21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      COVID-19 and food systems in Pacific Island Countries, Papua New Guinea, and Timor-Leste: Opportunities for actions towards the sustainable development goals

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d10462699e201"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d10462699e202">Context</h5> <p id="d10462699e204">The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted global food systems. This has led to different strategies by communities, governments, and businesses involved in food systems to mitigate and adapt to the unfolding pandemic. Small Island Developing States are particularly exposed to the conflation of risks from COVID-19 disease, economic downturns, underlying climate vulnerabilities and biosecurity risks. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d10462699e206"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d10462699e207">Objective</h5> <p id="d10462699e209">Our study aimed to identify the food systems vulnerabilities, impacts, and opportunities for supporting resilience and sustainable development in selected Pacific Island countries, Papua New Guinea, and Timor-Leste. The study focused on the impacts from the first six months of the pandemic (February–July 2020), with remote data collection and analysis done between May and July 2020. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d10462699e211"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d10462699e212">Methods</h5> <p id="d10462699e214">We conducted 67 interviews, and triangulated information with desktop and news sources emerging at the time. We present results on the effect on smallholder livelihoods, supply chains, governance, communities and employment. Overall, the major impacts of COVID-19 have been on economies, posing risks to future food security and further hampering progress towards key Sustainable Development Goals. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d10462699e216"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d10462699e217">Results and conclusions</h5> <p id="d10462699e219">We found that unemployment and economic contraction have been the most severe effects to date, with long-term consequences for food value chains and smallholder farmers. Disruptions to tourism, labour migration, and remittances have led to varying socio-economic impacts throughout the region. Vulnerable groups, notably women, urban poor, and youth, have been disproportionately affected by unemployment. Timor-Leste has had some social protection measures, whereas in Pacific Countries these have been varied. The lockdowns and State of Emergency initially influenced the distribution and marketing of food, but local food economies are starting to stabilise. The continued functioning of international food supply chains reduced the risk of food insecurity in high import dependent nations, notably import dependent countries like Tuvalu and Kiribati. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d10462699e221"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d10462699e222">Significance</h5> <p id="d10462699e224">The results have significance for three recovery pathways. The first recovery pathway relates to revisiting value chains in light of restricted travel. The second recovery pathway exists through leveraging the adaptive capacities of communities to stimulate innovative agriculture that also integrates climate adaptation and nutrition. The third recovery pathway relates to addressing the structural challenges that perpetuate inequalities and poverty while finding new ways of implementing inclusive policies and research. Our study presents a set of comparative examples of managing a food system shock that can inform future systems-oriented research and policy for sustainable development. </p> </div><p id="d10462699e229"> <div class="fig panel" id="f0005"> <a class="named-anchor" id="f0005"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <div class="figure-container so-text-align-c"> <img alt="" class="figure" src="/document_file/c22f1787-f6a6-424a-9683-36f690565e76/PubMedCentral/image/ga1_lrg"/> </div> <div class="panel-content"/> </div> </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Resilience of local food systems and links to food security – A review of some important concepts in the context of COVID-19 and other shocks

          The objective of this review is to explore and discuss the concept of local food system resilience in light of the disruptions brought to those systems by the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. The discussion, which focuses on low and middle income countries, considers also the other shocks and stressors that generally affect local food systems and their actors in those countries (weather-related, economic, political or social disturbances). The review of existing (mainly grey or media-based) accounts on COVID-19 suggests that, with the exception of those who lost members of their family to the virus, as per June 2020 the main impact of the pandemic derives mainly from the lockdown and mobility restrictions imposed by national/local governments, and the consequence that the subsequent loss of income and purchasing power has on people’s food security, in particular the poor. The paper then uses the most prominent advances made recently in the literature on household resilience in the context of food security and humanitarian crises to identify a series of lessons that can be used to improve our understanding of food system resilience and its link to food security in the context of the COVID-19 crisis and other shocks. Those lessons include principles about the measurement of food system resilience and suggestions about the types of interventions that could potentially strengthen the abilities of actors (including policy makers) to respond more appropriately to adverse events affecting food systems in the future.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Integration: the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals

            On 25 September, 2015, world leaders met at the United Nations in New York, where they adopted the Sustainable Development Goals. These 17 goals and 169 targets set out an agenda for sustainable development for all nations that embraces economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection. Now, the agenda moves from agreeing the goals to implementing and ultimately achieving them. Across the goals, 42 targets focus on means of implementation, and the final goal, Goal 17, is entirely devoted to means of implementation. However, these implementation targets are largely silent about interlinkages and interdependencies among goals. This leaves open the possibility of perverse outcomes and unrealised synergies. We demonstrate that there must be greater attention on interlinkages in three areas: across sectors (e.g., finance, agriculture, energy, and transport), across societal actors (local authorities, government agencies, private sector, and civil society), and between and among low, medium and high income countries. Drawing on a global sustainability science and practice perspective, we provide seven recommendations to improve these interlinkages at both global and national levels, in relation to the UN’s categories of means of implementation: finance, technology, capacity building, trade, policy coherence, partnerships, and, finally, data, monitoring and accountability. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0383-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Farming and the geography of nutrient production for human use: a transdisciplinary analysis

              Summary Background Information about the global structure of agriculture and nutrient production and its diversity is essential to improve present understanding of national food production patterns, agricultural livelihoods, and food chains, and their linkages to land use and their associated ecosystems services. Here we provide a plausible breakdown of global agricultural and nutrient production by farm size, and also study the associations between farm size, agricultural diversity, and nutrient production. This analysis is crucial to design interventions that might be appropriately targeted to promote healthy diets and ecosystems in the face of population growth, urbanisation, and climate change. Methods We used existing spatially-explicit global datasets to estimate the production levels of 41 major crops, seven livestock, and 14 aquaculture and fish products. From overall production estimates, we estimated the production of vitamin A, vitamin B12, folate, iron, zinc, calcium, calories, and protein. We also estimated the relative contribution of farms of different sizes to the production of different agricultural commodities and associated nutrients, as well as how the diversity of food production based on the number of different products grown per geographic pixel and distribution of products within this pixel (Shannon diversity index [H]) changes with different farm sizes. Findings Globally, small and medium farms (≤50 ha) produce 51–77% of nearly all commodities and nutrients examined here. However, important regional differences exist. Large farms (>50 ha) dominate production in North America, South America, and Australia and New Zealand. In these regions, large farms contribute between 75% and 100% of all cereal, livestock, and fruit production, and the pattern is similar for other commodity groups. By contrast, small farms (≤20 ha) produce more than 75% of most food commodities in sub-Saharan Africa, southeast Asia, south Asia, and China. In Europe, west Asia and north Africa, and central America, medium-size farms (20–50 ha) also contribute substantially to the production of most food commodities. Very small farms (≤2 ha) are important and have local significance in sub-Saharan Africa, southeast Asia, and south Asia, where they contribute to about 30% of most food commodities. The majority of vegetables (81%), roots and tubers (72%), pulses (67%), fruits (66%), fish and livestock products (60%), and cereals (56%) are produced in diverse landscapes (H>1·5). Similarly, the majority of global micronutrients (53–81%) and protein (57%) are also produced in more diverse agricultural landscapes (H>1·5). By contrast, the majority of sugar (73%) and oil crops (57%) are produced in less diverse ones (H≤1·5), which also account for the majority of global calorie production (56%). The diversity of agricultural and nutrient production diminishes as farm size increases. However, areas of the world with higher agricultural diversity produce more nutrients, irrespective of farm size. Interpretation Our results show that farm size and diversity of agricultural production vary substantially across regions and are key structural determinants of food and nutrient production that need to be considered in plans to meet social, economic, and environmental targets. At the global level, both small and large farms have key roles in food and nutrition security. Efforts to maintain production diversity as farm sizes increase seem to be necessary to maintain the production of diverse nutrients and viable, multifunctional, sustainable landscapes. Funding Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CGIAR Research Programs on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security and on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health funded by the CGIAR Fund Council, Daniel and Nina Carasso Foundation, European Union, International Fund for Agricultural Development, Australian Research Council, National Science Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and Joint Programming Initiative on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change—Belmont Forum.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Agricultural Systems
                Agricultural Systems
                Elsevier BV
                0308521X
                June 2021
                June 2021
                : 191
                : 103137
                Article
                10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103137
                be11aafc-5ddf-4d8e-811b-d1074772ef49
                © 2021

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article