Fo Food for though ght Review of the Dutch food security policy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Fo Food for though ght Review of the Dutch food security policy 2012-2016 Ferko Bodnár, IOB Food Security Exchange Wageningen, 31 May 2018 1

Presen entation o n outline ne 1. Food security, the global challenge 2. Dutch food security policy 3. IOB evaluation methodology Effects: 4. Smallholder production and income 5. Access to nutritious food 6. Enabling business environment 7. Food security 8. Efficiency 9. Coherence 10. Recommendations 2

1. 1. Food s d sec ecur urity, t , the he gl global c cha hallenge 50% 45% Poverty 40% (<USD 1.90 a day, 2011 PPP; % of world population) 35% Undernourishment % population 30% (calories, % of population, world) 25% Stunting 20% (% of children under 5, world) 15% Overweight 10% (BMI>25, % of population developing countries) 5% 0% 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 3

2. D 2. Dut utch policy obj bjec ectives and co contribution to to SDG2 G2 and globa bal challeng enges es Global Feed the world beyond 2050 Reduce hunger and malnutrition challenges SDG 2.1 SDG 2.2 SDG 2.3 SDG 2.4 SDG 2.5 end hunger end double sustainable agro- 2030 SDG malnutrition production and food production biodiversity 2030 income small- systems maintained and scale farmers accessible Objective 1 Objective 2 increased sustainable production access to nutritious food Dutch (a) inclusive growth ag. sector eradicate hunger and malnutrition food (b) sustainable food systems security policy Objective 3 enabling business environment Implicit principles and assumptions in Dutch policy • Emphasis on farmers with potential to produce for the market. • Inclusive: directly or indirectly food insecure people will benefit. 4 • Improved income will result in improved nutrition.

3. IOB E Evalua uation m n met etho hodo dology • Reconstruction food security policy • Analysis 248 food security activities (2012-2016) • Grouping food security activities under 11 ‘impact pathways’: similar strategy towards a policy objective. • 4 country studies: o Qualitative, food security programme o Quantitative, project impact at farm household level • Review project evaluations done by others (Dutch projects) • Review broader literature 5 5

4. Fou our r pathways t to o agri gricultural p prod oduction farmer production farmer income sustainable production 3. Value Chain Development 4. Natural Resource Mgt 2. Farmer Extension Crucial link to Varies: from very More productive • • • research positive to nil effect. use of land and Intensive: OK. Link to research and water. • • • Dependence on extension • Stability government? Integrated, farmers • central, most promising Long term effect ? • Little attention in • • Inclusiveness? design, and M&E 1. Agric. Research Balance private – public • • Large impact in interests? the long term Benefits of a few • outweigh the cost of all 6

Exampl ple: S Safal, v value c chain d n dev evel elopm pmen ent B Bang nglades desh Goal : Improving food security of >50.000 dairy, horticulture, and aquaculture farmers Activities: 1. Organise farmers for collective buying and selling. 2. Help in negotiations. 3. Train farmers to increase productivity and quality. 4. 1300 landless to become service providers. 5. Nutritional awareness and knowledge. Effect on income 5000 5000 farm income per houshold 4000 4000 per year (USD) 3000 3000 project 2000 2000 control 1000 1000 0 0 2014 2016 2014 2016 7 land owners landless

5. Three p pathways t to better n nutrition nutritional status consumption of nutritious food access to nutritious food 5. Social safety nets 6. nutrition awareness 7. Food fortification and behaviour Target most • Target most Mass fortification • • vulnerable vulnerable cheap, large reach Improved food • Hygiene and Improved • • access and preparation consumption consumption 8

6. 6. Four ur pa pathways f s for an ena n enabling busi business ss en environment Land rental Access inputs Public policies Market • • • • market and technology Private standards integration • Investment in • Investment in • Market access • Investment in ag. • agriculture agriculture Affordable • food • Off farm employment 9. land tenure 10. farmer 11. policy 8. rural security organisations dialogue roads 9

7. 7. Contribut bution to to food ood s securi rity “… … when en all peo eople, a at all tim imes, h have … acce ccess to … … nutritious food ood for or a a healthy life…” …” (World Food Summit, 1996) biological utilisation of food water, sanitation, child and health care consumption nutritious food food access stability in food access and availability farmer income farmer production food availability eco-efficient land mgt. objective 2 objective 1 increase sustainable production access to nutritious food 10

From agricul cultur ural p produc uction n and i nd income e to to improved n nutrition? Judgment criteria food security: Pay day! • Availability: + • Access: + • Stability: ? • Utilisation: +/- • Inclusiveness: +/- Nutrition effects agric. development (Value chain development in particular) • Type of product? (nutritious?) • Who are the producers? (women?) • What market? (informal?) • Who are the consumers? (BoP?) 11

Exampl ple: S Safal, v value c chain d n dev evel elopm pmen ent B Bang nglades desh Months 12 12 adequate food 11 11 access: 10 10 project control 9 9 8 8 2014 2016 2014 2016 landless land owners 12

8. E Effici cienc ency 1. Costs – benefits, or cost effectiveness • Quantified benefits? • Safal: benefits farmers exceed project costs. 2. Little evidence of synergy: • Innovations scaled up in large programmes? • Cascape and AGP in Ethiopia 3. Public private partnerships: • Leverage private sector finance and knowledge, potential large reach. • Conditions to assure additionality and inclusiveness? 4. Operational and management costs • High fragmentation (248 activities); geographical and organisational isolation. 13

9. Coherenc 9. ence EU policies C 7 partner country Dutch food security programme national Dutch C 1 policy policies MASP C 5 food C 4 embassy- centrally- security managed managed other donors C 3 policy C 6 C 2 other dev. needs local population policies C5. Improve coherence within Dutch food security programme C6. Improve coherence between food security and other policies  Important role for Dutch embassies 14

11. 11. Reco commendations 1. Flexible approach: small innovations and large scale programmes. 2. Distinguish farmers types: stepping up, stepping out, hanging in. 3. Food system approach: from production to consumption. 4. Value chain approach for sustainability challenges. 5. Fewer activities. 6. Quantify benefits, to steer for efficiency. 7. Study conditions for additionality PPP; enabling environment. 8. Create more synergy between food security activities 9. Address multiple constraints and divide tasks 10. Give Dutch embassies a larger role for a coherent programme. 15

Recommenda endation 2 n 2: D Disting ngui uish sh differen ent types pes o of farmer ers 1. Stepping up Farmers with potential to produce for the market. Commercially viable. Interesting for value chain development. 1-2% Commercial 2. Stepping out farmers Farmers (children of) that find employment outside smallholder farming (agro sector, other sectors). Private sector development, 3-15% regularly selling; 20-30% occasionally education. selling into markets 3. Hanging in Subsistence farmers with little commercial potential and few options 40-50% net food consumers; of other employment. Focus on most income form off-farm work and production and nutrition, rather than remittances income. (Andrew Dorward, 2009) 16

Recommenda endation 3: 3: Food s d system ems a s app pproach ( (1) 1) Food insecurity analysis 1. Who and where are food insecure consumers? 2. Characteristics food insecurity? (availability, access, stability, utilisation) Food system analysis 3. Where do food insecure people currently get their food from? 4. What does the food system look like? (production, market) Food security strategy 5. How can food systems be improved? Role for nut. sens. agriculture? 6. How to assure that food insecure people benefit, directly or indirectly 17

Recommenda endation 3 3 Food s d system ems a app pproach ( (2) 2) Market Consuming household Producing household (processing, trade) Food consumption Food consumption Food purchase Food prices Income Farm income Food sales Farm gate prices Household food production (food/cash, diversity, nutritional value, $value) Food availability B. Indirect effects on all households A. Direct effects on farm households Income Market development Agricultural development 18 Nutrition awareness

Recommenda endation 6: 6: Syner ergy bet etwee een activ ivit itie ies New Policy Note ‘Int. trade and dev. cooperation’, 18 May 2018 Example: integrated programme around cities in the Sahel Water Climate Food Private sector development Value chain development Employment for youth Agriculture Combine SDGs ‘Co-location’: one project does not have to do all, coordinate (Marie Ruel) 19