 We have the pleasure to have John Ingram visiting C4 and John is the head of the food systems program at the Environmental Change Institute at Oxford University and as the director of FTA, the CGR program on forestry, we couldn't miss this opportunity. This event is meant to address the global picture and the research which we are conducting and aim to conduct in FTA. We need better, more sustainable food systems and within that what roles can forests, trees and agroforestry play and what are the research perspectives. So to help us progress on this issue and later on for discussion, today we will have a keynote speech by John Ingram and then three short presentation by Terry Sunderland who will show how forests and trees contribute to food security and nutrition. As you remember, Terry Sunderland was a former C4 scientist and he has been team leader of the high level panel of experts report on sustainable forestry for food security and nutrition which was a landmark report because it was the first time that forestry issues were discussed in the committee on world food security of the United Nations. And then two scientists from FTA, one from C4 and one from ICRAF will present their perspectives. Amy Ecovis is the leader of the sustainable landscapes and food research in C4 and Stéphane Macmullin is from ICRAF where she leads the research on the contribution of agroforestry to nutrition. And at the end, I will ask Ramney Jamnadas who is connected with us in Nairobi to wrap up the seminar. Good afternoon everybody, thanks for staying with it. The enhancing food system resilience is what we are going to be talking about but I'm going to start by just repeating the notion of what the food system is because without understanding that you can't really talk about the resilience of it. First up we have this wide range of activities that we are all aware of, the notion of producing food through processing wholesale retail, consuming of course and the hospitality all of which have a wide range of activities. As we go from left to right in the diagram we see a transformation of material from what is essentially a biomass into what is essentially food and that's an important point to remember. We also see the opportunity for value addition as we go through that process and we see the cost of the food increasing, the cost as we go from left to right, we see a wide range of livelihoods and actors involved, all of whom are benefiting from that process. So in addition to the activities we also think about the food system outcomes and of course food security as a writ large of utilization, access and availability, all of which need to be stable over time but the food system activities themselves also give rise to a wide range of other outcomes to do with social economic well-being, social capital employment health etc. and there is a direct feedback to the activity but the activities also give rise to a wide range of environmental issues and here we see some of the points that we'll be looking at later this afternoon, again there are feedbacks and what we're trying to establish with this conceptual model is how to manage the trade-offs between the box on the left and the box on the right by exploiting potential synergies with our interventions so that if you will is the goal. Overall the global food situation, global food security situation, we've got about a billion people who don't have enough calorie, they're hungry, we've got perhaps three billion people with insufficient nutrients, we've got something like two and a half billion of us with too much, many of whom also have insufficient nutrients and you can see the overlap in the circles but even with the overlap we still recognize we've got this notion of triple burden of malnutrition and this really just leaves under half the global population with a satisfactory diet. We also know about the state of the environment, reports come out on an almost daily basis, soil degradation, fresh water exploitation, biodiversity loss, all of which have a significant driver in our food systems, the food from the ocean, overfished, fully fished and of course there's a massive greenhouse gas emission from the food system so three quarters or so from agriculture and perhaps a quarter from what's called the post farm gate. But then in addition we've got other issues and the notion of plastics is top of the list at the moment both macro and micro plastics but general pollution is a major issue. In addition we've got a whole range of other issues to do with our health in relation to the interaction animals. Here we see a diagram showing our livestock, our wildlife and our human population and the various diseases that emerge in these intersections, very largely driven by increased antibiotic use in the livestock sector leading to antimicrobial resistance and just generally more interaction between animals and humans as more and more people get urbanized. Then we have a whole host of ethical concerns. Now these are a list, this is a list and you can add your own issues, they are much more related to a personal worldview and what you think is important. You run your eye down the list and you can see it ends in such major issues as civil harmony and I just used this slide you might have seen before which was an analysis mapped on to the food price spikes of 2008- 2011 showing where there were food rights and very largely attributed to what's been termed the Arab Spring. The food, the world food price goes up and down all the time. This graph is the latest I could find from the 2018 up to December and you can see how the global food price index ranges considerably over time. Right now we're on the red curve and we're going down to not the very lowest but below average. The question is what's going to happen in the future or as I put it what's coming down the track and immediately we think of extreme weather events. We're well aware of the issues. Again on a daily basis in our news feeds we see droughts, we see major storms, we see floods, we see hurricanes. Attribution is difficult. What is a particular event related to climate change? Very hard to say but increasing science in that area. But what is very clear as you see on the right of the diagram is that as one changes both the mean and the variance of weather events one tends to have more extreme hot. We do not lose the extreme cold as we've just seen in North America. In addition to weather and climate there's a big biodiversity discussion going on. On the left we see projected global forest area up to the year 2030 and the graphs are all sloping down. On the right we see a recent analysis by Georgina Mace and other colleagues which is looking at the biodiversity index against much the same time. The curve is almost identical to the forest loss but as you look to the various options for better biodiversity management there is a red line steeply going down even more steeply. So the management of forest, the management of biodiversity is a major issue as we go over the next few decades. Also over the next few decades we see a marked increase in population. The red is the urban population and the blue is the rural population. The major areas of growth are in Asia and Africa and over the decade 2010, 2030, 2050 we see a very rapid increase in populations in these parts of the world and an increasing proportion in the urban environment. Hand in hand with the increase in population is increased in projected wealth and the Lancet report suggests there might be a threefold increase in wealth over the next few decades. This graph here on the left from Goldman Sachs shows that we have an overall increase in the world middle class which is defined as between $6,000 and $30,000 a year and there's going to be another 2 billion middle class people on the planet within a couple of decades which is generally a good thing. The question is and we see on the right how they're spread across different regions where the strongest growth in middle class will be in the Asia Pacific region where we're speaking from today. Hand in hand with that is a well-established relationship between the calorific intake per day on the y-axis and the disposable income on the x-axis and this is a very clear graph coming from Dave Tillman and Mike Clark a few years ago in nature. Indonesia is part of the green track here and I think you'll agree that that's a very clear relationship as we go through time as we look across economic groups we tend to eat more as we get wealthier. So there are emerging trends here we have just a headline from a few years ago now about obesity in the United States and the United States is often held up or has been held up as you know where it's all at. This was making the point that there's been an increase recently which is bucking the trend down but of course it's not only an issue in North America. Here's some data from here in Indonesia which is showing how the overweight and obese population is about one in three adults now in this country and there's over 10 million type 2 diabetic patients in this country already who are actually registered there are probably more who have yet to be registered and this is still very much in the in the press and this was from last Sunday from the Jakarta Post obesity continues to haunt Indonesia despite the campaign. It's really difficult really difficult to change our pattern of consumption. If one thinks about the future this is just a quick sketch which isn't to scale but it's to make a point that we have a graph of calorie consumption per day on the y-axis and billions of people on the x-axis. The green line is 2,000 calories a day which is just a little bit less than the national the global average now and the gray line is for the year 2000 showing when there were about six billion people we had over over a billion people hungry we had about one and a half billion people above the line with too much the majority were about the right amount of calorie this is just calorie it's not overall nutrient. Here we are today we've got about 7.3 7.4 billion people we see the stats I was giving earlier we've still got about a billion people who don't have enough and we have two and a half billion of us with too much. If we take this forward looking at the Goldman Sachs looking at the the the the the Clark and Thillman and Clark paper and we just linearly extrapolate over the next 10 10 years when we have that degree of increased wealth we see a global population of 8. something we still see about a billion people hungry and the latest FAO data is showing that that number is actually increasing over the last two years and we see maybe getting on for four billion people with too much. And if we linearly extrapolate that again we see the global population of about nine billion nine and a half billion and the extrapolation the reports from Goldman Sachs saying over half the global population will be excess weight. So what's the consequence of this this is this is not necessarily good to happen they're just linear extrapolations but if this were to happen we see a massive environmental consequence of providing that number of calories. The area beneath the curve is the amount of calorie that has to be produced. So here we are on the black line this amount of calorie on the red line this amount of calorie and you earlier saw the environmental data on our current methods. The current cost of the triple burden of malnutrition is in the order of 10 or 11 percent of global GDP. This is not only treatment of disease but lost working days and the like and the current cost of the nearly half billion diabetics is in the order of getting on to a trillion dollars a year. So these are these are massive numbers but these are numbers today and the point I'm trying to make is unless we reverse that trend that I have on the graph these numbers are going to be even greater. What we need to do however is continue to strive to meet demand for those who don't have enough fundamental but to my mind the bigger challenge is how to meet demand of those who have too much and this is to do with the societal trend that we are seeing in the in the data managing demand is the agenda that I think is very important at the moment we must not forget we need to continue to meet demand. So these food system challenges are interconnected what we're trying to achieve food security for a for a growing wealthier urbanizing population so these but that in itself is hard enough but it's against this background of other stresses and shocks and this is where I'm going to start beginning to talk about the need for resilience. Food system resilience many definitions but this is one from ETH Zurich capacity over time for a food system to deliver basic resilience in the terms of food. However this only relates to food security and we must remember all the other things we want out of the food system we want the livelihoods we want the health we want the the good environment so one needs to think of enhanced understanding to actually bring in this wide range this basket of things we want of our food system and it is indeed a very value laden debate and we need more evidence we need more research to get some better understanding of how we can manage these shocks and stresses. So when we're talking about resilience two questions immediately come to mind and these are these are well known resilience of what to what what are we talking about there's another question though for whom whose resilience and there's another question over what time period because you can have different strategies to handle different lengths of time. So of what food system activities yes of course these activities need to be resilient but I argue that it's the outcomes that need to be resilient we need to have food security we need to have good health and wealth and employment we need to have good environment these are the things that we need. The two what the notion of shock of steam trains or black swans this is some work from Jim Woodhill and others of my colleagues and Foresight for Food program where the steam trains are things we know are happening we can see that the engine coming down the track at us we know it is just getting bigger and bigger whereas the black swans are these very rare and unpredictable events and that the reality is we have a combination of the two and some examples of the stresses or the steam trains on the left the demographic change climate change urbanization whereas on the right we have these shocks we have trade wars we have food scares we have extreme weather and then across the piece we have science and technology that can be both stress and shock geopolitics etc so to differentiate stress and shock is important for whom well everybody in the room we are all part of the food system we're all consumers but of course for all these livelihoods all of these actors across the food chain it's fundamental that their that their livelihood strategy is maintained as best as possible and then to differentiate short-term interruptions usually due to shocks for instance just in time grocery delivery being disrupted by an it malfunction something like that that's a shock and the industry colleagues refer to these as interruptions and they differentiate from disruptions which are normally due to stresses and both of these stresses or shocks require different types of management to deal with as we'll see so coming on to the notions of resilience there is a very widely understood interpretation of the word which means robust I am resilient because I'm strong I can withstand the shock and the stress aim to resist disruption to our current outcome to our current food system recovery where we aim to return to the current outcome after that disturbance so we have the ability to get back to what we know and like and the third type I call reorientation which is that we actually accept an alternative outcome we accept an alternative future we don't try to go back to what we have we accept and that's what I call bounce forward as opposed opposed to bounce back we accept a different way of living any and all of these require reorganization they all require adaptation you need to adapt your system to make it robust you need to adapt your system to reorient the outcomes so what can we do reorganize the food system activities these activities we can do all these things differently we can produce food differently we can sell food differently we can certainly consume food differently but we can also organize reorganize the food system drivers the conditioners which are affecting the way those activities are undertaken whether it's in the policy context or the social we can look after the environment we can think about markets and there's a whole range of policy interventions to be made here and then of course we can reorganize our views of what we want as outcomes and here we see food security on the left as our principal goal but of course as I've mentioned there are various other things that we want out of our food system other societal interests and how do we think about changing our menu if you will of things we want and are happy with and this is the trade-off this is the synergy that we're looking for do we want better employment and how are we happy to sacrifice some aspect of our food system for instance change our diet and then we can also think about how we reorganize the food system outcomes in terms of better farming methods changing diet or just countries valuing food which is nutritious rather than cheap and this message is coming through again and again and again in a wide range of publications another point is really to reorganize our views on the demand function so that graph I put up that ramped up over the decades is a demand curve and so if we look at the FAO definition which I'm sure you recognize it's got a word kind of hidden in there which is sufficient and the important word sufficient is is is well worth thinking about because what sufficient actually means is enough for a given purpose and when this definition was drafted nearly 20 years ago just over 20 years ago the the sentiment of that word was for those who don't have enough we need to provide more but actually it applies more today than it did then because it also means for those of us with too much we don't need so much we should have the right amount and this is coming through in the very recently published Eat Lancet report um I've made the point that we're looking for healthy diets they are from sustainable food systems and I'm very pleased to see that reflected in the title of this because there was often a notion we want sustainable diets what we actually want is sustainable systems delivering healthy diets and healthy diet outcome have all these attributes including the word sufficient and sustainable food system activities have to be environmentally sound as everybody accepts and socially acceptable but they also have to be economically viable because without that viability the enterprises and the livelihoods will be at risk and so the notion of healthy diets sustainable food systems is a very very important point so how do we intervene with this system we have our activities giving rise to our outcomes which are modified by a range of environments we've seen the change in socioeconomic drivers over the last 50 years or so and these have led to measurable changes in environmental conditions very clearly mapped out in many many ways the important thing about the food system is not so much the impact of one of the words on the left for instance climate on one of the words on the right for instance crop growth which has had a huge amount of research the interesting thing from the system point of view is the interaction of these drivers on the whole system because the system will respond systemically not piecemeal and this is why one needs to think about the intervention when one has an intervention one can intervene with the activities we can do things differently we can intervene with the context the environments but we can't intervene with the outcomes the outcomes are a consequence of changed activity and a lot of people say oh we need to change we need to intervene on food security what you actually do is you intervene on the conditions and the activities that give rise or do not give rise to food security okay and when one makes an intervention normally for a socioeconomic goal more food security more political stability whatever it is one sees the feedback because that's why you're doing it but there is of course always an environmental feedback as well and even if one has a policy to enhance environment it will have an impact on the social the economic context it might make food more expensive for instance change the affordability so where to intervene and who does what is very important um just to conclude why is it so hard why is it so hard to make progress in this well we've got a complex adaptive system we need to understand it systemically it's challenging intellectually difficult but nonetheless reality wide range of actors a lot of vested interests fragmented governance across the piece so these are things to think about also beset with confused terminology but on the plus side there's a whole host of things that we could do look at all those activities we can do differently look at all those environments we can change but fundamentally it needs better cooperation between all the actors in the piece and this message again is coming out again again in the eat lancet reporters the most recent expose of that and this means there are many plausible futures that it's not necessarily that graph that i showed and goodness me i hope it isn't how are we going to do it well here's the summary of the graph on the left how to ramp it down on the right how to ramp it up but we've got a wide range of motives and different agendas running here on the right where a lot of the work of the cg system is it's how to increase for those who don't have enough this is it absolutely fundamental important work development agenda stuff on the left we've got a different set of agendas it's the health agenda it's the environment agenda it's driven by agencies such as those examples i've given and a whole host of national agencies NGOs etc etc but um the important thing is that looking for this word synergy it really should be possible to get these two agendas hand in hand and one of the best ways to do it is to include business more overtly in this equation because it is the agents of change the food system actors that we need to engage and that means everybody on that first slide from the fertilizer industry right the way through to the people who manage agricultural and human waste all of those actors are involved civil society think of yourselves as citizens or think of yourselves as consumers which one do you feel is is you know is is is the important so the the point about this last closing slide is that everything that's happening here in the cg is in fact helping on the left and everything that's happening on the left is in fact in effect helping on the right it's just that it's got to be captured and it's got to be it's got to be made clearer that investment should be balanced across the piece and i do say again that i think the bigger challenge is how to ramp down the graphs on the left rather than how to ramp up the graph on the right that's the challenge but if we can do that it will definitely help on the on the right so i think um Vincent that's where i'd like to close if i may i had a romp across a wide range of issues the notion of food systems the notion of resilience the notion of better collaboration and cooperation amongst the actors thank you if we could have terry's presentation that would really be an excellent opening to to the discussion and then i i i i suppose we can have a 50 to 20 minutes discussion and questions to to john and also debates amongst amongst ourselves for for the research we we do there was a question i wanted to to to ask you we're talking about production uh the food system at large so it's production it's consumption it's the value chain so uh if we are consumers sometimes we found ourselves in a very restricted uh space of choice uh whether because we're poor and and only part of you know uh is of what's out there is accessible or because of what is being produced where you live i mean if you live in the Sahel uh your diet is obviously very much constrained by the environment you're living in directly depends how rich you are yes but i mean in in in some regions where uh people are you know nomadic or or ways of lives or if you're in the middle of the forest in Calimantan and far from the city basically your diet is constrained so uh what is the best way to intervene on the on the constrained system we've been talking a lot about production we've talked about consumption difficult value chains i've got i think i've got one other slide if i if i may is this still gonna let me go down another slide so um is that gonna is that gonna is that live anymore i will um a lot of our work a lot of our work is is very much what i call post farm gate now that's not the traditional work area for the cg system but it increasingly needs to be and it's a different type of study it's important is it possible to get my next slide up from this set i i wasn't going to use it because it's a bit another sort of discussion but it's very much about the value chain and um thank you that's fine and so here here is our situation our global food security situation as i as i described it in shorthand um my question is what what determines which circle anybody falls in and the um the the the the point i make is it's it's not the agriculture it's your um constraints on dietary choice so in your example in the Sahel there are serious biophysical constraints but at the same time they could be mapped in terms of affordability so my response to you is if you're really rich in the Sahel it doesn't matter you just helicopter in all the food you want as a glib example but for all of us these other words in italics actually determine what we have for dinner and then the the point about the value chain is that um the the the the post farm gate activities of the processing the packaging the trading all of these activities all of these livelihoods actually um affect the affordability the availability the palatability the the cultural norms all of that stuff and that's absolutely fundamental and then those people depend on the primary producers for the raw material the biomass as i called it from the farming or the fishing or whatever it is but to imagine that the the producers are directly affecting the top line is false because even in the most basic system the most the most fundamental system there is food processing and i remember a a storybook from my childhood of a of a of a kid in Ghana called Effion who took cassava and he took it home and he grated it and he fried it into gary and he took it to the market and he sold it for a penny so he was he was a food system he was part of the food system and he was that he was he was both the grower and he was the the pink in the middle and the these people of course depend on the natural resource base the productivity of the diversity and the quality of that natural resource base in order to deliver the biomass at a at a at a at a quantity in quality which can then go into the pink box and there's very little stuff that we eat which does not go through the pink box basically you need to have your own apple tree in your own garden and you walk to it and you go like that otherwise something is happening in that pink box and and again to to make the point that's where so many livelihoods are the economic machine is there in the pink box and that's where the agents of change are it's not as simple as that of course there are massive feedbacks and the whole thing is is moderated by these environments so here we have a different type of food system map and it's a map to explain why we have the circles at the top so if we want to change the proportion of numbers in the circle at the top we need to think about the constraints on dietary choice not what do people grow that's a fundamental point thank you john and thank you for pointing to one of the important functions of food system is not only to deliver food but it also deliver jobs and income for a very wide range of of the world population so if we could have no Terry's presentation good afternoon it's wonderful to be here and you have an opportunity to share with you the key findings from the HLP report on sustainable forestry on food security nutrition i'd like to start with providing some statistics about the importance of forest and people and and why forests and food security are inextricably interlinked in many ways we all know through empirical evidence that more than a billion people rely on forests and forest resources in some way they provide an important safety net in times of food and income insecurity the forest based resources such as wild harvested meat and fish provide enormous amounts of protein for many rural communities and biodiversity terrestrial biodiversity in particular which occur in forests provide great amounts of primary health care or provide for primary health care and we also know that in complex multifunctional landscapes a great deal of the world's food comes from small holder farms in these complex landscapes often characterized by patches of forests and trees there's a long tradition of managing forests for food if we think of shifting cultivations to agriculture for example and it's extremely important now to understand these these processes and patterns have changed the nature of forests over time and particularly in these multifunctional landscapes that i mentioned earlier and we also know that forest sustain agriculture through the ecosystem service provision which i'm going to talk about a little bit later so in the HLP report we developed for the report rather we developed a conceptual sort of framework to understand how and why forests do play a role in food security nutrition and they range from provisioning ecosystem services so direct provisioning of food and bioenergy and income and the non-provisioning ecosystem services such as pollination services biodiversity etc and these are linked very closely to the four pillars of food security availability access and utilization and stability and these arrows here very clearly show although they're a little bit messy do show the the relationship between each of these ecosystem services and these four pillars so in terms of the direct provision of food although the contribution of forest foods or wild foods represent only a relatively small amount of the food energy supply we do know that people living in proximity to forests and tree base systems have better diets more nutritious diets and experience more dietary diversity and as i mentioned earlier bushmeat fish insects and other protein sources are extremely important sources of nutrients and you can see the scale from those figures there the scale of the of the importance of wild meat and bushmeat in the Congo base in an amazonia alone provision of wood fuel energy sources from forests and trees extremely important not only fuel wood but also charcoal which is a huge hugely traded commodity particularly in southern Africa and elsewhere very important for cooking but also very important for sterilizing water and this is incredibly important for to make sure the communicable diseases are not spread and extremely valuable in terms of rural health but we do know that an estimated 2.5 million people particularly women and young girls are affected each year and die can die due to the effects of long-term smoke inhalation in enclosed kitchen spaces so a bit of a double-edged sword in terms of income generation up to almost one percent of the global GDP is represented by the formal forestry sector but if we include the informal sector for example non-timber forest product collection and construction and energy sectors the value of forestry and forest products are incredibly important so they play an enormous role in local economies and rural economies of much of the developing world and that also goes for payments of environmental services worth an estimated 2.4 billion those figures were from 2016 an incredible amount of investment in in conserving forests and those payments going to local people and and landowners as well but also you can do some services very interested in the the way that forest and trees support agriculture and sustain agriculture in terms of water regulation soil formation biodiversity pollination and pest control and climate change all of these services extremely important in maintaining agricultural systems but provided by forests and trees so in terms of forest sustain agriculture we know that pollination of oil palm for example is reliant oil palm is a small hold of plantations I should hasten to add very important to have proximity to forest and trees pest control crops like cocoa coffee and other commodities do benefit from having proximity to forest and trees to make sure that there are elements of pest control and nutrient exchange between the two systems water regulation is extremely important we hear about the importance of water sheds both for agricultural production but also for potability of water for urban centers it's extremely important in terms of ecosystem service and but also climate regulation and some excellent work being done by simit in Ethiopia has shown that wheat yields actually increase closer to to forest patches and it's important in these landscapes is understanding how the landscape configuration how these patches of forest and trees interact with each other can provide the maximum outputs if you like for both sustainable forestry and agricultural production and there's a lot of work now being done on on this interrelationship so ways forward to enable conditions for sustainable forest management for food security nutrition one of the recommendations of the report is to manage permanent forest land more sustainably and develop appropriate forest management plans but looking also at the broader landscape promoting an integrated landscape approach breaking down the silos between agriculture and forestry as they have been done in much of the rural areas of the tropics that i've been speaking about and undertake a sort of systems approach to forestry and agriculture in a more holistic understanding of how they interrelate and interact and also ensure full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders in forest policies and forest management and one of the critical recommendations that came out of the report and the process involved was adopting a rights-based approach if we're saying that forests and wild foods play a very important role to rural economies rural livelihoods rural diets then we need to be considerate of making sure the access to those resources is maintained so this is a nice summary of the recommendations of the HLPE report provides secure land and forest tenure inequitable access related to the right to food issue recognize and integrate forest contribution to food security nutrition in forest policies often these these these considerations are missed out of the discourse on food security nutrition improve the alignment of food security nutrition policies across many sectors including agriculture forestry and others and increase access by small forest and farm holders and their organizations to access basic government services like extension services, insurance policies and new technologies training and credit. Gender is very important integrating gender quality into the formulation and implementation of policies related to food security nutrition and also strengthening the collection and timely dissemination of data relevant to the policy discourse and this is actually very important a lot of research has been generated related to the links between forestry and food security nutrition but as yet the policy environment has yet to embrace some of the hard science and the strong evidence that's coming out of some of this discourse. Thank you very much for this time you've given me to give this short presentation and I look forward to engaging further as part of the webinar seminar Thank you. Hi, I'm Stephen McMillan with World Agroforestry based in Nairobi, Kenya. Agroforestry is the practice of integrating a diversity of trees into landscapes for greater productivity and resilience. The direct benefits of agroforestry are the products it provides such as timber, fuel, butter, medicine and also food. The indirect benefits are the ecosystem services supported by trees such as watershed management, soil fertility, combating soil erosion, carbon sequestration and greater biodiversity. It is by these benefits which agroforestry supports food systems and today I want to give a specific example of how agroforestry can be used to diversify production for enhancing seasonal availability of more nutritious foods dressing harvest gaps and nutrient gaps in local food systems. In many parts of the world the consumption of nutrient dense foods such as fruits and vegetables are far below the amount recommended by the World Health Organization of which is 400 grams per person per day. In Kenya for example the daily consumption of fruits is only 87 grams and as little as 50 grams in Ethiopia. There are a multitude of factors affecting fruit and vegetable consumption including availability, affordability, socio-cultural preferences and practices, awareness and food marketing with the increase in urbanization having a significant effect on food choices as convenient and highly processed fast foods are more readily available in cities at the expense of more nutritious foods and it isn't only consumption which is lagging behind data shows that the production of fruits and vegetables is far below what is required to meet adequate consumption with eastern Asia the only region meeting and exceeding production needs of vegetables in particular and considering the recent Eat Landsat report on healthy diets and sustainable food systems which recommends an increased in fruit and vegetable consumption to 500 grams per person per day there is a need for greater production and so to address the low consumption which can be due in part to low availability of these foods it is necessary to look at ways in which increased and diversified production can be promoted and so to harness the benefits of trees world's agroforestry developed the food tree and crop portfolio approach with the intended use of selecting sociologically suitable and nutritionally important food tree species with complementary vegetable pulse and staple crops for production to identify these site specific portfolios several aspects are assessed such as on farm food production diversity food consumption patterns and food composition and to further support species selection in the portfolios world agroforestry and partners have developed decision support tools such as the vegetation map for Africa used to find the right tree for the right place these maps are based on natural vegetation and potential distribution understanding this distribution provides good approximation of where indigenous tree species can contribute to greater ecosystem services and support food and nutrition security the portfolios are combinations of indigenous and exotic species that can potentially provide year-end nutritious foods addressing food harvest gaps and nutrient gaps in local food systems for the portfolios harvest months of prioritized food tree and crop species are mapped across the months of the year and particularly against food insecurity periods highlighted by the red column in addition to filling harvest gaps the portfolio addresses certain nutrient gaps by matching identified foods with nutrient content data in this example the nutrient values for vitamins a and c and minerals iron folate are included food composition data plays a key role in linking landscapes to nutrition particularly the nutrient values of indigenous and underutilized species for which such information is often lacking without this information it could mean that certain crops rich in micronutrients are overlooked in agriculture nutrition planning projects and policies to include nutrient content information in the portfolios the mean values of recommended nutrient intake data are calculated based on FAO and WHO references and the percentages of nutrients are calculated for each species to simplify the nutrient content information for the portfolios and to highlight the variation in nutritional values food tree and crop species are scored for whether they are a high source a source or a present but low source for the respective nutrients based on our work developing these portfolios across 16 sites in three East African countries Kenya Uganda and Ethiopia we have compiled standardized and aggregated food composition data for over 80 species in an open access database to support decision making in the selection of ecologically suitable and nutritionally valuable tree and crop species the database serves an important function to not only provide nutritional information but it also highlights an important gap in data availability shown here by the gray shading here is an example of the nutritional value of some indigenous food tree species for which food composition data is available the vitamin c content of African species baobab and marula is five and three times out of oranges respectively and while amaranth leaves a leafy vegetable has similar vitamin c content to oranges it contains essential levels of iron and folate for which vitamin c is necessary in the uptake of iron from plant foods this highlights the importance of consuming a diversity of foods to benefit from these food interactions and this is even more relevant based on the recent eat land set report which not only recommends an increase in the amount of fruits and vegetables consumed but also recommends the use of more plant based foods which can provide protein and iron in diets indigenous and underutilized food tree and crop species are very important in local food systems because they're often more adapted to the landscape and therefore resilient in the face of climate change and so the mainstreaming of these foods into wider use is necessary to ensure we are harnessing the total value of these foods our projects in east Africa have increased our geographic scope for data generation to fill critical knowledge gaps on production diversity food consumption patterns and food composition data and to identify priority food tree and crop species which have the potential to contribute to healthier diets in more sustainable food systems the portfolio approach provides an entry point for linking landscapes and diets especially as we look towards a planetary health diet and focus on the critical role that diets play in linking human health and environmental sustainability hi my name is Amy Ikowitz and i'm a scientist at the Center for international forestry research working on sustainable landscapes and food systems thanks very much for listening to my talk today as part of the FTA webinar on food systems i'm going to be talking about local food systems and their relationships with landscapes and diets in the tropics we heard earlier today about the global food system and some of the challenges that we're facing today some of these challenges are reflected in local food systems i'm going to focus on three components of local food systems and how they interact to affect local diets so first we have agriculture agriculture can take a wide range of different types of systems at the one end of the extreme we can think of intensive monocrop systems picture a row of a field with just rows of wheat or rows of maize the other end of the spectrum we can think of complex polycultural systems with many different types of crops grown legumes and staple crops and vegetables and fruits all grown and grown in the same plot of land depending on the type of the type of agricultural system that people use that's going to affect the types of foods that are available from their agricultural landscapes then there's also the natural environment that people often forget about it's probably the most neglected aspect of local food systems in terms of when people think of local food systems they often think of the agriculture part and the market part but sometimes leave out the natural environment so terry sunderland talked today about forests as an important part of local food systems and the contributions that they can make in terms of providing wild foods but also ecosystem services that forests can provide to agriculture there are other types of natural environments that also contribute to local food systems so you can think of people fishing in rivers or having their cows graze on grasslands etc but then people can also purchase foods that either come from their local landscapes and local markets so some of the foods that will be available there will be from come from relatively short distances away but these local markets can also provide foods that come from further away so they can also connect the global food system to global food systems the different components of the local food system can all be affected by policies and sometimes the policies that are recommended to solve some of the challenges for the of the global food system can have unintended consequences on local food systems so we've all heard the the narrative that the world is facing a crisis we're going to be having nine billion people and we don't produce enough food to feed them so we have to grow more food and one of the common proposals to address this is to recommend that farmers in developing countries intensify their agricultural production systems to grow more usually staple crops in order to feed the world and this will not only provide more food for the world so solve the one of the global food system challenges but also help these farmers become more efficient and thereby increase their incomes and allow them to buy more food and improve their food security sometimes conservationists also support this idea because they say that if we intensify on on some land that will free up other land that can now be protected in order to conserve biodiversity so that's sometimes called the land-sparing argument however these types of policies can actually have a negative impact on the dietary quality of the people living in those producing landscapes so one potential problem is that if everybody in a landscape now instead of growing many different crops all focus on producing one staple crop that's going to reduce the agricultural diversity in that landscape so there will be fewer types of foods grown in that landscape so fewer foods available for people to consume from those landscapes and if the areas are set aside for protection this will also give people less access to wild foods because they can no longer go to protected areas to collect them so that's another potential loss on the other hand the whole idea of the solution is that it will give people higher incomes and better access to markets so the idea is that they can then purchase the foods that they're losing from their local landscapes in markets so then the question becomes what are the net effects of these changes foods in local markets have to come from somewhere if they're not coming from the local landscapes then they're going to have to be imported into these landscapes so one obvious potential problem with this is the ecological footprint of bringing foods from far away into landscapes just from the transportation alone but more importantly for this talk is that often nutritious foods in local markets don't come from very far away and others are often not even available in in in local markets we've done some research and see for looking at markets in both Burkina Faso and in Indonesia and we found in very different contexts that the majority of vegetables sold in local markets travel very few kilometers to get into those markets we also found very little fruit available in local markets what this means then if these fruits and vegetables are no longer produced in these landscapes it's likely that the markets won't be able to replace them for people at c4 where we're doing a study right now using data from the Indonesia family life survey and we have a panel of farming households that we observe at three points in time between 2000 and 2014 and we're seeing in these households we're seeing incomes increasing over this time period but we're also seeing that production diversity has declined so people are growing fewer crops and that at the same time their dietary diversity is declining even while their incomes are going up specifically we're seeing declines in fruit vegetable and fish consumption on the other hand we're seeing an increase in fats meat and processed food consumption so this is the classic example of the nutrition transition that we're seeing in many parts of the world the dietary challenges that we heard about from John Ingram earlier in the webinar are being reflected in areas in Indonesia even in relatively remote areas where we're doing specific projects and we're seeing that these changes are happening almost everywhere and these changes are happening at the same time as local landscapes are changing but the solutions proposed for solving some of the global challenges can sometimes actually have negative impacts on local diets in the producing landscapes we need to appreciate what is working in tropical landscapes because there are things that are working well people in these traditional systems often do eat lots of fruits and vegetables and legumes some of the things that we're losing in global diets and we need to work with local farmers to develop locally appropriate improvements to their food systems because these food systems are not perfect and can always be improved but we need to be careful not to try to solve some problems in one part of the global food system by making things worse elsewhere thanks so much for listening to my talk today I suggest that we take the time we have now for the remaining 10 to 15 minutes to to have a discussion with John with the room with scientists in the room about what it's what all of this tells us for you know our research questions are we doing the right things what should we what should we try to focus on and and I have been told that it seems that despite our technical issues with the interface the show is still running on youtube so it's I don't know how many people are able to follow us live currently on youtube but thank you for for that if it's if it's the case so first I have a set of questions that some people from fta had you know asked before the seminar but before I go to this list you know them Ravi has asked some questions Céline, Thermote from Bioversity etc Amy herself maybe some other questions from the room that we can try to address or points of discussions or remarks or you know what does that tell you? Just a reflection on that last presentation I didn't hear anything about climate regulation per se at the macro level and just talking with Maynard a week or two ago about what's going on here in the Congo basin as opposed to the very well known examples from the Amazon I think there's a it's an important point to stress and Maynard I'm kind of throwing the microphone at you to remind me what you were saying about the importance of forest cover extensive forest cover in climate regulation as distinct to that interaction between wheat yields however that happens in Ethiopia could you just say a little bit to help me remember what what the issue is on that? Yeah thanks John and so in last year we had a big report on forest and water under the IUFRO global all the big organizations around forestry on that but one of our main points that we emphasize there is that in much of the debate so far and almost all considerations of food production we take rainfall as a given we say well that's the climate and then this is what we do with the water well there is more and more evidence that the amount of rain that we have on the world's lands is to a much higher degree than we previously thought recycled terrestrial water so where forest and trees generally evaporate more water than other vegetation it also means they are generating more rainfall downstream yeah so all the discussions we say well we with climate change we might get more rain less rain are not yet sufficiently incorporating the feedback of vegetation on that we tend to think that forest and climate is a matter of carbon and carbon stocks and we've spent 10 years of time on reducing emissions and linking forest climate to carbon probably the link via the water cycle is at least as important and we can call that climate regulation we can talk call it the hydroclimate depends directly on on tree cover yeah i think that's a point that that has yet to filter down to the food systems discussion i think absolutely and i didn't hear it in terries no no no thank you yes and perhaps terry was a bit uh quick on one of on this on this because one of the thing one of the pathways by which forest and trees and landscape provide uh you know essential services for nutrition are perhaps the longer pathways that will not necessarily go through the food systems but through the environment and which i mean mentioned pollination perhaps more local ecosystem services but also more global ones such as the the atmospheric water recycling etc that are important for bread baskets and here there is a red if you see there is a red circle it's a bit hidden but the fact that deforestation in many ways is not only threatening forest but is threatening some of the function that forest can provide for agriculture are different and this is something that is very often overlooked and that minors report have also you know addressed directly through the effects through the water cycle for instance and and this is one of the effects that we would like to really much stress out in fta ramney jamnadas is not online unfortunately but looking at how and this are also some works of amy kovitz here in sifo in indonesia and how land use change can impact the nutrition of people that live in the areas that that are you know the speed or this the trains i mean the the land you're saying train that you mentioned how how does that really impact nutrition well and if i can bring up another question i mean the question is yeah the the traditional feo definition has these four things that we have here there is another discourse that say well there is a fifth dimension to that and it is sovereignty and food sovereignty should be part of food security and the question to who is deciding on on what we eat etc and bringing much more of the agency of decisions back to the consumers back to the farmers on that front and i think it is an interesting discourse an interesting discussion that when we say in the end while the solutions will have to come from changes in diet well changes in diet and don't come because the government tells you that we have to change the diet it will have to come bottom up and i think the the challenge with food systems is that we we still tend to think of it that food security while we need the ministry of agriculture that takes care of food security we need no it is the bottom up decisions of of every farmer every that add up to something in indonesia a classical challenge for people to understand is that when rice farmers decide that they're actually better off in converting their rice fields into an oil palm field and everyone says no but you can't do that you can't do that rice farmers have to be rice farmers because that's what we need for food security of this country well if these farmers make more money by selling palm oil than growing rice yeah so we we have this strong top-down planning perspective pervading everything that is about food and we're still have to learn how to deal with the yeah the emerging property there's all these different agents actors everyone makes their own decisions on their own accord both on the producer side and on the consumer side and i think that that's food sovereignty discourse has come mostly from the from the latin american countries and from italy but i think it does add some flavor and some aspect that we need if we want to look for how it can change thanks yes there are lots of controversies about this notion of of food sovereignty but the the way you depicted it giving the choice to the population is perhaps the the good way if i may have a question from from and then i will give it to give the questions to the floor from Javi Prabu from ecraft c4 no we need to say that so john transforming the food systems lots of huge transformation at many level needs to take place social transformations are needed what what is the how do we deal how can we deal with the political economy and the different powers around around that system and is there a role here for information and knowledge to to trigger a change instead of maintaining a status quo from ravi thank you ravi wow um first up understand that we're dealing with the system and um uh mining a moment ago said you know it's it's it's not the ministry of agriculture it should never be the ministry of agriculture it should be prime minister's office deals with food security as a starting point because all the different facets of government impinge on all the facets of the food system that's the top down bit the bottom up bit of course is us and i made the point are we citizens or are we consumers where we are both um we need to think in both with both hats and then in between there is everything else so at one point you have a monocentric governance which can which could um and should formulate policy that is conducive to systematic bottom-up change and that's the role of top down not to not to have a stick but to have a facilitation to allow the the the population to change in a bottom-up way so um there are many many aspects to that but i mean that's the sort of the first cut answer the second point is well what do we actually want to change and what are we prepared to accept and my example of enhancing resilience through reorientation is i think the most powerful because it addresses the resilience of the system in that we're not so demanding of the system but it also interfaces with the sustainability agenda because we're not so demanding of the system and that's that i think is the way forward so how do we how do we bring about a change in mindset amongst our societies of what is good that's that's really the number of it and here we're talking about behavioral psychology we're talking about behavioral economics we're talking about political economy and it's the motivations and the the embedded objectives of all the actors that we need to address and and i don't know how and if i did know how i'd i'd be very happy but all i know is that the challenge is not a technical challenge it's a social challenge it's a political challenge and it's an economic challenge and fundamentally it's a political problem and here in this country what little i've seen just about to go into an election that will spawn the next five-year plan by september the transition team of the new president will want a five-year plan wow what on earth is it going to say it would be a very interesting next few months for this country if that plan embraces the notion of food systems as distinct to agriculture i personally think it would be a step forwards yes thank you i guess uh rabbi would have lots of comments to say to to your answer so you will we will put you in the conversation with him and yes multi-stakeholder platforms we've been advocating for that as well so maybe the government needs to have a plan but also some flexibility to let the actors you know figure out by themselves are there some some questions further yes and please introduce yourself my name is janitha and i just graduated from university of kent i'm studying environmental anthropology so i touched out a lot of political ecology on that um about like power struggle regarding this food resilience system and i feel like well based on like the studies that i've read and like my own studies i feel like opportunities are really important to the people for this bottom-up change and i don't know if you have any idea or like information on that because like you said everything once the political um like people like already decided on something everything can just like change towards like you know like in an instant and like not really or like um like what do you feel especially in indonesia if you've been studying here um what's the opportunity for people to change on this food resilience system like to the one that we prefer the most favorable to this system is it difficult still well i'm not really in a position to say what's what's most favorite um uh you know what is better better is a subjective word and this is why it's to do with it's a psychology because it's a question of what we each hold in our worldview and there might be somebody who's particularly keen on environmental issues or animal welfare or business opportunity or new GM technology whatever it is and that's their drive how do we balance that set of drives across society and what you've been studying is where it's at not what i've been studying so we need more people like you to help us understand the political ecology of the piece to understand how we then introduce behavioral economics to bring about system change and the system has a behavior as well as the individual people and these need to be balanced what do you think about education system like is there because we need to change uh like you said psychological aspects of these people especially maybe it's it's both people urban and rural areas people uh definitely a different education and psychological um aspects but what do you think about that should like the rural and the urban people have different education on like this food system or like just to just to approach this this thing because i feel like not it's in the cities areas like people are starting to get aware that they need to change their diet and they're willing to do that but they don't know how for example and like all this stuff that's in the supermarket is what's available so that's what they take what that's what they eat plus if they're really busy they're probably just gonna you know take takeaway food like instant food microwavable food and it's not you know like it depends on what's on the market whilst the people on the rural areas on the villages um they're all just like see opportunities on like the natural resources that's in front of them that's what they manage or like what they um like plant and it's that's true that climate change really change everything on that like it's changing what they choose to plant too and what they choose to produce and i don't know it's a really complex system i really i have no idea like on what should we do it's really complex you ask about education um like i mean there is the notion of formal education you know in school and high school and stuff but really i think the the advent of social media is an extraordinary phenomenon in in you know in the last a few years of my lifetime i'm i'm now way behind that curve but there are other people in the room who are on that curve and they understand the power of that and so to bring about a movement as is using that as an education i would actually use the word awareness rather than just formal education um and so maybe that's the way forward use social media to extend the message to the village to the town in some way oh yeah absolutely why why not in the village um you know everyone's got a phone or a very large number of people got a phone and they're they're linked in a way that you know 30 years ago one would have said is science fiction and now it's remarkable and the sort of job that don does the communications is all feeding in through social media to help get this message across and it doesn't need to be technical but i think you answered your own question in so much as it was a series of very sensible comments well my name is angie i'm from communication team in z4 and well my question is about social media actually um now in the age of social media we can see like even what Beyonce eats what um top stars eat and how does it affect like local diets i mean Indonesian people can see like what what that people eats and i just wondering like how it how it um change well i'm probably the worst person to ask that question to because i don't even know what Beyonce is but is it but the the the the idea is that um you know having a what is i think the word's a meme is it yeah how that kind of rolls out across society is fascinating um and then hugely powerful providing it's rolling out in the right direction but if it's if it's the wrong message then it's probably not a good thing so we need to be careful what what messages are pushed out through through this immensely powerful new facility yes we can take uh i i propose we take two more questions and then we two or three and then we close up that's a great but here is a great shot so we're not constrained by time it's just to um to keep the overall timing of one hour and a half hey young thank you for the time my name is Ian from SLF i have a question about uh the things that you said before about the business that can help i'm quite curious from best on your experience what kind of business that actually can because you said that it's become uh also important actors that produce produce something that can be uh actually at the end people can eat that so i i wonder in your research what kind of sector or business that actually can have a relationship or work with with uh with this kind of food system that already been have a work sure well massive absolutely massive in the in the uk where i come from um 16 percent of of of uh the gdp is in the food sector and sort of one percent is actually in agriculture so it's this value addition and a huge number of jobs food processing is the biggest manufacturing industry in in the uk it dwarfs aerospace it dwarfs cars it dwarfs everything hugely important for the economy and it produces good stuff it produces less good stuff very much commercially driven and so if one was looking for a top-down approach one can have regulation there is regulation on quality salt fat content that sort of thing there is no regulation on amount overall amount because that is not something that any government dare touch this this phrase we use of nanny state and that this is political death to stand up and say consume less that's that's just not going to get anywhere and so managing the quality and managing the quantity are two very different agendas the point i was making was essentially one of managing quantity and i say it's a much tougher challenge because every attempt whether it was the um the the coke you know the bucket coax by uh bloomba whatever it was bounces back it just society rejects it so it really tricky stuff and this is why the the anthropology the behavioral psychology behavioral economics is really where it's at how do we change behavior tough yeah i think it's really interesting because you said about this not just about education but also about awareness and in one of your slides that's really interesting when when you write down about how many how many amount of price that you pay for each calorie or nutrition that you actually consume not so many people aware of how many calories that they consume uh instead of the nutrition that they actually can take like how much you willing to pay for something that is really actually garbage or you want to pay for something that is actually healthy i never i mean i think this is something new for me and i also raised my awareness so i just want to point out that thing but again it's it's a social norm and in that the top diagram the top um panel of the last diagram it had cultural norms as a determinant of food consumption and um in many parts of the world uh young chap wants to take his girl out and they go to kfc and this is the place to be seen yes yes you know occasionally it's not it's not toxic it's just a question of amount yes but it's there it's heavily promoted it heavily advertised this business that i was just discussing earlier i'm seeing right now the whole business about advertising is is both the the the fact and the emotion working together and you know it's cool to go to kfc it's cheap or whatever the whatever you know the fact and you've got an emotion and so if you translate that into how to bring about societal change we need to develop both well you need advertising skills basically to to present the fact but then to to put it in a basket of emotion yeah thank you okay um hello um my name is fadri i went to study to do in the uk in embryo college London two years ago and but then i've been working on a newly established non-profit from uh non-profit organizations with my colleague here it's called de joiner foundation so djf is actually working on uh to promote food security through the cultivations of um suboptimal lens which is wetlands lowland pitlands and our main ecosystem that we are currently working on is in Rio in Gregory Hillier it was it's the first time i came here it was like i found it very fascinating because the ecosystems are like very the the farmers are there and the business are also there and then what we are trying to do now is um trying to grow foods on the lens that people might see as a wasteland in a way so that um but then i remember you mentioned in your presentations about how to manage the trade-offs so if we want to promote the sustainable agriculture in such lands we're dealing with economically uh economic and then social and then environmental sustainability and our teams are just kind of like really want to believe that it is possible to actually minimize the trade-off as minimum as possible but then it's also there's always debate that i don't know you can't grow foods there because you're going to damage the environment but then if you don't grow food there we're going to run we're running out of lens in the urban areas to grow food so things like that that um i want you to more elaborate on how do we actually can manage the trade-offs well you know between the tree sectors that is like the triangle of that like how do we smack in the middle you know yeah basically that well goodness um how to manage trade-offs well first of all make sure you know what you're talking about in terms of what are the things you are trying to trade any intervention will have have winners and losers often the loser could be environment the winner might be a local enterprise so that you know how do you how do you balance these two currencies which are very different currencies and this again where it goes into into um your sort of worldview um how how much value do you put on soil loss or a muddy river or something like that so you know you need to work out that sort of thing but the the the main thing is to is to be clear what your conceptual framework is that you're working in and to have a boundary you can't include everything but you know that the boundary is there you know that some things are outside the boundary because they're just too difficult or they're something you don't have the skill in but at least you recognize them and then you need to think about the consequence of leaving that outside your conceptual framework and that's really how you do trade-off analysis because you first of all agree what you're trying to trade and then you have the conceptual framework and decide what's within your discussion and what's outside your discussion okay you're also developing our framework now so that is a very good suggestions on like trade-off analysis yeah think about boundaries the boundaries keywords boundaries okay thank you that's it any any other last question okay one last one before we close um so advertising companies or um major food companies such as for example Coca-Cola they're always hailed as the poster boy bad child but um they've been criticized for dishonest advertising and tapping into um the kind of addiction areas of our brain and praying on our impulses our caveman impulses if you like and I was just wondering if bad foods should be allowed to run advertising campaigns can I please ask everybody in the room who thinks bad food should be allowed to have advertising put their hand up so so what to do what to do again it goes back to who are the winners and losers the winners might be public health the losers would be the mcdonald truck driver out of a job like that so again it's this huge this huge balance it's it's it's really really difficult I mean it's glib to say it's really difficult but it is really difficult because of vested interests I don't know how everyone if everybody has a pension where that pension money is being invested is it ethically invested you really got to dig deep to find out where your own personal life is is is engaged with you know the good and the bad it's really it's really difficult there's so much kind of fog out there and there are areas of society I know nothing about like pension finance I don't think about that I'm just aware that pension houses or you know big big investment houses is where the where the real power is and if we if we want to bring about a change in in a corporate you don't talk to the corporate you talk to the investors who are investing in that corporate unfortunately it is in the best interest of pension funds of the world that we don't eat healthy food and a recent study from the so-called Rotterdam nutrition study showed healthier food is about eight years longer healthy lives well what is the problem of pension funds these days that people live too long and they retire early and we don't have enough money to pay them so it is in their very best interest that we don't eat healthy food that's the only way pension funds can work yes but perhaps that's not what we really want to aim at in the in the research we we do so thank thank you for John for this very interesting presentation that triggered a very interesting debate I think these are also very interesting questions for us in a research program that okay is focused on forestry agroforestry landscapes already a very wide agenda but okay what can we tell or what can we bring to systemic issues that are much much wider than this do we think first there is the recognition that the food system is a system and it's very complex and the question for us is whether we let that steam train just move on because it's going it's just too complex and it's too massive it's perhaps even as complex as climate change itself or all these you know earth system processes or do we try to figure out what could be the key interventions you know in our way or you know in our domains that could help the food system most towards more sustainability and to provide better or healthier diets and we believe that some of the level as we we can especially in some of the countries where there is I don't really much like the term but where there is a win-win in terms of developing new value chains out of three products nuts the the etlan said commission just recommended that the world population doubles the amount of nuts in their diets okay that has a huge I would have a huge implication on agroforestry on forest on tribe system the same thing with fruits it also needs to be doubled what can we do how can the value chains be organized how do we deal with fresh fruits or with with transformation that can bring a lot of jobs etc etc listening to these presentations my closing words would be that we are at a crossroads in the world food system we must not forget the challenge of the triple burden of malnutrition facing us today also a company associated issues contributing to the degradation of natural capital from not only climate change but also from over exploitation and other forms of abuse contributing to exceeding planetary boundaries this is a clear message and we cannot continue our current trajectory of consuming too little too much or the wrong types of food at an unsustainable cost to natural resources the environment and the health we must change the course to address this we of course need to look at all aspects relevant for food and nutritional security and that involves food and non-food systems which actually means dealing with complexity and working in an integrated manner so that proposed solutions are fit for both the problem they address and the main objective being pursued for the system addressing food and nutritional security as whole but moving from theory to practice on concepts of systems approach is however not simple productivity profitability flexibility adaptability gender responsiveness and resilience are just some of the aspects that characterize systems this of course all complicated by the fact that recommendations or interventions made will not be context specific there really isn't going to be one size that fits all so my question question is are we really clear to which boundaries should be considered under what conditions it tells me that a deeper understanding is needed by the science community to guide policymakers and others and other change implementers to reverse these global challenges well in the case of our program forest trees and agroforestry research is based on the premise that attention through policy and practice to under-recognize contribution of forest landscape mosaics agroforestry practices and specific forest and tree based foods in supporting nutritional diversity and human health will provide important contributions to rural and herbal communities concurrently we also seek ways to to protect soils and water restored degraded ecosystems and more sustainably manage them for increased resilience of those systems and the communities that depend on them as diets are changing there is also a need for greater understanding of the biological economic physical social physiological determinants of choice and the attitudes the beliefs and the knowledge that surrounds food consumption more research is definitely required on what drives food choice motives for healthy foods including those derived from trees in lower-income countries where very little is known undocumented so a big research agenda that we want to develop we'll take home some of the lessons of the discussions points here today we'll discuss with our teams Ramney at eCraft, Amy at C4 and colleagues at Bariversity and another in FTA and we very much look forward to continue to hopefully work with John and with Oxford with the Environmental Change Institute and your food systems program in the future because we we believe that between landscapes markets and you know better nutrition and better food systems we there there are lots of things we can contribute