The CSIPM welcomes draft action plan as an initial skeleton for the action plan and would like to highlight again the utmost importance of this workstream. The draft Action Plan entails several positive elements that point to the need for collaboration, support and coordination to strengthen the use and application of CFS policy outcomes and the CSIPM also welcomes the structure of the document.

For the CSIPM, it is fundamental to make sure that the work we do in this global space is unique and addresses the concerns and proposals of people on the ground in a participatory manner, and that the outcomes that are negotiated here go back to the territories and transform realities there, supporting the progressive realization of the right to food in the different regional and national contexts, translate them into policies and legislation that are relevant within the different territories, implement the policies, and monitor the implementation processes as well as their effects.

We see the work on Uptake and Application of CFS Policy Outcomes deeply related with the CFS Coordination Function – which promotes CFS’s linkages with other spaces to which our policy outcomes are relevant – and consider a great opportunity that the workstream on Uptake and the twentieth anniversary of the Right to Food guidelines coincide.

Although there is still a lot to be clarified and concretized in the Action Plan, the CSIPM is appreciates this detailed list of roles and responsibilities coming together and looks forward to working with CFS members and participants’ counterparts in capitals, communities and territories to make sure the CFS policy frameworks meet their objective, from Rome to home.

The CSIPM has some overarching suggestions both to improve the existing action areas and to include some additional ones. We have proposed concrete text to add to the draft action plan language (see annex). These proposals respond mainly to the following key points.

1. Right to adequate food:

The reference to the right to food is currently missing from the action plan and should be included throughout the document as overarching framework (e.g. in the introduction, point 1.A.1, point 1.B.7, point 2.B.4).

2. Social Participation:

The relevance of social participation shall be highlighted to centering the most vulnerable during the entire process and at all levels. When it comes to the use of CFS policy outcomes, it is essential to develop and/or to strengthen national multisectoral and coordination spaces that are human rights based. These government-driven platforms must be leveraged for the uptake of CFS products, while at the same time improving their inclusiveness and the representation of the most vulnerable through participation of social movements. The CONSEA in Brazil is a good practice of such a multi-actor space, in which social participation and horizontal exchanges are guaranteed. Working with networks of Parliamentarians can also be an idea to consider. FAO has done so much work on this in LAC and Africa. Therefore, we suggest concretizing the point 2.B.3 in this regard.  

3. Ownership:

The use of CFS products increases when ownerships exists. This points to the need for inclusive processes, by CFS providing the necessary environment for all actors to meaningfully participate, i.e. providing interpretation for all OEWGs, AG/Bureau sessions etc. Therefore, and in coherence with the title of this workstream, we suggest that the sections A are called “Actions to strengthen the ownership and usefulness of CFS policy agreements”.

When it comes to the usefulness and ownership of CFS policy outcomes to other UN agencies we consider it key to highlight that CFS’s policy outcomes have high legitimacy due to its unique inclusive policy convergence processes and should therefore be taken into account by other UN agencies. The VGGTs are a wonderful example as they have been included in a resolution of UNCCD and therefore been adopted as a binding policy instrument.

4. Member States responsibility:

As noted in the introduction of the draft Action Plan “Member States have primary responsibility for promoting CFS and the use and application of CFS policy agreements at all levels”. Even though the policies endorsed are non-binding, Member State representatives who convene and take part in negotiations commit to socializing their governments with the policies and leverage these for policy reform. This could be stressed further, e.g. through a strong chapeau to points 1 and 2.

5. Role of Rome Based Agencies (RBAs):

Under the section of UN agencies, we would like to underline the important role that the RBAs play on one hand hosting the CFS and supporting technically policy convergence, on the other hand supporting the dissemination of outcomes through their national and regional offices and in the national governance spaces where they interact.

6. Indigenous Peoples:

The CSIPM requests that the Action Plan consistently refers to Indigenous Peoples’ organizations in addition to civil society ones.

7. Updated strategy for monitoring and evaluation: The CSIPM considers that action plan presents a great opportunity to put in practice recommendations of the CFS evaluation from 2017/2018 which should be taken into account. In this regard we propose an addition to the point 1.B.4 mentioning that the proposed updated strategy for monitoring and evaluation shall respect previously defined principles and also build on the framework for monitoring-related activities. Both are referenced in the annex.

Download the CSIPM text insertion suggestions in the draft outline for action plan (scroll to page 3).

Contacts
Twitter
Contacts

Privacy PolicyCookie Policy

Csm4cfs © 2024. Website by Marco Principia

to top
#FoodSystems4People
Join the online and offline citizen mobilisations

to challenge the UN Food Systems Summit and re-claim Peoples’ sovereignty over food systems!

JOIN NOW