Skip to main content
Image
Multi-Stakeholder Mechanisms

National Case Studies

CASE STUDIES OF NATIONAL MULTI-STAKEHOLDER MECHANISMS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEMS

 

While there are very few cases of SFS MSMs linked to the implementation of a holistic sustainable food systems policy at national level, some recent developments, such as the Canadian Food Policy Advisory Council and the UK’s Advisory Panel suggest that the multi-stakeholder approach to national food policy formulation and implementation is expanding. See below three case studies of national SFS MSMs.

FRANCE: FRENCH NATIONAL FOOD COUNCIL (CNA)

   

alt

Source: Margaux Denis, Secrétariat interministériel CNA

 

About:
  • The CNA’s main role is to be an advisory body on food-related issues in France
  • It has established participatory processes for consultation and debate to take into account the perspectives of the whole French society.
  • It operates at a national level and is a highly participatory SFS MSM, with a broad and diverse representation from each food system stakeholder.

 

Achievements:
  • Since its creation, the CNA has issued 89 opinions (“avis”) on issues like food in hospitals, collective food catering in schools, food packaging etc - these have been fundamental to advising the policy-related work of the ministries attached to the SFS MSM.
  • The CNA participates in the development of the National Food Program (Programme national pour l'alimentation - PNA) which was adopted in 2010 and defines the objectives of the French Food Policy.
  • The CNA has contributed to the drafting of the law on the future of agriculture, food and forestry (2014), and many food-related policies in France.
  • In particular, the CNA was instrumental in the development of regulations for school food catering services (2017)

 

Challenges:
  • Private and public sector members´ perceived resistance to the transformative change.
  • Only 43 percent of respondents believe the SFS MSM has a good mechanism for dealing with power relations; a low 29 per cent think that the leader uses a good mechanism for resolving disagreements; and 43 per cent believe that the mechanism's processes are not conducive to the equitable participation of members.
  • Perceived lack of political will and support and limited stakeholders´ time to participate.

 

INDIA: EAT RIGHT INDIA

alt

Source: Ruchika Sharma Lead - Media, PR & Corporate Engagement Social and Behavior Change Division

 

About:

  • Eat Right India is an institutionalized SFS MSM hosted by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) that focuses on three themes: eat safe, eat healthy and eat sustainably.
  • The SFS MSM plays a consultative and advisory role, while at the same time participating in policy formulation processes, managing knowledge of food systems, stimulating collective action and facilitating new initiatives.
  • It also plays a strong advocacy role at global, national and sub-national levels and brings together 15-20 primary stakeholders.
  • The SFS MSM applies a “whole of government” and “whole of society” approach.

 

Achievements:

  • Eat Right India is aligned to the National Health Policy 2017, which focuses on preventive healthcare, and flagship programs such as “Ayushman Bharat” (National Health Protection Mission), “POSHAN Abhiyaan” (PM’s Overarching Scheme for Holistic Nourishment), “Anemia Mukt Bharat” and “Swacch Bharat Mission”.
  • Eat Right India has contributed to the formulation and adoption of the food fortification policy and the Smart City Mission led by the Ministry of Urban Affairs.
  • The SFS MSM developed several actions for the three themes to be applied on the ground such as the Food Safety Training and Certification and the Food Safety Magic Box to fight adulteration.
  • It also launched several consumer awareness campaigns to encourage healthier food choices, reduce food waste, plastic use, and sustainable cooking oil use.

 

Challenges:

  • As a relatively new MSM, it still faces a range of challenges: the inadequacy of its representativeness; a leadership and governance not always conducive to multi-stakeholder work; a lack of budget to support participation and collaboration; and low perceived political support.

 

DENMARK: ORGANIC DENMARK

  

alt

Source: Paul Holmbeck, former CEO of Organic Denmark 

 

About:

  • Organic Denmark is a registered membership association that mobilizes and actively leads various groups of actors to increase the supply of and demand for organic food products
  • Public sector involvement is achieved through strong and constant formal and informal collaboration with the government at different levels (e.g. ministries, political parties, members of parliament, municipalities)
  • It is the leading force behind the formulation and implementation of the world’s first national Organic Action Plan, as well as a series of national organic policies and strategies
  • Although Organic Denmark operates at national level, it also establishes collaborations with actors at municipal and local levels, working with almost half of Denmark’s municipalities.

 

Achievements:

  • Consumer demand for organic food has grown so fast that Denmark currently imports more organic food than it exports. Consequently, farmers’ interest in conversion has grown since 2015 and organic agricultural areas have doubled in size between 2007 and 2020
  • Public kitchens in Denmark were certified 60 per cent organic in 2020, through investments in education and meal planning, together with advice from kitchen conversion experts
  • Creation of the Organic Cuisine Label for public kitchens, restaurants and canteens. This national label is promoted by Organic Denmark, and certified by the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration
  • Acquisition of a 13 per cent organic market share in the retail sector. Organic Denmark’s close partnerships with major retail chains have motivated supermarkets to add new organic products to the shelves, by connecting organic producers with retailers, and helping supermarkets to actively promote organics 

 

Challenges:

  • Lack of motivation, incentives, and long-term commitment
  • Lack of budget to encourage member participation.
  • Inability to reach agreements in the face of divergent agendas and conflicts of interest.
  • Constraints imposed by EU legislation on the development of the Danish organic market.

Explore the report