{"id":1579,"date":"2017-02-06T13:14:10","date_gmt":"2017-02-06T13:14:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/datablog.cde.unibe.ch\/?p=1579"},"modified":"2019-08-28T11:26:41","modified_gmt":"2019-08-28T11:26:41","slug":"policycoherencesd","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/datablog.cde.unibe.ch\/index.php\/2017\/02\/06\/policycoherencesd\/","title":{"rendered":"The 2030 Agenda requires coherent policies"},"content":{"rendered":"

Click for German version<\/a><\/small>.
\nSustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 of the United Nations\u2019 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is to end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture. Numerous policy measures can contribute to its achievement. But each of them comes with a bundle of positive and negative \u201cside effects\u201d. The example of food security illustrates how complex it can be to implement the 2030 Agenda.<\/p>\n

From field to plate \u2013 and beyond<\/h5>\n

Food systems include the provision of inputs, the production of food, feed, or fibre, the transport, processing, retailing, and consumption of agricultural goods, and the disposal of packaging and organic waste. Food systems are complex and interrelated. Furthermore, they are embedded in national and international policy and regulatory frameworks. <\/p>\n

Navigating trade-offs related to the SDGs: the case of ending hunger<\/h5>\n

These policy and regulatory frameworks define the basic parameters of food systems and the markets they are operating in. By doing so, they shape the conditions for various actors\u2019 food security, and they impact on natural resources such as soils, water, the atmosphere, and agrobiodiversity in different ways. For this reason, it is important to accurately assess any policies developed to promote progress towards SDG 2. Possible trade-offs between the various targets under SDG 2 and with other related SDGs need to be uncovered, and interests must be carefully balanced.<\/p>\n

A simulation tool shows what the challenges might be<\/h5>\n

In the following simulation, it is assumed that both Bolivia and Switzerland adopt new policies to promote food security and the implementation of SDG 2. Their policy decisions will then be assessed \u2013 in a simplified way \u2013 for their compatibility with further targets of SDG 2 and other related SDGs. Such simulations can help to find ways of framing optimal policy options.<\/p>\n

Bolivia<\/h3>\n

It is assumed that the government of Bolivia decides to implement SDG 2. In order to address the eight targets listed for this goal, the government discusses several policy options. Each of these options has other implications for different producers, natural resources, and social conditions in the country, and can therefore be scored according to the achievements in each of the eight targets of SDG 2. Each policy option comes with different trade-offs, also if measured against other SDGs. The optimal policy option consists of a package of related actions which simultaneously target environmental, social, and economic elements of current food systems.<\/div>

Switzerland<\/h3>\n

It is assumed that the Swiss government decides to support the implementation of SDG 2 in Bolivia. It is further assumed that for this purpose, the government assesses its current trade measures and their impact on food systems in developing countries, and that while doing so it also examines options to facilitate access of developing countries\u2019 producers to the Swiss market. The policy measures it is assumed to propose would influence food systems in the global South in different ways, depending on the extent to which trade-offs between SDGs can be minimized. Furthermore, the proposed policies\u2019 impacts on Swiss food systems need to be taken into account as well.<\/div>

<\/div>
\nClick for fullscreen<\/a><\/small><\/p>\n
<\/div>\n