@FAO CFS
The Rome-based Committee on World Food Security (CFS) formally adopted “Voluntary Guidelines on Food Systems and Nutrition” (VGFSN) in February of 2021. Resulting from a five-year inclusive multi-stakeholder consultation and negotiation process informed by the scientific evidence of the CFS High-Level Panel of Experts, these Guidelines represent a tool that governments, UN agencies, civil society, private sector, financial institutions, and other development actors can use when developing policies and interventions to address malnutrition through a holistic ‘food systems’ perspective.
“The Guidelines will be used to support the development of coordinated, multi-sectoral national policies, laws, programs, and investment plans to enable safe and healthy diets through sustainable food systems. The VGFSN includes a wide range of recommendations of actions to promote transparent and accountable governance, sustainable food supply chains, access to healthy diets, food safety across sustainable food systems, nutrition education, gender equality, and resilient food systems in humanitarian contexts.”
Why do I bring this up? Well, I led a team of 10 experts that produced the High-Level Panel of Experts Report on Food Systems and Nutrition report, way back in 2017, which served as the backbone of the VGFSN. I will write another blog in the near future on why the use of “high level” or “expert group” is problematic in so many ways…
I learned a few things having been engaged in this 5-year process full of trial and tribulation:
Seeking solidarity: UN processes take a long time to come to a consensus. There are plenary and open working group discussions, public forums, and backdoor lobbying. And imagine getting consensus during COVID when all the negotiating was being undertaken on zoom zombie. Not easy. Talk about death by dialogue…
Lacking teeth: While the VGFSN are important in that they provide recommendations for countries, they are still voluntary and non-binding. Meaning, they don’t have any teeth. They can be easily ignored and cherry-picked.
Naming names: Words and definitions matter. A lot. Many tears were shed and arduous time was spent arguing over such words and their meaning like:
Healthy diets
Unhealthy diets
Nutritious foods
Food systems
Sustainable food systems
Having voice: Not everyone agreed but everyone was heard. Civil society, governments, private sector, UN agencies. Everyone.
Falling flat: All actors need to be engaged in the process, their endorsement, and the carrying out of VGFSN or else, they fall flat.
Knowing Knowledge: Evidence can vary by type and is interpreted in different ways. Evidence coming from randomized controlled trials is not always the highest valued data. Indigenous peoples and community knowledge can be powerful and just as convincing to policymakers.
Glocalization: Countries need to decide which Guidelines are relevant for their context, how they will enact them, who is responsible, and what impact they want to have. So while the global dialogue is important, local action is even more crucial. And feeding that local experience back to the global conversation is even more important.
The VGFSN should be seen as a global norm of reference in the governance of food systems because they are the first of an internationally negotiated set of guidelines on food systems that have navigated the complex, global web of competing interests, values, and evidence in which members of the CFS have come to a common ground. And THAT is, well, something.