GLOBAL F O O D POLICY REPORT 2016 About IFPRI The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), established in 1975, provides research-based pol- icy solutions to sustainably reduce poverty and end hunger and malnutrition. The Institute conducts research, communicates results, optimizes partnerships, and builds capacity to ensure sustainable food production, promote healthy food systems, improve markets and trade, transform agriculture, build resilience, and strengthen institutions and governance. Gender is considered in all of the Institute’s work. IFPRI collaborates with partners around the world, including development implementers, public institutions, the private sector, and farmers’ organizations. GLOBAL F O O D POLICY REPORT 2016 A Peer-Reviewed Publication Copyright © 2016 International Food Policy Research Institute. All rights reserved. For permission to reprint, contact the Communications and Knowledge Management Division at ifpri-copyright@cgiar.org. Recommended citation: International Food Policy Research Institute. 2016. 2016 Global Food Policy Report. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). International Food Policy Research Institute 2033 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1002, USA Telephone: +1-202-862-5600 www.ifpri.org ISBN: 978-0-89629-582-7 DOI: 10.2499/9780896295827 Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available from the Library of Congress PHOTO CREDITS Cover main image: India, Panos/Chris Stowers. Cover collage (from top, l-r): iStock; Algeria, Reuters/Ramzi Boudina; Taiwan, Panos/Chris Stowers; Kenya, Panos/Mikkel Ostergaard; Kenya, Panos/Mikkel Ostergaard; India, Panos/Jacob Silberberg; Indonesia, Panos/Chris Stowers; India, IFAD/Susan Beccio; China, Imaginechina/Shan he. Timeline images (l-r): iStock; (far right) Panos/Mikkel Ostergaard. Chapter images: p. 1, Ethiopia, Panos/Sven Torfinn; p. 12, Malawi, Alamy Stock Photo/Joerg Boethling; p. 22, Germany, AP Images/picture-alliance/dpa/Stephanie Pilick; p. 32, India, IWMI/Prashanth Vishwanathan; p. 40, Sierra Leone, Panos/Alfredo Caliz; p. 48, India, Panos/Jacob Silberberg; p. 56, India, Panos/Abbie Trayler-Smith; p. 66, China, Panos/Mark Henley; p. 80, Afghanistan, UN Photo/Homayon Khoram. Cover design: Julia Vivalo Project manager: Pamela Stedman-Edwards Book design and layout: David Popham and Julia Vivalo iv Contents Preface � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � vii Acknowledgments � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ix CHAPTER 1 Food Policy in 2015–2016: Reshaping the Global Food System for Sustainable Development � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 1 Shenggen Fan CHAPTER 2 Climate Change and Agriculture: Strengthening the Role of Smallholders � � � � � � � � � � 13 Kanayo F. Nwanze and Shenggen Fan CHAPTER 3 Toward a Sustainable Food System: Reducing Food Loss and Waste � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 23 Monica Schuster and Maximo Torero CHAPTER 4 Water, Nutrition, and Health: Finding Win-Win Strategies for Water Management ��33 Claudia Ringler and Simone Passarelli CHAPTER 5 Land and Soil Management: Promoting Healthy Soils for Healthier Agricultural Systems � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 41 Jawoo Koo, Ephraim Nkonya, Carlo Azzarri, Cindy Cox, Timothy Johnson, Adam Komarek, Ho-Young Kwon, Alex De Pinto, Cleo Roberts, and Wei Zhang CHAPTER 6 Nutrition and Sustainability: Harnessing Value Chains to Improve Food Systems � � 49 Summer Allen, Alan de Brauw, and Aulo Gelli CHAPTER 7 Green Energy: Fueling the Path to Food Security � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 57 Channing Arndt, Siwa Msangi, and James Thurlow CHAPTER 8 Shifting Diets: Toward a Sustainable Food Future � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 67 Janet Ranganathan, Daniel Vennard, Richard Waite, Tim Searchinger, Patrice Dumas, and Brian Lipinski1 CHAPTER 9 Regional Developments � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 81 Africa � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 82 Ousmane Badiane, Tsitsi Makombe, and Julia Collins Middle East and North Africa � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 87 Nadim Khouri and Clemens Breisinger Central Asia � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 92 Kamiljon Akramov and Allen Park South Asia � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 96 P. K. Joshi, Akhter Ahmed, Stephen Davies, and Anjani Kumar East Asia � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 100 Kevin Chen, Peter Timmer, and Longwen Chiang Latin America and the Caribbean � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 104 Eugenio Díaz-Bonilla and Maximo Torero Food Policy Indicators: Tracking Change � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 108 Notes � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 126 v vi Preface The 2016 Global Food Policy Report is the fifth in an annual series that provides a comprehensive overview of major food policy developments and events. In this report, distinguished researchers, policymakers, and prac- titioners review what happened in food policy, and why, in 2015 and look forward to 2016. This year’s report takes an in-depth look at the latest research on opportunities and challenges the world will face in achieving the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to food and nutrition security. The year 2015 saw notable developments in the global commitment to ending hunger and undernutrition and to sustainability. Following on the success of the Millennium Development Goals in halving global pov- erty, the SDGs call for eradicating poverty, hunger, and malnutrition by 2030. The 17 SDGs put food secu- rity and nutrition front and center in their vision of a sustainable world. Several other international events reinforced this commitment to sustainable foods systems, notably the 21st UN Conference of the Parties (COP21), which made unprecedented commitments to mitigation and adaption to climate change, and a G7 commitment to a zero-carbon economy by the end of the century. Regional agreements also moved forward on food policy, including food safety policies in South and East Asia, initiatives for climate-smart agriculture in Africa, and prioritization of food security by regional organizations in Latin America and the Middle East and North Africa. World food prices remained low, as did energy prices, with benefits for consumers. Natural and human disasters had major impacts on food security. Continued slow economic growth, par- ticularly in China and Russia, combined with low oil prices reduced food security in Central Asia and the Arab region, and have slowed growth throughout Asia and Latin America. The expanding conflict in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen led to unprecedented numbers of displaced persons and refugees, with global impacts. Con- tinuing conflicts and violence in Nigeria, the Central African Republic, Somalia, and South Sudan, and in Central America, drew less attention but nevertheless slowed progress in reducing hunger and food insecu- rity. Weather extremes associated with El Niño—predicted to be one of the largest ever—are already linked to a drought in Ethiopia that has left over 8 million in need of food aid, and impacts are expected to be severe in Central America and the Philippines. In 2016 the world will begin to address the new global commitments on food security, nutrition, and pov- erty. This is an extraordinary opportunity to build on the synergies between human development and sus- tainability, and truly end hunger and food insecurity by 2025. Topics covered in the 2016 Global Food Policy Report were the result of consultations with top experts in the field. For inclusion in this report, a topic has to represent a new development in food policy or a new way of looking at an important food policy issue; the topic has to be international in scope; and assessments and recommendations must be backed by evidence based on high-quality research results or expert judgment. I hope this report is met with interest not only by decisionmakers who set the food policy research agenda but also by media, nongovernmental organizations, and broad groups of civil society who all have a big stake in food policies that benefit the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people. I welcome your feedback, comments, and suggestions. SHENGGEN FAN Director General vii Acknowledgments The 2016 Global Food Policy Report was prepared under the overall leadership of Shenggen Fan and a core team comprising Rajul Pandya-Lorch, Katrin Park, Andrea Pedolsky, Pamela Stedman-Edwards, Klaus von Grebmer, Sivan Yosef, and Laura Zseleczky. Text and data contributions were made by Akhter Ahmed, Kamiljon Akramov, Summer Allen, Chan- ning Arndt, Carlo Azzarri, Suresh Babu, Ousmane Badiane, Nienke Beintema, Samuel Benin, Jill Berstein, Alan de Brauw, Clemens Bresinger, Kevin Chen, Longwen Chiang, Julia Collins, Cindy Cox, Stephen Davies, Eugenio Díaz-Bonilla, Paul Dorosh, Patrice Dumas, Aulo Gelli, Timothy Johnson, P. K. Joshi, Nadim Khouri, Adam Komarek, Jawoo Koo, Anjani Kumar, Ho-Young Kwon, Brian Lipinski, Tsitsi Makombe, Siwa Msangi, Nilam Prasai, Alejandro Nin-Pratt, Ephraim Nkonya, Kanayo F. Nwanze, Allen Park, Simone Passarelli, Alex De Pinto, Mark Rosegrant, Janet Ranganathan, Claudia Ringler, Cleo Roberts, Marie Ruel, Monica Schuster, Tim Searchinger, James Thurlow, Peter Timmer, Maximo Torero, Daniel Vennard, Richard Waite, and Wei Zhang. Production of the report was led by IFPRI’s Publications Unit under the guidance of Andrea Pedolsky and Pamela Stedman-Edwards. Team members include Terra Carter, Patricia Fowlkes, Heidi Fritschel, Corinne Garber, Michael Go, David Popham, Katarlah Taylor, Julia Vivalo, John Whitehead, and Sandra Yin. Chapter 1, which draws partially on other chapters in this book, benefitted from research and writing assis- tance from Heidi Fritschel. Denise Chin, Tolulope Olofinbiyi, Bas Paris, and Christopher Rue contributed to Chapter 2, which also benefited from International Fund for Agriculture colleagues, Edward Heinemann, Bruce Frederick Murphy, and Bettina Prato. The report underwent a peer review by IFPRI’s Publications Review Committee, chaired by Gershon Feder. ix SUMMARY The year 2015 saw a new global commitment to sustainable devel- opment that will require a reshaping of the world’s food system. The well-being of people and the planet will depend on creation of a food system that is more efficient, inclusive, climate-smart, sustainable, nutrition- and health-driven, and business-friendly. Shenggen Fan is director general, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA. FOOD POLICY IN 2015–2016 Reshaping the Global Food System for Sustainable Development Shenggen Fan The year 2015 was a watershed moment for the interna- tional development community. The endpoint of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015 represented the culmination of an ambitious agenda designed to improve human well-being worldwide. Adopted in 2000 by the United Nations (UN) member countries, the MDGs were an enormous undertaking that achieved some striking advances: extreme poverty, child mortality, and hunger all fell by around half between 1990 and 2015.1 We also made important progress in reducing maternal mortality, combating HIV/ AIDS and malaria, raising primary school enrollment, and boosting total offi- cial development assistance. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has called the MDGs “the most successful anti-poverty movement in history.”2 Still, we cannot sit back and declare victory. Progress varies by region, and millions of people still live in conditions of severe deprivation. Poverty and hunger remain serious problems. Conflicts have killed, injured, and displaced millions of people. Population growth and urbanization are pushing up food demand while natural resources are under strain. And climate change, extreme weather, and environmental degradation not only impose hardships now, but threaten to do so even more in the future. So the global community committed to a new set of objectives in 2015—the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—to chart a path toward meeting cur- rent human needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. The 17 goals and 169 targets will anchor the global develop- ment agenda for the next 15 years. At the core of the SDGs are goals to eliminate extreme poverty, hunger, and malnutrition, and to conserve the environment. Chapter 1 At the same time, we are moving toward more comprehensive—or systems level—thinking as we look at issues of poverty, hunger, and malnutri- tion and come to a greater understanding of their complexity. The world’s food system includes all of the activities and elements—environment, people, inputs, processes, knowledge, infrastructure, and institutions—involved in getting food from farms to consumers’ plates. Just as important, it includes the outputs of these activities, such as socioeconomic and environmental outcomes. Because the food sys- tem reaches into so many areas, it has a large part to play in people’s prosperity, food security, and nutri- tion. Not only does the food system generate the calories and nutrients that people require for good health, it also is the basis for the livelihoods of mil- lions of the world’s poorest people. Creating a world food system that operates for the well-being of people, as well as the planet on which we all depend, is a major challenge. We need a food system that can help us reach a whole range of SDGs by 2030. What would such a food system look like? How close have we come to achieving it? And how do the events and issues of 2015 fit into the effort to build a sustainable food system? LOOKING BACK AT 2015 A new chapter opened with the September UN Gen- eral Assembly meeting, at which the UN member countries adopted the SDGs. The new goals are meant to be truly global and apply not just to devel- oping countries, but to every country. They cover a wider set of policy areas than the MDGs did, and the 169 targets are intended to advance the goals in specific ways. SDGs 1 and 2, for instance, call for ending poverty and hunger, including all forms of malnutrition, by 2030. Although the goals are global, actions will need to be led and implemented by indi- vidual countries, with participation not only from national governments, but also from local communi- ties, the private sector, aid donors, researchers, and other partners. Discussions also took place on how to pay for global development efforts. In July 2015, a global conference in Addis Ababa on financing develop- ment led to several new agreements, such as a social compact to provide all people with basic services including education, health, and water and sanita- tion, as well as a commitment to universal second- ary education and equal economic rights for women. The conference also reaffirmed that the developed countries would spend 0.7 percent of their national income on official development assistance—a decades-old goal that only a few countries have met.3 In December 2015, the 21st UN Conference of the Parties (COP21) in Paris marked a new approach to coping with climate change. It moves away from the mandated cuts in greenhouses gases (GHGs) typified by the Kyoto agreement and instead allows countries to put forward their own plans for lower- ing domestic emissions. With a goal of keeping the average global temperature increase below 2 degrees Celsius—and ideally even below 1.5 degrees Cel- sius—188 countries submitted plans for slowing the pace of GHG emissions. Moreover, every five years countries will submit updated and increasingly ambitious plans. Also in December, the World Trade Organi- zation’s (WTO) ministerial meeting in Nairobi resulted in a package of decisions, including a com- mitment to eliminate subsidies for farm exports and to seek a permanent solution for treatment of coun- tries’ public holdings of food stocks for food secu- rity purposes—an unresolved issue that has been an important point of contention. Along with these global decisions, many devel- opments in 2015 served to underline the intercon- nectedness of the world’s countries and people. Economic and natural forces, as well as people, crossed borders and had wide-ranging impacts across countries. Overall global economic growth was disappoint- ingly slow in 2015, at 2.4 percent, amid slow growth Creating a world food system that operates for the well-being of people as well as the planet is a major challenge. 2 Reshaping sR ngGlohG llod eSe Rem l eSe hpihoGR odReRGlaemRi in the emerging economies.4 At the same time, world food prices continued their downward slide, falling for the fourth year in a row. The Food Price Index of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) averaged 19 percent less in 2015 than it did in 2014.5 Plentiful supplies coupled with modest demand, as well as appreciation of the US dollar, appear to underpin the fall in food prices. World oil prices slid dramatically, reaching their low- est level in 11 years at the end of 2015.6 A series of shocks buffeted countries, regions, and food systems across the world in 2015. Flood- ing in southern Africa, drought in Central America, and a major earthquake in Nepal led to widespread food insecurity. In March, a strong El Niño weather pattern commenced, with severe effects for food security in several regions. It led to one of the worst droughts in decades in Ethiopia, leaving millions of people in need of relief assistance. The year also saw the numbers of displaced people reach unprecedented crisis proportions. Although conflicts in various countries contributed to the massive movements of people, the civil war in Syria is responsible for the bulk of the displaced. The flow of refugees represents not only hardship and risk for the displaced people themselves, but also daunting challenges for the host communities and for the international humanitarian system.7 In Africa, although the continent as a whole did not meet the MDG 1 goal of halving poverty and hunger, 18 countries did achieve the poverty goal.8 African countries have pursued other goals as well, with mixed results. East Africa surpassed the Com- prehensive Africa Agricultural Development Pro- gramme (CAADP) target of 6 percent agricultural growth in 2008–2014, reaching a rate of 6.6 percent growth. But total public spending on agriculture as a share of public spending in Africa fell far short of the CAADP target of 10 percent. In early 2016, the World Health Organization declared that Ebola transmission had ended in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. This outbreak of the virus killed more than an estimated 11,000 people.9 Conflict in sev- eral countries, including Central African Repub- lic, Nigeria, Somalia, and South Sudan, jeopardized food security there. And as climate change effects began to be felt, several initiatives were launched to promote the spread of climate-smart agricultural policies and practices across Africa. Developments and conditions in the Middle East and North Africa in 2015 were troubling, even beyond the conflicts in Syria and elsewhere. With the price of oil falling, the revenues of the oil-rich Gulf Cooperation Council countries were expected to fall by 50 percent in 2015, putting a strain on their finances. For oil-importing countries, the bene- fit of lower oil prices was counteracted by reduced demand for goods and services from the Gulf states. Hunger and malnutrition remain serious problems in many countries in the region, even as obesity rates in some countries soar. In contrast, South Asia benefited from rapid economic growth in 2015. Poverty and hunger have fallen in the region but remain high. Weather extremes and disasters, including earthquakes, droughts, and heat waves, posed challenges for the region’s food security. Yet the countries of South Asia made a number of food policy advances, includ- ing new initiatives related to nutrition policy and food safety in Bangladesh, a new sanitation program and an irrigation program in India, and programs to improve farmers’ inputs in India and Pakistan. In East Asia, rice prices—an important indi- cator of food security—fell slightly in 2015, even though production was modest, probably due to large stockpiles of rice in the region. In 2016, how- ever, as the weather effects of El Niño decrease pro- duction, stockpiles could decline and prices could become more volatile; the East Asian countries may find it difficult to ensure an affordable supply of staple grains for the poor and hungry in the region. The flow of refugees represents not only hardship and risk for the displaced themselves, but also daunting challenges for the host communities and the humanitarian system. llod alGpcS pi 2015–2016 3 JANUARY Spotlight on Soils. The United Nations declares 2015 the “International Year of Soils” to focus the world’s attention on “healthy soils for a healthy life.” F E B R U A RY Growing Numbers of Refugees. Turkey becomes the world’s biggest refugee-hosting country, with nearly 1 million refugees from Syria alone. Intensified conflict in Yemen leaves 12 million people food insecure and 1.8 million children malnourished. M A R C H Ebola Outbreak in West Africa. The epidemic in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone disrupts markets and trade, and 1.2 million people face crisis levels of food insecurity. A P R I L Major Earthquake Hits Nepal. A magnitude 7.8 quake leaves an estimated 1.4 million people in need of food assistance and destroys 52,000 metric tons of grain stocks. M AY Showcasing Food for the World Expo Milan. A global exposition on “feeding the planet energy for life” opens, showcasing technologies for a sustain- able future. J U N E Pope Calls for Earth Stewardship. Pope Francis’s encyclical highlights the impact of climate change on the poor and stresses our responsi- bility to care for the Earth. Ambitious Goals Set by G7. For the first time, the G7 commits to ending extreme poverty and undernutrition by 2030 and sets a zero-carbon economy goal for the end of the century. J U LY Agenda Set for Financing Development. In Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 193 UN member states meet and agree to a new social compact to provide critical public services—health, education, energy, water, and sanitation—for all. A U G U S T Low, Stable Food Prices. Bumper crops lead to notably low and stable international food prices, which hit a six-year low. S E P T E M B E R SDGs Adopted. The UN General Assembly formally adopts 17 Sustainable Development Goals with 169 targets covering a broad range of sustainable development issues. SDGs 1 and 2 are “no poverty” and “zero hunger” by 2030. N O V E M B E R El Niño Brings Ethiopian Drought. Suffering the worst drought in decades, 8.2 million Ethiopians are in need of relief assistance. D E C E M B E R COP21 in Paris. World leaders negotiate an unprecedented agreement on climate change, committing all countries to limit global warming to 2°C and offering poorer countries financial help to cut emissions and cope with the effects of climate change. Focus on Food Waste. By invitation from 20 agricul- tural ministers, IFPRI and FAO launch the G20 Technical Platform on the Measurement and Reduc- tion of Food Loss and Waste. Agricultural Export Subsidies to Be Eliminated. Tenth WTO Ministerial Conference culminates in historic Nairobi package, includes a commitment to abolishing subsidies for farm exports. FOOD POLICY TIMELINE: ISSUES, ACTIONS & EVENTS2015 GLOBAL TRENDS & ENVIRONMENT THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS LEAD THE WAY TO 2030 GLOBAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY REMAINS SLOW GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL PRICES FOR MAJOR COMMODITIES DECLINE FOR FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW CLIMATE CHANGE REMAINS AT THE TOP OF THE GLOBAL POLICY AGENDA THE STRONGEST EL NIÑO IN 18 YEARS CAUSES DROUGHTS AND FLOODS THAT THREATEN FOOD SECURITY IN AFRICA, CENTRAL AMERICA, AND ASIA THE REFUGEE CRISIS, AND ITS IMPACT ON LIVELIHOODS AND FOOD SECURITY, DEEPENS AND BECOMES THE FOCUS OF POLICYMAKERS JANUARY Spotlight on Soils. The United Nations declares 2015 the “International Year of Soils” to focus the world’s attention on “healthy soils for a healthy life.” F E B R U A RY Growing Numbers of Refugees. Turkey becomes the world’s biggest refugee-hosting country, with nearly 1 million refugees from Syria alone. Intensified conflict in Yemen leaves 12 million people food insecure and 1.8 million children malnourished. M A R C H Ebola Outbreak in West Africa. The epidemic in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone disrupts markets and trade, and 1.2 million people face crisis levels of food insecurity. A P R I L Major Earthquake Hits Nepal. A magnitude 7.8 quake leaves an estimated 1.4 million people in need of food assistance and destroys 52,000 metric tons of grain stocks. M AY Showcasing Food for the World Expo Milan. A global exposition on “feeding the planet energy for life” opens, showcasing technologies for a sustain- able future. J U N E Pope Calls for Earth Stewardship. Pope Francis’s encyclical highlights the impact of climate change on the poor and stresses our responsi- bility to care for the Earth. Ambitious Goals Set by G7. For the first time, the G7 commits to ending extreme poverty and undernutrition by 2030 and sets a zero-carbon economy goal for the end of the century. J U LY Agenda Set for Financing Development. In Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 193 UN member states meet and agree to a new social compact to provide critical public services—health, education, energy, water, and sanitation—for all. A U G U S T Low, Stable Food Prices. Bumper crops lead to notably low and stable international food prices, which hit a six-year low. S E P T E M B E R SDGs Adopted. The UN General Assembly formally adopts 17 Sustainable Development Goals with 169 targets covering a broad range of sustainable development issues. SDGs 1 and 2 are “no poverty” and “zero hunger” by 2030. N O V E M B E R El Niño Brings Ethiopian Drought. Suffering the worst drought in decades, 8.2 million Ethiopians are in need of relief assistance. D E C E M B E R COP21 in Paris. World leaders negotiate an unprecedented agreement on climate change, committing all countries to limit global warming to 2°C and offering poorer countries financial help to cut emissions and cope with the effects of climate change. Focus on Food Waste. By invitation from 20 agricul- tural ministers, IFPRI and FAO launch the G20 Technical Platform on the Measurement and Reduc- tion of Food Loss and Waste. Agricultural Export Subsidies to Be Eliminated. Tenth WTO Ministerial Conference culminates in historic Nairobi package, includes a commitment to abolishing subsidies for farm exports. FOOD POLICY TIMELINE: ISSUES, ACTIONS & EVENTS2015 GLOBAL TRENDS & ENVIRONMENT THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS LEAD THE WAY TO 2030 GLOBAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY REMAINS SLOW GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL PRICES FOR MAJOR COMMODITIES DECLINE FOR FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW CLIMATE CHANGE REMAINS AT THE TOP OF THE GLOBAL POLICY AGENDA THE STRONGEST EL NIÑO IN 18 YEARS CAUSES DROUGHTS AND FLOODS THAT THREATEN FOOD SECURITY IN AFRICA, CENTRAL AMERICA, AND ASIA THE REFUGEE CRISIS, AND ITS IMPACT ON LIVELIHOODS AND FOOD SECURITY, DEEPENS AND BECOMES THE FOCUS OF POLICYMAKERS After a series of food safety scandals, food safety is a pressing issue in China, which passed new regu- lations in 2015. Other countries in the region have also been working toward bringing local food-safety inspection guidelines up to regional standards.10 Final agreement on the Asian Infrastructure Invest- ment Bank was reached, and this new institution is expected to help East Asia meet its substantial infra- structure needs. Central Asia remains vulnerable to shocks in the wake of an economic downturn in Russia—due in part to low oil and gas prices and international sanctions, which substantially reduced remittances from migrants. Inflation is high, and economic growth is expected to slow. Still, all Central Asian countries except Tajikistan managed to meet the MDG target of cutting poverty and hunger by half by 2015. And several countries in the region are adopting new policies to promote food security and improved nutrition. Latin American countries achieved several of the MDGs, including the poverty and hunger goals, thanks in part to strong agricultural and economic growth and expanded social safety nets. Hunger and undernutrition remain problems in some areas, though, such as Central America and the Caribbean, and the whole region suffers from serious rates of overweight, obesity, and related noncommunica- ble diseases. In January 2015, most countries in the region adopted a regional plan for food security that commits them to eliminating hunger by 2025. BUILDING A FOOD SYSTEM THAT WORKS FOR PEOPLE AND THE PLANET As the events of 2015 showed, while our current food system has major strengths, it also suffers from significant weaknesses. On the one hand, it feeds more than 6 billion people—more than many in ear- lier decades and centuries would have believed pos- sible. On the other hand, it leaves nearly 800 million people hungry. It does not provide all people with a healthy, safe, and nutritious diet; many of those who get sufficient calories are still malnourished. The food system does not generate adequate liveli- hoods for millions of people employed in the food system. And in a context of scarce natural resources and advancing climate change, it is not environmen- tally sustainable. A food system that promotes the well-being of people and the planet should have six characteris- tics: it should be efficient, inclusive, climate-smart, sustainable, nutrition- and health- driven, and business-friendly. Efficient To begin with, we need a food system that produces more food using the fewest resources possible. The UN reports that the world’s food producers will need to produce 70 percent more food by 2050 to feed a projected world population of 9.6 billion.11 Yet the world’s land and water resources are already under serious pressure. Technologies, institutions, and policies must all be designed to promote the efficient and productive use of these resources. Value chains, markets, and trade systems need to work more effi- ciently. By reducing distortions in trade policies, the recent WTO agreement to end export subsidies is a promising step in this direction. In addition, there is growing awareness that loss and waste of the food we produce constitute a large source of inefficiency in our food system. Estimates of the share of food lost and wasted globally through the various stages of the food value chain fall in the range of 30 percent, and even higher for some prod- ucts.12 Food loss is particularly high during agri- cultural production and processing in developing countries, and food waste is common at the con- sumer stage in industrialized countries. Moreover, lost or wasted food has high environmental costs— perhaps 30 percent of the world’s agricultural land is devoted to producing food that will never be eaten. International organizations, research institutions, national governments, and others have undertaken Latin American countries achieved several of the MDGs, including the poverty and hunger goals. 6 Reshaping sR ngGlohG llod eSe Rem l eSe hpihoGR odReRGlaemRi initiatives to reduce food loss and waste, but so far these efforts have resulted in few major success sto- ries (see Chapter 3, “Toward a Sustainable Food System: Reducing Food Loss and Waste”). Becom- ing more efficient will involve improving infrastruc- ture, technology, transportation, and distribution along the supply chain, and educating consumers about food waste. A new G20 Technical Platform on Food Loss and Waste, launched by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and FAO in 2015, will provide knowledge on best practices in these areas. Inclusive We need to make sure that opportunities and eco- nomic growth reach poor and marginalized people, such as smallholders, women, and youth, who have important roles to play in ending hunger and malnu- trition. These groups often face constrained access to assets and markets and are at risk of exclusion from increasingly complex food value chains. Maximiz- ing the potential of commercially viable smallholder farms and empowering women and youth are not only critical for food security and nutrition, but also central to achieving several other SDGs, especially those related to reducing inequality. An overwhelming majority (84 percent) of the world’s 570 million farms operate on less than 2 hectares of land. Small farms are a critical source of income, employment, and food for billions of people in many developing countries,13 but they are also home to half of the world’s hungry.14 Smallholders are not always the most efficient producers in agricultural systems. Given that labor on small farms is often supplied by family mem- bers, such farms typically benefit from the low cost of supervising workers, which can make them more efficient than larger farms. But this advantage diminishes as agriculture becomes more capital intensive and as large farms benefit from econo- mies of scale with the increased use of tractors and other machines.15 Policies should help smallhold- ers shift either toward producing more nutritious and profitable foods or toward engaging in off-farm employment.16 Empowering women is also a vital step in boost- ing agricultural output and productivity. Female farmers’ yields are estimated to be 20–30 percent lower than men’s. This is mainly because women have less access to resources, such as land titles, inputs, and financial services, and they face the additional demands on their time of household work and childcare.17 Removing these inequalities and closing the gender gap in agricultural yields could increase developing countries’ agricultural output by between 2.5 and 4.0 percent and in turn reduce the number of undernourished people by 12–17 percent (100–150 million people).18 Climate-smart Climate change is modifying the environment in which agriculture operates by bringing about changes in temperature, precipitation, and weather volatility. It is already having significant negative impacts on crop yields and is expected to decrease yields even more in the coming decades, just as the world requires higher yields to meet future food needs. For example, global cereal yields are pro- jected to fall by 20 percent by 2050.19 Moreover, commercially viable smallholder farmers, who have such an important role to play in achieving food security and in meeting the SDGs, are particularly vulnerable to the extreme weather events associated with climate change, because they are already oper- ating with limited resources, assets, and capacities (see Chapter 2, “Climate Change and Agriculture: Strengthening the Role of Smallholders”). Of course, the food system itself is a signifi- cant contributor to climate change. The FAO esti- mates that the global food system is responsible for about one-fifth of GHG emissions (see Figure 3 in Chapter 7). A climate-smart food system, there- fore, is crucial. Such a system would integrate Maximizing the potential of smallholders, including women and youth, is critical to food security and nutrition, and to achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals. llod alGpcS pi 2015–2016 7 2016 GLOBAL FOOD POLICY REPORT SURVEY Over 1,000 individuals representing more than 80 countries responded to a Global Food Policy Report survey on perceptions about food policy and food security now and for the future, and on priorities among the Sustainable Development Goals. The respondents, most of whom work in agricultural or economic development, or the health and nutrition field, are pessimistic about the possibility of eliminating hunger and undernutrition by 2025 globally. They are more optimistic, however, about eliminating hunger and undernutrition in their own countries. Among the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, most respondents give priority to ending hunger. More than half are dissatisfied with global food policies. Men and women have different views. Young people are more pessimistic about ending global hunger. People are more optimistic about ending hunger and undernutrition in their own country than globally. Yes, I’m satis�ed with current global food policies. Respondents working in finance are the most optimistic about eliminating hunger by 2025; those in agricultural development are the least optimistic. Europeans are the most optimistic about ending hunger and undernutrition by 2025; Africans are the least optimistic. GLOBAL FOOD POLICIES PERSPECTIVES FROM THE FIELD REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES HUNGER & UNDERNUTRITION SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS: PRIORITIES DISSATISFIED 60% TOP PRIORITY50% Even more are dissatisfied with food policies in their own country. DISSATISFIED 70% END HUNGER FIRST68% CAN 50% CAN 30% 7% WILL RES PONDENTS UNDER 303% Yes, global hunger CAN be eliminated by 2025. Yes, global hunger WILL be eliminated by 2025. Yes, global hunger WILL be eliminated by 2025. SDG2, end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture. Yes, ending hunger and undernutrition is a prerequisite to ending extreme poverty. Yes, hunger in my country CAN be eliminated by 2025. WILL 25% RESPONDENTS UNDER 3025% Yes, hunger in my country WILL be eliminated by 2025. Yes, hunger in my country WILL be eliminated by 2025. 43% 37% Yes, I’m satis�ed with current food policies in my own country. 38% 23% 43 % 29 5 69 40 34 16 67 45 32 9 73 40 33 8 64 90 30 20 70 28 17 6 89 31 38 7 65 Agricultural Development Economic Development Social Protection & Safety Nutrition & Health Finance Humanitarian Assistance Other Africa Asia Europe Latin America Middle East/North Africa North America Pacific 26 40 15 70 40 46 31 71 44 83 6065 20 60 23 68 13 50 19 66 22 68 16 60 29 71 24 52 % Satisfied with global food policies Think global hunger and undernutrition can be eliminated by 2025 Think global hunger and undernutrition will be eliminated by 2025 Think ending hunger and undernutrition are a prerequisite to ending extreme poverty Source: The survey was conducted online, from January 25-31. IFPRI invited over 17,000 individuals to participate. Complete survey questions and results are available at www.ifpri.org/gfpr/2016. agricultural development and responsiveness to cli- mate, while aiming to reduce or remove GHGs and build resilience. Building a climate-smart food system will pro- ceed faster if we invest in technologies and policies that can meet more than one goal. That is, solutions should be designed not only to increase productivity, but also to improve food security and nutrition and to help farmers mitigate or adapt to climate change. A number of such technologies have already been identified, including zero-till farming; certain crop varieties, such as C4 rice; and agroforestry systems in which farmers grow trees and shrubs on their farmland. Many of these technologies are suitable for smallholder farmers. Sustainable A sustainable food system is one that efficiently meets current and emerging demand for food without jeop- ardizing the availability of scarce natural resources. At present, resource use in agriculture is unsustain- able. For example, as much as 85 percent of global water use goes to agricultural irrigation,20 of which 15–35 percent is thought to be unsustainable.21 Fur- thermore, nearly a quarter of all global land has been affected by environmental degradation.22 We can avoid sacrificing the environment for food security and nutrition by focusing on sus- tainable intensification, whereby increased food production goes hand in hand with more efficient use of natural resources and reduced environmen- tal impacts. Although there is debate over exactly what sustainable intensification entails in practi- cal terms,23 researchers have identified a number of agricultural technologies that can reduce trade-offs among sustainability, food security, and nutrition and even exploit synergies among them, such as nitrogen-use efficiency, heat- and drought-tolerant crop varieties, precision agriculture, and drip irri- gation.24 Sustainable intensification strategies can also help promote soil health and sustainable land management, which are key to producing a sustain- able food supply; ensuring ecosystem services, such as habitats for beneficial insects and pollinators; and promoting human health (see Chapter 5, “Land and Soil Management: Promoting Healthy Soils for Healthier Agricultural Systems”). Many ways of using water more efficiently in agri- culture already exist. Lining irrigation canals would help reduce water loss, for example, and such tech- nologies as modern drip or sprinkler irrigation sys- tems would improve the application of water to crops. Effective water management through pricing, taxes, subsidies, and quotas can reduce water waste by giving farmers incentives to adopt resource-efficient technologies and penalizing those who engage in unsustainable practices (see Chapter 4, “Water, Nutrition, and Health: Finding Win-Win Strategies for Water Management”). Energy is required throughout the food system to produce crops, livestock, and fish; to process, store, and distribute food products; and to prepare and preserve foods. To be sustainable, the global food system will need to ensure widespread access to modern energy. Although sustainably meeting the world’s needs for food and energy will be challeng- ing, there are several potential opportunities for doing so through greater use of renewable forms of energy, such as hydropower and solar power; care- fully managed biofuels; and more efficient cook- stoves (see Chapter 7, “Green Energy: Fueling the Path to Food Security”). Global diets are also on an unsustainable trajec- tory. Three current trends are worrisome: increas- ing numbers of people are consuming more calories than they need for a healthy and active life; rising numbers of people are consuming more protein than they require and shifting their consumption toward animal-based protein; and demand for beef, which is an inefficient and resource-intensive food source, is rising rapidly (see Chapter 8, “Shifting Diets: Toward a Sustainable Food Future”). These trends Researchers have identified agricultural technologies that can reduce trade-offs among sustainability, food security, and nutrition, and even exploit synergies among them. llod alGpcS pi 2015–2016 9 impose high costs not only in terms of human health and nutrition, but also in terms of the environment, through land use and GHG emissions. So far, efforts to shift people’s diets, primarily through labeling and consumer education, have had limited success. It is time to develop strategies that correspond better with how people actually make dietary decisions. Nutrition- and health-driven Our current food system does not provide a nutri- tious diet to all people. Worldwide, an estimated 2 billion people suffer micronutrient deficien- cies, and 795 million people are undernourished. Although undernutrition is slowly declining, 162 million children under age five still suffer from stunted growth, most of them in Africa south of the Sahara and South Asia. Not only is undernutrition the single biggest contributor to child mortality, but it also impairs people’s cognitive and physical devel- opment, hindering their educational attainment and labor productivity, and ultimately undermining the economic progress of countries. At the other end of the spectrum, a growing number of people are suffering from overnutrition: currently more than 2 billion people are overweight or obese. Moreover, undernutrition and obesity increasingly coexist in the same households. Many countries are also experiencing increased threats to the safety of food supplies. We need to build a global food system that makes it easier for people to con- sume safe, nutritious, diverse diets in appropriate amounts, while limiting processed foods of limited nutritional value. Agricultural value chains, which encompass all actors and activities from the farm to the table, need to be designed with both nutrition and sus- tainability in mind (see Chapter 6, “Nutrition and Sustainability: Harnessing Value Chains to Improve Food Systems”). Various types of value chain interventions are possible: interventions could be designed to result in greater supplies of nutritious foods, greater demand for those foods, or better functioning of value chains through more infor- mation or regulation. Such interventions could include, for example, nutrition education for con- sumers, “cold chains” that can help keep perishable foods fresh, and contract farming arrangements that encourage farmers to grow nutritious crops. Gender also plays an important role in building a nutrition-driven food system, given women’s import- ant roles in agricultural production and as consum- ers and caregivers. IFPRI’s gender-related research shows, for instance, that empowering women in agri- culture can help improve their households’ dietary diversity and reduce child stunting.25 Business-friendly Global, national, and local food systems must be supported by well-functioning markets and partner- ships in food supply chains and by an environment that allows food-system entrepreneurs to promote long-term, market-based solutions. Private sector participation in the global food system, in the form of domestic and foreign investments, can help push forward critical advances in technology, productiv- ity, and other outcomes. In addition to promoting links between private sector parties along the supply chain, the stakeholders in the food system should facilitate partnerships between private sector actors and public bodies, development agencies, and civil society organizations. It is also important to use market and trade pol- icies to soften the negative effects of market shocks and improve resilience across the supply chain. Gov- ernments and civic organizations should provide stability and mitigate the risk of extreme food price volatility through, for example, well-regulated food warehousing and reserve systems. To function well for the private sector, the enabling environment will require, among other things, adequate transportation, communications, and energy infrastructure; availability of finance; and agricultural research and extension services. It is useful to keep in mind that private sector actors in Agricultural value chains—from farm to table—need to be designed with both nutrition and sustainability in mind. 10 Reshaping sR ngGlohG llod eSe Rem l eSe hpihoGR odReRGlaemRi the food system are likely to contribute to such goals as nutrition and sustainability if pursuing those goals also expands their potential for profits (see Chapters 3 and 8). A FOOD SYSTEM WE CAN ALL THRIVE IN A food system index is needed to help measure prog- ress in these six dimensions and to quantify changes in the many moving parts of the food system. Such an index, along with more research and more exper- imentation with policies and technologies, will give us a better idea of how to advance, step by step, in making improvements to the global food system. A food system that is efficient, inclu- sive, climate-smart, sustainable, nutrition- and health-driven, and business-friendly will promote the well-being of people and the planet, as it helps us achieve many of the SDGs. Such a food system would contribute to, for example, the SDGs related to food security and nutrition, gender equity, water and sanitation, employment, and land use. By oper- ating in a climate-smart way, it would move coun- tries closer to meeting their COP21 commitments. And it could help the world end hunger and under- nutrition by 2025, a goal adopted by IFPRI in 2015 and joined by several countries and partners through the Compact2025 initiative. Changing the global food system in these ways will not be easy. But having a vision of where we want to be is a vital first step. Ultimately, a global food system that supports a healthy, well-nourished population and a healthy planet can be sustained for generations. ■ llod alGpcS pi 2015–2016 11 SUMMARY Smallholder farmers have a vital role to play in global food secu- rity and nutrition, and in supporting a range of development and climate change goals. Strengthening the resilience and commercial viability of these farmers, particularly women and youth, can increase their capacity to contribute to these global goals. Kanayo F. Nwanze is president of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Rome, Italy. Shenggen Fan is director general of the International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA. Smallholder farmers are key contributors to global food security and nutrition. The 500 million smallholder farms in the devel- oping world provide an estimated 80 percent of the food produced in Asia and Africa south of the Sahara.1 Yet smallholders are a vulnerable and often neglected group, who account for most of the world’s poor and hungry. Glob- ally, the poor and hungry live predominantly in rural areas, where agriculture is their main source of livelihood.2 Smallholders face a mix of interrelated risks and challenges that threaten their livelihoods, food security, and nutrition— among these, climate change looms large. Increasing the resilience and viability of smallholder farming could both reduce rural poverty and food insecurity, and contribute broadly to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Evidence is strong that climate change will continue to have negative impacts on agriculture, increasing the vulnerability of smallholder farmers, especially in tropical regions.3 Climate change exacerbates the production challenges faced by smallholders and increases the likelihood of agricultural and income losses, pests and diseases, and asset depletion.4 For example, yields of staple crops grown by smallholders, such as maize, rice, and wheat, are expected to decline in the coming years as a result of climate change.5 At the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015, world leaders agreed on the SDGs—17 goals with 169 targets—which will anchor the global development agenda for the next 15 years. At the core of the SDG initiative are goals to eliminate extreme poverty, hunger, and malnutrition, and preserve our planet. Smallholders have a unique role to play in this new development agenda and can contribute to several SDGs. Smallholder agriculture, especially if well CLIMATE CHANGE AND AGRICULTURE Strengthening the Role of Smallholders Kanayo F. Nwanze and Shenggen Fan Chapter 2 integrated into a diversified rural economy and agri- food value chains, can contribute to more inclusive growth and, critically, to employment generation. Even very poor subsistence farmers can be empow- ered to manage resources sustainably and can benefit from goals focused on education, peace, and gen- der equality. Assistance through such measures as safety nets and support through off-farm employ- ment to diversify livelihoods can also help develop rural communities and disrupt cycles of poverty, hunger, and undernutrition. This support can also promote more inclusive patterns of growth and cush- ion the short-term impact of transitioning into non- farm activities. Although smallholder agriculture is often recog- nized as a vital sector for development, it has rarely enjoyed the policy and institutional support neces- sary to allow smallholders and rural economies to thrive.6 A commitment to treat smallholder farms as viable businesses is key to unlocking the sector’s potential to contribute to the broader development agenda. Indeed, meeting many of the SDGs will require support to strengthen smallholders’ resil- ience to various shocks, including climate shocks, which put their livelihoods and prosperity at risk. Investing in solutions that offer multiple wins, such as increased productivity or profitability, improved food security and nutrition, and climate change mitigation and adaptation, will foster resilience and facilitate smallholders’ integral role in achieving the SDGs. SMALLHOLDERS’ ROLE IN COMBATING CLIMATE CHANGE Many smallholders earn low incomes and lack access to adequate education, land, credit and financial services, technical assistance, and markets. Such limited resources and capacities leave smallholders extremely vulnerable to the direct impacts of climate change, particularly the higher frequency and inten- sity of extreme weather events, such as heat waves and severe droughts, extreme rainfall and floods, and tropical cyclones. These same limitations will also make it difficult for smallholders to adapt to the effects of climate change, further constraining their productivity and resilience.7 For smallholders to build resilience to climate shocks, investments must be made in climate change mitigation and adap- tation measures. Multiple-win solutions, such as climate-smart agriculture (CSA), can offer opportu- nities for smallholders to sustainably and efficiently produce more nutritious crops while contributing to positive climate action. These solutions can reap high returns: studies show that multiple-win solu- tions have large benefits for smallholders and create spillover effects for the rest of society.8 Smallholders are highly vulnerable to climate shocks Smallholders are not all the same—they are a diverse set of households living in different types of economies.9 They do, however, share a vulnerability to climate shocks. Smallholder productivity depends on well-functioning ecosystems and ecosystem ser- vices. Predictable freshwater delivery is particularly important because smallholders in many develop- ing countries engage in rainfed agriculture. Changes in weather patterns, such as longer dry seasons or extended rains, require farmers to make adjust- ments to their agricultural activities, which in turn can increase pressure on ecosystems, for example, through overextraction of water or inappropriate use of agrochemicals.10 Land degradation also compounds the vulner- ability of smallholders. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) esti- mates that 12 million hectares of land are lost annu- ally to drought and desertification, and also predicts that the fertility of arable land will be negatively affected by climate change.11 In Africa south of the Sahara, up to 20 percent of arable land may become much less suitable for agriculture by 2080.12 The world’s drylands, which cover about 40 percent of the world’s land surface and are inhabited by about 3 billion people, are also extremely vulnerable to climate change.13 This puts smallholders who tend farms in drylands—more than 200 million of whom are in Africa south of the Sahara—at high risk.14 Smallholders have limited capacity to adapt to climate shocks Large farms with access to capital and resources may be able to adapt to unpredictable changes. 14 StrenStrenen Str tRor Rof SmootRolrt Smallholders, however, the vast majority of whom are poor, lack access to assets and services that could help them cope with the results of unexpected weather or other unforeseen challenges. In India, for example, where smallholders contribute 70 percent of the country’s agricultural production, more than half of the country’s agriculture is rainfed and is thus heavily dependent on a predictable monsoon sea- son.15 When the monsoon arrived late in 2011, small farmers with fewer assets, higher risk aversion, and less access to irrigation and weather information were less able to respond effectively to the delay than farmers with greater assets.16 Smallholders also face policy-related constraints, such as distortionary price regulation and poor extension services.17 These barriers make it difficult for smallholders to build the resilience needed to prepare for, cope with, and recover from shocks, and to improve their welfare.18 Leverage climate-smart agriculture to achieve broader development goals Strategies to promote climate change mitigation and adaptation should be an integral component of efforts to strengthen the contribution of smallholders to global food security, nutrition, and climate action. Developing and implementing strategies that address these multiple goals requires a holistic assessment of synergies, trade-offs, and opportunities, as well as coordination of support to smallholders by policy- makers, researchers, and practitioners. CSA offers a triple-win strategy—simultaneously improving smallholder productivity for nutritious crops and helping smallholders both adapt to climate change and mitigate agriculture’s contribution to climate change.19 For example, development of climate-ready crops, such as C4 rice, has been found to dou- ble water use efficiency, increase yields by almost 50 percent, and increase nitrogen use efficiency by 30 percent.20 Climate-smart approaches to agriculture can have high payoffs. Research suggests that adap- tation and mitigation initiatives can have valuable economic, environmental, and social spillover effects for smallholders and their communities.21 In Niger, for example, smallholders are promoting regrowth of trees and shrubs on agricultural land using the farmer-managed natural regeneration technique. This low-cost, simple agroforestry approach protects crops from heat, provides families with firewood, allows farmers to keep livestock, enhances biodiversity, and combats desertification. As one of the poorest coun- tries in the world, Niger is also extremely vulnerable to climate change, particularly drought and desertifica- tion. Farmer-managed natural regeneration has been adopted on about 5 million hectares across the coun- try since the 1980s, constituting around 50 percent of total farmland. In many cases, it has halted and reversed desertification.22 By improving crop yields, diversifying livelihoods, and on average, doubling farmers’ income, such investments can generate high economic, social, and environmental payoffs for smallholder agriculture. These agroforestry initiatives have spread across Africa south of the Sahara, includ- ing to Ghana and Zambia.23 Zero-tillage agricultural systems are another approach that can offer multiple benefits. One study found that smallholder farms in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of India that adopted zero-tillage systems became almost carbon neutral in the span of three years (from 2009 to 2012), as emissions from farm- ing activities were counterbalanced by carbon sequestration. The same study showed that farmers’ incomes increased by almost US$100 per hectare per year with zero-tillage systems, mainly because of lower input and production costs.24 The potential of CSA initiatives to support eco- nomic development, poverty reduction, and food security is attracting global-level attention. The Global Alliance for Climate-Smart Agriculture, for example, was launched in 2014 following the UN Climate Summit in New York. With members from government, civil society, farmer associations, and research organizations, the Global Alliance focuses on scaling up CSA to improve food security and nutrition worldwide. The initiative provides tools and methodologies for assessing stakeholder needs in terms of adopting CSA, and supports regional and country-level action suited to local environments. The largest global financing source dedicated to supporting the adaptation of poor smallholder farm- ers to climate change is the Adaptation for Small- holder Agriculture Programme. Launched in 2012 by the International Fund for Agricultural Develop- ment (IFAD), the program gives smallholders access ConSmSr Ctmenr mel mntnCuoSutr 15 to climate finance that promotes adaptation initia- tives by sharing knowledge on CSA, land manage- ment, postharvest practices and technologies, and women’s empowerment. Eight million smallholder farmers are expected to benefit from this financing by 2020.25 SMALLHOLDERS’ ROLE IN ACHIEVING THE SDGs Smallholders will be critical to achieving many SDGs and targets on time, despite the many chal- lenges they face.26 Figure 1 provides examples of ways in which support to smallholders can help over- come these challenges and strengthen their role in achieving particular SDGs. A more comprehensive summary of the challenges that smallholders face, potential gains from supporting smallholders, and key interventions or investments is provided at the end of this chapter (Table 1). Although smallholder agriculture contributes to climate change, it is also a key part of the solution to climate change and the attainment of SDGs. Small- holders have the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, maintain ecosys- tem services, and preserve biodiversity; they also often produce higher output per unit of land than large farms, reducing pressure for agricultural land expansion.27 Because of their size, smallholders can take advantage of labor-intensive CSA techniques that also enhance productivity and support biodiver- sity. Successful smallholders can also contribute to the attainment of the SDGs related to poverty allevi- ation, education, gender equality, water use, energy use, economic growth and employment, sustainable consumption and production, and ecosystem man- agement. Ensuring the achievement of the SDGs, therefore, will depend on strengthening small- holder resilience to various shocks, including climate shocks, and investing in successful small farms. FigURe 1 Support to smallholders can contribute to multiple SDGs—key examples Source: Authors’ compilation, adapted from Farming First, “The Story of Agriculture and the Sustainable Development Goals” (2015), http://www.farming- first.org/sdg-toolkit#home. Increase equality in access to and control of land Increase women’s access to inputs, finance, and insurance Support efficient water management systems Invest in modern irrigation technologies Promote climate-smart agriculture Improve access to climate finance Increased productivity Higher agricultural growth Invest in agricultural research and development Support efficient and inclusive food value chains Scale up productive social safety nets Zero Hunger Gender Equality Clean Water & Sanitation Climate ActionNo Poverty Empowered women in agriculture Increased participation in rural labor markets Increased availability, affordability, acceptability, and quality of nutritious foods Improved food security and nutrition Efficient water use in agriculture Improved irrigation for water savings Climate change mitigation and adaptation Climate readiness and efficiency of farmland SUPPORT FOR SMALLHOLDERS GAINS SDGs 1 2 5 6 13 16 StrenStrenen Str tRor Rof SmootRolrt Make implementation of the SDGs inclusive of smallholders In working to achieve the SDGs, countries must adopt context-specific policies that are inclusive of all smallholders, including women and youth. While all smallholders are vulnerable, women and men have different adaptive capacities, in large part because of unequal access to land and technologies, which often leaves women less able than men to cope with shocks. For instance, men are more likely to own farming assets and have access to technologies that could support adaptation to climate change. A preliminary study in Mali suggests that access to irrigation allowed men to increase their value of production almost enough to offset the nega- tive impact of climatic shocks. Women, however, were less able to adapt because they had only lim- ited access to irrigation and other farm technolo- gies that could be used to increase productivity.28 Another study undertaken in Kenya suggests that when women had equal access to information on climate-smart adaptation practices, they were as likely as men to adopt such practices.29 Empowering women in agriculture not only will improve climate adaptation practices, but also can contribute to other societal gains, such as improved household nutrition. According to an FAO multicountry study, women who have equal access to resources can increase yields by close to 30 percent, improve agricultural outputs, and reduce the number of undernourished people by up to 17 percent.30 SDG implementation must also be inclusive of youth in agriculture. As the world becomes progressively more urban, sustainable cities will depend on greater amounts of food, clean water, and environmental services that only vibrant rural economies can provide.31 However, young people are increasingly abandoning agriculture and rural areas in search of employment in cities or abroad.32 Rural youth in impoverished regions do not see employment in agriculture as a viable career. In Africa, for example, there is great potential to increase opportunities on-farm and in value chains, yet these opportunties are unrecognized by or inac- cessible to most young people.33 There is a press- ing need to create opportunities for young people to earn a decent living in the agricultural and nonfarm rural sectors in order to promote thriving rural economies. Treat smallholder agriculture as a viable business to achieve multiple SDGs Treating smallholder agriculture as a business when it has potential to become commercially viable will help to leverage its contribution to multiple SDGs. For example, supporting a shift from traditional sub- sistence farming to high-value, climate-smart, and nutrition-driven agriculture for smallholders can greatly contribute to the attainment of several SDGs. Making this shift will require sustained policy and institutional support, and sufficient investments in key areas, including financial facilities and risk man- agement tools, knowledge and technical skills, mar- ket access, and social safety nets for smallholders. Give smallholders access to financial and risk management tools To sustain and grow their operations, smallhold- ers require access to financial capital and facilities, including climate finance, and to risk management tools, including insurance. Bundling financial and nonfinancial services, such as credit or savings together with insurance, can provide a comprehen- sive solution for smallholders.34 Such solutions are especially crucial in the event of unexpected climatic shocks. In Bolivia, IFAD’s Adapation for Small- holder Agriculture Programme provides finance to smallholders that will help communities adapt to climate change and receive climate-risk management training, among other projects. This initiative is expected to improve the resilience of at least 49,000 smallholder farmers.35 Similar investments are being made across Africa south of the Sahara. The lessons learned from these initiatives will provide insight regarding the effectiveness and sustainability of cli- mate finance interventions under various designs and circumstances. Accessible risk management tools, such as index-based insurance, can help smallholders man- age the insecurity inherent in farming livelihoods. Weather index–based insurance provides farmers with a payout during poor and irregular weather, increasing their resilience by protecting them from the worst effects of weather-related shocks.36 In ConSmSr Ctmenr mel mntnCuoSutr 17 the past, the high costs associated with measuring losses made agricultural insurance unaffordable for smallholders. Weather index–based insurance, how- ever, does not require costly measurements, making it cost-effective for smallholders. In Ethiopia and Senegal, for example, farmers who were previously considered uninsurable (because of poverty and lack of education, among other reasons) participated in the R4 Rural Resilience Initiative, which provided access to improved climate-risk management tools, such as natural resource rehabilitation. The insur- ance component of the initiative covered almost one-third of Ethiopian farmers from 2009 to 2012.37 In India, more than 30 million smallholders have adopted weather-indexed insurance in recent years, enabling some farmers to shift toward more profit- able farm production systems that may incur higher risk.38 The global Platform for Agricultural Risk Management, managed by IFAD, assesses agricul- tural risk and facilitates integration of risk manage- ment strategies into public policies, agricultural investment programs, and private sector practices. Through this platform, IFAD is strengthening its understanding of agricultural risk and developing better tools to assist smallholders.39 Provide smallholders the knowledge and technical skills needed to build climate resilience Strengthening the capacity of smallholders to mit- igate and adapt to climate change–induced shocks by adjusting farming strategies—particularly by adopting CSA—will be critical to their success. For example, providing farmers with knowledge and training on how to adjust sowing dates and intro- duce drought- or flood-resilient crops can facilitate adaptation. Initiatives of this type are being sup- plemented by investments in improved climate information services, a core activity in Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture–supported programs across Africa and Asia. Ensure smallholders have access to high-value markets Linking smallholders to high-value markets can help to increase the profitability of smallholder enterprises and connect rural and urban areas. Strengthening rural-urban linkages allows for better integration of rural farmers with urban cen- ters and provides expanded market-based agri- cultural opportunities.40 Some farmers, however, face hard constraints—such as marginal lands and long distances to markets—that are likely to impede efforts to increase profits or to participate in high-value markets. Improved road networks can increase access for smallholders, and off-farm employment opportunities should also be pro- moted for these farmers.41 An example of a successful rural-urban link is India’s dairy grid, popularly known as Operation Flood. Small dairy farmers were linked to urban consumers in a chain of production, procurement, processing, and marketing. The dairy grid involved 13 million participants, including almost 4 million women, in the value chain as of 2008, giving them access to urban markets. Consumers also benefited, gaining access to more and better-quality milk.42 The Strategic Partnership Program supported by IFAD and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) aims to provide smallholders with better access to markets for high-value commodities and to opportunities related to climate change mit- igation.43 From 2008 to 2011, the program imple- mented four activities in Morocco related to market access and climate change mitigation, and identified new market opportunities for high-value CSA prod- ucts and services, such as carbon sequestration.44 Provide smallholders social protection Social protection programs, including social safety nets, provide a critical short-term cushion for coping with livelihood shocks, such as extreme weather, and facilitate investment in long-term productivity-enhancing or exit opportunities.45 A preliminary study in Honduras suggests that social protection programs can boost community and smallholder resilience and adaptive capacity while reducing poverty and improving food security. Spe- cifically, social protection measures that focused on enhancing social and human capital are thought to have reduced smallholder and community vulner- ability to drought.46 Cross-sectoral social protec- tion programs, such as Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme, which is paired with a food secu- rity and household asset–building program, are 18 StrenStrenen Str tRor Rof SmootRolrt examples of important forms of social protection. These measures can help support improvements in productivity with multiple benefits for smallholders and other vulnerable groups.47 To generate further benefits, social protection programs should also integrate gender considerations and be designed to suit country contexts. SUPPORTING THE CONTRIBUTION OF SMALLHOLDERS Smallholders are essential to achieving global food security, nutrition, and positive climate action. Fos- tering smallholders’ resilience is key. In addition, a new outlook on global food security and nutrition that views smallholder agriculture as a business can further promote the role of smallholders in achieving gains in climate change adaptation and mitigation, food security and nutrition, and poverty reduction. With the right tools and strategies, successful small- holders can contribute significantly toward a host of development goals. The SDGs, therefore, must be inclusive of smallholders, especially smallholder women and rural youth—groups extremely vulnera- ble to shocks but also critical to ensuring global food security and nutrition for all. Additionally, strength- ening rural-urban linkages can boost smallholder productivity and profitability, and promote better access to nutritious food for urban consumers. At the global level, international climate negoti- ations must recognize the vital role of smallholders. Given the strong link between agriculture and cli- mate change, support for smallholders needs to be a cornerstone of global agreements related to climate change. At the 21st Session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Conven- tion on Climate Change (COP21) in December 2015, a global agreement was signed to combat cli- mate change and unleash actions and investments toward a low-carbon, resilient, and sustainable future. Agriculture, however, was only indirectly rec- ognized in the final agreement as a key component to combat climate change. Against that backdrop, it is critical to ensure that agriculture is integrated in ongoing and follow-up efforts to COP21 and that smallholders are recognized for their potential con- tribution to climate action. Finally, global agreements, including COP21 and the SDGs, must translate to local action. The SDGs call for country-level implementation to end pov- erty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all. Similarly at COP21, 195 countries agreed to submit updated climate plans every five years and define roadmaps for implementation. Such plans must go beyond governments and afford other sectors, including smallholders, the opportunity and means to contribute to their country’s economy and overall well-being, and to truly promote inclusive growth. ■ ConSmSr Ctmenr mel mntnCuoSutr 19 TAble 1 How smallholders can contribute to the SDGs Issues/challenges faced by smallholders Gains from supporting smallholders Key interventions/ investments needed Sustianable Development Goals Smallholders account for most of world’s poor ▶ Increased productivity improves smallholders’ income and helps them contribute to greater agri- cultural growth ▶ Agricultural growth is at least twice as effective in reducing pov- erty as other sectors—however, resource costs must be considered ▶ Investing in agricultural research and development (R&D) and extension ▶ Scaling-up productive social safety nets ▶ Promoting land rights and effi- cient land markets ▶ Supporting efficient and inclusive food value chains ▶ Supporting nutrition-sensitive agricultural production 1 No poverty Smallholders account for most of world’s hungry and many are malnourished ▶ Increases ability of smallholders to produce and purchase more nutritious foods by lowering food prices for poor consumers, and by raising demand for rural labor ▶ Improves food security and nutri- tion for smallholders 2 Zero hunger Many smallholders lack access to high-quality education and technical know-how ▶ Smallholder-friendly agricultural extension services help farm- ers to access skills, inputs, and technologies ▶ Well-designed extension ser- vices can offer high returns on investment ▶ Creating extension services that provide knowledge and skills for use of new technologies ▶ Strengthening capacity to improve human, organizational, and institutional capacities and knowledge systems for providing in-country solutions 4 Quality education Smallholder women have less access to resources than men ▶ Empowering women in agricul- ture will contribute to reduction of global hunger ▶ Increased participation in flexi- ble, efficient, and fair rural labor markets ▶ Women mediate pathways from agriculture to nutrition ▶ Increase equality in access to and control of land ▶ Improving women’s access to inputs and credit ▶ Expanding women’s access to education ▶ Supporting gender-driven agri- cultural policies for improved nutrition 5 Gender equality Smallholders face declining water resources ▶ Better water-use efficiency in agriculture can help to meet future food and nutrition requirements ▶ Adoption of modern irrigation technologies can lead to better irrigation efficiences and water savings ▶ Eliminating inefficient subsidies that promote overuse of water ▶ Establishg efficient water man- agement systems ▶ Investing in efficient irrigation technologies 6 Clean water and sanitation Smallholders lack access to energy ▶ Improved access to energy can improve living standards and reduce hunger ▶ Greater energy efficiency is needed, as demand is expected to increase, especially in the devel- oping world ▶ Improving energy efficiency in production, processing, and retail sectors ▶ Eliminating inefficient subsidies to nonfood crops for biofuels ▶ Promoting rural renewable energy use 7 Affordable and clean energy 20 StrenStrenen Str tRor Rof SmootRolrt Issues/challenges faced by smallholders Gains from supporting smallholders Key interventions/ investments needed Sustianable Development Goals Smallholders are not always seen as entrepreneurs who contribute to the local and global economies ▶ Spurs economic growth—income multipliers are linked to agricul- tural growth ▶ Attracts youth to profitable busi- ness opportunities and leverages “youth dividend” ▶ Supporting smallholders with profit potential to move up to more commercial activities through various means, such as improved access to land, markets, infrastructure, and trade ▶ Tailoring agriculture employment interventions to specific needs of young people 8 Decent work and economic growth Smallholders lack access to high- value markets that could improve profitability ▶ Rural–urban linkages can help to address both rural and urban hun- ger and poverty ▶ Connecting smallholders in rural and peri-urban areas to high- value urban markets ▶ Promoting pro-smallholder value chains through increased access to information and communica- tion technologies 11 Sustainable cities and communities Smallholders lack infrastructure to process and store postharvest yields, leading to food loss ▶ Food loss reduction measures can improve food availability and access, and reduce hunger and malnutrition ▶ Increases resource-use efficiency ▶ Investing in infrastructure and transportation ▶ Promoting research and training on food loss prevention in the packing and processing industries 12 Responsible consumption and production Smallholders are vulnerable to cli- mate change threats, such as land degradation and drought Climate-smart agriculture leads to multiple wins: ▶ Increased productivity and profitability ▶ Climate change mitigation and adaptation ▶ Climate readiness and efficiency of farmland ▶ Promoting climate-smart agricul- ture technologies and practices ▶ Improving access to climate-re- lated risk management ▶ Expanding agricultural R&D to produce more nutritious foods with fewer resources and reduced GHG emissions 13 Climate action Smallholders respond to changing conditions by increasing pressure on ecosystems, such as overextraction of water and use of agrochemicals ▶ Sustainable intensification can help to meet rising food demand, reduce negative environmental effects, and preserve ecosystems 15 Life on land Source: Authors’ compilation. Note: Adapted from Farming First, The Story of Agriculture and the Sustainable Development Goals (2015), http://www.farmingfirst.org/sdg-toolkit#home. ConSmSr Ctmenr mel mntnCuoSutr 21 SUMMARY Reducing food loss and waste can contribute to food security and sustainability. Measuring food loss and waste, identifying where in the food sys- tem it occurs, and developing effective policies along the value chain are essential first steps toward addressing the problem. Monica Schuster is a postdoctoral researcher, Division of Bioeconomics, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, Belgium. Maximo Torero is division director, Markets, Trade, and Institutions Division, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA. TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEM Reducing Food Loss and Waste Monica Schuster and Maximo Torero On the way from field to fork, substantial food loss and waste is common, posing a challenge to both food security and sus- tainability. Growing demand for food, stemming from both popula- tion growth and dietary changes associated with increasing wealth, is creating pressure on the world’s available land and scarce natural resources and contrib- uting to greenhouse gas emissions. Food loss and waste compound this pressure. The overall productivity of our food system is reduced by food loss and waste, which can result in lower incomes for food producers and higher costs for food consumers. Much of the burden falls on the poor. Food loss and food waste have recently caught the attention of both research- ers and policymakers, and sparked interest in initiatives to understand and reduce their impacts. As policymakers look to achieve the Sustainable Devel- opment Goals (SDGs) and the climate change commitments of 2015, reducing food loss and waste may provide an efficient means to improve food security and sustainability. Food loss and waste occur at different places along the food value chain: in production, postproduction procedures, processing, distribution, and consump- tion.1 Figure 1 shows the stages of the value chain at which food loss may occur, as well as the types of loss likely at each stage. These vary with different com- modities and geographical locations. However, loss and waste are commonly the result of underlying inefficient, unjust, and unsustainable food systems.2 By reducing food loss and waste, we can improve food availability and food access—increasing the productivity of the food system without increasing agricultural inputs, the use of scarce natural resources, or the application of Chapter 3 improved production technologies. However, suc- cess stories of reducing food waste and food loss are rare, and measurements of food loss and food waste remain highly inconsistent.3 DEFINITIONS OF FOOD LOSS AND WASTE Food loss and waste have been defined in many ways, and disagreement remains over proper terminology.4 Although the terms “postharvest loss,” “food loss,” “food waste,” and “food loss and waste” are frequently used interchangeably, they do not refer consistently to the same aspects of the problem.5 Also, none of these classifications includes preharvest losses, such as crops lost to pests and diseases before harvest, crops left in the field, crops lost as a result of poor harvesting techniques or sharp price drops, or food that was not produced because of a lack of proper agricultural inputs and technology. To incorporate loss and waste along all stages of the value chain, from preharvest to table waste, we propose a more expansive definition using a new term: “potential food loss and waste” (PFLW), which includes these important preharvest losses and unrealized potential production (Figure 2). DIFFERING METHODOLOGIES Differences in definitions of food loss and food waste can affect the methodologies used to mea- sure and interpret loss.6 Two estimation methodol- ogies have been used to study food loss and waste. The macro approach, which uses aggregated data from national or local authorities and large com- panies, provides a low-cost way to measure overall food loss and waste along an entire value chain. The drawbacks to this approach include its lack of rep- resentative and good-quality data, particularly for low- and middle-income countries and for specific stages of the value chain, including primary pro- duction, processing, and retail.7 The micro approach uses data on specific actors at different value chain stages. These data are highly specific to region and context, and thus more use- ful for disentangling the origins of food loss and waste along the value chain and providing insights FigURe 1 Food losses along the value chain Source: Authors. POSTPRODUCTION PROCESSING DISTRIBUTION CONSUMPTIONPRODUCTION Preharvest Harvest Breeding Damage/spillage Left behind in fields Pests/diseases Weather Wrong inputs Handling Storage Transport Degradation Pests Premature animal death Spillage Canning Packaging Transformation Degradation Discard Spillage Retail Transport Degradation Discard Excess supply Spillage Spoilage Preparation Table Discard Excess preparation Spoilage VALUE CHAIN STAGES CAUSES OF LOSS 24 Reducing FFe Foo ie osR into potential prevention strategies. However, the micro approach is costly and time consuming to implement, and hampered by the inherent diffi- culty of collecting sufficient responses to repre- sent an entire value chain or region. In addition, results from micro-level studies are often difficult to compare because the studies are adapted to specific objectives and stages of the value chain, and use different data collection and estimation methodologies. Neither the macro not the micro approach calculates PFLW—clearly presenting an area where measurement of food loss and waste needs improvement. WHAT IS NEEDED? Our lack of clear knowledge about the real mag- nitude of food loss and waste is a major barrier to addressing the problem.8 Estimates of global mag- nitudes vary widely. An overview of recent studies on global food loss and waste magnitudes shows a range from 27 percent to 32 percent of all food pro- duced in the world. Moreover, there are significant differences across studies at the commodity level.9 According to the Food and Agriculture Organiza- tion of the United Nations (FAO), cereal losses are estimated at 19–32 percent, root and tuber losses at 33–60 percent, and fruit and vegetable losses at 37–55 percent.10 A review of 213 papers on Africa south of the Sahara identified large differences in estimates attributable not only to the choice of methodology, but also to such factors as agroeco- logical conditions, technology, and socioeconomic contexts affecting both production and postproduc- tion (Figure 3).11 Standardized estimation meth- ods are clearly necessary. But these alone will not Figure 2 Food loss and waste terminology Potential Food Loss Food Waste Post Harvest LossProduction Loss FOOD LOSS: Unintentional reductions in food quantity or quality before consumption, including postharvest losses. FOOD LOSS + FOOD WASTE: Deliberately discarded food that is fit for human consumption FOOD LOSS + FOOD WASTE + POTENTIAL FOOD LOSS: Crops lost before harvest to pests and disease or left in the field, crops lost due to poor harvesting techniques or sharp price drops, or food that was not produced because of a lack of appropriate agricultural inputs FL FLW PFLW FL FLW PFLW Source: Authors. Toward a SuSTainable Food SySTem 25 be sufficient to identify the underlying causes and potential solutions to food loss and waste, and espe- cially to PFLW, or to monitor specific progress on reduction targets. As discussed above, a standard definition and terminology for food loss and waste is crucial. To be most useful, the definition should adopt a value chain approach and include preharvest losses. Rooted in this definition, goals for reducing food loss and waste must include both quantitative and qualitative criteria, measurable in economic, caloric, or quality-adjusted weight terms. In addition, assessments must identify loss and waste occurring at particular value chain stages, not just the overall loss. PFLW measurement must also take into account that food loss and waste often orig- inate at different stages along the value chain in dif- ferent geographical locations.12 Estimation methods used for low- and middle- income countries should differ from those used in high-income countries because of data availability. Figure 3 Range of postharvest loss estimates by commodity from various studies in Africa 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Benin Benin Benin Benin Benin Benin Ghana Ghana Kenya Kenya Kenya Tanzania Tanzania Tanzania Benin Benin Ghana Ghana Tanzania Tanzania Tanzania % POSTHARVEST LOSS WITH INTERVENTIONS IN PLACE % POSTHARVEST LOSS WITH NO INTERVENTIONS IN PLACE SWEET POTATOES DRIED CASSAVA MANGOES MAIZE Source: Authors’ interpretation based on H. Affognon, C. Mutungia, P. Sangingac, and C. Borgemeistera, “Unpacking Postharvest Losses in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Meta-Analysis,” World Development 66 (2014): 49–68. Notes: Each pair of bars represents a separate study of postharvest food loss and waste for a particular commodity. 26 Reducing FFe Foo ie osR The methodology for developing countries should measure food reductions at different stages of the value chain and should be applicable across crops and regions. Representative surveys of farmers, mid- dlemen, wholesale buyers, and processors will allow for the characterization of inputs, harvesting, stor- age, handling, and processing practices for each of these agents, as well as for the estimation of product quantities, quality, and prices along the value chain. As a basis for estimating PFLW, the methodology should use the highest potential production level (the “production possibility frontier”) for a partic- ular commodity and a specific region, expressed in either quantities or equivalent prices. Using poten- tial, rather than actual, production guarantees the inclusion of losses relative to potential yield, prehar- vest losses, and harvest losses in the food loss calcu- lation. By expressing the loss in terms of quantity or price, the methodology differentiates between losses in physical quantities and reductions in quality and value. In developed countries, detailed data on food loss and waste in the processing, distribution, whole- sale, and retail stages are often tracked by companies but not made available to researchers and policy- makers. Transparency should be encouraged in order to systematize data collection and to increase access to reliable food loss and waste information. The methodology must capture both quantitative and qualitative food loss, as well as discretionary food waste in the processing, large distribution, and retail sectors. Food service waste and household waste are more challenging to capture—data will need to be collected on representative samples using a variety of methods (such as waste composition analysis, ques- tionnaires, interviews, or waste diaries).13 WHAT HAS BEEN DONE SO FAR? The issue of food loss and waste is high on the polit- ical agenda in industrialized countries, and food waste is likely to become an increasing problem in developing countries as standards of living improve. In 2015, the G20 agriculture ministers noted “with great concern the significant extent of food loss and waste throughout food value chains,” describ- ing it as “a global problem of enormous economic, environmental and societal significance.”21 Several initiatives to reduce food loss and waste have been undertaken by international organizations and research institutes, national and local governments, civil society actors, and retailers. International organizations and research institutes The Global Initiative on Food Loss and Waste Reduction (also known as SAVE FOOD), launched jointly by the FAO and the private sector trade-fair organizer Messe Düsseldorf in 2011, is probably the largest worldwide initiative to fight food loss and waste. The initiative is built on four pillars: research and assessment; support for evidence-based poli- cies; awareness raising (such as “Think.Eat.Save”); and coordination of global initiatives, including collaboration with donors, national governments, the private sector, and other international orga- nizations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Commission. The OECD’s Food Chain Analysis Network dedicated its fourth annual meet- ing in 2013 to the issue of reducing food waste, and the European Commission currently co-funds two initiatives: one aimed at reducing food waste in Europe (FUSIONS) and one aimed at estimating food loss in Africa south of the Sahara (APHLIS). The Natural Resources Institute and the Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statis- tics implement cost-effective methods to quantify The methodology used to measure food loss and waste must capture both quantiative and qualitiatve food loss along the value chain, as well as discretionary food waste in processing, distribution, and retail sectors. sF e odos ci b R FFe oyosRm 27 Box 1 Case studies of food loss—Kenya and Nigeria Food loss and waste occur at different points along the value chain, depending on the particular food crop and the particular context. A study in Kenya that looked at potatoes—an important food crop primar- ily cultivated by smallholders—found a variety of production factors causing loss and waste along the value chain, including poor land preparation and soil manage- ment, and ineffective pest and disease control.14 Losses also occur throughout the postharvest stages. Using a methodology to measure postharvest losses, the authors found that up to 95 percent of recorded damage and loss in the Kenyan potato value chain occurs at the production level, where diseases, the use of inappropri- ate harvesting tools, and an insufficiently trained workforce play a major role. Another study, looking at the major production constraints in potato-produc- ing areas of Kenya, has identified bacterial wilt as the most common disease.15 Its prevalence is partly attributable to use of seeds from informal sources (because of the high cost of certified seeds) and to inadequate rotation of crops.16 Both of these factors tend to accelerate the spread of seed-borne diseases which, compounded by the lack of effective con- trol methods, make bacterial wilt a major constraint for small-scale potato farmers. Potential solutions include suitable crop rotation (growing potatoes once every four seasons) and removal of volunteer potatoes (tubers left in the soil following a commercial potato harvest, which create a serious weed problem).17 A study of the cassava value chain in Nigeria used survey information collected from farmers, marketers, and proces- sors to estimate losses.18 Local farmers and agroprocessing companies produce cassava; farmers, middlemen (mostly women), and agroprocessing companies perform postharvest handling and pro- cessing activities to turn the cassava into gari for human consumption and starch for use by the food and beverage indus- try; and finally, middlemen and agropro- cessing companies market and trade the cassava. In contrast to Kenya’s potato value chain, in the Nigerian cassava value chain major losses occur postharvest, during gari and starch processing, rather than during production (Figure 4). This is consistent with a wider study that looked at losses of cassava in Ghana, Nigeria, and Vietnam, and found that a shortage of peeling capacity led to processing delays that caused losses.19 A shift to mechanical peeling would help to tackle this problem. Although efforts to date have made lim- ited progress, it is estimated that improve- ments in processing could lower losses by about 44 percent.20 FigURe 4 Losses in the Nigerian cassava value chain ON-FARM PRODUCTION POSTHARVEST HANDLING PRIMARY PROCESSING MARKETING CONSUMPTIONINPUT-SUPPLY Cassava Tubers Farm 8.5% Gari Processing 14.8% Gari Market 9.5%Starch Factory 11.8% Gari, Chips, Starch, Flour HARVEST 5% STORAGE/SPOILAGE 1.6% SIZE/SMALL 1.9% Food Products FRESH TUBERS 12.1% Transport 2.2% Too woody 4.1% Too sma