Mr. Silver Nanema: Committing to Transform Food Systems: Responsiveness of pledges by African governments to the WHO Priority Food Systems Policies and select CAADP Biennial Review Indicators

African Food Systems Transformation and the Post-Malabo Agenda

Transcript

1. RESPONSIVENESS OF FOOD SYSTEMS TRANSFORMATION PLEDGES BY AFRICAN GOVERNMENTS TO THE WHO PRIORITY FOOD SYSTEMS POLICIES & FOOD-RELATED CAADP BIENNIAL REVIEW PERFORMANCE CATEGORIES. Silver Nanema Research Associate HM2R & School of Public Health University of Ghana
2. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR I HAVE NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST TO DECLARE.
3. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR OUTLINE • Food environments & Food systems • The “Polycrsis” in Africa • Malnutrition, a political decision • Assessing the responsiveness of our commitments to transform food systems to CAADP and WHO • Findings • Recommendations
4. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Food environments & systems
5. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Review Monitoring and benchm arking governm ent policies and actions to im prove the healthiness of food environm ents: a proposed Governm ent Healthy Food Environm ent Policy Index B. Swinburn 1,2# , S. Vandevijvere 1# , V. Kraak 2# , G. Sacks 2# , W. Snowdon 2,3# , C. Hawkes 4# , S. Barquera 5 , S. Friel 6 , B. Kelly 7 , S. Kumanyika 8 , M. L’Abbé 9 , A. Lee 10,11 , T. Lobstein 12,13 , J. Ma 14 , J. Macmullan 15 , S. Mohan 16 , C. Monteiro 17 , B. Neal 18 , M. Rayner 19 , D. Sanders 20 and C. W alker 21 for INFORMAS ∧ 1 School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand;2 W HO Collaborating Centre for Obesity Prevention, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia;3 Pacific Research Centre for the Prevention of Obesity and Non-communicable Diseases (C-POND), Suva, Fiji;4 W orld Cancer Research Fund International, London, United Kingdom;5 National Institute of Public Health, Mexico City, Mexico;6 National Centre for Epidemiology and Public Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; 7 School of Health and Society, University of W ollongong, W ollongong, New South W ales, Australia;8 Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America;9 Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada;10 School of Public Health and Social W ork, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia;11 School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia;12 International Association for the Study of Obesity, London, United Kingdom;13 Public Health Advocacy Institute of W estern Australia, Curtin University, Perth, W estern Australia, Australia;14 Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CCDC), Beijing, China;15 Consumers International, London, United Kingdom;16 Public Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India;17 School of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil;18 The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South W ales, Australia; 19 British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom;20 School of Public Health, University of the W estern Cape, Cape Town, South Africa; 21 Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), Geneva, Switzerland Sum m ary Government action is essential to increase the healthiness of food envi- ronments and reduce obesity, diet-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and their related inequalities. This paper proposes a monitoring framework to assess government policies and actions for creating healthy food environments. Recommendations from relevant authoritative organizations and expert advisory groups for reducing obesity and NCDs were examined, and pertinent components were incorporated into a comprehensive framework for monitoring government policies and actions. A Government Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food- EPI) was developed, which comprises a ‘policy’ component with seven domains on specific aspects of food environments, and an ‘infrastructure support’ component with seven domains to strengthen systems to prevent obesity and NCDs. These were revised through a week-long consultation process with international experts. Examples of good practice statements are proposed within each domain, and these will evolve into benchmarks established by governments at the forefront of creating and implementing food policies for good health. A rating process is proposed to assess a government’s level of policy implementation towards good practice. The Food-EPI will be pre-tested and piloted in countries of varying size and income levels. The benchmarking of government policy implementation has the potential to catalyse greater action to reduce obesity and NCDs. Keywords: government policies, INFORM AS, non-communicable diseases, obesity prevention. obesity reviews (2013) 14 (Suppl. 1), 24–37 Address for correspondence: B Swinburn, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. E-mail: boyd.swinburn@auckland.ac.nz # Members of the writing group for this manuscript, listed in order of their contribution to the writing of the manuscript. ∧ INFORMAS is the International Network for Food and Obesity/non-communicable diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support. All authors who are not members of the writing group are listed in alphabetical order, and contributed to the development of the key concepts and principles discussed in this manuscript as part of the first formal meeting of INFORMAS from 19 to 23 November 2012 at Bellagio, Italy. obesity reviews doi: 10.1111/obr.12073 24 © 2013 The Authors. Obesity Reviews published by John W iley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 14 (Suppl. 1), 24–37, October 2013 This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. Food environments are defined as the collective physical, economic, policy, and sociocultural surroundings, opportunities and conditions that influence people’s food and beverage choices and nutritional status. (Swinburn et al., 2013)
6. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR (Downs, Ahmed, Fanzo, and Herforth, 2020) foods Concept Paper Food Environm ent Typology: Advancing an Expanded Definition, Fram ework, and M ethodological Approach for Im proved Characterization of W ild, Cultivated, and Built Food Environm ents toward Sustainable Diets Shauna M . Downs 1 , Selena Ahm ed 2, * , Jessica Fanzo 3 and Anna Herforth 4 1 Departm ent of Urban-Global Public Health, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102, USA; sd1081@sph.rutgers.edu 2 Sustainable Food System s Program , Departm ent of Health and Hum an Developm ent, M ontana State University, Bozem an, M T 59717, USA 3 Berm an Institute of Bioethics, Nitze School of Advanced International Studies and Bloom berg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, W ashington, DC 21205, USA; jfanzo1@jhu.edu 4 Departm ent of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard, University Boston, M A 02125, USA; aherforth@hsph.harvard.edu * Correspondence: selena.ahm ed@m ontana.edu Received: 12 February 2020; Accepted: 10 April 2020; Published: 22 April 2020 Abstract: The food environm ent is a critical place in the food system to im plem ent interventions to support sustainable diets and address the global syndem ic of obesity, undernutrition, and clim ate change, because it contains the total scope of options within which consum ers m ake decisions about which foods to acquire and consum e. In this paper, we build on existing definitions of the food environm ent, and provide an expanded definition that includes the param eter of sustainability properties of foods and beverages, in order to integrate linkages between food environm ents and sustainable diets. W e further provide a graphical representation of the food environm ent using a socio-ecological fram ework. Next, we provide a typology with descriptions of the di↵erent types of food environm ents that consum ers have access to in low-, m iddle-, and high-incom e countries including wild, cultivated, and built food environm ents. W e characterize the availability, a↵ordability, convenience, prom otion and quality (previously term ed desirability), and sustainability properties of food and beverages for each food environm ent type. Lastly, we identify a m ethodological approach with potential objective and subjective tools and m etrics for m easuring the di↵erent properties of various types of food environm ents. The definition, fram ework, typology, and m ethodological toolbox presented here are intended to facilitate scholars and practitioners to identify entry points in the food environm ent for im plem enting and evaluating interventions that support sustainable diets for enhancing hum an and planetary health. Keywords: sustainable diets; natural food environm ents; built food environm ents; socio-ecological fram ework; clim ate change 1. Introduction Nourishing a growing population in ways that support hum an and planetary health is one of the greatest challenges of the Anthropocene. M alnutrition in all its form s, including overweight, obesity, undernutrition, and their coexistence, is the leading cause of death globally and a↵ects every country [1–3]. M ost countries (88% ) are experiencing a coexistence of m ultiple burdens of Foods 2020 , 9, 532; doi:10.3390/foods9040532 www.m dpi.com/journal/foods
7. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR The “Polycrisis” in Africa
8. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR CHAPTER 2 FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION AROUND THE WORLD FIGURE 1 GLOBAL HUNGER REMAINED VIRTUALLY UNCHANGED FROM 2021 TO 2022 BUT IS STILL FAR ABOVE PRE-COVID-19-PANDEMIC LEVELS 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 0 6 8 2 4 10 12 14 16 18 MILLIONS PERCENTAGE Prevalence of undernourishment (percentage, left axis) Number of undernourished (millions, right axis) 12.1% 793.4 597.8 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022* 8.6% 563.9 7.7% 588.9 7.9% 612.8 7.9% 656.6 743.7 796.9 10.1% 8.5% 738.9 735.1 9.2% 674.6 783.1 9.8% 8.7% 690.6 701.4 9.5% 8.9% 8.4% 9.3% NOTES: * Projections based on nowcasts for 2022 are illustrated by dotted lines. Bars show lower and upper bounds of the estimated range. SOURCE: FAO. 2023. FAOSTAT: Suite of Food Security Indicators. In: FAO. [Cited 12 July 2023]. www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FS GLOBAL HUNGER (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2023)
9. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR CHAPTER 2 FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION AROUND THE WORLD the recovery observed in 2021 slowed further in 2022 and global gross domestic product (GDP) Although global food commodity prices were rising steadily even before the war, the added FIGURE 3 IN 2022, ASIA WAS HOME TO 55 PERCENT (402 MILLION) OF THE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD AFFECTED BY HUNGER, WHILE MORE THAN 38 PERCENT (282 MILLION) LIVED IN AFRICA NOT UNDERNOURISHED 7 240 million UNDERNOURISHED 735 million AFRICA 282 million ASIA 402 million LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 43 million OCEANIA 3 million NORTHERN AMERICA AND EUROPE n.r. NOTES: Projected values are based on the projected midranges. The full ranges of the projected 2022 values can be found in Annex 2. n.r. = not reported, as the prevalence is less than 2.5 percent. SOURCE: FAO. 2023. FAOSTAT: Suite of Food Security Indicators. In: FAO. [Cited 12 July 2023]. www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FS HUNGER IN AFRICA (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2023)
10. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR THE STATE OF FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION IN THE WORLD 2023 Africa, 1.1 million more in Southern Africa, and 3.6 million more in Western Africa facing severe slightly in Western Asia. Moderate or severe food insecurity remained virtually unchanged FIGURE 6 MODERATE OR SEVERE FOOD INSECURITY REMAINED UNCHANGED AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL FROM 2021 TO 2022, WITH WORSENING FOOD INSECURITY LEVELS IN AFRICA AND IN NORTHERN AMERICA AND EUROPE, AND IMPROVEMENTS IN ASIA AND IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 0 10 20 30 40 50 70 60 PERCENTAGE Severe food insecurity Moderate food insecurity 2015 2017 2019 2020 2021 2022 WORLD 2015 2017 2019 2020 2021 2022 AFRICA 2015 2017 2019 2020 2021 2022 ASIA 2015 2017 2019 2020 2021 2022 LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 2015 2017 2019 2020 2021 2022 NORTHERN AMERICA AND EUROPE 21.7 23.9 25.3 29.4 29.6 29.6 45.4 51.5 52.3 56.0 59.9 60.9 17.7 18.9 21.2 25.7 24.5 24.2 33.0 31.5 39.3 40.3 9.3 7.1 20.2 22.4 23.8 24.0 10.4 7.6 14.2 8.2 15.7 9.3 16.1 10.8 18.6 11.7 17.9 11.3 18.3 32.1 33.6 36.1 36.9 6.6 11.2 6.5 12.4 8.1 13.1 9.6 16.0 14.2 9.7 14.6 7.3 20.0 9.7 23.3 9.7 21.9 20.0 31.5 12.5 26.8 13.9 26.4 12.6 24.9 1.4 8.0 1.2 7.2 0.9 6.2 1.2 6.6 1.5 6.2 1.5 6.6 17.2 28.2 8.4 7.8 7.7 8.0 37.5 27.3 NOTE: Differences in totals are due to rounding of figures to the nearest decimal point. SOURCE: FAO. 2023. FAOSTAT: Suite of Food Security Indicators. In: FAO. [Cited 12 July 2023]. www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FS MODERATE & SEVERE FOOD INSECURITY (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2023)
11. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Access to food in 2022: Filling data gaps Results of seven national surveys using the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) WHAT DOES THIS MEAN (Cafiero et al, 2023)
12. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR NUTRIENT ADEQUATE DIET meets all essential nutrient needs HEALTHY DIET meets food group targets and is nutrient adequate (Food Prices for Nutrition, Retrieved November 24, 2023) ENERGY SUFFICIENT DIET meets caloric needs for short-term subsistence 0-6-23-59 AFFORDABILITY
13. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR (World Bank Group, 2023) AFFORDABILITY
14. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Food Policy 99 (2021) 101983 Available online 13 October 2020 0306-9192/© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Cost and affordability of nutritious diets at retail prices: Evidence from 177 countries Yan Baia , Robel Alemu b,d , Steven A. Block b , Derek Headey c , W illiam A. M astersa,d,* a Friedman School of Nutrition, Tufts University, USA b The Fletcher School, Tufts University, USA c International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), W ashington DC, USA d Department of Economics, Tufts University, USA A R T I C L E I N F O JEL codes: Q11 I15 Keywords: Food prices Diet costs Nutrient adequacy Cost of subsistence Poverty A B S T R A C T M any policies and programs aim to bring nutritious diets within reach of the poor. This paper uses retail prices and nutrient composition for 671 foods and beverages to compute the daily cost of essential nutrients required for an active and healthy life in 177 countries around the world. W e compare this minimum cost of nutrient adequacy with the subsistence cost of dietary energy and per-capita spending on all goods and services, to identify stylized facts about how diet cost and affordability relate to economic development and nutrition out- comes. On average, the most affordable nutrient adequate diet exceeds the cost of adequate energy by a factor of 2.66, costing US$1.35 per day to meet median requirements of healthy adult women in 2011. Affordability is lowest in Sub-Saharan Africa. The sensitivity of diet costs to each requirement reveals the high cost of staying within acceptable macronutrient ranges, particularly the upper limit for carbohydrates. Among micronutrients, total diet costs are most sensitive to requirements for calcium as well as vitamins A, C, E, B12, folate and riboflavin. On average, about 5% of dietary energy in the least-cost nutrient adequate diets is derived from animal source foods, with small quantities of meat and fish. Over 70% of all animal products in least-cost diets is eggs and dairy, but only in upper-middle and high-income countries. In lower income countries where egg and dairy prices are significantly higher, they are replaced by larger volumes of vegetal foods. W hen controlling for national income, diet costs are most significantly correlated with rural travel times and rural electrification. These data suggest opportunities for targeted policies and programs that reduce market prices and the cost of nutritious diets, while improving affordability through nutrition assistance, safety nets and higher earnings among low-income households. 1. Introduction Poor diets contribute to one in five adult deaths, through both insufficient intake of healthy foods and excess intake of unhealthy items (Afshin et al., 2019). M ultiple burdens of malnutrition typically coexist, with symptoms of insufficiency (stunting, underweight, wasting, and micronutrient deficiencies) observed alongside the consequences of excess food intake such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes (W HO, 2003). Diverse types of food are needed to sustain a healthy and active life, and food prices differ across countries in systematic ways that might contribute to poor diet quality and malnutrition around the world (Darmon and Drewnowski, 2015; Headey and Alderman 2019; Hirvonen et al., 2019; Herforth et al. 2020). This study uses worldwide retail prices and nutrient composition data to identify the most affordable combination of foods and beverages needed to meet requirements in 2011, and thereby quantify whether and how national food systems bring nutrient adequate diets within reach of the poor. Previous analyses of food prices for policy analysis typically use farmgate or wholesale prices of a few bulk commodities to address farm income (FAO, 2018), or use retail prices weighted by expenditure shares to measure overall inflation (IM F, 2020). Our focus on the cost and affordability of a nutritious diet is made possible by matching food items to their nutrient composition and solving for the least-cost diet to meet nutritional needs, allowing for substitution among the items actually available in each country. In so doing we build on Allen (2017) and other previous studies to make three specific contributions: * Corresponding author at: Tufts University, 150 Harrison Avenue, Boston, M A 02111, USA. E-mail address: william.masters@ tufts.edu (W .A. M asters). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Food Policy journal hom epage: www.elsevier.com /locate/foodpol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101983 Received 12 November 2019; Received in revised form 23 September 2020; Accepted 27 September 2020 (Bai, Alemu, Block, Headey, and Masters, 2021) CoCA is much lower, in the range of $0.50–0.70/day. The premium for required nutrients, as measured by the CoNA/CoCA ratio, has wide variation between 2.05 and 3.53 reflecting differences in availability and price of low-cost options. Diet costs vary less than income, and affordability of CoNA ranges by a factor of ten from just 3% of household expenditure in high income countries to 36% in low income countries. Looking across regions, we see considerable variation in the premium for nutrients with the highest observed in South Asia [3.50 (0.97)] and adult woman can be achieved with diets whose primary source of energy is starchy staples, complemented by oils and fats plus vegetal sources of micronutrients and very small quantities of animal-sourced foods. Ani- mal sources of dietary energy are significant in these least-cost diets only for dairy and eggs in upper middle and high income countries, where they replace fruits and nuts which play a larger role in low and lower middle income countries. That substitution can be traced to the price gradient for dairy and eggs shown in Fig. 1. Higher prices for dairy and Table 1 Diet costs per day, by income category and geographic region. N Cost of nutrient adequacy (CoNA) Cost of caloric adequacy (CoCA) Premium for nutrients (CoNA /CoCA) Affordability of nutrients (CoNA/ total expenditure) Income levels Low income 32 1.07 (0.29) 0.53 (0.17) 2.05 (0.34) 0.36 (0.14) Lower middle income 39 1.14 (0.27) 0.50 (0.29) 2.90 (1.13) 0.15 (0.04) Upper middle income 46 1.42 (0.27) 0.67 (0.15) 2.18 (0.48) 0.11 (0.04) High income 57 1.82 (0.64) 0.57 (0.24) 3.53 (1.22) 0.03 (0.02) Geo-graphic regions East Asia & Pacific 20 1.51 (0.51) 0.69 (0.13) 2.23 (0.80) 0.14 (0.05) Europe & Central Asia 45 1.49 (0.22) 0.45 (0.16) 3.60 (1.06) 0.05 (0.04) Latin America & Caribbean 37 1.68 (0.39) 0.81 (0.27) 2.21 (0.73) 0.09 (0.06) Middle East & North Africa 17 1.32 (0.24) 0.81 (0.20) 1.69 (0.42) 0.10 (0.06) North America 3 1.89 (0.04) 0.79 (0.07) 2.41 (0.15) 0.02 (0.00) South Asia 7 1.00 (0.10) 0.33 (0.18) 3.50 (0.97) 0.14 (0.03) Sub-Saharan Africa 45 1.02 (0.21) 0.54 (0.16) 1.97 (0.40) 0.32 (0.16) Worldwide 174 1.35 (0.44) 0.57 (0.24) 2.66 (1.04) 0.14 (0.10) Note: Data shown are population weighted means, with standard deviations in parentheses, over the number of countries indicated in each region. Underlying food prices are as shown for Fig. 1, from which diet costs computed as described in the text. Data for column (5) omit Cuba due to missing data on total household expenditure. AFFORDABILITY
15. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR 2022 © GeoNames, Microsoft, OpenStreetMap, TomTom Powered by Bing 1990s 3.2 62.2 Percentage of women who are overweight or obese according to BMI (≥25.0) 2022 © GeoNames, Microsoft, OpenStreetMap, TomTom Powered by Bing 1990s 0.1 4.5 Percentage of children overweight for their age (above +2 SD of weight for age according to the WHO standard) (USAID. 2023. The DHS Program STATcompiler. Accessed Oct, 23, 2023) (World Obesity Atlas 2022) OBESITY CRISIS
16. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Production & supply chain Environment Climate Conflicts OTHER CIRSIS
17. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Nutrition is a political decision
18. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR FOCUS ON THE PEOPLE WE SERVE (Shawn Baker @FANUS2023) INCLUSIVE AND EMPOWERI NG VISIBLE AND URGENT POLITICAL, NOT PARTISAN ACCOUNTA BILITY FOR RESULTS GOOD GOVERNANCE
19. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE UNIÃO AFRICANA Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA P. O. Box 3243 Telephone 517 700 Cables: OAU, ADDIS ABABA ASSEMBLY OF THE AFRICAN UNION Second Ordinary Session 10 - 12 July 2003 Maputo, MOZAMBIQUE Assembly/AU/Decl.4- 11 (II) DECLARATIONS Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods African Union Food Systems Summit 2021 A-Z Site Index Home About » The Summit The Hub Leadership Vision and Principles Contributors Champions Network Action Tracks Levers of Change SDGs Frequently Asked Questions The Hub Events » News » Take Action » The Science Summit Dialogues Press » Documents and Reports Man buys vegetables at supermarket About the Summit What is the Food Systems Summit? In 2021, UN Secretary-General António Guterres will convene a Food Systems Summit as part of the Decade of Action to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. The Summit will launch bold new actions to deliver progress on all 17 SDGs, each of which relies to some degree on healthier, more sustainable and equitable food systems. The Summit will awaken the world to the fact that we all must work together to transform the way the world produces, consumes and thinks about food. It is a summit for everyone everywhere – a people’s summit. It is also a solutions summit that will require everyone to take action to transform the world’s food systems. Guided by five Action Tracks, the Summit will bring together key players from the worlds of science, business, policy, healthcare and academia, as well as farmers, indigenous people, youth organizations, consumer groups, environmental activists, and other key stakeholders. Before, during and after the Summit, these actors will come together to bring about tangible, positive changes to the world’s food systems. What does the Summit aim to achieve? The Summit process aims to deliver the following outcomes: 1. Generate signi[cant action and measurable progress towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Summit will succeed in identifying solutions and leaders, and issuing a call for action at all levels of the food system, including national and local governments, companies and citizens. 2. Raise awareness and elevate public discussion about how reforming our food systems can help us all to achieve the SDGs by implementing reforms that are good for people and planet. 3. Develop principles to guide governments and other stakeholders looking to leverage their food systems to support the SDGs. These principles will set an optimistic and encouraging vision in which food systems play a central role in building a fairer, more sustainable world. Principles of engagement  4. Create a system of follow-up and review to ensure that the Summit’s outcomes continue to drive new actions and progress. This system will allow for the sharing of experiences, lessons and knowledge; it will also measure and analyse the Summit’s impact. Why food systems? The term “food system” refers to the constellation of activities involved in producing, processing, transporting and consuming food. Food systems touch every aspect of human existence. The health of our food systems profoundly affects the health of our bodies, as well as the health of our environment, our economies and our cultures. When they function well, food systems have the power to bring us together as families, communities and nations. But too many of the world’s food systems are fragile, unexamined and vulnerable to collapse, as millions of people around the globe have experienced first-hand during the COVID-19 crisis. When our food systems fail, the resulting disorder threatens our education, health and economy, as well as human rights, peace and security. As in so many cases, those who are already poor or marginalized are the most vulnerable. The good news is that we know what we need to do to get back on track. Scientists agree that transforming our food systems is among the most powerful ways to change course and make progress towards all 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Rebuilding the food systems of the world will also enable us to answer the UN Secretary-General’s call to “build back better” from COVID-19. We are all part of the food system, and so we all must come together to bring about the transformation that the world needs. ShareFacebook Twitter EmailWhatsApp DONATE      A-Z SITE INDEX CONTACT COPYRIGHT FAQ FRAUD ALERT PRIVACY NOTICE TERMS OF USE Search   Welcome to the United Nations ﺔﯾﺑرﻌﻟا 中⽂ English Français Русский Español 1. Principles and Values of the CAADP Process 2. Enhance Investment Finance in Agriculture 3. End Hunger in Africa by 2025 4. Halve Poverty by the year 2025 5. Boost Intra-African Trade in Agricultural commodities and services 6. Enhance Resilience to Climate Variability and other related risks 7. Mutual Accountability to Actions and Results 1. Ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all 2. Shift to sustainable consumption pattern 3. Boost nature-positive production 4. Advance equitable livelihoods 5. Build resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks and stress 17 SDGs 1. REVITALIZE the agricultural sector 2. IMPLEMENT CAADP 3. CALL UPON the AUC and partners 4. ENGAGE in consultations at national and regional levels 5. ENSURE preparation of bankable projects 6. ENSURE the establishment of regional food reserve systems 7. ACCELERATE the process of establishing the African Investment Bank, 8. INTENSIFY cooperation with our development partners Maputo 2003 Malabo 2014 SDGs 2015 UFSS 2021 COMMITMENTS BY AFRICAN GOVS
20. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR ASSESSING THE RESPONSIVENESS OF THE COMMITMENTS
21. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR Available online at www.sciencedirect.com From dialogues to action: com m itm ents by African governm ents to transform their food system s and assure sustainable healthy diets Am os Laar1,1 , Julia Tagwireyi 2 and Habiba Hassan-W assef 3 The 2021 United Nations Food System s Sum m it (UNFSS) and associated dialogues brought together diverse food system actors and stakeholders from across the globe to take action on transform ing food system s. These actions included pledges and expression of com m itm ents from both state and nonstate actors to transform their food system s. State actor com m itm ents are visions of what governm ents expect of their food system s by 2030, and their aspirations to achieve those expectations. This paper reviews pledges m ade by African Heads of State at the 2021 UNFSS and exam ines how responsive those com m itm ents are to three dim ensions of sustainable healthy diets, nam ely, nutrition and health, socio- econom ic, and environm ental. Second, the paper assesses how responsive the com m itm ents are to the W orld Health Organization’s “priority food system s policy actions” that include nutrition labeling, m arketing regulation, public food procurem ent, fiscal policies, food fortification, reform ulation, and food safety. W e operationally define responsiveness as alignm ent or relatedness of the com m itm ents to the dim ensions of sustainable healthy diets, or the priority policies. W e contextualize our appraisals using available literature on the subject. Addresses 1 Departm ent of Population, Fam ily & Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana 2 Africa Catalysing Action for Nutrition (AfriCAN), Harare, Zim babwe 3 National Nutrition Sciences Com m ittee, Academ y of Scientific Research and Technology, Cairo, Egypt Corresponding author: Laar, Am os (alaar@ug.edu.gh) 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5557-0164 Current Opinion in Environm ental Sustainability 2023, 65:101380 This review com es from a them ed issue on Sustainable Food system s Edited by M aria J. Darias, M afaniso Hara, Israel Navarrete and Eric O. Verger Available online xxxx Received: 10 February 2023; Revised: 15 August 2023; Accepted: 15 October 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101380 1877–3435/© 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Introduction The world is facing an unprecedented challenge of a succession of global crises that include economic crises, pandemics, climate change-related crises, and recently, the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic with its disrup- tion of food supply chains, spiking of food prices, and income reduction. These have devastating con- sequences for humans, food systems, and the planet [1]. As with others, the African continent and its food sys- tems have been impacted by these crises [1]. These challenges, especially of the last few years, have laid bare the fragility and weaknesses of Africa’s food systems [2]. Home to more than half of the world’s acutely food-in- secure people [3], with an alarmingly high and increasing rate of obesity and other diet-related noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) [4], Africa has a colossal challenge. Urgent and decisive food system actions are needed. It has become increasingly apparent in the 21st century that the earth’s food systems are unsustainable for both humans and the planet, and hence need to be transformed. M any agree that food system transformation will require deep and radical shifts in the way food is produced, con- sumed, and how its associated by-products are disposed of or up-scaled. Such transformation must respond to the multiple intersecting challenges enumerated above. Building on existing initiatives for food system transforma- tion, the United Nations Secretary General in 2021, con- vened the United Nations Food Systems Summit (UNFSS), hoping to inspire urgency and action to- ward transforming food systems globally [5]. A summit that many believe offered an opportunity to collectively iden- tify bold new partnerships, actions, solutions, and strategies to deliver progress on all the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), was held on September 23, 2021. At this summit, over 160 United Nations M ember States (in- cluding 77 Heads of State) and representatives of regional blocks delivered statements and commitments to trans- form their food systems [5]. That notwithstanding, some food system actors expressed dissatisfaction with the summit process. The cited concerns included lack of suf- ficient and meaningful engagement. Others raised ques- tions bothering on equity, power asymmetry, conflict of interest, and legitimacy of the entire summit process [6–8]. A group of African Civil Society threatened to not engage with the summit without radical change [9]. ]]]] ]]]]]] www.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Environm ental Sustainability 2023, 65:101380 (Adapted from Laar, Tagwireyi, and Hassan-Wassef 2023) Food Systems Summit 2021 A-Z Site Index Home About » The Hub Events » News » Take Action » The Science Summit Dialogues Press » Documents and Reports Summit Pre-Summit Information Notes Scienti3c Group Summit Dialogues Action Tracks Other Summit Under the leadership of UN Secretary-General António Guterres, the UN Food Systems Summit took place on Thursday, 23 September 2021. The event was conducted in a completely virtual format during the UN General Assembly High-level Week. Find out more here. Programme 1. Programme ﺔﯾﺑرﻌﻟا | 中⽂ | English | Français | Русский | Español 2. Independent Side Events Resources / Outputs 1. Commitments Registry 2. Summit Compendium 3. UN Secretary-General’s Chair Summary and Statement of Action on the UN Food Systems Summit 4. Summit Science Reader Event Information Documents 1. Guidance Note ﺔﯾﺑرﻌﻟا | 中⽂ | English | Français | Русский | Español Member State Statements Albania Algeria Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Bahamas Bahrain Gambia (Republic of The) Germany Ghana Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary (English) (Hungarian) Iceland India Paciac Islands Forum Pakistan Palau Panama Paraguay Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Republic of Korea Search   Welcome to the United Nations English 36 26 ACP FS 219 Globally, malnutrition in all its forms remains a huge challenge The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021 report reveals that the world is not on track to achieve global targets for any of the nutrition indicators by 2030. In 2020, even without accounting for the devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were still an estimated 149.2 million children under 5 years of age affected by stunting, 45.4 million were suffering from wasting and 38.9 million were overweight. The current rate of global progress on child stunting, exclusive breastfeeding, and low birthweight is insufficient, and progress on child overweight, child wasting, anaemia in women and adult obesity is stalled or worsening (1). There are a staggering 1.9 billion adults affected by overweight or obesity. At least 2.8 million people each year die as a result of being overweight or obese (2) and unhealthy diets cause 11 million deaths per year (3). At the same time, nearly 3 billion people cannot afford a healthy diet (1). Our diets have also become a leading contributor to global environmental degradation. The need for food systems transformation for improved nutrition and health Today’s food systems are simply failing to deliver healthy diets for all*. In addition to the suffering this causes to individuals and families, the economic costs to society due to the health and environmental impacts of current dietary patterns are heavy, and often hidden. If food systems are transformed, they can become a powerful driving force towards ending hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms. There is no single solution, but coherent portfolios of policies, investments and legislation are needed. Action across the agriculture, food, health, and environment systems is required to lower the cost of nutritious foods and increase the affordability of healthy diets (1). At the same time, it is also important to ensure a fair price for the producer and reflect the true environmental, health and poverty costs. A new WHO Food Systems for Health narrative highlights the different ways in which food systems impact on health and embraces the interconnectedness of humans, animal, and the planet (4). Transformation of food systems is needed to deliver safe, sustainable and healthy diets, that are affordable and build on and respect local culture, culinary practice and knowledge. * FOOD SYSTEMS FOR HEALTH Information Brief FOR FOOD SYSTEMS HEALTH 3rd CAADP Biennial Review Report 2 0 1 5 - 2 0 2 1 The Biennial Review Report of the African Union Commission on the Implementation of the Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods. Assembly Decision (Assembly/AU/2(XXIII)) of June 2014 Fully PARTIALLY NOT AT ALL 149
22. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR (Adapted from Laar, Tagwireyi, and Hassan-Wassef 2023) CAADP Biennial Review Performance Categories (PCs) 1. PC 3.1 Access to agric. inputs and technologies 2. PC 3.2 Agric. productivity 3. PC 3.3 Postharvest loss 4. PC 3.4 Social protection 5. PC 3.5 Food security & nutrition 6. PC 3.6 Food safety WHO food systems for health priority policy actions 1. Nutrition labeling 2. Marketing regulation 3. Public food procurement 4. Fiscal policies 5. Fortification 6. Reformulation 7. Food safety
23. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR FINDINGS
24. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR CAADP-BR-PC-3s (Country) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% PC 3.1 Access to agriculture inputs and technologies PC 3.2 Agriculture productivity PC 3.3 Postharvest loss PC 3.4 Social protection PC 3.5 Food security and nutrition PC 3.6 Food safety Fully responsive CAADP BR PC Somewhat responsive to CAADP BR PC
25. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR CAADP-PCs (Commitments) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% PC 3.1 Access to agriculture inputs and technologies PC 3.2 Agriculture productivity PC 3.3 Postharvest loss PC 3.4 Social protection PC 3.5 Food security and nutrition PC 3.6 Food safety Fully responsive CAADP BR PC Somewhat responsive to CAADP BR PC Not responsive
26. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR IMPLICATIONS FOR NUTRITION (WHO PRIORITY POLICY ACTIONS) Agriculture productivity Nutrition security Food security “…little mention of the WHO recommendations….” Converging with Laar and colleagues (2023)
27. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR GAPS WHERE WE ARE WHERE WE WANT TO GO
28. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR RECOMMENDATIONS
29. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR NOTE PRODUCTION FOOD HEALTHY FOOD
30. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR MAIN CALL FROM FEEDING TO NOURISHING BREASTFEEDIN 1ST FOOD DIVERSITY UN/MINI PROCESSED SAFE ADEQUATE MINIMUM GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, WATER, AND LAND USE PRESERVE BIODIVERSITY MINIM USE OF PLASTICS AND DERIVATIVES 11 IN FOOD PACKAGING FOOD LOSS & WASTE CULTURE, ACCEPTABLE ACCESSIBLE AND DESIRABLE GENDER TRANSFORMAT IVE
31. #2023ReSAKSS #2023ATOR AUDA-NEPAD GUIDELINES FOR ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR FOR “WIN-WIN OUTCOMES” IN NUTRITION IN AFRICA WARNING AUDA-NEPAD AFRICAN UNION DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FAO STRATEGY FOR PRIVATE SECTOR ENGAGEMENT 2021-2025 1 AUDA-NEPAD Nutrition and Food Systems Implementation Plan AUDA-NEPAD Nutrition and Food Systems Implementation Plan Towards a Coordinated and Accelerated Action for the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition in Africa www.nepad.org | #TheAfricaWeWant 2019 - 2025
32. THANK YOU