Discussion: training manuals on food security

Contribution by Prakash Shrestha from Nepal

Namaste (Greeting) from Himalayan country, Nepal

My name is Prakash Shrestha and I keeping in mind that:

• 
  around three fourth of world population is in developing countries- in 2050, 9 in every 10 people will be from developing countries
  

• 
  Challenged of providing food particularly the people who live in food insecure areas like remote villages/mountains;
  

I would like to share following:
In mountain regions (particularly in Nepal-my country), there have been chronic food shortage- a large portion of Nepalese population live in extremely vulnerable (food insecure) situation. Approach the governmentt/external development partners has been sending subsidized food/charity food to these regions when food crisis arises year after year. I see two main problems associated with this:
Firstly, as some of the contributors correctly pointed out, we need to seek diversity in food (not only focus on rice, wheat and corn). Local produce such as potato, beans, yams and millet must be promoted. They are considered ‘poor man’s food’ and its price is unreasonably cheap- cheaper than subsidized food support (usually rice).
Secondly, this subsidized food has been changing the eating habit as well as working habit of the mountain people. Eating habit- it is becoming social status to eat rice- the subsidized food that is cheaper (people walk 3-4 days to district headquarters-distribution center- to buy 5-15 kg quota of subsidized rice- giving preference over local food.) Who will work so hard to produce local foods (that is ‘poor man’s food’), while one can work (under food for work schemes of development partners or as cheap unskilled labour in cities/across border) and get better money that can buy ‘reach man’s food’ is subsidized rate.
No wonder, this has been happening in last 30-40 years and food shortage and hunger is only increasing and not decreasing in the mountains of Nepal (and of other economically poor countries- I assume) and if this train continues without seeking alternate situation will only worsen even in 2050.
As issue of food is not only technical issue, but also issue of political, governance, social and economic, demographic issue- I think following points should be considered for long term solution particularly at remote rural/mountain areas:
1. Review food aid system/move towards sustainability: While food aid is necessary for coming few years; it should be well considered that this is not leading community to (exotic aid) food dependent. Food support must promote local food- buying the local food from local farmers as far as possible in reasonable price and re distributing it is subsidized rate. This should be cheaper than air transporting food to rural mountain areas.
2. Food bank: As proved in many places around the world, community based food bank can insure food security. Facilitating to build community food bank system can bring following benefit: it stores food safely- from rodents and other loss; it promotes production of food (rather than switching away from farming to labour for aid supported low cost-‘infrastructure’ development).
3. Alternate Crops: Government, external development partners and private sectors should support on research, processing and marketing on valuable herbal products that are now being under used or used in unsustainable way and local getting very poor share of total economic return.
4. Demography and settlement: As death rate- particularly child mortality- in mountain areas are gradually coming down- the population in mountain will be rapidly increasing. These are scattered population. Government/development organizations effort should put more effort on controlling population growth and also bring policy that promotes shifting scattered population to small cities so that food delivery (from market system or aid system) become more practical.
5. Fresh Water: Mountains are source of fresh water. There can be alternate to (fossil) fuel, foods, and transportation system but not alternate to fresh water. National & International Government bodies should work together to make a just system to utilize the fresh water- so that these fresh water become available to people who need it while local people get economic benefits from it (incentive to conserve/protect it from being polluted- the fresh water system). As the population grows, by 2050, fresh water will be also highly valuable resource.
6. Carbon Credit: Can the international communities (who have 100s of times larger per capita carbon footprint) make system to pay mountain people ‘Carbon Credit’ as these rural/mountain people use very limited natural resources as there is no road, no electricity and no industries meaning they have only negligible ‘carbon foot-print’. The payment system can be based on maintaining (increasing) greeneries in these critical rural/mountain areas. After all the mountain people are among the one who are most adversely affected by climate change.
I am fully convinced with Prof George Kent:: ‘Food follows where money is’ 
Namaste (also meaning bye)
Prakash Shrestha

Kathmandu, NEPAL

Contribution by Rebecca Kik from FAO, Italy

Dear all,

Thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss about this interesting question and for all the interesting comments and ideas which have been contributed so far. As I am working as a legal consultant in the FAO Right to Food Unit I would like to give some contribution regarding the right to food aspects of „How to feed the world in 2050“, as Mr de Haen has mentioned „it is also clear that good governance, including the realization of the right to food, is an essential ingredient of success“.
The query is raising the question whether the „Voluntary Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of the Right to Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security“ (Right to Food Guidelines) are a good framework to remind governments of their obligations. This question must be answered with a clear YES. The Right to Food Guidelines do not only remind the governments of their obligations, they also give them guidance and support on how to realize their obligations. The Right to Food Guidelines give guidance in 19 different policy areas and „take into account a wide range of important considerations and principles, including equality and non-discrimination, participation and inclusion, accountability and rule of law“.
I am also very thankful to Mr Thomas Mokake who is arguing that governments which are violating their right to food obligations should be held legally responsible by the UN system. So far 160 countries signed the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and thereby have accepted their obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right to food. On the 24th of September the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR opened for signature. Once this Optional Protocol entries into force, it will confer competence to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Committee) to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals concerning alleged violations of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant. It also permits the Committee to conduct inquiries into grave and systematic violations of any of the economic, social and cultural rights – including the right to food– by a Party that has made a declaration recognizing this competence of the Committee. This Optional Protocol is a huge step forward to the justiciability of the right to food!
Additionally to that I would like to direct your attention to the „CALL from the Cordoba Group“ which was released last week. In their last meeting the Cordoba Group addressed food security and climate change and they also came to the conclusion that „today’s hunger is not a result of production failure but due to failure of equitable access“. In their CALL the Cordoba Group focuses on two mayor issues:
1. Coherence in four policy areas, namely coherence in decisions, coherence in delivery, coherence in dialogue and coherence in diplomacy (Rome and Copenhagen).

2. Support to small farmers to achieve food security by 2050 in a world with a changing climate.

They point out that „climate change will lead to highly unstable production conditions that will require farmer-led research and breeding strategies in changing ecosystems. In particular, the development of the numerous underutilised (so-called „orphan“) crops could, for a very small investment, yield reliable and nutritious food. The innovative potential of small producers must be recognized and supported“. Furthermore the governments have to ensure that intellectual property rights requirements and restrictions are not barriers to innovation and diffusion.

The whole CALL from the Cordoba Group is available at:

http://www.fao.org/righttofood/news35_en.htm
Rebecca Kik
Legal Consultant, FAO Right to Food Unit