Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Equity and expertise in the un Food Systems Summit

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Nisbett, Nicholas
Friel, Sharon
Aryeetey, Richmond
Gomes, Fabio da Silva
Harris, Jody
Backholer, Kathryn
Baker, Phillip
Jernigan, Valarie
Phulkerd, Sirinya

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

BMJ Publishing Group

Abstract

The UN Food Systems Summit is expected to launch bold new actions, solutions and strategies to deliver progress on all 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs), each of which requires a transformation in the way the world produces, consumes and thinks about food. However, the summit preparations have started controversially, with claims of corporate capture by prominent civil society groups, who, alongside the current and two former UN Special Rapporteurs on the Right to Food,2 have also noted insufficient attention paid to human rights and to rebalancing power in the food system itself. The issue of corporate capture is an important one for the summit. Early decisions to implement a clear set of rules on corporate participation and transparency were missed and need rectifying urgently for the summit to continue with any legitimacy, as the UN Special Rapporteurs and the scientists of a new boycott have pointed out. The summit has embraced the (contested, some would argue failed) principle of ‘multistakeholder inclusivity’ as essential for the summit to be a ‘safe space’ for all actors, but with little regards to how power asymmetries between stakeholders within the summit itself must be acknowledged, addressed and accounted for transparently; not a helpful precedent for a global architecture to address those same power asymmetries.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

BMJ Global Health

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

Open Access

License Rights

Creative Commons Attribution licence

Restricted until

Downloads