Bite The Talk – UNFSS Stocktaking Series | Episode 23 | C20250716
Transcript
Mark Gachagua:
You're listening to Bite The Talk, the podcast where bold ideas meet real accountability in global food systems. I'm your host, Mark Gachagua, and today we launch a new series aimed at answering one burning question: What steps have governments taken since the 2021 United Nations Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) and the UNFSS+2 Stocktaking Moment? Let’s rewind.
In 2021, the world came together to reimagine food systems for people, planet, and prosperity. At the UNFSS+2, nations reported their progress—some showing remarkable strides, others offering reflections and renewed commitments.
To guide us through the current landscape, we’re honored to welcome Dr. Lawrence Haddad, Executive Director at GAIN and a leading voice in global food systems transformation.
Mark Gachagua:
Lawrence, welcome to Bite The Talk. It's a pleasure to have you.
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
Thank you, Mark. It’s a pleasure to be here.
Segment: What's Top of Mind Approaching UNFSS+4?
Mark Gachagua:
GAIN has partnered with governments around the world to support food systems transformation. As we approach UNFSS+4, what’s top of mind for you?
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
As we approach +4, both bad news and good news come to mind. The bad news is that progress has been slow. The Food System Countdown Initiative, the only initiative that tracks food system changes country by country, tells us that of roughly 50 indicators, only about a third are moving in the right direction. A third are static, and a third are going in the wrong direction. That’s not great.
But the good news? There are many examples of real progress—we just need more of them.
Let me share a few from GAIN’s partnerships in 12 countries. For instance, Indonesia has embedded its food system action plan into both its medium- and long-term development strategies. That’s a serious commitment—anyone familiar with Indonesia knows those strategies are taken seriously across government. They also engaged 1,500 stakeholders across sectors and communities in the process.
Together with GAIN, they’ve developed a Food Systems Dashboard disaggregated across 500 regencies and cities, offering a wide set of indicators to diagnose and guide food system interventions. It’s managed and funded by Bappenas (the national planning ministry), with GAIN providing support. This dashboard helps Bappenas allocate resources across sectors and geographies—very exciting.
Rwanda offers another strong example. In the past 18 months, they’ve transitioned their agriculture transformation strategy (PSTA4) into a comprehensive food system transformation strategy (PSTA5)—a significant and rapid pivot that addresses nutrition, climate, employment, and more.
In Mozambique, GAIN worked with the government and market vendors in Pemba’s Gingome Market to map the local food system and align it with the national food system pathway. It connected abstract national policy to real community action.
And finally, in Pakistan, the Higher Education Commission—governing curricula for all public universities—has worked with GAIN and others to embed food systems thinking into agricultural economics and agricultural curricula. This long-term vision is building a generation that understands food systems from age 18, preparing them to lead in government and the private sector.
So yes, Mark, beyond the numbers, there’s a lot of hope.
Mark Gachagua:
Indeed, those are excellent examples. I was just reading about PSTA5 the other day—it's a fantastic strategy. But I’m curious, Lawrence, what’s slowing progress?
Segment: Barriers to Progress
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
We’ve identified four major barriers.
First, it's difficult to turn food system objectives into clear priorities. Prioritization means deciding what to do first—and if you choose the wrong first step, you might block progress on others. Then, you have to convert that priority into an investable initiative. Many governments lack the diagnostic tools to guide that process. That’s why GAIN has developed tools to help describe food systems, identify opportunities and weaknesses, assess policy coherence, and analyze budget allocations.
Second, decision-making takes time. Food systems involve many players. Governments that succeed are those that find the balance between inclusivity and decisiveness—by establishing focused task forces, with strong leadership linked to top offices, making informed, inclusive decisions.
Third, government-business engagement is weak. Since food systems are largely driven by the private sector, effective collaboration is essential. Farmers, processors, storage providers, marketers—they’re all private actors. Yet governments often don’t know who to engage with. GAIN works through industry forums and networks to bridge that gap.
Fourth, finance. Great plans don’t matter without funding. Development finance institutions (DFIs) and international finance institutions (IFIs) are crucial here. But their instruments often don’t suit fragmented agri-food sectors. We need to help governments, DFIs, and private entities work better together.
And finally, we need better ways to monitor change. Waiting five years for hunger or malnutrition indicators to shift is too long. Governments need early signs—policy changes, budget reallocations, public commitments—that efforts are paying off. These “moments of change” provide the motivation to continue.
Segment: The Importance of UNFSS+4
Mark Gachagua:
One of the key themes at UNFSS+2 was the need for strong political engagement. Why is UNFSS+4 so important?
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
Stocktaking moments signal that the 2021 Summit wasn’t just a flash in the pan. It’s a mechanism for accountability—if we make it honest and reflective.
Credit to UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed—she’s deeply committed to this agenda.
UNFSS+4 serves multiple purposes: it’s a focusing moment that generates momentum; a learning moment where countries and organizations share experiences; and a platform for political leadership. Transformation doesn't happen without political will, and food is at the center of nearly every Sustainable Development Goal.
Finally, it’s a chance to accelerate. UNFSS+2 was about moving from commitment to planning. UNFSS+4 must be about implementing those plans—and fast.
Segment: Hopes for UNFSS+4
Mark Gachagua:
What is your hope for UNFSS+4?
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
Some partners ask me if food systems transformation is running out of steam. My answer: food systems are the basics. They’re the best path to reduce hunger, malnutrition, and climate risk.
I hope UNFSS+4 reenergizes everyone and leads to open, honest discussions—not just about successes but also challenges. That level of maturity builds credibility and attracts more support.
We also need more collaboration—beyond coordination. Coordination aligns existing work. Collaboration solves new problems no one can solve alone. I hope we talk to people we don’t normally talk to—especially those investing in ways that aren’t helping transformation, or those investing well but on too small a scale. And I hope we lay the groundwork for much more good news at UNFSS+6.
Segment: Acceleration and Institutional Innovation
Mark Gachagua:
Tell us more about food systems transformation acceleration—what does that look like?
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
Acceleration is about helping governments turn plans into investable propositions quickly—like a $50M program supporting women-led food enterprises in rural areas. But to do that, governments, businesses, DFIs, and researchers need to work together.
Right now, it’s like trying to assemble six different puzzles with the pieces mixed together—everyone has coherent systems that don’t interoperate.
So we’ve partnered with the UN to build a Food Systems Transformation Accelerator—a multi-organization platform (GAIN, GIZ, AGRA, others) that can support countries over a 2–3 year period. It’s demand-driven: countries apply, and we co-create the solutions with them. We also work with local institutions to ensure ownership and long-term success.
Crucially, ODA (Overseas Development Assistance) should act as a catalyst. $10 million in ODA can unlock $100 million in DFI funding, which can unlock $500 million in private investment. These aren’t made-up ratios—they’re conservative, evidence-backed estimates.
To use a fire metaphor: right now, the logs are too far apart. We need them closer—aligned but breathable—so that when the ODA spark hits, the fire catches.
Segment: Regional Collaboration and Accountability
Mark Gachagua:
That’s a powerful analogy. It reminds me of a Nigerian proverb: “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” How does regional collaboration—like CAADP and the Kampala Declaration—fit into this?
Dr. Lawrence Haddad:
I love that proverb, Mark, but I’d tweak it: Go far and fast—together. We don’t have the luxury of time.
CAADP is essential—because it's African-led and owned. It tells external partners, “If you want to work with us, here’s the program.” But for it to succeed, we need a robust results framework to ensure accountability.
At GAIN, we’ve partnered with CAADP to develop tools and indicators for the UNFSS+4 Summit. We’re working with IFPRI, Academia 2063, and others to help countries track progress and align efforts. This is not just about African governments—it’s about everyone involved.
Mark Gachagua:
Thank you, Lawrence. That’s a great note to end on. You’ve shared invaluable insights, and I know our audience appreciates it as much as I do.
That wraps up this episode of Bite The Talk. In upcoming episodes, we’ll explore country case studies, highlight innovative partnerships, and hear directly from youth leaders driving change.
Follow us, share this conversation, and be part of this journey—because here at Bite The Talk, we’re not just talking about food systems—we’re shaping them together.
Until next time: stay informed, stay engaged, and keep advancing the dialogue.