Kugelberg Susanna, Bartolini Fabio, Kanter David R, Milford Anna Birgitte, Pira Kajsa, Sanz-Cobena Alberto, Leip Adrian
Public Health Consultant, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Pisa, Via del Borghetto 80, Pisa, 56124, Italy.
Glob Food Sec. 2021 Mar;28:100451. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100451.
A call to governments to enact a strategy for a sustainable food system is high on the global agenda. A sustainable food system presupposes a need to go beyond a view of the food system as linear and narrow, to comprehend the food system as dynamic and interlinked, which involves understanding social, economic and ecological outcomes and feedbacks of the system. As such, it should be accompanied by strategic, collaborative, transparent, inclusive, and reflexive agenda-setting process. The concepts of, directionality relating to an agreed vision for a future sustainable food system, and, reflexivity which describes the capacity for critical deliberation and responsiveness, are particularly important. Based on those concepts, this paper proposes an evaluative framework to assess tools and instruments applied during the agenda-setting stage. We apply the evaluative framework to recent food policy processes in Finland and Sweden, revealing that their agenda-setting design cannot be assessed as fully addressing both directionality and reflexivity, thus possibly falling short of the policy design needed for enable more transformative policy approaches.
呼吁各国政府制定可持续粮食系统战略已成为全球议程的重要内容。可持续粮食系统的前提是,需要超越将粮食系统视为线性和狭隘的观点,将其理解为动态且相互关联的系统,这涉及到理解该系统的社会、经济和生态成果及反馈。因此,它应伴随着战略、协作、透明、包容和反思性的议程设定过程。与未来可持续粮食系统的商定愿景相关的方向性概念,以及描述批判性审议和响应能力的反思性概念,尤为重要。基于这些概念,本文提出了一个评估框架,以评估议程设定阶段所应用的工具和手段。我们将该评估框架应用于芬兰和瑞典近期的粮食政策进程,结果显示,其议程设定设计无法被评估为充分兼顾了方向性和反思性,因此可能无法满足实现更具变革性政策方法所需的政策设计要求。