Currently browsing posts about: Food-systems

Stuart Gillespie.  Food Fight: From Plunder and Profit to People and the Planet.  Canongate, 2025.

I wrote a blurb for this book:

From his years of experience working in international nutrition, Gillespie has on-the-ground knowledge of why and how global food systems lead to widespread hunger, obesity, and environmental damage, and what needs to be done to make those systems healthier for all.  He makes it clear that this food fight is crucial to take on.

I particularly like his discussion of what is needed to transform food systems:

‘Food system transformation’ has become the mother of all development clichés in this decade.  The real goal of many who invoke it is not real transformation—it’s more about fiddling on the fringe.  To truly overhaul the food system, we need to see a major shift in the structure and dynamic of power.  Unsurprisingly, those in power now don’t really want such a shift, whatever they proclaim in conferences, interviews, and annual reports…What’s really being discussed in these conferences and reports is transition, not transformation.

On the need for a real food movement:

Linking people working separately on obesity, undernutrition or the climate crisis is one of the big challenges in creating concerted local-to-global action.  No transformative social movement yet exists that addresses malnutrition.  It’s about time.

Indeed, yes.

The United Nations has issued a digital Food Systems Thinking Guide for UN Resident Coordinators and UN Country Teams with tools and information for working collectively towards food system transformation.

It is intended as a working draft.  It provides an easy mechanism for immediate feedback.

You have to do a lot of scrolling.  When you do, you will get to key questions:

• What is a food systems approach and why does it matter?
• What is the state of food systems in my country?
• Who are the actors influencing the foods system?
• What are barriers and entry points to food system transformation?
• How can I integrate foods systems approach into programming?
• How can I communicate and advocate for foods systems transformation?

I took a look at the actors.  This section provides resources for engaging with stakeholders.

I also looked at barriers.  It lists things to consider and provides resources.

And I looked at communication strategies.  This one is much more complete and has useful videos and key messages along with the resources.

I see this as an advocacy toolkit focused on food system transformation.  Happy to have it.  Try it and give the UN some feedback on it to make it even better and more complete.

It’s a slow-news holiday week so I’m going to use it to catch up on reports.  The first:

FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture 2024: Value-Driven Transformation of Agrifood Systems

FAO uses true cost accounting (TCA) to analyze global food systems.

• ➔ By improving on the hidden costs quantified in The State of Food and Agriculture 2023, this report unpacks the health hidden costs associated with unhealthy dietary patterns linked to an increased risk of non-communicable diseases (NCDs).
• ➔ Case studies show how targeted TCA assessments conducted across multiple agrifood systems categories provide more nuanced insights into the requisite agrifood systems transformation and potential actions moving forward.

Here is an example of the kinds of analyses presented here.

And here are the resources:

• Read the full digital report
• Read the In Brief
• Read the interactive story: Beyond the price tag
• Watch the video: State of Food and Agriculture 2024. Value-driven transformation of agrifood systems
• Read the press release: Unhealthy dietary patterns drive $8 trillion in annual hidden costs of global agrifood systems
• Read The State of Food and Agriculture 2023

Read the background papers:

• Navigating the distributional challenges of agrifood systems transformation
• The hidden costs of coffee production in the Eastern African value chains
• A typology for agrifood systems
• Potential of crop diversification to address the hidden costs of major crop value chains in Central Asia
• Refining national true cost accounting for agrifood systems
• Hidden costs of agrifood systems
• How to reduce agrifood systems’ future hidden costs? A multi-country case study

IPES Food (International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems) has a new report,  Food From Somewhere: Building food security and resilience through territorial markets.

The report argues that territorial food systems are better able to promote food security than industrial food systems.  This is because “corporate controlled global food chains offer a flawed recipe for food security, and are full of risks and vulnerabilities:

• the exposure of industrial commodity production to climate shocks;
• the diversion of valuable resources into ultraprocessed foods, livestock feed, and fuel;
• the standardization of diets around wheat, rice, and maize, and the growing reliance on a handful of crops and commodity exporters for global calorie intake;
• the bottlenecks in fragmented and geographically-dispersed global chains;
• the vast energy requirements built into high-tech digitalized supply chains – and
• the dangers of making global food security contingent on ‘just-in-time’ supply chains that do not work all the time.”

The remedy: “we found that territorial markets are the backbone of food systems in many countries and regions, and make critical contributions to food security, equity, and sustainability, while building resilience on multiple fronts.”

By territorial, they mean regional, local, close-to-home markets, with short supply chains.

The report comes with a video introduction.

I was interested to see this report and the academic analysis on which it is based—both from the Food Systems Countdown Initiative.

The academic analysis is extremely complicated and difficult to get through.  This initiative is highly ambitious.  It developed a set of 50 (!) indicators and “holistic monitoring architecture to track food system transformation towards global development, health and sustainability goals.”

The 50 indicators fall under five themes: (1) diets, nutrition and health; (2) environment, natural resources and production; (3) livelihoods, poverty and equity; (4) governance; and (5) resilience.

The analysis applies these themes and indicators to countries by income level and finds none of them to be on track to meet Sustainable Development Goals.

I can understand why they produced a report based on the analysis: it is easier to understand (although still extremely complicated).

For one thing, it defines Food Systems; By definition, food systems are complicated.

Food systems are all the people, places, and practices that contribute to the production, capture or harvest, processing, distribution, retail, consumption, and disposal of food.

For another, it presents data on compliance with indicators in more comprehensible ways, for example, these two indicators from the Diet theme.

As the report makes clear, this use of indicators has useful functions:

• Global monitoring of food systems
• Tracking UN Food System Summit commitments
• Development of national monitoring systems

This initiative reminds me a lot of the decades-long US Healthy People process—currently 359 (!) health objectives to be achieved by 2030—with no responsibility assigned for making sure they are achieved (which they mostly have not been, unsurprisingly),

Initiatives like these are great about identifying gaps.  What they can’t do is hold governments accountable.  They are supposed to inspire advocacy; to the extent they do, they might have some chance at stimulating progress.

As you can tell from my insertion of parenthetical explamation points, I think there are too many things to keep track of.

But then, I’m a lumper; this is a splitting initiative.

Both have their uses, but I want to see priorities for action.

I received an e-mailed news release from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) about its latest report.

The press release headline: Hidden costs of global agrifood systems worth at least $10 trillion.  154-country study makes case for true cost accounting to guide policy.

Our current agrifood systems impose huge hidden costs on our health, the environment and society, equivalent to at least $10 trillion a year, according to a ground-breaking analysis by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), covering 154 countries. This represents almost 10 percent of global GDP.

According to the 2023 edition of The State of Food and Agriculture (SOFA), the biggest hidden costs (more than 70 percent) are driven by unhealthy diets, high in ultra-processed foods, fats and sugars, leading to obesity and non-communicable diseases, and causing labour productivity losses. Such losses are particularly high in high- and upper-middle-income countries.

This report, FAO says, presents initial cost estimates.  A report next year will focus on ways to mitigate these costs.  Governments, it says, “can pull different levers to adjust agrifood systems and drive better outcomes overall. Taxes, subsidies, legislation and regulation are among them.”

The FAO director says: “the future of our agrifood systems hinges on our willingness to appreciate all food producers, big or small, to acknowledge these true costs, and understand how we all contribute to them, and what actions we need to take. ”

The report urges governments to use true cost accounting to address the climate crisis, poverty, inequality and food security.

True cost accounting (TCA), according to the report is:

A holistic and systemic approach to measuring and valuing the environmental, social, health and economic costs and benefits generated by agrifood systems to facilitate improved decisions by policymakers, businesses, farmers, investors and consumers.43

Translated, this means trying to assign numbers to the externalized and hidden costs of food production and consumption, meaning not just what you pay at the cash register but also the costs you pay in other ways for health care, animal welfare, biodiversity, polluted water and soil, and climate change.

These, says this report, add up to about $12.7 trillion a year.

The idea is to get food producers to pay their fair share of these costs—issues of accounting and accountability (according to the Scientific Group of the UN Food Systems Summit). 

The report comes with a big collection of resources:

• Read the full digital report
• Read the In Brief
• Read the Interactive story: Beyond the price tag
• Watch the Video: State of Food and Agriculture 2023. Revealing the true cost of food to transform agrifood systems
• Read the press release: Hidden costs of global agrifood systems worth at least $10 trillion

Read the background papers:

• Hidden costs of agrifood systems and recent trends from 2016 to 2023
• Revealing the hidden costs of agrifood systems to enhance their value
• Accounting for the hidden costs of agrifood systems in data-scarce contexts
• The role of true cost accounting in guiding agrifood businesses and investments towards sustainability
• True cost accounting applications for agrifood systems policymakers

That should be plenty to keep us all busy for quite a while.  Enjoy and ponder.

The prolific International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems has produced another must-see report:

Here’s what it’s about:

Corporate influence over food system governance has become the new normal: the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit exposed the ability of multinational agri-food corporations to influence food system decision-making and dominate seemingly inclusive ‘multi-stakeholder’ processes…corporations have
succeeded in convincing governments that they must be central in any discussion on the future of food systems. Public-private partnerships and ‘multi-stakeholder’ roundtables…have normalized a prominent role for corporations and given them an inside track to decision-making.

Here’s where it’s headed:

To meet the needs of those impacted by  worsening hunger and malnutrition, it will be necessary to address the influence of corporations at all levels, including through a UN-wide Corporate Accountability Framework and robust conflict of interest policies, taking inspiration from World Health Organization frameworks for tobacco control and engagement with non-state actors.

IPES Food is doing great work.  Read their reports!

If you aren’t familiar with IPES Food, here is your chance.

IPES-Food – the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems – is a diverse and independent panel of experts guided by new ways of thinking about research, sustainability, and food systems. Since 2015, IPES-Food has uniquely shaped the debate on global food systems reform, through policy-oriented research and direct engagement with policy processes.

The IPES Food panel is an impressive bunch, starting with its co-chairs, Olivier De Schutter, currently UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, and Maryam Rahmanian, independent expert on agriculture and food.

Their two most recent reports:

I.  Smoke & Mirrors: Examining competing framings of food system sustainability 

This comes with a background report: Agroecology, Regenerative Agriculture, and Nature-Based Solutions: Competing framings of food system sustainability in global policy and funding spaces.

Together, these cover those key terms, their emergence and evolution, and the ways they are used in global policy and funding.

The report favors use of Agroecology:

Agroecology, and in some uses regenerative agriculture, offer a more inclusive and comprehensive pathway toward food system transformation because they connect social
and environmental aspects of sustainability, address the whole food system, is attentive to power inequalities, and draws from a plurality of knowledges emphasizing the inclusion of marginalized voices.

II.  Special Report: Debt & Food Crisis: Breaking the Cycle of Unsustainable Food Systems, Hunger and Debt

Unsustainable food systems, this says, are major drivers of “the debt crisis. Import dependencies, extractive financial flows, boom-bust commodity cycles,” leaving countries exposed to shocks and unable to invest in climate-resilient food production and food security.

The IPES panel calls for:

• Debt relief and development finance
• Reparation of historical food system injustices and the return of resources to the Global South.
• Putting the interests of the world’s poorest countries and marginalized populations first.

The documents

• The special report
• The press release
• A one page summary for policymakers

IPES Food deals with Big Picture issues.  What they say is worth attention.