13.11.2015
Comments on the HLPE Zero Draft (V0) and consultation
“Sustainable Agricultural Development for Food Security and nutrition including the Role of Livestock”
by the Federal Government of Germany
Germany highly welcomes the opportunity to comment on the HLPE V0-Draft that aims to explore how sustainable agricultural development, in particular in the livestock sector, can contribute to achieving food security and nutrition (FSN) by outlining the possible responses and pathways to address the main challenges involved. Its intention is to provide recommendationsthat policy-makers and stakeholders should consider.
The paper (provides a good overview ofthe role of Sustainable Agricultural Development for Food Security and nutrition (FSN) and, thus, a solid ground for the development of a comprehensive and valuable study.
I.General remarks
1.The description of the status-quo, which seems to be necessary for developing pathways and responses, remains relatively superficial. A more sophisticated and more detailedview seems to be necessary. Generally, the report should be better focused and streamlined. The existing redundancies and the in parts lengthy definitions – caused by the early stage of the report – make it difficult to extractthe major insights of the study. In addition, the report could be better structured. The descriptions made in Chapters 1,2 and 3 switchbetween regions (developed, developing), production systems, market situations, etc. The missing specificity makes the results and thoughts somehow arbitrary.
2.The report’s title raises the expectation for the report to analyzethe role of livestock for FSN more precisely. It remains open to which extent the different livestock systems contribute to each of the four dimensions of food security (availability, access, stability and utilization). Thereby, the different livestock systems can play different roles for FSN. Though the four dimensions of FSN are presented in Figure 1, they are never usedagain within the study.
3.The report does not reveal the prerequisites for the sustainable production of safe food of animal origin, e.g. education and training as well as the establishment of a functioning veterinary administration at the national level as an important contributor to public health.This seems problematic as the importance of this aspect is even reinforced by the ongoing trend towards globalization. Furthermore, the idea that the sustainable provision of safe food is not possible without healthy animal populations should constitute a central point of the paper.
4.The term food security and nutrition should be used consistently. At some points, the report uses the expression food and nutrition security.
II.Statements regarding the questions raised on pp. 2-3
- The report is wide-ranging and comprehensive in analyzing the contribution of sustainable agricultural development to ensuring food security and nutrition (FSN), with a particular focus on the livestock sector because of its importance for both nutrition and sustainable futures. Do you think that the report is striking the right balance between agricultural development overall and the livestock sector specifically with respect to their relative contribution to FSN?
a)About 40% of the total agricultural output is based on the livestock sector, which implies that still 60% of the agricultural output is related to the non-livestock sector. Obviously, the livestock sector is one of the major aspects when aiming to achieve FSN. But the role of other sectors (vegetables, fruits, coffee and cacao, etc.) should be (more) recognized and involved when dealing withFSN. Moreover, the cultivation of vegetables, fruits, etc. usually has a large impact to the environment and should therefore be regarded as an aspect of a sustainable production.
- The report is structured around context, trends, challenges and pathways/responses. Do you think that these are comprehensive enough, and adequately considered and articulated? Does the report strike the right balance of coverage across the various chapters? Are there important aspects that are missing?
The major trends and challenges are clearly defined and described (cf. p. 59). Nevertheless, some improvement is needed:
a)One assumption in the study is that livelihoods will improve by keeping livestock. What about the competitiveness of smallholders in liberalized markets? - It is to bear in mind that the real price level is declining (p. 37). Is the gained increase in purchasing power used for substantial improvements in FSN, especially malnutrition? From this point of view, a further market integration could, in the short to medium term, lead to less FSN. For some regions, slower market integration could be preferable.
b)The exchange of knowledge and the diffusion of know-how is a neglected point. The exchange of knowledge could prove viable to reduce theyield gap, the efficiency gap and the environmental gap. Additionally, the role of research is underrepresented. Facing climate change and desertification of land, there has to be further research in the field of adapted varieties, different cultivation systems, etc.
c)The role of cooperatives in the meat and dairy sector could be highlighted as they provide particularly smallholders with the necessary assets to produce, allow a better connection ofsmallholders to marketsas well as strengthen their role in the value chains. In this regard, the report could provide best-practice examples.
d)Besides other resources, water plays a crucial role in animal husbandry. The water-footprint in the meat and dairy production should not be neglected (cf. the outcomes of the 42. CFS in regard to the HLPE report on water for FSN).
e)The role of property rights should be emphasized. As described for the livestock category pastoralist, property with legal certainty is significant for all categories of livestock keepers as well as for the whole agricultural sector. This includes not only land but also water (especially between neighboring countries) in line with the RAI and VGGT.
f)The contribution ofbreeding strategies and techniques as possible tools to meet the future needs of food security, potentially improving feed efficiency, is onlymarginally discussed. In particular, the role and great potential of modern genome-based breeding methodsand biotechnology is not sufficiently discussed.
g)More precisely, modern breeding techniques hold the potentialto improve sustainable animal production. A higher intensity in animal production may only be achieved at the expense of animal biodiversity. Local breeds should be considered for cross breeding with higher performing ones. So there is a need to sustain those and to support initiatives with this aim. Most of the breeding goals in high performing breeds have already considered functional traits which are important with regard to animal health, performance, adaptability and longevity. They have been applied in most countries with high animal welfare standards. Welfare issues are extremely diverse when compared globally which is also recognized in this report.
h)There are obvious conflicts between intensification and specialization on one side, and loss of biodiversity on the other. Product diversification is illustrated, and co-existence of the different strategies, e.g. industrialization and small-scale mixed production systems, is emphasized. It remains unclear, however, how the intensification, needed to reduce use water resources and environmental pollution, could be achieved in developing countries under smallholder mixed farming systems (page 35). Even though smallholder mixed systems are not suited to provide all food needed for globally increasing demand, it is recognized that they provide an important contribution to both providing food and income for poorest parts of people and to maintain biodiversity (page 43).
i)The need for activities to eradicate infectious animal diseases and zoonoses has to be stressed, as these diseases have strong implications for livestock production and trade as well as for human and animal health. So far, activities of the relevant international organizations, such as OIE, WHO or the Codex-Alimentarius, have not been included. Similarly, the report does not account for national, international or joint activities such as the eradiction of zoonoses within the framework of the „one health“-initiative.Given that the report focusses on livestock, animal welfare should be explicitly mentioned. In this regard, socio-cultural and religious aspects in animal husbandry and traditional slaughtering should be taken into consideration as well.
j)The statement on page 34, line 25 that “intensification of animal production is not necessarily associated with the industrialization” is very important but not continuously considered in Chapter 4.
k)Furthermore, the role of alternative, sustainable sources of animal proteins could also be considered taking into account their implications for supply and demand of traditional products of animal origin.
l)The text contains information about the recently agreed SDGs (page 16-17, lines 50 – 2). An indication of which role livestock production could play in achieving the SDGs and how international actors could be involved is missing.
m)So far, the report consequently ignores the Leader’s declaration (G7 summit) concerning „neglected diseases“, antibiotic resistances or international initiatives under the umbrella of „one health“(cf. public health, global health). The latter refer to agricultural production and animal diseases/zoonoses, which play an important role for FSN based on food of animal origin even now and will increasingly do so in the future.
n)Climate change as well as international trade (namely the transportation of agricultural goods in a globalized economy) imply the spread of invasive animal populations, which may result in the transmission of non-indigenous infectious diseases (vectors). These new diseases (epizootic pathogens and zoonoses) have the potential to drastically endanger human and animal health as well as livestock production. This also implies a risk in the provision of food of animal origin. Strategies to mitigate or overcome these risks are unfortunately not part of Chapter 4 and 5.
o)The topic on “food losses and waste” (page 41, line 38ff) does neither consider livestock products norspecific quality aspects (e.g. in milk). The role ofstorage facilities and cold chains are not mentioned.
p)Many studies show that although prices are key drivers of consumer demand behavior, also psychological factors and the social and physical context are important for explaining eating habits. There is a large amount of literature dealing with the role of socialization, especially in childhood, pointing out that eating habits are learned in early years and are relatively stable over life.
q)The gender issue is not considered adequately (page 47), asthe so-called gender gap is only mentioned in sentence 18 and consequences and challenges are not considered at all. No example is given in Chapter 4.
r)It is mentioned that the growing demand for ASF and urban livestock keeping can make important contributions to FNS and livelihoods because the majority of the world’s population now lives in cities. But it should also be asked for the situation of the rural population, which mostly is more food insecure and vulnerable than the urban population. The contributions of livestock keeping, as well as its challenges, should also be discussed in this regard.
s)The role of urban livestock production is shortly mentioned but not further elaborated and incorporated in the recommendations.
t)The role of ICT should be better highlighted. In fact, ICT will probably have much more importance than stated with implication on production (education, extension), coordination andtransparency.
u)More generally, the report neglects the various successful measures and possibilities to establish specific regional systems, which have positive implications not only at a regional level but also internationally. In this regard, a more systematic approach would be helpful –including the description of concrete measures in Chapters 4 and 5.
- The report uses a classification to distinguish between four broad categories of livestock systems, in order to better identify specific challenges and sustainable development pathways for each of them. Do you find this approach useful for identifying specific policy responses and actions in different socio-economic and environmental contexts?
a)The four systems described in Chapter 2.3 seem to be comprehensive. Diversity in farm systems and ecological conditions argue for diversification of strategies to meet requirements of FSN, and each system has its own pros & cons (pages 30 - 33). These are extensively and adequately discussed.
b)The four categoriesare distinguished by different production systems, land use, feeding systems, farm and herd sizes, labor organization and farm ownership, as well as some more criteria. The categories, however, do not build on the same indicators which makes the comparison difficult. In this regard, thereport uses a number of undefined expressions such as ‘smallholders’, ‘intensive’, ‘commercial’, ‘industrial’, to name some examples.
c)The four categories are not used subsequently in the text, i.e. for analyzing the challenges (Chapter 3) and the pathways to address agricultural development (Chapter 4).
d)In a dynamic development of livestock systems, transformations from one category to another category are relevant (e.g. from pastoralist to smallholder). The role and scope of suchtransformations should be elaborated. Is there a main direction of transformation to a livestock system?
e)Intensive landless systems can also be found in areas not close to urban conglomerates such as feedlots in the US or Australia, and often a relevant processing industry is associated with them. This could be an additional category.
f)Pastoralism is described rather positively whereas the focus of the assessment of intensive systems seems to be set on disadvantages and challenges. A more consistent, comparable definition and description of their characteristics would be more helpful, instead of only discussing advantages (for example high productivity in intensive systems) and disadvantages (for example overgrazing of common land in pastoralism systems, exploitation of labor in mixed farming systems).
- The report has referenced key projections and scenario studies in identifying the drivers and trends through to 2050. Are there other studies that the report needs to reference, which offer different perspectives on the future outlook for the agriculture (including livestock) sector, in particular those that focus on nutrition and diet?
a)The TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) Study (2007-2010) looks at the sustainability, the negative environmental impacts but also the benefits of agricultural production from the EU perspective. Besides the efforts in food security, environmental services of production could also be acknowledged. This concept can also consider any regional differences (
b)Amore detailed view and reflection concerning the distribution of meat consumption worldwide is missing. Changing consumer habits in ageing populations should also be considered. Missing document:FAO. (2011a) “World Livestock 2011 – livestock in food security, available at:
c)The section dealing with animal welfare (page 58) does not include a reference to the latest IFC document on “Improving animal welfare in livestock operations”, available at:
- Do you think that there are other key challenges/opportunities that need tobe covered in the report?
In addition to the responses to Question 2, the following challenges should be regarded and/or explained in more detail:
a)Loss of soil through development of infrastructure, building sites etc.
b)Change of landuse with regard to the environmental impact of an increasing livestock
c)Education, skills and expertise
d)Access to credit by smallholders and pastoralist
e)Infrastructure (roads, equipment)
f)Rural development: incentives for staying at rural areas (e.g. by creation of jobs in the agricultural sector)
g)The role of international trade for FSN
h)The development of livestock production with the aim of improving FSN relates to improving the functioning of the entire value chain (e.g. cold chain, processing, distribution & transportation, etc).
i)Changing meat consumption patterns
j)Worldwide differing preferences for different types of food of animal origin as well as different parts of the animal
k)The gender issue
l)Erosion
- A decision-making approach that could be useful for policy makers in designing and implementing policies and actions has been proposed in Chapter 4 of the report. Is this a useful and pragmatic approach?
a)Yes, the approach is a rather pragmatic entry into the topic. Possible pathways to sustainable agriculture are discussed and a list of often conflicting options or choices is given. The responding list of challenges is a comprehensive collection of different challenges, but it does not contain any new aspects. It could be useful for the development of adapted decision-making response approaches.
b)The chapter misses a first reflection on how the livestock production will contribute to the achievement of the SDGs and how international actors could be involved. Could the Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock (GALS) play a role in that?
The National Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) (page 62, line 35) are an interesting instrument which is applied in many countries. It would be helpful to include an example on the application of a NAMA as a case study under Chapter 4.6.
- Chapter 4 also contains case studies/examples of evolutions of agricultural development policies and actions in different contexts/countries. Could you offer other practical, well-documented and significant examples to enrich and provide better balance to the variety of cases and the lessons learned in agricultural development, including the trade offs or win-win outcomes in terms of addressing the different dimensions of sustainability and FSN?
An example on building the resilience of Turkmen pastoralists to environmental variability is enclosed (Attachment 1
- The social dimension of sustainable agriculture development has often been less well described and understood, including due to lack of data. Examples and experiences on such issues (livelihoods, gender, share and situation of self employed versus wage workers, working conditions, etc.) would be of particular interest to the team.
The issue of child labor is notverified yet. Although there is not much information available, the FAO publication “children’s work in the livestock sector: herding and beyond“. gives a comprehensive overview on this often overlooked subject.
- The upstream and downstream sectors are playing an increasingly important role in respect of the orientation of agricultural development, food choices and diets. Can you provide examples of the role these sectors play in sustainable agricultural development and FSN?
An example on smallholder dairy development in Northern Sri Lanka is enclosed (Attachment 2