{"id":6205,"date":"2024-09-17T12:08:34","date_gmt":"2024-09-17T04:08:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/panap.net\/?p=6205"},"modified":"2024-09-17T12:08:34","modified_gmt":"2024-09-17T04:08:34","slug":"feeding-the-future-corporate-takeover-of-food-systems","status":"publish","type":"panap_updates","link":"https:\/\/panap.net\/beta\/updates\/feeding-the-future-corporate-takeover-of-food-systems\/","title":{"rendered":"Feeding the future? Corporate takeover of food systems"},"content":{"rendered":"

Acknowledging that the Sustainable Development Goals SDGs are “badly off track,” the United Nations (UN) promises a “fundamental rethink” of global systems in a high-level Summit of the Future (SOTF) to be convened in New York from 22 to 23 September. By supposedly reinvigorating multilateral governance, the SOTF aims “to forge a new international consensus” on how to salvage the SDGs amid slow and even deteriorating progress marked by rising levels of poverty and hunger and the growing intensity of environmental crises and wars.<\/span><\/p>\n

The goal of Zero Hunger (SDG 2) has been particularly off-track, with hunger and food insecurity deteriorating. Based on official figures, about 733.4 million people <\/span>faced hunger<\/span><\/a> in 2023, 162.4 million more than the number of hungry in 2015 when the world adopted the SDGs. By the 2030 Zero Hunger deadline, it is estimated that 582 million people will still be chronically undernourished. In Africa, hunger has steadily risen for the past decade and a half, with 298.4 million hungry people in 2023 – a whopping 106.3 million rise since 2015. In Asia, hunger levels have also been on the uptick since 2015, with a 48.2 million increase in the number of hungry people to an estimated 384.5 million today. The highest levels of hunger are recorded in rural and semi-rural areas in the Global South. Meanwhile, 2.33 billion people (28.9% of the global population) were food insecure in 2023 – more than four times the number in 2015.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

What makes these trends even more appalling is that amid deteriorating hunger and food insecurity, the world today is producing <\/span>more food<\/span><\/a> than ever, with the production of primary crops increasing by 54% and meat by 53% from 2000 to 2021. This underscores an irony unchanged since the UN and its members forged the 2030 Agenda: the majority of people who feed the world\u2014small farmers, farmworkers, fisherfolk, indigenous peoples, and other rural peoples\u2014remain the world’s hungriest.<\/span><\/p>\n

Other SDGs related to environmental sustainability and heavily impacting food and agriculture have also seen deteriorating progress. The UN’s <\/span>Sustainable Development Report 2024<\/span><\/a> described global progress on Climate Action (SDG 13) as “stagnating and facing significant challenges” and on Life on Land (SDG 15) “as stagnating and facing major challenges.” Again, poor rural communities from the Global South bear the disproportionate impacts of ecological and climate catastrophes. For instance, floods increase the <\/span>income disparity<\/span><\/a> between poor and non-poor households in rural areas by around USD 21 billion annually, while heat stress contributes to an additional gap of over USD 20 billion each year.<\/span><\/p>\n

Clearly, the most urgent and existential global crises are nowhere near being resolved by actions taken by international institutions and governments under the name of “sustainable development.” World leaders claim to be on top of these crises by appearing to reinvent the ways in which they respond. But a closer look at their latest, supposedly future-proof development agenda\u2014including “making food systems work for the people and the planet”\u2014reveals that it safeguards and props up the same system that has kept eliminating world hunger and genuine sustainable development a pipe dream.<\/span><\/p>\n

‘Transformation’ for whom?<\/b><\/p>\n

In 2021, the UN kickstarted a radical-sounding “food systems transformation” approach to addressing chronic problems and inequities in food and agriculture. However, civil society and people’s movements <\/span>quickly unmasked<\/span><\/a> the UN Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) as a mechanism that further entrenches corporate control over food systems through a “multistakeholder” governance structure that gives corporate entities much greater influence on policy framing and decision-making. Indeed, the UNFSS, which saw the prominent involvement of big corporations, as well as leadership by known advocates of the Green Revolution (e.g. AGRA’s Agnes Kalibata), has resulted in outcomes that reinforce the dominance of corporate food systems. Centred on the private sector’s role in solving the food, biodiversity, and climate crises, the UNFSS’ “inclusive multistakeholder governance” and “whole-of-society approach” is a remake of greenwashing efforts through global governance mechanisms.<\/span><\/p>\n

During the UNFSS+2 Stocktaking Moment in July 2023, the UN Secretary-General’s <\/span>Call to Action<\/span><\/a> said as much. Recognising their “centrality for food systems,” “promoting increased engagement of businesses, including through public-private partnerships,” is one of the six priority areas of action identified by the UNFSS Coordination Hub, a body led by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to oversee UNFSS processes.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In the UN Secretary-General’s <\/span>progress report<\/span><\/a> to the High-Level Political Forum on progress since UNFSS+2, it appears that multistakeholder mechanisms\u2014which effectively involve the private sector in governance\u2014are already set up in 70% of countries that have modified their governance processes to incorporate a food systems approach or so-called “pathways.” Furthermore, 36% of countries have “developed investment strategies to attract both public and private financial resources,” and 37% have specifically allocated public funds to “support activities related to food systems transformation.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Undoubtedly, significant public resources are being put into efforts to transform food systems. But who is steering these efforts\u2014and towards what vision of transformation?<\/span><\/p>\n

Coalitions of Action: Business as usual<\/b><\/p>\n

A major mechanism through which the UNFSS operates is through the 28 so-called <\/span>Coalitions of Action<\/span><\/a>. Tasked with championing solutions to specific issues related to food systems, the Coalitions claim to bring together experts to “ensure countries get the political and technical support they require” in a range of areas, including “advocacy, data and analytics, thought leadership, finance, capacity building, and the development of indicators.” The UNFFS Hub plays the crucial role of connecting coalitions with countries where they are expected to engage “in country-level transformation efforts,” including through country pilots. National focal points for coalitions can be appointed within UN agencies.<\/span><\/p>\n

The UNFSS boasts of inclusivity due to the Coalitions’ multistakeholder nature. In reality, this has compromised the independence normally expected from formations borne out of multilateral efforts and which hold significant influence over UN Member States. While Coalitions claim to “challenge business as usual,” many of them are led by big corporations and corporate-led or influenced institutions\u2014in other words, those responsible for current unjust, unhealthy, and unsustainable food systems and stand to gain most from <\/span>business as usual<\/span><\/i>.<\/span><\/p>\n

The following are some examples:<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n