The document outlines the proceedings of a webinar focused on the Global Network Against Food Crises, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based political decisions for food security. It discusses the need for comprehensive data analysis to address food crises, including various factors like climate shocks, conflicts, and socio-economic vulnerabilities. The EU's contributions and ongoing developments in the global assessment of food insecurity are highlighted, along with efforts to enhance stakeholder collaboration and improve report quality.

2. List of
webinars

3. INFORMED
INFORMATION FOR NUTRITION FOOD SECURITY AND RESILIENCE FOR DECISION MAKING

4. 4
#ks4resilience
#resilience
#UNFAO

5. WEBINAR 30/11/2016
THE EXPERIENCE OF THE GLOBAL NETWORK
AGAINST FOOD CRISES FOR STRENGTHENING RESILIENCE
Bernard Rey
European Commission
Directorate Sustainable Growth and Development
Food and Nutrition Security Unit

6. Genesis of the (EU) assessment
6
 Evidence-based political decision for food crises related
programming and fund allocation
 Need for a coherent and exhaustive (as much as possible)
picture of food crises at a given period;
 No automatic trigger response mechanism
 Move forward the resilience agenda (Resilience Communication of
Resilience, 2012)

7. Why a global analysis
 Global decisions for programming and fund allocation;
 Considering all shocks with an impact on FNS at the same time
 Climatic shocks, namely the El Niño impact
 Armed conflicts and political unrests
 Refugees in host countries
 Epidemics, like Ebola virus disease
 Socioeconomic vulnerability – chronic food insecurity
 Market failures
 Look at short and long-term trends
 Focus on root causes/ resilience building, bridging emergency and
development actions

8. Approach 2016
 Needs assessment in terms of food-insecure population
 Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) as a reference
for levels of food insecurity
 Data from a wide range of sources
 Joint analysis of the final data by EC, WFP and FAO
 The first report was published by the EU.

9. 2016 report limitations
 Static analysis (as in January 2016);
 No projection for the coming months;
 Limited geo coverage;
 Quality of data varies from country to country;
 Methods to estimate food insecurity prevalence not homogenous –
maximum effort made to reconcile data across countries but
discrepancies subsist;
 EU report isn't yet a public good;
 The report was "good enough", to be improved through the Global
Network

10. Opportunity for promoting a public
good
 A global analysis of food crises shared by stakeholders do not
exist yet
 The global assessment could be of interest for different
stakeholders for different uses
 Coherent with the WHS in Istanbul (invest in data analysis,
independent assessments, joint assessments…)
 Neutral analysis
 Further possible developments besides the analysis
 Joint response analysis
 Joint planning
 Joint implementation
10

11. Added value of a Global Network
 Produces a consensus based shared needs analysis;
 Promotes shared response analysis;
 Enhance partnership, coordination and collaboration;
 Promote joint planning;
 Pave the way for joint implementation of response;
 Promotes political level coordination;
11

12. Population affected by food crises – situation in January 2016

13. Population affected by food crises – situation in January 2016

14. Food-insecure population
(Millions)
< 1.0
1.0 - 5.0
5.0 - 10.0
> 10.0
Food-insecure population – situation in January 2016

15. Food-insecure population – situation in January 2016

16. How the EU used the results of the
Global Assessment in 2016
16
Global response not only related to El Niño
Total EU contribution about €550 million
• Emergency and short-term response €302
million
• Development and long-term €245.5 million

17. Membership of the Global Assessment
• Network of Networks, based on existing analytical processes, no
duplication of analyses
• Confirmed participants
FAO, WFP, UNICEF, EU, FEWS-NET, CILSS, IGAD, SICA
• Institutions already contacted, which interest is to be confirmed
SADC, CEMAC, ASEAN, EU Member States
17

18. Membership of the Global Network
?• To be discussed with partners of the global assessment;
• No concrete steps so far;
• doors opened.
18

19. Recent relevant major events 1/2
19
Date Event Outcome
March "Global analysis of food and nutrition
security situation in food crisis
hotspots" JRC-FAO-WFP report
The report 2016 is
published
April
Brussels
High Level Event "Moving forward:
from food crises to sustainable and
inclusive agriculture growth"
the joint effort EU,
FAO, WFP was
announced
May
Istanbul
WHS Side event "Walking the last
mile: a joint global analysis of food
crises to inform planning and
resource allocation decisions"
the Global Network
was announced by the
EU, FAO and WFP

20. Recent relevant major events 2/2
20
Date Event Outcome
June
Rome
Side event during the Executive
Board Meeting of WFP
WFP Member States
are informed about the
Global Network
Sept
Rome
– 1st "Technical Consultation on
Global Network against Food Crises
and the Global Report"
The structure of the
global assessment is
discussed at technical
level
Nov
Rome
Committee on Food Security (CFS)
side event
CFS partners (MS, Civil
society, etc.) are
informed

21. On-going steps
To be a public good the Global Network requires:
 Technical improvement of the
assessment
• Enhancing report quality through technical
consultations
 Political impulse to the network
• Enlarging participation to the global analysis from
stakeholders at global level besides the EU, FAO and
WFP
21

22. Overview of food crises
2017 Report country coverage

23. In-depth analysis of major food crises
2017 Report country coverage

24. Calendar coming events
24
Date Event Outcome
Dec Draft of the report 2017 and shared
for comments
The technical
committee peer-review
the draft report
Febr
2016
Publication of the Report 2017 Consensus based
report is public
Febr -
on
Public events for report presentation,
coordination exercise
Global network political
component is active
and coordination
process move forward

25. Key messages from the EU
• Large involvement of stakeholders
• Calendar of the assessment
• Synergy and subsidiarity with existing analysis
• Global assessment (tech) vs global network (pol)
• Global AND local level coordination
25

26. Thank you for your attention
Comments ?
Questions?
Please, write them in
the chat box
THE EXPERIENCE OF THE GLOBAL NETWORK
AGAINST FOOD CRISES FOR STRENGTHENING RESILIENCE

27. Click on the link
and give us your feedback on this webinar
THANK YOU