Food and Agriculture Organization

Examines the benefits of information and communication technology (ICT) in agriculture and rural areas, examining the challenges and providing recommendations. While the digital revolution has reached rural areas in many developing countries, the rural-urban digital divide remains, and rural women face a digital, rural, and gender divide. Bypassing social restrictions on mobility and traditional legal barriers to account ownership, new mobile finance services significantly boost women’s economic empowerment and entrepreneurship, allowing them to save and transfer money, process financial transactions, and receive credit. Development practitioners create an enabling environment in which appropriate mobile financial services prove widely available at a reasonable cost for providers and customers. Mobile learning expands rural learning opportunities, enabling communities to access educational resources, share information, and create content, both inside and outside classrooms. Mobile learning can help rural women improve skills and knowledge in agriculture, business, and nutrition vital to their livelihoods and the well-being of their families.

In any national economy, agriculture is one of the key sectors of economic activity overall. As always anthropogenic activities held in conjunction and, not infrequently, the adversarial relationship with the environment, agriculture accumulate elements of society, from food security to social stability. In this context, one of the objectives of long-term agricultural development strategy must be accounted for to ensure food security threshold. This paper aims to study the scientific endeavor further the current concepts of food security and the challenges facing countries in this regard. Every day, the world's population grows by about 220,000 people and the world population every year we add 80 million people. All these people must have access to sufficient and safe food. Globalization of the food chain causes constant new challenges and risks to health and interests of consumers. This article was prepared as a basic research as sources of information: the international literature, FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization - United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization) data, official statistics etc. According to FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization - United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization), food security means “guaranteeing each individual at all times, in any place or time of access to adequate and healthy diet to allow him to have a regime sufficient food for a healthy and active life”. Multidimensional nature of food security, just as the fight against poverty, calls a good correlation between the various sectors - agriculture, commerce, infrastructure, health - and the variety of intervention levels - local, national, international. In recent years indicate that there are problems of food insecurity in 86 countries, 43 African, 24 Asian, 9 in Latin America and the Caribbean, 7 in Oceania and Europe 3. In 2004, 35 countries have received emergency aid because of the food crisis. The main causes were: military and civil conflicts, post-conflict situations, refugees, economic disadvantaged areas and climate issues. Global agricultural production should increase by at least 3% per year to provide live feed of the rising population, according to a study by the Economist Intelligence Unit. At present, current agricultural productivity growth is only 2%. In the present research work, we demonstrated that food security is a global problem of humanity, in the context of population growth, climate change and economic crisis. The food security is influenced by four groups of factors, namely: the social - economic and political, agro-food sector performance, social protection and health and hygiene.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations was founded in 1945 with a mandate to raise levels of nutrition and standards of living, to improve agricultural productivity, and to improve the condition of rural populations in the world. Today, FAO is the largest specialized agency in the United Nations system and is the lead agency for agriculture and rural development. FAO is composed of eight departments: Agriculture, Economic and Social, Fisheries, Forestry, Sustainable Development, Technical Cooperation, General Affairs, and Information and Administration and Finance. As an intergovernmental organization, FAO has 183 member countries plus one member organization, the European Union. Since its inception, FAO has worked to alleviate poverty and hunger by promoting agricultural development, improved nutrition, and the pursuit of food security—defined as the access of all people at all times to the food they need for an active and healthy life. Food production in the world has increased at an unprecedented rate since FAO was founded, outpacing the doubling of the world’s population over the same period. Since the early 1960s, the proportion of hungry people in the developing world has been reduced from more than 50% to less than 20%. Despite these progressive developments, more than 790 million people in the developing world— more than the total population of North America and Western Europe combined—still go hungry (FAO, 2004). FAO strives to reduce food insecurity in the world, especially in developing countries. In 1996, the World Food Summit convened by FAO in Rome adopted a plan of action aimed to reduce the number of the world’s hungry people in half by 2015. While the proper foundation of this goal lies, among others, in the increase of food production and ensuring access to food, there is also a need to monitor the current food supply and demand situation, so that timely interventions can be planned whenever the possibility of drought, famine, starvation, or malnutrition exists. With an imminent food crisis, actions need to be taken as early as possible because it takes time to mobilize resources, and logistic operations are often hampered by adverse natural or societal conditions, including war and civil strife.

We agree with much of the Letter “Tyranny of trees in grassy biomes” (30 January, p. [484][1]), in which J. W. Veldman et al. caution against indiscriminate afforestation in general and especially in grassland areas, as well as acknowledge grasslands' substantial contribution to carbon sequestration ([ 1 ][2], [ 2 ][3]). We consider it misleading, however, to claim that because grasslands are not “formally” recognized, they are not actively studied and considered in ongoing activities of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The FAO has been working on grasslands activities for more than 30 years ([ 3 ][4]) and recognizes that even within grasslands, there are many categories. The FAO's 2005 publication Grasslands of the World explicitly includes grassland biomes ([ 4 ][5]). We estimate that 26% of the world land area and 70% of the world agricultural area are covered by grasslands, which contribute to the livelihoods of over 800 million people ([ 5 ][6]). We have also developed a grassland database with descriptions of more than 300 grassland species from different grassland ecosystems. The FAO has many grassland-related projects and case studies ([ 6 ][7]), including rehabilitation of degraded areas through protected areas and promoting native grassland species. Two relevant projects are the completed “Range rehabilitation and establishment of a wildlife reserve in the Syrian steppe” and the ongoing, globally focused, “Participatory assessment of land degradation and sustainable land management in grassland and pastoral systems” ([ 7 ][8]). We do acknowledge that the definitions of grasslands need to be harmonized and that more research is needed into understanding these areas. 1. [↵][9] FAO, Grasslands Carbon Working Group ([www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/spi/gcwg/en][10]). 2. [↵][11] FAO, Knowledge Base ([www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/spi/gcwg/gcwg-docs/en][12]). 3. [↵][13] FAO, Publications ([www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/pasture/publ_year.htm][14]). 4. [↵][15] 1. J. M. Suttie, 2. S. G. Reynolds, 3. C. Batello FAO, Grasslands of the World, J. M. Suttie, S. G. Reynolds, C. Batello, Eds. (FAO, Rome, 2005); . 5. [↵][16] FAO, Are grasslands under threat? ([www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/doc/grass_stats/grass-stats.htm][17]). 6. [↵][18] FAO, Case studies on grassland and rangeland management ([www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/spi/scpi-home/managing-ecosystems/management-of-grasslands-and-rangelands/grasslands-cases/en][19]). 7. [↵][20] FAO, Participatory assessment of land degradation and sustainable land management in grassland and pastoral systems ([www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/intranet/projects-database/detail/en/c/234274][21]). [1]: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6221/484.3 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #ref-3 [5]: #ref-4 [6]: #ref-5 [7]: #ref-6 [8]: #ref-7 [9]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [10]: http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/spi/gcwg/en [11]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [12]: http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/spi/gcwg/gcwg-docs/en [13]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3 in text [14]: http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/pasture/publ_year.htm [15]: #xref-ref-4-1 View reference 4 in text [16]: #xref-ref-5-1 View reference 5 in text [17]: http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/doc/grass_stats/grass-stats.htm [18]: #xref-ref-6-1 View reference 6 in text [19]: http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/spi/scpi-home/managing-ecosystems/management-of-grasslands-and-rangelands/grasslands-cases/en [20]: #xref-ref-7-1 View reference 7 in text [21]: http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/intranet/projects-database/detail/en/c/234274

The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) endorsed its strategic framework for the period 2022–2031 during the 42nd session of the FAO conference held on 18 June 2021. The new framework for the period 2022–2031 seeks to support the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development through the transformation of agri-food systems in line with the sustainable development goals (SDGs). The FAO strategic framework 2022–2031 was developed in the context of significant global and regional challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In developing the strategic framework, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) outlined Programme priority areas (PPAs) that describe how FAO’s work on food safety will contribute to the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development in alignment with FAO’s strategic framework 2022–2031. The strategic priorities are, in turn, organised into four strategic outcomes, which are interconnected and interdependent to achieve FAO’s vision of ‛safe food for all people at all times’.

In the last several decades, intergovernmental organizations have played an increasingly significant role in implementing international treaties by providing innovative implementation proposals. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has been a core institution for improving international fisheries governance. This chapter proposes that based on a combination of delegated and derivative international organization powers that the FAO has responsibilities to implement actively those portions of UNCLOS that are relevant to the FAO’s mission to conserve natural resources. Even though FAO is not a party to the UNCLOS treaty, the FAO has played a central role in elaborating general concepts within UNCLOS and innovating in the area of fishery management. FAO has done this both as an agent of States but also independently through the exercise of FAO’s delegated powers to conserve natural resources. This chapter highlights five areas where the FAO has made substantive contributions to improving practices for sustainable fisheries management: (1) ecosystem approach fisheries management, (2) port state measures to combat illegal fishing, (3) guidelines to assist small-scale fisheries, (4) improved flag state performance in relation to fisheries and (5) facilitation of regional fisheries bodies. The Author proposes at the end that the FAO might be able to exercise its derivative powers to improve enforcement on the high seas with the possibility of FAO-organized enforcement efforts.

In the introduction to the annual report for 1954–1955 on the work of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) the Director-General of FAO (Cardon) stated that although FAO had many separate projects in the fields of agriculture, economics, fisheries, forestry, and nutrition, the organization had an over-all program, that of improving human well-being by increasing and improving the production, distribution, and utilization of food and other products of agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. He stated that progress had been made in unifying and integrating FAO's work since 1) each division of FAO contributed to the five major aspects of the general program, and 2) the work of direct technical advisory assistance for economic development had been more closely integrated with the regular FAO program. In elaborating on his themes of integration, the Director-General stated that “…the need grows more pressing for the closest integration within each receiving government, within each agency, among agencies, and with the like activities of bilateral and other programs”. During the year under review, considerable progress had been made in the more effective association of FAO's work with that of other international organizations.

This chapter discusses Food and Agriculture Organisation's (FAO's) work to promote international action against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. It commences with a short background, noting that FAO had been involved in promoting measures to combat unauthorized fishing in zones of national jurisdiction, when the issue was raised in FAO at the Ministerial Conference on Responsible Fisheries. The chapter considers the scope of FAO initiatives to eradicate IUU fishing. It addresses the constraints on implementation, both in FAO and in member states. The chapter outlines FAO's work relating to capacity building as a means of facilitating the implementation of post-1999 measures and instruments to combat IUU fishing. Finally it concludes that continuing serious nature of IUU fishing and its adverse impact on fisheries management and oceans governance, noting FAO's concern to ensure that there are effective capacity-building initiatives in place to assist developing countries reduce incidence of IUU fishing. Keywords: capacity-building initiatives; fisheries management; Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); illegal unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; oceans governance

Review: The State of Food and Agriculture: Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor? By the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Reviewed by Richard J. Blaustein Washington, DC, USA United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization. The State of Food and Agriculture , 2003-04: Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor? ( FAO agriculture series, no. 35). Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2004. 209 pp. ISBN 92-5-105079-1. US$65.00 ISSN 0081-4539. In May 2004 the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) released its 2003-2004 book-length report, The State of Food and Agriculture: Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor? It immediately garnered significant press and media attention. Without doubt, the context for this unusual attention being paid to a UN branch’s biannual report is, as the report quotes, “the global war of rhetoric” (p.3) that is focused on biotechnology’s agricultural applications. With a fundamental questioning about whether the “global war of rhetoric” is preventing a “reasoned debate regarding the hazards and opportunities posed by biotechnology” (p.3), the FAO report seeks a balanced appreciation of the risks and promise of biotechnology for the farmers of developing nations. In fact, while reporting on its survey of existing examinations of risks posed by agricultural biotechnology, the FAO report concludes that “biotechnology is capable of benefiting small resource-poor farmers” (p. 104) and that in numerous situations the benefits clearly outweigh the risks. This salient thrust of the report no doubt accounts for the unusual attention given at its public release. Yet The State of Food and Agriculture: Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor? is much more than an argument for biotechnology for development, and details, among other biotechnology-related concerns, the state of environmental and health assessments for biotechnology and how the global mode of researching and dissemination of biotechnology has failed to properly address the needs of the poor. In addition to attempting to re-orient biotechnology discussions and lessen the polemics attendant to them, the FAO report offers and illuminates much factual information that is encompassed by biotechnology research, applications, and distribution. In fact, The State of Food and Agriculture: Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor? lays out a coherent understanding of what biotechnology is, and offers a clear exposition for general readers—as well as policy and scientific specialists—of

Calls to boost agricultural production in order to meet the demands of a growing global population are now commonplace. Yet, depending on where productivity changes and population growth occur, international trade could be increasingly necessary in the transfer of food from farms to consumers. Fader et al (2013) offer a nuanced view of this spatial disconnect and its food security implications by considering a valuable thought experiment: what countries could foreseeably meet their food requirements from internal production alone circa 2000 and for contrasting scenarios in 2050? They investigate the extent to which available renewable water and land resources constrain domestic per capita crop production, assuming current as well as broadly improved yields. The findings convey an intuitive, though often overlooked, point that population growth is likely to increase the reliance of certain regions on food imports unless substantial productivity improvements are realized.

The 29th session of the Council of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) was held in Rome from October 27 to November 7, 1958. The Council had before it the Director-General's annual report, The State of Food and Agriculture, and a supplementary statement bringing the situation up to date as at mid-October. It noted with concern the deterioration in the ‘terms of trade’ for agricultural products in world markets and the continuing problems of excess production and surplus disposal; it was suggested that policies should aim at making countries economically self-supporting rather than self-sufficient. A report from the Committee on Commodity Problems tended to confirm the Council's conclusion that there was a definite need for long-term measures which might help to bring about a better balance in world commodity markets. The Council also reviewed the state of various of the organization's current activities, including projects for Mediterranean development, desert locust control, Sunn pest control, and a re-examination of the social welfare aspects of FAO's work. Resolutions passed by the Council included: 1) the continuation of the FAO/United Nations Children's Fund Joint Policy Committee; 2) the approval of minor amendments to the Constitution of the European Commission on Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease; 3) the extension of the Latin American Forestry Research and Training Institute until the end of 1958; 4) the establishment of an ad hoc committee of member governments to work with the Director-General in preparation for a ‘Free-the-World-from-Hunger’ year; 5) authorization for a close association of FAO with the United Nations Special Fund for Economic Development; 6) approval of a relationship agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency; and 7) endorsement of various plans for a reorganization of FAO Headquarters, post adjustments, and modifications in the program of work for 1958 and 1959.

It is a perilous time to be a farmer. Across the world, 2015 broke records for unseasonal, unprecedented, and unexpected weather. The combination of El Nino and climate change produced conditions with devastating effects for the agriculture sector around the globe. This article examines the impacts of unseasonal weather on farmers around the world, in losses to yield quality and quantity but also in economic, physical and psychological effects for farmers coping with the “new normal” in weather. It considers regional differences in farmers’ susceptibility to unseasonal weather, and presents the implications of the lack of resiliency of the major crop producers for the future of food security, and by extension, political stability. Finally, it looks at how the international community is addressing this situation, concluding with practical and achievable means for farmers and cooperatives to start to build resiliency to climate change today.

Imagine a world free from hunger and malnutrition

** The paper is based on the study carried out by the author for FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) and FANRPAN (Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network) as a consultant.
 Based on the projection on population growth and food consumption pattern in developing countries, there is likely to be a deficit in the food production by the year
 2050. Africa’s population has just passed 1 billion and it is expected to double by the year 2050 (FAO 2012) According to FAO, Sub Saharan Africa, Uganda inclusive, is the region that has the highest proportion of poor and undernourished people in Africa (FAO,2011a). Agricultural production will, therefore have to increase by at least 70% in order to ensure that the food demands are met.
 Meeting the food demands of a growing population is already a formidable task for agricultural sector of many developing nations like Uganda but this will be further exacerbated by climate change. Largely due to climate change, agricultural productivity is likely to decrease. Similarly, the stability of production and incomes are likely to change. This trend may be even worse in countries which are already experiencing food insecurity (FAO 2012)
 The important implication of this is that for Uganda, policy makers will be faced with an even greater challenge to ensure that agriculture contributes more in addressing food security issues, development and climate change (adaptation and mitigation). In other words, agriculture in Uganda must undergo major and significant transformation in order to address the challenges likely to be faced in achieving food security and responding to climate change. Put in another way, in order to stabilize output and income, production systems must become more resilient or more capable of performing well in the face of disruptive events. This requires transformation in the management of natural resources and higher efficiency in the use of these resources and inputs for production. 
 According to FAO, approaches that seek to maximize the benefits and minimize the trade-offs across the multiple objectives, often associated with agricultural sector, require more integrated and coordinated planning, policies and institutional arrangements as well as financing and investments. Such approaches and related enabling requirements are referred to by FAO as climate smart agriculture. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) is thus a way to ensure the achievements of future food security under climate change. CSA encompasses sustainable agriculture and it includes the need for adaptation and the potential for mitigation with associated technical, policy and financing implications.
 This scoping study attempts to review and examine the current production practices as it relates to CSA in Uganda. The study also seeks to conduct comprehensive reviews of the existing policies, analyze gaps and identify relevant policy recommendations.

As many of the world’s poor and food-insecure people live in mountain regions, sustainable mountain development is an important part of the work of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN). Over the years, FAO has played the leading role in sustainable mountain development within the UN system; it was appointed task manager for chapter 13 of agenda 21 in 1992 and acted as the lead agency for the International Year of Mountains in 2002. From 2003 onward, FAO was also mandated by the UN General Assembly to lead the annual observance of International Mountain Day on 11 December. Every 2 years, FAO prepares the secretary general’s report to the UN General Assembly, which describes the status and progress of sustainable mountain development at the national and international levels and provides suggestions for consideration by the Assembly. FAO is a member of the Mountain Partnership and hosts its secretariat.This review of the latest actions of FAO’s program on sustainable mountai...