Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA.
BMC Public Health. 2024 Feb 14;24(1):461. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-17919-x.
The COVID-19 pandemic, extreme weather events, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine have highlighted global food system vulnerabilities and a lack of preparedness and prospective planning for increasingly complex disruptions. This has spurred an interest in food system resilience. Despite the elevated interest in food system resilience, there is a lack of comparative analyses of national-level food system resilience efforts. An improved understanding of the food system resilience landscape can support and inform future policies, programs, and planning.
We conducted a cross-country comparison of national-level food system resilience activities from Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, Sweden, and the United States. We developed upon and adapted the resilience framework proposed by Harris and Spiegel to compare actions derived from thirteen national food system resilience documents. We coded the documents based on the actions taken by the governments including: the food system resilience attributes utilized, the part of the food supply chain, the specific shocks or stressors, the implementation level, the temporal focus of action, and the expected impact on food security. We analyzed and compared countries' coded categories and subcategories, and category combinations.
The results showed that these countries are addressing some of the same issues, are using multi-pronged policy actions to address food system resilience issues, and are focused on both retrospective reviews and prospective models of disruptive events to inform their decisions. Some work has been done towards preparing for climate change and other natural disasters, and less preparing has been done for other shocks or stressors.
This paper develops and applies a framework rooted in literature to understand the content of national-level food system resilience documents. The analysis identified potential gaps, concentrations, and themes in national food systems resilience. The framework can be applied to augment existing policy, create new policy, as well as to supplement and complement other existing frameworks.
新冠疫情、极端天气事件以及俄罗斯对乌克兰的入侵凸显了全球粮食系统的脆弱性,也暴露出各国在应对日益复杂的冲击时准备不足且缺乏前瞻性规划。这些问题引发了人们对粮食系统复原力的兴趣。尽管人们对粮食系统复原力的兴趣日益浓厚,但缺乏对国家级粮食系统复原力工作的比较分析。增进对粮食系统复原力格局的了解,可以为未来的政策、计划和规划提供支持并提供信息。
我们对澳大利亚、新西兰、瑞典和美国的国家级粮食系统复原力活动进行了跨国比较。我们在哈里斯和施皮格尔提出的复原力框架基础上进行了拓展和改编,用以比较从十三个国家级粮食系统复原力文件中得出的行动。我们根据各国政府采取的行动对这些文件进行了编码,包括:利用的粮食系统复原力属性、粮食供应链的哪个部分、具体的冲击或压力源、实施级别、行动的时间重点,以及对粮食安全的预期影响。我们分析和比较了各国编码的类别和子类别以及类别组合。
结果表明,这些国家正在解决一些相同的问题,正在采取多管齐下的政策行动来解决粮食系统复原力问题,并且重点关注对破坏性事件的回顾性审查和前瞻性模型,以指导其决策。在为气候变化和其他自然灾害做准备方面已经做了一些工作,但对其他冲击或压力源的准备工作做得较少。
本文开发并应用了一个基于文献的框架,以了解国家级粮食系统复原力文件的内容。该分析确定了国家级粮食系统复原力中的潜在差距、重点和主题。该框架可用于补充现有政策、制定新政策,以及补充和完善其他现有框架。