« rôle des petits exploitants») apparaît
pertinent mais necessite de complexifier ce débat. L’echelle est souvent insuffisante
pour classer des exploitations (taille très subjectif selon les pays, les productions etc…) ; le
concept d’utilisation du travail salarié, du type d’accès au capital, du revenu est sans doute
plus adapté pour différencier des exploitations selon leur potentiel de contribution a la
réduction de l’insécurité alimentaire. Par ailleurs, ils s’agit d’integrer les relations entre ces
formes d’organisation et d’autres et pas de simplement segmenter . Dans un territoire donné,
ces diverses formes (qui varient de la petite agriculture familiale aux entreprises à grande
échelle), ont des conditions d’accès différenciées aux marchés et aux ressources et
fournissent différents services économiques, sociaux et environnementaux. Elles ont des
contributions différentes, parfois complémentaires, à la réduction de la pauvreté et à
l’amélioration de la sécurité alimentaire pour le territoire concerné et au-delà
- Importance de la gouvernance locale et du renforcement des capacités des acteurs
souvent exclus (OP etc…). La gouvernance est rappelée dans les points 8 puis peu/pas
rappelée en point 10 et options. Il s’agit de mieux reconnaître en diagnostic (point 8), comme
l’a fait le rapport du HLPE, qu’il y a de forts problemes d’asymetrie entre acteurs, meme si
on les « associe »ou invite. Il s’agit donc dans les options de sans doute de davantage
renforcer les institutions rurales et notamment les capacités des organisations de
producteurs à participer à ce dialogue efficacement (rapport FAO sur institutions rurales à
157
Proceedings | 15
8
paraître); il s’agit aussi de renforcer l’acces de differenta types d’acteurs à une
information partagée (donc renvoie egalement a renforcement gouvernance systeme
d’information et de reconnaissance des savoirs locaux)
Sur le point V des options pour le suivi, il serait judicieux d’inclure un suivi également plus
systemique, permettant notamment egalement de relier aux enjeux environnementaux
B. Sur le diagnostic des questions qui « influent sur les tendances à long terme dans le domaine de
l'agriculture et de la sécurité alimentaire », nous avons également noté quelques enjeux
importants :
- Point 4 :
o Dans cette partie, il ne faut pas limiter l’insuffisance des investissements aux seuls
« investissements dans le secteur agricole » ; de nombreuses régions de part le
monde sont dépourvues des infrastructures minimum (routes, énergie, marchés, etc.)
nécessaires au développement économique.
o Les défaillances de marché devraient également être mentionnées dans cette partie,
et en particulier les aspects de corruption et autres comportements qui pénalisent
nombre de petits producteurs et qui ne sont pas conjoncturelles, mais bien
structurelles.
-
Point 4 et 5 : il nous semble que l’accent est trop mis sur l’aspect quantitatif de
l’insécurité alimentaire au détriment de l’accès et donc de la pauvreté, des inégalités,
emplois etc. Un accent trop fort sur ces problématiques de long terme a conduit certains
pays à privilégier des investissements pour la production immediate, excluant la petite
agriculture sous pretexte de moindre capacité immediate à produire davantage. Ce qui
n’apparait pas dans le texte tel que formulé au point 4. Si pour la pauvreté le texte en fait
mention plus loin (essentiellement en page 5), les inégalités sont absentes (évoquées aux
points sur : (i) la vulnérabilité page 5 et (ii) la réforme foncière page 7). Ces deux aspects
doivent clairement être évoqués dans cette partie pour que plus loin il soit proposé, comme
l’un des principes promus par le CSA, meilleure répartition à tous les échelons (du local au
mondial) de la valeur ajoutée, et au sens plus large des richesses. L’équité est évoquée au
point IV : « l’importance de l'équité dans les échanges commerciaux internationaux » … elle
reste plus modérée que l’affirmation de « l’échange inégal ».
-
Point 6 : il conviendrait de rajouter les évolutions structuelles de l’agriculture et du
secteur agro-alimentaire et le défi que cela pose dans différents contextes.
o Les agricultures connaissent aujourd’hui de rapides transformations structurelles, en
témoignent des évolutions majeures concernant les régimes fonciers, l’utilisation de
la main d’œuvre salariée, le recours aux activités non agricoles, les modes
d’intégration aux marchés, les nouvelles formes d’entreprises, etc. On connaît
toutefois peu de choses sur l’ampleur de ces changements, leur dynamique et
l’importance de leurs impacts, notamment vis-à-vis de la sécurité alimentaire et
nutritionnelle.
o Dans certains pays, une transition rapide vers une agriculture a faible nombre d’actifs
pourrait soulever des enjeux majeurs alors que la croissance demographique reste
forte et les possibilités d’emploi limitées (notamment en Afrique SubSaharienne)
o De même les évolutions de l’organisation du secteur agro-alimentaire avec de fortes
concentrations au niveau de la transformation des produits agricoles et surtout de la
158
Proceedings | 15
9
-
commercialisation sont des éléments à prendre en compte d’une part vis-à-vis de la
production (revenu des petits producteurs, diversité des produits et espèces,
pratiques imposées, etc.) que de la consommation (qualité, diversité, etc.).
La formulation du premier tiret « les variations démographiques : croissance de la
population, urbanisation et exode rural » ne laisse entrevoir qu’une partie des
problèmes avec un focus sur le départ des zones rurales vers les zones urbaines. Les
problèmes sont plus diversifiés, avec des zones de forte croissance et d’autres de stagnation
avec en toile de fonds la répartition des actifs et en conséquence les emplois à fournir aux
nouveaux actifs dans les zones à forte croissance. Dans certaines zones (notamment en
Afrique subsaharienne), la croissance de la population agricole se prolongera pendant encore
de nombreuses années alors que les ressources disponibles se dégradent, l’agriculture a
donc un rôle important à jouer pour l’emploi.
English translation
Our comments are organized in two parts, summarized here and later described in detail:
-
-
A. Suggestions for the options and approaches that should be further enhanced: (i)
systematic approach, (ii) placed in local/ regional context (the national scale is important but it
is insufficient in countries where there is diversity of production systems), (iii) diferentiated
between different forms of production units (incorporating the non-agricultural sector), giving
priority to the « small agriculture » but integrating other parameters (i.e. paid
employment/work, income, etc…) so that the most pertinent in terms of reducing poverty and
others are targeted; (iv) institutional approaches (governance) that will allow reduction of the
dissimilarities between the different parties involved, taking care, for example, to support the
producers’organizations’ participation in the political dialogue and to improve the access of
the different parties to the shared diagnoses.
B. Questions and suggestions on the diagnosis of funding (parts II and III): the importance of
non-agricultural investments, putting more emphasis on access instead of concentrating on
mere food production, highlighting the issues linked to structural changes in agriculture and
agro-industry and their repercussions, combined with demographic issues that differ from
zone to zone and which involve major concerns in terms of employment and migration in
certain regions.
C. This framework is interesting but does not put enough emphasis on certain aspects which
we consider essential in order to present the options related to the issues of food security
and that should appear both in the diagnosis under parts II and III and in the options section of
point IV; some items appear only in one of these sections (the coherence between the different
parts of the document could well be improved)
- Systematic and multisectorial approachs that allow the integration of different aspects of
food security and nutrition, to better understand how the local economy functions, the
interrelations between issues and to appreciate the effects of policies on food security and
nutrition. This systematic approach (focused on the relations between the variables rather
than only on the sectoral variables), would be based on the different ways in which
agricultural activity is organised, their dynamics and contribution to a sustainable
development.
- Local and in context approachs, that take equally into account the different regional
issues: the challenges, issues and priority reflexions are different not only according to the
159
Proceedings | 16
0
-
-
-
country but also within the country, according to the context. We think that this local diversity
and characteristics are insufficiently weighted, as well as the need for a minimum of
decentralization/adaptation to local issues
Targeted and differenciatede approaches according to the different forms of
production organization, assuming a better understanding of the basic units i.e the
farms (and where the production decisions are taken) and which are also, for the family
farmers, units of consumption. It is necessary to be able to understand the effects of
policies implemented at the level of these units by seeking out the interrelations.
The preferential targeting of smallholders (« role of small farmers») seems pertinent,
but means that this debate needs to be more complex. Their size is often insufficient
for classifying the farms (size is very subjective depending on the country, the crops,
etc…) ; the concept of using paid labour, types of access to capital, and income is without
doubt more adapted to ranking farms according to their potential to contribute to the
reduction of food insecurity. In addition, it is a question of integrating the relationships
between these and other forms of organization and not simply segmentation. In a given
region, these diverse forms (that vary from small family holdings to big businesses) have
different conditions of access to markets and resources and provide different economic, social
and environmental services. They make different contributions, maybe complementary, to the
reduction of poverty and the improvement of food security for the region concerned and
beyond.
Importance of local administration and reinforcement of capabilities of participants
often excluded (producers’organizations etc...). Governance is mentioned under point 8
and later has little or no mention in point 10 and options. The diagnosis (point 8) needs to
recognize more fully, as does the HLPE report, that there are serious problems of
asymmetry between the participants, even if they are « involved » or invited to participate.
Therefore among the options it is a question, without doubt a preference, of reinforcing
rural institutions and in particular the capabilities of producers organizations to
participate effectivelly in this dialogue (see FAO´s report on rural institutions to be
published); also, of reinforcing the access of different categories of participants to a
shared information (therefore, refers equally to reinforced administrations, information
systems and the recognition of local knowledge)
In relation to point V, options for follow-up, it would also be prudent to include a more systematic
follow-up that allows in particular linking in to environmental issues.
D. On the analysis of questions that "influence the long term tendencies in agriculture and food
security," we have noted some important issues:
- Point 4
o In this area, the insufficiency of investments should not be limited only to
« investments in the agricultural sector » ; several areas in the world are lacking the
minimum infrastructures (roads, energy, markets, etc.) necessary for economic
development.
o Equally, the market´s shortcomings must here be mentioned and in particular the
aspects of corruption and other conduct that penalize many smallholders and that are
not short-term, but rather, structural.
-
Points 4 and 5 : it seems to us that there is too much enphasis on the quantitative aspect
of food insecurity to the detriment of access, and therefore poverty , inequality,
160
Proceedings | 16
1
employment, etc. A too strong accent on the long term problems has led certain countries to
give priority to investments in very short term production, excluding the smallholders on the
pretext of their lesser immediate capacity for increasing production . This does not appear in
the text, in the way that it is set out in point 4. If the text in fact mentions poverty further on
(essentially on page 5), the inequalities are not mentioned (as raised in points related to: (i)
vulnerability on page 5 and (ii) the property reform on page 7). These two aspects must be
clearly presented in this section so that later there may be proposed, as one of the principles
endorsed by the CFS, better distribution at all levels (from local to global) of the added value,
and, in the broader sense, of wealth. The need for fairness is mentioned in point IV : « the
need for fairness in international trading » … it remains moderate compared to the claim of
«unequal trade».
Item 6: It would be convenient to include the structural evolutions of agriculture and the
food processing industry and the resulting challenges in different contexts
o The farming industry today is experiencing rapid structural transformations, as
testified to by the major evolutions in land tenure, the use of paid labour, the
resorting to non-agricultural activities, the ways of markets integration, the new
forms of businesses, etc. However,we know little of the scale of these changes, their
impetus and the importance of their impact, in particular in relation to food security
and nutrition.
o In certain countries, a rapid transition towards an agriculture sector with a small
number of operators could raise big issues, while demographic growth rates stay
high and the possibilities of employment are limited (in particular in Sub-Saharan
Africa)
o Likewise, the development of the organization of agrobusiness towards big
concentrations at the level of transformation of agricultural products, and above all in
marketing, are elements to take into account, on one hand in relation to production
(income of the smallholders,diversity of products and species, imposed practices,
etc.) and on the other, to consumption (quality, diversity, etc.).
The formulation of the first draft indent « the demographic changes: population growth,
urbanization and rural-urban migration » only allows a part of the problems to be engaged with
a focus on the migration of people from the rural to the urban zones. The problems are more
diversified, with zones of high growth and others with stagnation against the backdrop of the
distribution of assets and in consequence of the jobs to be filled for new assets in the zones of high
growth. In certain regions (in particular in Sub-Saharan Africa), the agricultural population growth will
still increase for many years whereas the available resources will deteriorate, therefore agriculture
has an important role to play in terms of em
-
115) Government of France
Objectifs du GSF
Comme l'indique le document décrivant les objectifs, principes de base, structure et processus
d'élaboration du GSF (CFS 2011/Inf.14), « l'objectif global du GSF est de fournir un instrument
dynamique pour renforcer le rôle du CSA et promouvoir sa vision en tant que plate-forme pour
améliorer la coordination et guider l'action synchronisée d'un large éventail d'intervenants à l'appui
des programmes mondiaux, régionaux et des actions menées par les pays, dans le but d'éviter de
161
Proceedings | 16
2
futures crises alimentaires, d'éliminer la faim et de garantir la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition pour
tous les êtres humains. »




La France soutient la définition d'un GSF avec l’objectif de mieux coordonner les politiques et
les actions en faveur de la sécurité alimentaire.
Ce cadre stratégique doit être destiné à tous les acteurs de la sécurité alimentaire et plus
globalement du développement (Etats, bailleurs, ONG, secteur privé, organisations de
producteurs, institutions de recherche, organisations de la société civile).
Il devra pouvoir être une référence pour ces acteurs qui mettent en place aux niveau national,
régional et global des politiques et actions de développement et de lutte contre l'insécurité
alimentaire ; mais rester suffisamment souple pour permettre une adaptation en fonction des
contextes et conditions institutionnelles et économiques de mise en œuvre.
Les objectifs présentés dans la partie I.3 du schéma annoté constituent une bonne
base de départ. Le mapping des financements dédiés à la sécurité alimentaire ne
devraient néanmoins pas faire partie du GSF.
Processus d’élaboration


Comme l'indiquent le schéma annoté et le document sur le statut du GSF (CFS 2011/8),
l’élaboration du GSF devrait permettre la participation de l’ensemble des acteurs concernés,
en particulier de la société civile, représentant les populations les plus affectées par la
sécurité alimentaire. Les acteurs impliqués devront être représentatifs des différents
domaines impactant la sécurité alimentaire (agriculture, environnement, commerce, santé,
éducation, nutrition, emploi …), qui nécessite un traitement intersectoriel. Les orientations du
GSF devront ainsi faire l’objet de concertations et de débats. Le schéma annoté gagnerait à
préciser les parties prenantes qui seront consultées.
Le calendrier proposé devrait être précisé, par exemple sous forme de tableau, afin
d'indiquer la durée et le résultat attendu (production de documents de travail et de
versions intermédiaires du GSF) pour chaque étape. Compte-tenu de l'expérience des
Directives volontaires sur le foncier, il nous semble contraint.
Structure du document

Le concept de document souple et évolutif, bien que rappelé dans l'introduction, n'est pas
explicité ensuite, notamment en ce qui concerne le mécanisme de révision périodique et
d’évaluation du GSF.

La structure proposée dans le schéma annoté ne répond pas entièrement aux objectifs
identifiés. Notamment, les parties II et III se chevauchent parfois, la distinction entre les 2
n'est pas toujours claire. L'identification des manques et lacunes n'apparait pas clairement.
Par ailleurs, la partie définition n'apporte pas de plus-value.
Contenu actuel du schéma annoté
Le schéma annoté préfigure le contenu du GSF. Néanmoins, il doit être à ce stade conçu comme un
document de base pour une large consultation. Le document actuel va trop loin dans la substance et
devrait se limiter à un plan détaillé sans prises de position sur le fond. Celles-ci alimenteront les
consultations à venir.
162
Proceedings | 16
3
A titre d'exemple, concernant le « renforcement des systèmes commerciaux », il est préférable de
parler d'accès au marché et de supprimer les références à la libéralisation (supprimer « la liberté des
flux commerciaux tant à l'intérieur des pays qu'entre pays, et » ainsi que « grâce à la réduction
d'obstacles aux commerce et à l'élimination des mesures de soutien à l'agriculture qui perturbent les
échanges »).
Partie I : les objectifs :
 Cette partie pourrait également reprendre le point II du document décrivant les objectifs,
principes de base, structure et processus d'élaboration du GSF (CFS 2011/Inf.14).
Partie II :les défis
 La partie II gagnerait à se concentrer sur les défis à long terme (dimension prospective) : la
notion de causes structurelles de la sécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition de la partie II
relevant davantage des « questions prioritaires » de la partie III (« causes structurelles de la
sécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition et questions prioritaires en découlant »). Ainsi, le
paragraphe 4 relève de la partie III.
 Le paragraphe 6 listant les questions à aborder est hétérogène (de très général - changement
climatique - à très technique - dégradation des sols qui pourrait être repris dans pression sur
les ressources naturelles-). Des défis devraient être ajoutés : urbanisation, emploi rural et
diversification des revenus, pertes post récoltes et gaspillage, énergie (et notamment
biocarburants), gouvernance, etc.. Certaines questions sont mélangées (commerce avec
qualité sanitaire des aliments et nutrition) : il faudrait les traiter séparément, même si on peut
en examiner les liens.
Partie III : les questions prioritaires
 Un certain nombre de questions pourraient être ajoutées : l'emploi et des revenus dans le
secteur agricole et agro-alimentaire ; l'accès au marché ; les structures de production
agricole ; les politiques agricoles et alimentaires (notamment régionales) ; le renforcement de
capacités, la vulgarisation, le transfert de technologies ; la recherche agronomique.

La partie « harmonisation des subventions agricoles » devrait être revue, le langage actuel
n'est pas acceptable.

De manière générale, la liste des questions prioritaires devrait être discutée : le document va
loin dans la substance et devrait se limiter à un plan détaillé sans prises de position sur le
fond. Celles-ci alimenteront les consultations à venir.

Une référence au HLPE devrait être introduite : le HLPE pourra être sollicité pour apporter
son analyse.
Partie IV : les options politiques
 Il manque une référence explicite aux différents cadres mentionnés par le document de
réforme du CSA, tels que le Cadre global d'action (Comprehensive Framework for Action CFA) des Nations Unies, le Programme détaillé pour le développement de l'agriculture
africaine (Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme - CAAPD) et les
directives volontaires à l'appui de la concrétisation progressive du droit à une alimentation
adéquate dans le contexte de la sécurité alimentaire nationale (Volontary Guidelines for the
Right to Food – VGRtF). Au-delà de ces cadres, il nous semble essentiel que le document
163
Proceedings | 16
4
prenne en compte : les conclusions du Sommet sur la sécurité alimentaire de 1996, le cadre
global pour la nutrition (Scaling Up Nutrition -SUN), l’ensemble des travaux de référence sur
le droit à l’alimentation, les travaux de l’évaluation internationale de la connaissance, la
science et la technologie agricole pour le développement (IAASTD), les Directives volontaires
sur la tenure foncière et les ressources naturelles. Ces différents cadres sont
complémentaires et le GSF doit souligner cette complémentarité et permettre de mettre en
cohérence ces cadres.

Point sur le « renforcement des systèmes commerciaux » : il est préférable de parler d'accès
au marché et de supprimer les références à la libéralisation (supprimer « la liberté des flux
commerciaux tant à l'intérieur des pays qu'entre pays, et » ainsi que « grâce à la réduction
d'obstacles aux commerce et à l'élimination des mesures de soutien à l'agriculture qui
perturbent les échanges »).

Les recommandations du HLPE retenues par le CSA pourront également être introduites
dans cette partie.
Partie V : le suivi
Le document propose un suivi des objectifs au niveau national. Plutôt que de se lancer dans des
processus lourds qui risquent d'être inefficaces, il semble plus opportun de proposer des outils à
adapter au niveaux global, régional ou national.
Partie VI : les définitions

Cette partie n'est pas nécessaire et pourrait être supprimée.

Sécurité nutritionnelle : outre le fait qu'une telle définition n'existe pas à l'heure actuelle et que
la définition proposée devrait être discutée, la question de l'intérêt même de développer ce
(nouveau) concept doit être posée en préalable. La définition de la sécurité alimentaire
comporte déjà la mention de « nourriture saine et nutritive ».
English translation
GSF Objectives
As it is indicated in the document describing the objectives, basic principles, structure and process of
elaboration of GSF (CFS 2011/Inf.14), "the overall purpose of the GSF is to provide a dynamic
instrument to enhance the role of the CFS and promote its vision as a platform to improve
coordination and guide synchronization action by a wide range of stakeholders in support of global,
regional and country-led actions to prevent future food crises, eliminate hunger and ensure food
security and nutrition for all human beings."



France supports the definition of a GSF aiming at a better coordination of policies and
measures promoting food security.
This strategic framework must be designed for all the actors of food security and more widely
of development (states, donors, NGO, private sector, producer organizations, investigation
institutions, civil society organizations).
It must be a reference for those actors that put in place politics and actions for development
and fight against food insecurity at national, regional and global levels; but must stay
164
Proceedings | 16
5

sufficiently flexible to allow an adaptation according to the context and economic and
institutional conditions for implementation.
The objectives presented on part I.3 of the annotated outline are a good base for
departure. Nevertheless, the mapping of funds dedicated to food security should not
be part of GSF.
Process of elaboration


As it is shown in the annotated outline and on the statute of GSF (CFS 2011/8), the drafting
of GSF must allow the participation of all the groups of concerned actors, in particular of civil
society, which represents the population more affected by food security. The actors involved
must be representatives of the different fields affected by food security (agriculture,
environment, trade, health, education, nutrition, employment ...) that need an inter-sectorial
treatment. Thus, the directions of GSF must be the object of consultations and debates. The
Annotated Outline must specify the stakeholders that will be consulted.
The schedule proposed must be clarified, for example, in the form of a chart, in order to
indicate deadlines and the expected result (production of working documents and GSF
intermediate versions) for each stage. In view of the experience of the Voluntary Guidelines
on land, such calendar seems to be restrained.
Document structure

The concept of flexible and progressive document, as it is mentioned in the introduction,
is not explained afterwards, especially in relation to the mechanism of periodic revision and
evaluation of GSF.

The proposed structure in the Annotated Outline does not respond entirely to the
identified objectives. In particular, sometimes parts II and III overlap, the distinction between
the two is not always clear. The identification of shortages and gaps does not appear clearly.
Furthermore, the definition part does not contribute to any added value.
Annotated Outline current content
The Annotated Outline anticipates the content of GSF. Nevertheless, it must be conceived at this
stage as a basic document for a broad consultation. The current document goes to long to the
substance and should be limited to a detailed plan without taking positions over the background.
These will be fed by future consultations.
As an example, in relation to « strengthened trading systems », it is better to talk about market access
and to eliminate references to liberalization (eliminate « open trade flows within and between the
countries and » as well as « by way of reductions in trade barriers and the elimination of tradedistorting support to agriculture »).
Part I: the objectives:
 This part could equally take the item II of the document that describes the purposes, basic
principles, structure and GSF elaboration process (CFS 2011/Inf.14).
Part II: the challenges
165
Proceedings | 16
6


Part II will benefit from focusing on the long term challenges (prospective dimension): the
notion of structural causes of malnutrition of Part II increasing the importance of « priority
issues » of Part III (« structural causes of food security and malnutrition and priority issues to
be addressed»). Thus, paragraph 4 should be included in Part III.
Paragraph 6 listing the issues to be addressed is heterogeneous (from too general - climate
change - to too technical - land degradation, that could be covered in conjunction with natural
resources-). Challenges must be added: urbanization, rural employment and income
diversification, losses after harvest and waste, energy (in particular biofuels), governance, etc.
Some issues are mixed (trading with food safety and nutrition): they must be treated
separately, even if one could examine their connections.
Part III: priority issues
 A certain number of issues could be added: employment and incomes in the food and
agricultural sector; market access; structures of agricultural production; food and agricultural
policies (at regional level in particular); capacity building, extension, transfer of technologies;
agricultural research.

The part « uniformity in agricultural subsidies » must be revised; the current expression is not
acceptable.

In general, the priorities issues list should be discussed: the document is too long and it
should be limited to a detailed plan without taking positions over the background. These will
be fed by future consultations.

A reference to HLPE should be introduced: HLPE could be asked to contribute with its own
analysis.
Part IV: Policy Options
 There is no explicit reference to the different frameworks mentioned in the document
reforming CFS, such as Comprehensive Framework for Action - CFS, United Nations, the
detailed program for the development of African agriculture (Comprehensive Africa
Agriculture Development Programme - CAAPD) and the Voluntary Guidelines for the Right to
Food – VGRtF. Beyond these frameworks, we think that it is essential that the document
takes into account: the conclusions of the Summit for Food Security (1996), the global
framework for nutrition: Scaling Up Nutrition -SUN, the whole background work over the right
to food, the work of the Intergovernmental Assessment on Agricultural Science and
technology for Development (IAASTD), Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance
of Land and Natural Resources. These different frameworks are complementary and GSF
should emphasize such complementarity and allow consistency between them.

An item on « strengthened trading systems », it is better to talk about market access and to
eliminate references to liberalization (eliminate « open trade flows within and between the
countries and » as well as « by way of reductions in trade barriers and the elimination of
trade-distorting support to agriculture »).

The HLPE recommendations kept by CFS could equally be introduced in this part.
Part V: Monitoring Progress
166
Proceedings | 16
7
The document proposes monitoring the progress of objectives at national level. Rather than starting a
long process that could be inefficient, it seems more appropriate to propose tools that could be
adapted to the global, regional or national levels.
Part VI: the definitions

This part is not necessary and could be eliminated.

Nutritional security: besides the fact that such definition does not exist at present and that the
definition proposed must be discussed, the point of developing this (new) concept must be
tackled as a prerequisite. The definition of food security already mentions « healthy and
nutritious food ».
116) Ministerio de Agricultura y Ministerio de la Mujer y Desarrollo Social del Perú
El esquema anotado es el punto de partida del proceso para la elaboración del Marco Estratégico
Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y la Nutrición. Cuando se culmine su elaboración, el Marco
Estratégico ofrecerá directrices y recomendaciones para que se adopten medidas en los planos
internacional, regional y nacional que permitan alcanzar la seguridad alimentaria y erradicar el
hambre y la desnutrición. Por ello, la FAO busca recoger las aportaciones y sugerencias de los
Estados a fin de llevar a cabo un proceso inclusivo con miras a la elaboración de dicho Marco
Estratégico.
El Esquema Anotado aborda los siguientes aspectos:
-
Declaración de principios, propósitos y función.
Las causas estructurales del hambre y la desnutrición
Cuestiones prioritarias que se deben abordar
Opciones en materia de políticas, y
Seguimiento de los progresos en el plano nacional
Es sobre esos aspectos que se elaboran las siguientes interrogantes que se deben responder:
1.- ¿Están claramente definidos el fundamento, los objetivos y funciones del Marco
Estratégico Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y la Nutrición?, y en caso contrario qué
cambios específicos sugiere.
No está claramente definido el fundamento, los objetivos ni las funciones del Marco Estratégico
Mundial para la Seguridad Alimentaria y la Nutrición. Lo que se aprecia es una redacción confusa en
esa parte que se podría organizar de la siguiente manera:
Objetivo general.Proveer un instrumento dinámico para potenciar la función del Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria
Mundial como una plataforma para mejorar la cooperación, catalizar una acción coordinada y
proporcionara orientación para alcanzar asociaciones eficaces y sinérgicas en apoyo de los planes y
procesos mundiales, regionales y lideradas por los países, diseñados para evitar futuras crisis
167
Proceedings | 16
8
alimentarias, eliminar el hambre y garantizar la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición para todas las
personas.
Objetivos específico.Proveer directrices y recomendaciones claras para que se adopten medidas coherentes en los
planos internacional, regional y nacional, que cuenten con el apoyo de una amplia variedad de partes
interesadas y la aprobación del grupo de alto nivel de expertos, a la vez que se respeta el control de
los países sobre los programas para luchar contra la inseguridad alimentaria.
Funciones.Determinar desafíos y oportunidades para la acción en materia de políticas relativas a la
seguridad alimentaria.
Fomentar la convergencia y credibilidad internacional de estrategias, políticas y programas
relativos a la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición
Fomentar la adopción de estrategias nacionales que combinen objetivos a corto y largo
plazo y determinar formas que permitan a la comunidad internacional respaldar a los
países que inviertan acciones de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición.
2.- ¿Existen causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y desafíos
adicionales a largo plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta y cuáles cree que son las más
relevantes?
Una de las causas estructurales también está referido al tema del acceso a los alimentos; si bien es
cierto que es importante abordar a la seguridad alimenaria desde la disponibilidad de los alimentos
también es necesario considerar que muchas personas en el mundo pasan hambre por que se
encuentran en condiciones de pobreza o pobreza extrema en la que no cuentan con recursos
necesarios para acceder a alimentos suficientes y tener una vida digna y sana.
3.- ¿Existen cuestiones adicionales que deben ser consideradas y cuáles cree que son las
más importantes para ser incluidas en el Marco Estratégico?
En términos de ordenar mejor la propuesta, se podría sugerir que se visibilicen los componentes de
la seguridad alimentaria como son; disponibilidad, acceso, uso, estabilidad e institucionalidad y
alrededor de ellos estructurar la propuesta.
4.- ¿Hay opciones adicionales de política que deben ser tomadas en cuenta y cuáles de ellas
cree que deben ser incluidas en el Marco Estratégico?
Se podría incluir como una de las opciones de política el mejorar las condiciones de la
institucionalidad en la seguridad alimentaria; ya que una buena gestión pública para la seguridad
alimentaria incide en la mejora de la coordinación de las políticas. De esta forma se podría equilibrar
los intereses y la participación de múltiples partes interesadas con decisiones sustantivas y
estratégicas que se traduzcan en resultados tangibles, y entonces para ello es necesario un liderazgo
efectivo que promueva la coordinación y los vínculos entre las partes.
5.- En relación al seguimiento del progreso hacia los objetivos de seguridad alimentaria y
nutrición a todos los niveles (nacional, regional y mundial) ¿Qué tipo de orientación debería
aportar el Marco Estratégico?
168
Proceedings | 16
9
De igual forma se sugeriría que el seguimiento a las acciones de seguridad alimentaria estén en
relación a indicadores que tienen que ver con cada uno de los componentes de la seguridad
alimentaria y enfatizando las diferencias entre indicadores ex ante y ex post; es decir, indicadores ex
ante(producción de alimentos, uso de agua segura, niveles de pobreza, etc.) y ex post (desnutrición,
anemia, déficit calórico, etc.)
CONCLUSIONES
La consulta realizada sobre la propuesta del “Marco Estratégico Mundial para la Seguridad
Alimentaria y la Nutrición” es de relevancia ya que es un espacio para que los Estados canalicen sus
sugerencias y observaciones en el proceso de elaboración de un documento que servirá de marco de
referencia en los esfuerzos para la erradicación del hambre y la desnutrición a nivel mundial.
MINISTERIO DE AGRICULTURA
1)
Están claramente definidos el fundamento, los objetivos y funciones del CGSF, y en caso
contrario, que cambios específicos sugiere?
2)
De la lectura se observa que sí se encuentran claramente definidos los fundamentos,
objetivos y funciones; ya que son bastantes amplios, temas como la armonización con
los cinco principios de Roma, el proceso de carácter democrático, articulación con los
demás marcos institucionales, su consideración como documento de alto nivel y la
especialización del grupo que lo trate (compuesta por expertos de las partes interesadas)
2) Existen causas estructurales de la inseguridad alimentaria y la desnutrición y desafíos
adicionales a largo plazo que deben ser tomados en cuenta
y
cuáles
cree que son los
más relevantes?
Debería considerarse la complejidad de la inseguridad alimentaria en las poblaciones rurales
en pobreza extrema, donde los Estados deben generar instrumentos que permitan armonizar la
inversión pública sectorial entre sí,y facilitar el cofinanciamiento de los recursos con los recursos de
la cooperación para el desarrollo en este segmento de la población. Asimismo, debe tratarse
de manera especial para las poblaciones indígenas, que son poco visualizadas, y para las cuales se
debería de tratar de manera especial.
3) Existen cuestiones adicionales que deben ser consideradas y cuáles cree que son las más
importantes para ser incluidas en el marco estratégico mundial?
Debería agregarse el tema de derechos de propiedad intelectual sobre la manipulación del
germoplasma de la biodiversidad conservada por las poblaciones indígenas, derecho a
participar de las utilidades generadas por el comercio de fármacos desarrollados en base a dicho
germoplasma. Este tema no se trata de manera abierta, y requiere ser visualizado y expuesto. La
inclusión de estas poblaciones requiere que se les reconozca como conservadoras y
poseedoras de germoplasma potencialmente utilizable, y conocimientos
(metodologías,
métodos, etc.) válidos para su aprovechamiento.
4) Hay opciones adicionales de política que deben ser tomadas en cuenta y cuáles de ellas cree
que deben ser incluidas en el Marco Estratégico Mundial?
169
Proceedings | 17
0
Promover el desarrollo de políticas nacionales y programas de FAO que los financien, a fin de
identificar, investigar, poner en valor el germoplasma nativo y sus conocimientos asociados, así
como el desarrollo de un protocolo internacional que vele por la protección de los derechos de los
pueblos originarios (indígenas, nativos) en esta materia.
5) En relación al seguimiento del progreso hacia los objetivos de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición
a todos los niveles (Nacional, Regional y Mundial)¿que tipo de orientación debería aportar el
Marco Estratégico Global y a quién?.
No hay comentario al respecto.
117) Justin Bienvenu Moyo, ACFM, Congo Brazzaville
Existe t-il des causes structurelles de l’insécurité alimentaire et de la malnutrition ainsi que
d’autres défis à long terme à prendre en compte ? D’après vous, quels sont les plus
importants ?
-
manque de la conception de programme de planifications cohérentes et réalistes
-
manque de politique fiable pour prévenir les catastrophes ;
-
absence dans beaucoup de pays africains d’un mécanisme de veille concernant les
changements climatiques.
Existe t-il des options de politiques à prendre en compte ? D’après vous, lesquelles devraient
être incluses dans le GSF ? Que pensez- vous du rôle des interventions directes telles que
fournies par les banques alimentaires ? Comment peut- on les renforcer ?
-
Politique de relance des cultures vivrières avec des semences améliorées ;
-
Organisation professionnelle des producteurs avec un accès facile aux financements ;
-
Revoir la politique du PAM en matière de banques alimentaires : privilégier les productions
locales, réduire les importations de produits agricoles d’autres pays surtout du Nord ;
-
Eviter de déstructurer les marchés des pays africains producteurs
-
Améliorer la productivité des systèmes de production agricole à petite échelle, surtout face
aux changements structurels touchant la demande de produits alimentaires et agricoles
o
La politique agricole au niveau des pays africains doit s’ouvrir à des
o
Investissements, concrets.
Dans quelle mesure les cadres relatifs à la sécurité alimentaire et à la nutrition (FSN) auxquels
participent les parties prenantes multipartites, peuvent être renforcés de façon à encourager
les liens et contacts parmi les groupes opérant dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire et
de la nutrition ?
-
Il faudra mettre en place un mécanisme de dialogue participatif et encourager les contacts
par des échanges réguliers
Dans quelle mesure les cadres relatifs à la sécurité alimentaire et à la nutrition (FSN) auxquels
participent les parties prenantes multipartites, peuvent être renforcés de façon à encourager
170
Proceedings | 17
1
les liens et contacts parmi les groupes opérant dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire et
de la nutrition ?
-
-
Faire pression auprès des gouvernants pour la mise en œuvre des engagements pris en
matière d’investissement dans l’agriculture (le pourcentage de 10%) proposé par la
déclaration de Maputo).
Il faudrait aussi que les gouvernements africains subventionnent l’agriculture
MOYO Justin Bienvenu
ACFM CONGO Brazzaville
171