How unsustainable global supply chains exacerbate food insecurity – The Conversation

Report on Global Food Systems and Their Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: The Global Challenge to Achieving SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)

Despite global food production being sufficient to feed the entire world population, the persistence of hunger and food insecurity presents a significant obstacle to achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger). In 2024, an estimated 8% of the global population faced hunger, while approximately 28% experienced food insecurity, defined as a lack of consistent access to safe and nutritious food. While global supply chains are critical for food distribution, their structure and operation can paradoxically undermine progress towards the SDGs, particularly those related to poverty, hunger, and inequality.

Global Supply Chains vs. Local Food Systems: An SDG Perspective

The Conflict Between Profit-Driven Models and Sustainable Development

Research indicates that the expansion of globalized food supply chains often creates a dichotomy of wealth and poverty, directly impacting SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). While these systems can generate significant wealth for large-scale exporters, they frequently undermine local food systems essential for community resilience and food security.

• The focus on high-value export crops can divert resources, such as land and water, away from the production of staple foods for local consumption.
• This shift often leads to increased food prices domestically, disproportionately affecting low-income households and hindering progress on SDG 2.
• Conversely, establishing a domestic right to food represents a viable policy framework for combating food insecurity and advancing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Case Study: Brazil’s Dichotomy in Pursuing Zero Hunger

The Impact of National Policy on SDG 2 Targets

Brazil serves as a compelling case study of how national policies can either advance or reverse progress on food security. The nation’s journey on and off the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) world hunger map illustrates this dynamic.

1. 2002-2014: The implementation of pro-poor policies, including the fome zero (zero hunger) initiative and bolsa família grant, significantly reduced hunger, aligning with SDG 1 and SDG 2. This led to Brazil’s removal from the hunger map in 2014.
2. 2022: A shift in policy, coupled with economic shocks from the COVID-19 pandemic, led to a reversal of these gains, and Brazil was returned to the hunger map.
3. 2025: The reinstatement of pro-poor social policies once again resulted in Brazil’s removal from the map, demonstrating the direct link between targeted social investment and achieving Zero Hunger.

Despite this progress, 28 million Brazilians, predominantly women and children, still face food insecurity, highlighting ongoing challenges to achieving SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Agricultural Models and Their Effect on Sustainable Production (SDG 12)

Brazil’s integration into global supply chains has been characterized by a focus on a few primary export commodities, which conflicts with the principles of sustainable production and consumption.

• Brazil accounts for over half of the world’s soybean trade, with the majority used for animal feed abroad. It is also a top exporter of corn for animal feed and biofuels.
• This export-oriented model has enriched agribusiness but has undermined domestic food production. Between 2010 and 2022, soybean production more than doubled, while the production of rice, a domestic staple, fell by 30%.
• The consequence has been a rise in domestic food prices faster than general inflation, directly impacting the food security of low-income families and moving the country away from the targets of SDG 2 and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production).

A Localized Framework for Achieving the SDGs: The Belo Horizonte Model

Establishing the Right to Food as a Municipal Strategy

The city of Belo Horizonte offers a successful alternative model centered on the right to food, demonstrating a powerful approach to creating sustainable and inclusive urban communities (SDG 11). In 1993, the city government declared the right to food for its population and established a municipal duty to guarantee it, a policy that later influenced the national fome zero program.

Core Components and Alignment with the SDGs

The Belo Horizonte system integrates production, distribution, and consumption through a multi-faceted approach that aligns with numerous SDGs.

• Production: The city uses its purchasing power to stimulate local, agroecological food production (SDG 12) and empowers low-income farmers with inputs and secure land tenure (SDG 1, SDG 8).
• Distribution: Programs like “straight from the field” connect producers directly to public restaurants. The city also partners with groceries to sell a range of products at 25% below market prices, improving food access (SDG 2, SDG 10).
• Consumption: A network of public restaurants provides over 20,000 healthy, nutritionist-planned meals daily for under US$1. Meals are free for the homeless and discounted for beneficiaries of social grants, directly addressing SDG 1, SDG 2, and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

Measurable Impacts on Sustainable Development

The long-term effects of the Belo Horizonte model provide clear evidence of its success in advancing the SDGs at a local level.

1. A 25% reduction in the number of people living in poverty (SDG 1).
2. A marked increase in the consumption of fruits and vegetables among the poor (SDG 3).
3. A 75% reduction in hospitalizations for malnutrition among children under five (SDG 2, SDG 3).

Conclusion: Reorienting Food Systems to Achieve the 2030 Agenda

The prevailing model of global food supply chains, designed primarily for profitable exports, often operates in direct opposition to the goals of ending hunger and reducing inequality. These systems can redirect critical resources away from where they are most needed for achieving food security.

The case of Belo Horizonte demonstrates that rights-based, locally-focused food systems are a powerful and effective alternative. To successfully combat food insecurity and make meaningful progress on the Sustainable Development Goals, policies must be tailored to local contexts. Key components for success include:

• Policies that support both food consumption and local production.
• Coordinated and efficient distribution systems that prioritize local needs.
• A foundational commitment to the right to food as a public duty.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

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

The article primarily addresses issues related to hunger, poverty, and inequality, which directly connect to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The analysis reveals connections to the following SDGs:

• SDG 1: No Poverty: The article explicitly links food insecurity with poverty. It discusses how “pro-poor policy” in Brazil helped reduce hunger and how the Belo Horizonte model led to a “25% reduction of people living in poverty.” This demonstrates a direct focus on alleviating poverty as a means to improve food security.
• SDG 2: Zero Hunger: This is the central theme of the article. It opens by stating that “hunger and food insecurity persist” despite sufficient global food production. The entire discussion, from Brazil’s presence on the FAO’s “world hunger map” to the success of the “fome zero” (no hunger initiative) and the Belo Horizonte “right to food” policy, is focused on achieving food security and ending hunger.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article highlights the disparity created by global food supply chains, noting that they can “reward large-scale exporters” while undermining local food systems and creating a situation where “wealth and poverty are two sides of the same coin.” It also discusses how policies like Brazil’s “bolsa família” (family allowance grant) and Belo Horizonte’s subsidized meals for the poor and homeless are designed to reduce economic and social inequality.

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

Based on the issues and solutions presented in the article, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 1 (No Poverty):
   • Target 1.2: “By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty…” The article’s mention of Belo Horizonte achieving a “25% reduction of people living in poverty” through its food security program directly relates to this target of poverty reduction.
   • Target 1.4: “By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services… and control over land…” The Belo Horizonte scheme, which empowers low-income farmers with “secure land tenure,” is a direct implementation of this target.
2. Under SDG 2 (Zero Hunger):
   • Target 2.1: “By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.” The entire article focuses on this target, contrasting the failure of global supply chains to achieve it with the success of local initiatives like Belo Horizonte’s, which declared the “right to food” and provides “20,000 healthy meals a day” for less than a dollar.
   • Target 2.3: “By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers…” The Belo Horizonte model supports this by stimulating “local, agroecological food production” and creating programs where the city “purchases food directly from producers,” aiming to maintain “small farmer’s incomes.”
   • Target 2.4: “By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices…” The article critiques Brazil’s export-focused agricultural system, which undermines domestic food production, and promotes the Belo Horizonte model’s focus on “local and regional family farms” as a more sustainable and resilient alternative.
3. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.1: “By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the population…” Brazil’s national policies of “bolsa família (the family allowance grant) and rising minimum wages” are direct measures aimed at improving the economic standing of the poorest, aligning with this target.
   • Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all…” The Belo Horizonte program promotes inclusion by making its public restaurants “open to all,” providing free meals for the homeless, and offering a “50% discount” to beneficiaries of social assistance programs.

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

Yes, the article mentions several explicit and implied indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• For SDG 1 (No Poverty):
  • Indicator 1.2.1 (Proportion of population living below the national poverty line): The article provides a direct measure for this, stating the Belo Horizonte scheme resulted in a “25% reduction of people living in poverty.”
  • Indicator 1.4.2 (Proportion of total adult population with secure tenure rights to land): Progress is implied through the policy action of providing low-income farmers with “secure land tenure.”
• For SDG 2 (Zero Hunger):
  • Indicator 2.1.1 (Prevalence of undernourishment): The article directly references this by discussing Brazil’s removal from and return to the Food and Agriculture Organization’s “world hunger map.” It also cites a global statistic that “around 8% of people faced hunger” in 2024.
  • Indicator 2.1.2 (Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity): The article provides specific data points related to this indicator, stating that globally “about 28% were food insecure” and that “28 million Brazilians… still face food insecurity.”
  • Implied Indicator (Change in crop production): The article provides data showing a negative trend away from food self-sufficiency, noting that between 2010 and 2022, “soybean production increased by over 100% while rice production fell by 30%.” This can be used to measure the sustainability of food production systems.
  • Implied Indicator (Child malnutrition rates): A key outcome of the Belo Horizonte scheme was “75% fewer children under five being hospitalised for malnutrition,” serving as a powerful indicator of improved nutrition.
• For SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
  • Implied Indicator (Access to social protection programs): The article’s reference to the “bolsa família” scheme and its role in reducing hunger serves as an indicator of social protection policies targeting the vulnerable.
  • Implied Indicator (Food price inflation vs. general inflation): The article notes that “domestic food prices increased faster than general inflation,” which can be used as an indicator of economic strain on low-income families.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: theconversation.com