Pandemic-Inspired Strategies for Cross-Sector Collaboration on Food Equity Across the Lifespan

Early during the pandemic, access to food by residents across the lifespan was problematic in many communities. We observed well-intentioned responses by community organizations but a lack of centralized coordination across sectors, even as donations and resources significantly increased. Most of the organizations were in various sectors and not aware of the efforts and capabilities of others causing duplication or gaps in services. To prepare for future emergencies, our team created a project to develop and pilot a user-friendly, evidence-based roadmap to guide communities through the process of developing and sustaining effective collaborative partnerships for food and nutrition-related problems they could address together. We will describe the process through which we developed the roadmap structure and recruited stakeholders and content experts for our advisory board. To determine the effectiveness of our interventions, we designed methods with which we can analyze the organizations willing to use the roadmap and participate in the collaborative partnership; how they implement the roadmap; and ways they cope with challenges they face during implementation using strategies in the roadmap. We will describe elements of an effective, efficient roadmap development process using as many currently available evidence-based resources as possible and creating evidence-informed resources when we identify gaps. Expected outcomes are: 1) format of the final roadmap; 2) types of groups willing to use it; 3) how well the roadmap was implemented; 4) feasibility of continued use of the roadmap by groups over the long term; and 5) potential to expand roadmap use to other communities.

Tightening the Net: Net zero climate targets – implications for land and food equity

Many governments and companies are adopting net zero climate targets as they recognize the urgency of the climate crisis. Without clear definition, however, these targets risk being reliant on using vast swathes of land in low-income countries to capture carbon emissions, allowing the biggest emitters to avoid making significant cuts in their own emissions. ‘Net zero’ could end up being a dangerous distraction that could delay the rapid reductions in emissions that high-emitting countries and companies need to make if we are to avoid catastrophic climate breakdown. It could also lead to an explosion in demand for land which, if not subject to careful safeguards, might risk increasing hunger and fuelling land inequality. Net zero should be a pathway to real and transformative climate action and not greenwash. Carbon emissions need to be reduced now, and land-based climate solutions must centre ‘food-first’ approaches that help achieve both zero emissions and zero hunger.

Citizen science for climate change preparedness and self-governance in the digital era: The Food Equity and Environmental Data Sovereignty (FEEDS) project (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Despite having the tools at our disposal to enable an adequate food supply for all, inequities in food acquisition, distribution, and most importantly, food sovereignty, worsen food insecurity. Moreover, the detrimental impact of climate change on food systems is further exacerbated by lack of food sovereignty. We urgently require innovative solutions to enable food sovereignty and minimize food insecurity. Indigenous communities have a wealth of Traditional Knowledge for climate change adaptation and preparedness to strengthen food systems. Traditional Knowledge combined with Western methods can revolutionize ethical data collection, engagement, and knowledge mobilization. OBJECTIVE The Food Equity and Environmental Data Sovereignty (FEEDS) project takes a participatory action, citizen science approach for early detection and warning of climate change impacts on food sovereignty and security. The objective of this project is to develop and implement a sustainable digital platform that enables real-time decision-making to mitigate climate change-related impacts on food systems. METHODS Citizen science enables citizens to actively contribute to all aspects of the research process, from project planning and data collection, to co-created and self-determined knowledge mobilization. The FEEDS project is being implemented in four phases: i) Participatory project planning, ii) Climate change platform co-development and customization; iii) Community-led evaluation; iv) Refinement of innovative data analytics and community engagement, and v) Knowledge mobilization and exchange. The project is governed by a Citizen Scientist Advisory Council comprising Elders, Traditional Knowledge Keepers, key community decision-makers, youth, and FEEDS researchers. The Council governs all phases of the project, including co-conceptualizing a climate change platform, which consists of a smartphone application (app) and a digital decision-making dashboard. Apart from capturing environmental and health-related big data (e.g., weather, permafrost degradation, fire hazards, human movement, etc.), the custom-built app uses artificial intelligence to engage and enable citizens to report on environmental hazards, changes in biodiversity or wildlife, and related food issues in their communities. The app provides citizens with valuable information to mitigate health-related risks, and relays big data in real-time to a digital dashboard. RESULTS This project is currently in Phase 1 with the sub-arctic Métis jurisdiction of Île-à-la-Crosse, Saskatchewan, Canada. CONCLUSIONS The FEEDS project facilitates Indigenous self-determination, governance, and data sovereignty. All citizen data are anonymous and encrypted, and communities have ownership, access, control and possession over their data. The digital dashboard system provides decision-makers with real-time data, thereby increasing capacity to self-govern. The participatory action research approach, combined with digital citizen science, advances co-creation of knowledge and multidisciplinary collaboration in the digital age. Given the urgency of climate change, leveraging technology provides communities with the tools to respond to existing and emerging crises in a timely manner, as well as scientific evidence regarding the urgency of current health and environmental issues. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable.

The Effect of Village Funds, Special Allocation Funds, Revenue Sharing Funds on Regional Inequality in the Regencies/Cities of South Sumatra Province

Regions' development is a high priority for Indonesia and is critical for food, equity, and economic growth. To address the problems of economic inequality between regions, the government has created several funds to balance funding for regional development. This study aims to analyze the effect of the Village Funds (DD), Special Allocation Funds (DAK), Revenue Sharing Funds (DBH) on Regional Inequality in the Regencies/Cities of South Sumatra Province during 2015-2019. The research covers 14 regencies and cities of South Sumatra Province. This study uses secondary data, including Village Funds, Special Allocation Funds, Revenue Sharing Funds, and Regional Inequality. Meanwhile, other data is available from the Central Statistics Agency of South Sumatra Province and the Directorate General of Fiscal Balance. The data analysis method used is the Williamson Index and panel data regression analysis that has met the requirements of the classical assumption test and model suitability test. The results of this study are as follows: (1) The Village Funds have a positive and significant effect on Regional Inequality, with the regression coefficient value reaching 0.067. It means that every 1% increase in village funds will increase the value of regional inequality by 0.067. (2) Special Allocation Funds (DAK) and Revenue Sharing Funds (DBH) have a negative and significant effect on Regional Inequality. Each increase in the Special Allocation Fund and Profit Sharing Fund by 1% will cause a decrease in the Regional Inequality Index by 0.022 and 0.050. (3) Regional Inequality in South Sumatra Province is significantly determined by 72% of the variables of the Village Funds, Special Allocation Funds (DAK), and Revenue Sharing Funds (DBH). In comparison, other variables outside the model determine the remaining 28%.

Fostering food equity in an immigrant neighborhood of New York City during COVID-19

Food equity includes the right to food that is cul­turally appropriate. Immigrant neighborhoods can be sites of contestation over who participates in the production, distribution, and consumption of food. Manhattan’s Chinatown is a good example of a neighborhood where food is central to its com­merce, cultural heritage, and reputation as a tourist destination. The coronavirus’ origin in China caused imme­diate material impact on Chinese restaurants and food purveyors in New York City as well as in other cities with major populations of Chinese people. Chinatown suffered disproportionate closures of its grocery stores, restaurants, and produce vendors due to COVID-19 as compared to other neighbor­hoods in NYC. The grassroots response to this crisis is a reminder that people have the power to use food to assert the society that they desire, to shape a highly contested urban space, and to claim their right to the city.

Can Labelling Create Transformative Food System Change for Human and Planetary Health? A Case Study of Meat

Background: One important way to transform food systems for human and planetary health would be to reduce the production and consumption of animals for food. The over-production and over-consumption of meat and dairy products is resource-intensive, energy-dense and creates public health and food equity risks, including the creation of superbugs and antimicrobial resistance, contamination and pollution of land and waterways, and injustice to animals and humans who work in the sector. Yet the continuing and expanding use of animals is entrenched in food systems. One policy response frequently suggested by parties from all sectors (industry, government and civil society) is voluntary or mandatory labelling reforms to educate consumers about the healthiness and sustainability of food products, and thus reduce demand. This paper evaluates the pitfalls and potentials of labelling as an incremental regulatory governance stepping-stone to transformative food system change. Methods: We use empirical data from a study of the regulatory politics of animal welfare and environmental claims on Australian products together with an ecological regulation conceptual approach to critically evaluate the potential of labelling as a regulatory mechanism. Results: We show that labelling is generally ineffective as a pathway to transformative food system change for three reasons: it does not do enough to redistribute power away from dominant actors to those harmed by the food system; it is vulnerable to greenwashing and reductionism; and it leads to market segmentation rather than collective political action. Conclusion: We suggest the need for regulatory governance that is ecological by design. Labelling can only be effective when connected to a broader suite of measures to reduce overall production and consumption of meat. We conclude with some recommendations as to how public health advocates and policy entrepreneurs might strategically use and contest labelling and certification schemes to build support for transformative food system change and to avoid the regressive consequences of labelling.