First of all, we would like to make this contribution understandable to everybody whether it is an evaluation professional or an actual food producer or an ordinary consumer of food. Otherwise, it would run the risk of being an academic post inaccessible to people who are really concerned with policies and regulations affecting food systems.
It is easy and simple to outline what such policies and regulations ought to enable food systems to achieve, but unfortunately, theorists often forget what the end-users of food systems wish and require from the one they use vary widely. Their wishes and requirements are for the most part, governed by their food culture, which has both a physiological and an environmental relevance that should not be overlooked.
Briefly then, successful policies and regulations concerned here should guide food systems adequately to meet the following objectives:
Their operation is progressively environmentally sustainable; most of the current ones are not, hence the need for their gradual progress towards their future sustainability.
Their output is guided by the norms of the local food culture to the greatest possible degree.
Their output should be adequate for their end-users to procure a wholesome, varied and a balanced diet.
Their output should be physically accessible and affordable to the end-users.
Minimise food losses as much as possible; neither policy nor regulations offer a feasible means of reducing domestic food losses.
However, they are useful in reducing them from the trade, storage and transport sub-systems in food systems.
We need not emphasise that unless the above criteria are met, no technical improvement of food systems or how they are financed would enable one to deal with the problems of hunger, malnutrition and inappropriate nutrition rampant in the world today. Whether a given food system meets those criteria would have to be ascertained by local inspection, and then one would be able to formulate relevant generic regulations.
But let it be remembered that the value of such formulations will be nugatory, unless a mechanism exists to enforce them with sufficient vigour.
It is often tempting to direct both policies and regulations to the exclusive benefit of a particular group of foodf producers, harvesters (eg. fishermen) or the end-users. However, a careful look at any food system would show that farmer poverty as well as malnutrition and inappropriate nutrition often stem from inequities in the trade sub-system of a fiven food system.
All things being equal, inadequacies in other sub-systems in a food system would have the same effect owing either to inadequate food production of the yielder sub-system or its wastage in transport and storage sub-systems.
The goal of a food and agriculture policy is to enable the people of a country to procure on a regular basis what they require to obtain a wholesome, varied and balanced diet at an affordable cost.
Achievement of this goal requires a number of strategies whose specific nature depends on a country's current food culture.
Success of this policy depends on meeting two critical requirements. First,the strategies it employs should be in accord, i. e., intra-policy harmony.
For instance, in a country where adequate nutrition for the majority does not obtain, a food and agriculture policy that embodies the strategy of investing in cash crops is not in harmony with its goal as described above. Sometimes, international organisations are guilty of this harmful activity as illustrated by World Bank compelling certain West African regimes to export their peanut crop resulting in protein malnutrition among children.
Secondly, as a food system consists of several sub-systems that come under the jurisdiction of different ministries, their policies may conflict with the main objective of a country's food and agriculture policy. This inter-policy disharmony with respect to latter's goal could have very undesirable consequences for the people concerned.
Consider now, the trade policy of a country that allows import of new food stuffs, establishment of large foreign monoculture factory farms etc., which would have disastrous consequences for small holders, independent retailers and the general state of nutrition in the land involved.
Achievement of the requisite inter-policy harmony is difficult for three reasons.
First, vested interests that plague every government
Secondly, bureaucratic norm of shielding oneself behind 'institutional autonomy' in order to preserve status quo
Finally, lack of intellectual breadth and competence to apprehend it necessity in every field should the authorities deliver what they so glibly promise.
The perceptive reader would have noticed that while the regulations needed call for on-the-spot investigation, ascertaining whether an acceptable degree of intra-policy and inter-policy harmony obtains would have to be undertaken before the strategies they employ are implemented. This may run into a wide variety of difficulties, but unless it is done, at least a partial failure of a given food and agriculture policy is inevitable. Inertiaof the bureaucratic tradition and infatuation with the peculiar terminology of tradesmen seem to be the greatest obstacles to progress in this field.
RE: Evaluating Agri-Food Systems Transformation Policies and Regulations
Norway
Lal - Manavado
Consultant
Independent analyst/synthesist
Posted on 18/02/2025
Greetings!
First of all, we would like to make this contribution understandable to everybody whether it is an evaluation professional or an actual food producer or an ordinary consumer of food. Otherwise, it would run the risk of being an academic post inaccessible to people who are really concerned
with policies and regulations affecting food systems.
It is easy and simple to outline what such policies and regulations ought to enable food systems to achieve, but unfortunately, theorists often forget what the end-users of food systems wish and require from the one they use vary widely. Their wishes and requirements are for the most part, governed by their food culture, which has both a physiological and an environmental relevance that should not be overlooked.
Briefly then, successful policies and regulations concerned here should guide food systems adequately to meet the following objectives:
However, they are useful in reducing them from the trade, storage and transport sub-systems in food systems.
We need not emphasise that unless the above criteria are met, no technical improvement of food systems or how they are financed would enable one to deal with the problems of hunger, malnutrition and inappropriate nutrition rampant in the world today. Whether a given food system meets those criteria would have to be ascertained by local inspection, and then one would be able
to formulate relevant generic regulations.
But let it be remembered that the value of such formulations will be nugatory, unless a mechanism exists to enforce them with sufficient vigour.
It is often tempting to direct both policies and regulations to the exclusive benefit of a particular group of foodf producers, harvesters (eg. fishermen) or the end-users. However, a careful look at any food system would show that farmer poverty as well as malnutrition and inappropriate
nutrition often stem from inequities in the trade sub-system of a fiven food system.
All things being equal, inadequacies in other sub-systems in a food system would have the same effect owing either to inadequate food production of the yielder sub-system or its wastage in transport and storage sub-systems.
The goal of a food and agriculture policy is to enable the people of a country to procure on a regular basis what they require to obtain a wholesome, varied and balanced diet at an affordable cost.
Achievement of this goal requires a number of strategies whose specific nature depends on a
country's current food culture.
Success of this policy depends on meeting two critical requirements. First,the strategies it employs should be in accord, i. e., intra-policy harmony.
For instance, in a country where adequate nutrition for the majority does not obtain, a food and agriculture policy that embodies the strategy of investing in cash crops is not in harmony with its goal as described above. Sometimes, international organisations are guilty of this harmful activity
as illustrated by World Bank compelling certain West African regimes to export their peanut crop resulting in protein malnutrition among children.
Secondly, as a food system consists of several sub-systems that come under the jurisdiction of different ministries, their policies may conflict with the main objective of a country's food and agriculture policy. This inter-policy disharmony with respect to latter's goal could have very
undesirable consequences for the people concerned.
Consider now, the trade policy of a country that allows import of new food stuffs, establishment of
large foreign monoculture factory farms etc., which would have disastrous consequences for small holders, independent retailers and the general state of nutrition in the land involved.
Achievement of the requisite inter-policy harmony is difficult for three reasons.
order to preserve status quo
competence to apprehend it necessity in every field should the authorities
deliver what they so glibly promise.
The perceptive reader would have noticed that while the regulations needed call for on-the-spot investigation, ascertaining whether an acceptable degree of intra-policy and inter-policy harmony obtains would have to be undertaken before the strategies they employ are implemented. This may run into a wide variety of difficulties, but unless it is done, at least a partial failure of a given food and agriculture policy is inevitable. Inertiaof the bureaucratic tradition and infatuation with the peculiar terminology of tradesmen seem to be the greatest obstacles to progress in this field.
Best wishes!
Lal Manavado.