Food & Climate
Unintended consequences and systemic conflicts among multiple objectives of food systems may make many challenges. For example, maximizing crop and livestock productivity through intensive systems has not only led to increased food availability but also contributed to environmental degradation, declining diet quality for some populations and increased inequality between small- and large-holder production systems, according to a new study.
A groundbreaking new study, “Governance and resilience as entry points for transforming food systems in the countdown to 2030”, presents the first comprehensive analysis of change since 2000 in key food system indicators, according to a statement that “Food & Climate” platform received.
The peer-reviewed research was conducted by the Food Systems Countdown Initiative (FSCI), a collaboration of leading experts and organizations, coordinated by Columbia University, Cornell University, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), and the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN). The resulting report tracks 50 food systems indicators across the world, organized into five themes: 1) diets, nutrition, and health; 2) environment, natural resources, and production; 3) livelihoods, poverty, and equity; 4) resilience; and 5) governance.
The study which published today in Nature Food, said: “food systems span multiple domains, actors, governance systems, spaces and time horizons, and decisions may be made without structured, systematic consideration of these multiple dimensions or the diverse outcomes to which food systems contribute”.
For example, policies targeting short-term objectives to ensure calorie sufficiency may not consider the long-term impacts of large-scale monocropping on biodiversity or pest adaptation nor the impacts of staple-focused policies on nutrition. As a result, many food systems challenges have arisen owing to unintended consequences and systemic conflicts among multiple objectives.
Part of understanding, addressing and preventing these pernicious unintended outcomes is making food systems’ interactions more explicit so that they can be directly managed and governed.
Governance role
Governance has a specific role in navigating these interactions, especially through decision-making processes that consider potential consequences across domains. Appropriate governance for food systems transformation has been gaining recognition on the global political agenda.
Recent analysis of country progress along national food system transformation pathways shows 70 countries reporting efforts since 2021 to strengthen food systems governance.
Governance impacts food system transformation through multiple channels. Corporate concentration and influence on policymaking through lobbying and campaign contributions can bias governments against policies that are important for food environments and diets. Political polarization and electoral turnover can impede policy momentum and detract attention from long-term policymaking.
The countries with weak institutional capacity may be unable to manage risks from economic or climate shocks, thereby affecting their ability to drive food systems change and undermining prior gains.
Geopolitical conflicts have cross-jurisdictional impacts on food systems, as demonstrated by the Ukraine war’s impact on global food security.
The thematic focus of this Analysis is on governance indicators in both the monitoring update and the analysis of interactions, on the premise that governance quality is linked to whether synergies are enabled, and tradeoffs are identified and managed.
To identify the network of interactions across food systems, we build on growing literature on food system interactions from multiple disciplines focused on food, environment, water, health, socioecological, political and economic systems.
these studies underscore that data limitations, lack of interoperability and gaps across domains, geographies and scales pose challenges to understanding complex food systems interactions.
Food price volatility
20 of the 42 metrics analyzed over time have improved, and notable achievements include significant increases in access to safe water and the availability of vegetables. Conservation of plant and animal genetic resources has also risen, bolstering the resilience of food systems to climate shocks and other disruptions.
And 7 indicators show significant decline, including increased food price volatility, worsening government accountability, and decreased civil society participation. These shifts suggest challenges in maintaining stability and policy coherence amid global crises.
Jessica Fanzo, Professor of Climate and Director of the Food for Humanity Initiative, Columbia Climate School, said, “We need wholesale reform of our food systems so we can provide the world’s population with the nutritious food needed to grow and develop. We are facing a syndemic of challenges: increasing diet related disease, continued undernutrition, and a changing climate. Combating these requires significant and rapid change. This study is so important because it shows the speed of change so far, to guide more action because we can only manage what we measure.”
José Rosero Moncayo, Chief Statistician and Director of the Statistics Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), concluded, “This report provides a clear roadmap for evidence-based policymaking. As we enter the final five years of the SDG process, we have to double down on areas of progress while addressing persistent gaps, keeping the interconnectedness of food systems at the forefront. At the same time efforts are needed to improve the pool of indicators we have at our disposal to describe and analyze different elements of the system. As the report points out, the Countdown Initiative has a strong commitment to filling the current data gaps”.