Food and Agricultural Policy Summit Brings Together Changemakers from across the Food Landscape – GW Today

Report on the Inaugural Food and Agriculture Policy Summit

I. Introduction and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The first annual Food and Agriculture Policy Summit, co-hosted by The George Washington University’s Global Food Institute, Food Tank, and the Culinary Institute of America, convened policymakers, researchers, and industry experts. The summit’s primary objective was to identify actionable strategies for creating sustainable food systems that nourish both people and the planet, directly addressing multiple United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

• SDG 2 (Zero Hunger): The central theme was the eradication of global hunger through sustainable and resilient agricultural practices.
• SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): Discussions focused on food loss and waste reduction.
• SDG 13 (Climate Action): The agenda included a significant focus on building climate resilience within food systems.
• SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): The collaborative nature of the summit itself exemplified the multi-stakeholder approach required to achieve the SDGs.

II. Keynote Address: An Integrated Policy Approach to Global Hunger

Humanitarian and GFI founder José Andrés delivered a keynote address emphasizing the need for an urgent and integrated policy response to global food challenges. He stressed that policies must be adaptable to address rapidly evolving issues related to technology and climate change.

Core Arguments and SDG Implications:

1. Rejection of Siloed Policymaking: Andrés argued against one-dimensional solutions, citing how poorly designed humanitarian aid can undermine local economies. This directly impacts SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) by destroying local agricultural markets and livelihoods.
2. Integrated Humanitarian and Immigration Policy: He illustrated how food aid that displaces local farmers can create migration pressures, linking food security (SDG 2) directly to policies on migration and inequality (SDG 10).
3. Empowering Local Systems: The work of World Central Kitchen was presented as a model for building local capacity, enabling communities to establish resilient food distribution systems post-disaster, which supports long-term food security and community self-sufficiency in line with SDG 2.

III. Thematic Panel Discussions and Findings

The summit featured several panels addressing critical components of food system transformation.

A. Nutritional Challenges and Global Food Security

A panel titled “Feeding 10 Billion” explored the nutritional challenges of a growing global population, with a focus on human rights and economic costs. This discussion directly relates to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

• Economic Impact of Current Systems: It was reported that the current global food system incurs environmental and human health costs estimated at $10 trillion annually, highlighting a critical failure in achieving sustainable production (SDG 12).
• A Rights-Based Approach: Panelists affirmed that every child has a fundamental right to a healthy diet, establishing a moral and ethical foundation for policy action aimed at achieving SDG 2 and SDG 3.

B. Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration

The summit underscored the importance of collaboration across sectors, a principle central to SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Participants included:

• Federal government representatives
• Chefs and farmers
• Corporate leaders
• Academic researchers and thought leaders
• Community-based organizations

This diverse participation highlights the shared belief that a multi-faceted, collaborative approach is essential for building a food system that is equitable, sustainable, and resilient.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  The article’s central theme is food systems, directly addressing issues of global hunger, nutrition, and sustainable agriculture. The summit’s purpose is to explore “what better food systems would look like” and take steps to build a system that “nourishes both people and planet.”

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article connects flawed food policies to poverty. José Andrés explains how shortsighted humanitarian aid can destroy local economies by putting local farmers out of business, thus exacerbating poverty. He states, “Suddenly you have tens of thousands of farmers and families, poor in a poor country already, with no crops to sell, no income to gain.”

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

  The summit explicitly covered “food loss and waste” as a key topic. This directly relates to the goal of ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns by reducing waste along the entire food supply chain.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  The article mentions “climate resilience” and “climate change” as critical challenges that require adaptable food policies. This highlights the need for food systems to withstand and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  The entire event described in the article is an example of SDG 17 in action. The summit was co-hosted by multiple organizations (George Washington University, Food Tank, Culinary Institute of America) and brought together a diverse group of “policymakers, researchers, advocates and experts” to “work together” across “political and disciplinary lines.”

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 2.1: End hunger and ensure access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food

   The article’s focus on addressing “global hunger” and the question posed by Anna Nelson, “Does every child born on this earth have the right to food, to a healthy diet?” directly align with this target of universal access to food.

2. Target 2.4: Ensure sustainable food production systems and resilient agricultural practices

   The discussion on building “climate resilience” within food systems and developing “humane, sustainable food policies” points directly to this target, which aims to create food systems that are productive, adaptive, and do not harm ecosystems.

3. Target 12.3: Halve per capita global food waste

   The inclusion of “food loss and waste” as a major topic at the daylong summit indicates a direct connection to this target, which focuses on reducing food losses along production and supply chains.

4. Target 1.5: Build the resilience of the poor to climate-related extreme events and other shocks

   The work of World Central Kitchen is highlighted as a model for this target. Andrés emphasizes that their goal is not just to provide food after a disaster like Hurricane Melissa, but to “create distribution systems those communities can use to build themselves back up after disaster,” thereby increasing their resilience.

5. Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships

   The summit itself is a manifestation of this target. It gathered representatives from the federal government (U.S. Reps.), major corporations (Instacart), academia (GW, NYU), and civil society (Food Tank, World Central Kitchen) to collaborate on food policy.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Economic cost of current food systems

  The article explicitly mentions a quantifiable indicator: “the environmental and human health costs of our current global food systems are equivalent to about $10 trillion a year.” Reducing this monetary value would be a clear indicator of progress towards more sustainable systems (relevant to SDG 2 and SDG 12).

• Prevalence of access to a healthy diet

  The question, “Does every child born on this earth have the right to food, to a healthy diet?” implies that the percentage of children with access to such a diet is a key performance indicator for measuring success in ending hunger (relevant to Target 2.1).

• Income of local farmers in developing countries

  José Andrés’ example of Haitian farmers losing their income due to poorly designed aid implies that the stability and growth of local farmers’ income is a crucial indicator of whether humanitarian and food policies are sustainable and not causing harm (relevant to SDG 1).

• Community self-sufficiency after disasters

  The article implies that a measure of success for humanitarian aid is the ability of local communities to feed themselves. The statement, “It’s the people of Jamaica who are going to be feeding the people of Jamaica,” suggests that the level of local control and functionality of food distribution systems post-disaster is a key indicator of resilience (relevant to Target 1.5).

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: gwtoday.gwu.edu