Roadmap beyond UNFSS+4

Hello everyone and welcome!

I am Lucia Palmioli, your moderator for this discussion room focused on Roadmap beyond UNFSS+4. I look forward to hearing your thoughts, suggestions, and perspectives on the way forward for food systems transformation beyond this important milestone.

You can respond to the questions in any order. Please, remember to indicate the organization you represent and the question number you are addressing in your comment.

You are also welcome to respond in any language of your choice by clicking the language button on the top right of the page; the platform will automatically translate it.

Thank you for being here, and let’s have a rich and constructive discussion!

Buenos días, represento a la Asociación Gremial de Productores de Huevos de Chile (Chilehuevos).

Me refiero a la pregunta 3: 

• ¿Cuáles son las mejores maneras de garantizar que los resultados de UNFSS+4 se integren eficazmente en las iniciativas mundiales sobre el clima, la biodiversidad y la salud pública?

Para lograr la adecuada integración de las iniciativas mundiales es necesario que las decisiones que se tomen en UNFSS+4 sean consistentes con los objetivos de dichas iniciativas.

En este sentido, si se considera que estamos ante una emergencia climática, incluidos el cambio climático y la escasez de agua, es fundamental que las decisiones sobre los sistemas alimentarios tomen en consideración estos aspectos.

Así por ejemplo, en el caso específico de la producción de huevos UNFSS+4 debe apoyar decididamente la tecnificación de la producción a través de sistemas de producción automáticos, especialmente los consistentes en jaulas y colonias enriquecidas.

Lo anterior debido a que estos sistemas tienen menor uso de terreno agrícola, menor consumo de agua y alimento y una mejor inocuidad de los huevos que producen. A la vez, en estos sistemas se puede producir con adecuados niveles de bienestar animal.

Por tanto, la UNFSS+4 debería rechazar el accionar de ONGs financiadas por intereses corporativistas tendientes a transiciones forzosas a sistemas libres de jaulas, que son menos sostenibles y, por tanto, en contra de poder abordar los desafíos climáticos globales.

Por otro lado, en lo que corresponde a las dietas a seguir por la población, los sistemas alimentarios deberían propender a privilegiar los alimentos "reales", es decir, rechazar los alimentos procesados, debido a que, por sus características industriales, generan enfermedades en la población.

En muchos países nos encontramos en una crisis de salud por enfermedades crónicas, que son generadas en mayor medida por el consumo intensivo de alimentos procesados. En esta crisis causada por alimentos, hay un grupo de ellos que no son parte del problema sino de la solución. Se trata de alimentos naturales y por ello "reales". Aquí se incluyen los huevos y el pescado, así como las frutas y verduras, los cuales deberían ser promovidos por la UNFSS+4, por sobre los alimentos procesados.

To ensure that the momentum generated by UNFSS+4 leads to concrete change, it is essential to move beyond one-time dialogues. In the context of Türkiye, civil society organizations and youth groups have increasingly played a role in advancing local food systems solutions; it is often without formal recognition or integration into national pathways. For example, local youth initiatives focused on food waste reduction and agroecological education have emerged in some municipalities. However, these remain largely disconnected from national-level food policy frameworks. To bridge this gap, mechanisms such as periodic progress reviews -ideally co-led by national convenors and independent stakeholders, could provide continuity and visibility. Multi-year support for pilot projects, such as municipal school food programs in Southeastern Türkiye, can serve as scalable examples if embedded within the broader food systems roadmap.

Inclusivity and equity in engagement require more than consultation; they demand a redesign of how and where decisions are made. A key lesson from recent youth forums held alongside UN summits is the power of regional hubs and co-created processes. The UN Food Systems Coordination Hub could better support underrepresented voices by establishing regional dialogue centers in partnership with local universities or NGOs.

Finally, the challenge of connecting UNFSS+4 outcomes to broader global frameworks. Türkiye has already started aligning certain climate and agriculture policies, such as with its updated Climate Action Plan and discussions on green agriculture under the EU Green Deal alignment process. However, food systems transformation remains siloed from climate and biodiversity agendas. To change this, the outcomes of UNFSS+4 should be explicitly referenced in Türkiye’s revised Nationally Determined Contributions and integrated into its biodiversity strategies, particularly regarding soil health, pollinators, and agrobiodiversity. 

The UN Food Systems Coordination Hub has a critical opportunity to institutionalize these connections and ensure that countries have the tools and incentives to translate high-level dialogue into grounded action. With the right support and intentional design, the post-UNFSS+4 period can serve as a launchpad for more inclusive, integrated, and resilient food systems in my country and beyond.

Thank you all for your valuable contributions so far.

A key point that has emerged from the two comments received is the importance of aligning UNFSS+4 outcomes with global goals. Both comments emphasize the need to ensure that decisions taken at UNFSS+4 are consistent with global frameworks, whether related to climate, biodiversity, health, or inclusion.

Health crises and inclusion gaps are the two main themes raised. On one hand, there is a particular focus on the health crisis caused by chronic diseases linked to the intensive consumption of processed foods. On the other, there is a strong emphasis on inclusion gaps and the need for more equitable systems that involve underrepresented voices.

Both of these issues are crucial, and I would like to invite you all to share not only concrete examples but also any concerns or reflections you have on these topics. For example, the role of youth is often cited as critical, yet many young stakeholders feel left out. It would be valuable to hear about how these issues manifest in your context:
How do health crises emerge in your country or region, and what actions are being taken to address them?
What inclusive practices or policies have you seen that meaningfully engage youth, Indigenous peoples, or other marginalized groups?
How can these local experiences and concerns help inform the global dialogue?

Your contributions will enrich this chapter and help ensure it reflects the diversity of challenges and solutions around the world.

Thank you again for your engagement!

I'm sorry for reaching out through the group chat. I urgently need to contact someone individually regarding the draft of the survey results on initiatives for transforming the food system. Could you please advise whom I should contact?

I have contacted the UN-Food-Systems-Coordination-Hub's email address twice, but I have not yet received a response. I urgently need to get in touch. Thank you for your assistance.

Regarding the matter I mentioned in my comments yesterday, I was able to get in touch with the person in charge, and it has been resolved. Thank you very much for your assistance.

Concrete actions and follow-up mechanisms needed:

Policy Implementation:

• Establish formal technical assistance programs where GFN and other organizations can help countries develop and implement regulatory frameworks that facilitate food donation and recovery at scale for food banks, with emphasis on liability protections, date labeling reforms, and tax incentives that GFN has documented as effective
• Create mandatory integration of food banks and food recovery and redistribution organizations into national food systems strategies, recognizing their strategic role in reducing food loss and waste while reducing hunger and achieving methane reduction
• Implement GFN's Global Food Donation Policy Atlas recommendations as concrete policy reforms, moving beyond aspirational documents to binding measures

Measurement and Accountability:

• Scale GFN's FRAME methodology as the standardized tool for measuring methane reduction and nutritional impacts of food recovery operations globally
• Establish formal mechanisms so that progress in reducing food loss and waste through food banks is reflected in voluntary national SDG reports with specific metrics
• Create performance indicators that track both reducing hunger and methane reduction outcomes achieved by food banks

Financing Mechanisms:

• Develop concrete financing pathways that recognize food banks contributions to methane reduction, enabling access to climate finance and green bonds
• Create blended finance mechanisms that combine philanthropic, public, and private capital to support food banks infrastructure
• Establish formal channels for food banks participation in funding program design that recognize their dual climate and social impact

Operational Scale-up:

• Expand GFN's Agricultural Recovery Hub to increase food recovery from agriculture sector 10x by 2030, demonstrating concrete scaling of reducing food loss and waste
• Replicate GFN's Accelerator Program model globally to reduce operational maturation time for food banks from 10 to 4 years
• Achieve GFN's commitment to reach 1% of global food waste recovery through our network by 2030

 Enhancing inclusive and equitable stakeholder engagement

How the UN Food Systems Coordination Hub can better support engagement:

Formal Integration:

• Establish permanent thematic working groups focused specifically on food recovery and redistribution, with GFN and food banks as core stakeholders representing civil society organizations essential for transforming potential waste into food security
• Create formal integration of food banks in governance mechanisms and consultation processes of the Hub, recognizing their unique role as actors operating at the intersection of food security, climate action, and economic development

Knowledge Sharing Platforms:

• Develop an interactive digital platform that functions as a knowledge hub to share GFN's best practices, successful legal frameworks, and FRAME methodology, allowing continuous learning and adaptation of solutions to local contexts
• Facilitate exchanges between countries to enable direct learning between implementers of successful food waste prevention policies and food banks operations

Capacity Building Support:

• Implement capacity building programs modeled on GFN's approach that helps grassroots food banks expand their impact in reducing food loss and waste while reducing hunger
• Provide training on FRAME methodology to enable broader networks to quantify their methane reduction contributions
• Support development of standardized measurement methodologies that capture multiple dimensions of impact (environmental, social, economic) for various stakeholder groups

Representation Mechanisms:

• Include food banks representatives on advisory committees for food systems policy development
• Ensure GFN's expertise is integrated into multi-stakeholder dialogue platforms that explicitly connect food recovery with climate and social policy discussions

Linking UNFSS+4 outcomes with other global agendas

Best ways to ensure effective integration:

Climate Integration:

• Position food banks and GFN's food recovery work as high-potential mitigation solutions in climate frameworks, particularly for methane emission reduction through preventing food waste from reaching landfills
• Integrate food recovery into Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), using GFN's FRAME methodology to quantify the methane reduction and co-benefits contributions of food banks
• Ensure emerging standards for sustainable finance incorporate food recovery as eligible activity for climate investments, facilitating capital flow into food banks operations

Biodiversity and Health Alignment:

• Create bridges between food security and public health communities, recognizing food banks impact on adequate nutrition and population health outcomes
• Link reducing food loss and waste through food banks to biodiversity conservation by reducing pressure on natural resources and land use
• Demonstrate how food banks contribute to sustainable food systems that support both environmental and human health

SDG Implementation:

• Establish formal mechanisms ensuring food banks progress in reducing hunger (SDG 2), reducing food loss and waste (SDG 12), and methane reduction (SDG 13) is captured in national reporting
• Use FRAME methodology to provide standardized metrics that track multiple SDG contributions simultaneously
• Position GFN and food banks as impact multipliers that simultaneously contribute to multiple priority global agendas

Financing Framework Integration:

• Include food recovery in sustainable finance taxonomies, enabling food banks to access green finance based on their methane reduction contributions
• Create investment pathways that recognize food banks as strategic climate interventions providing measurable methane reduction while addressing food security
• Develop monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems using FRAME methodology that meet requirements for climate finance eligibility

Institutional Coordination:

• Establish GFN as a strategic partner in global coordination mechanisms, leveraging our expertise across 50+ countries in reducing food loss and waste
• Create coordination platforms where food banks can demonstrate their multidimensional contributions to climate, health, and development objectives
• Ensure FRAME methodology becomes a recognized standard for measuring integrated impact across global frameworks

As a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the UNFSS Coordination hub and an academic, it is really important to engage the different stakeholders equally in order to move from intent to action. Several priority topics have been identified including agroecology and regenerative agriculture, climate-resilient technologies, circular economy approaches, but in my experience the perspectives of women, youth and indigenous peoples are often ignored or not taken on board. Also many of these approaches are introduced without proper research and understanding of the pros and cons. For example, some climate smart agriculture technologies can end up increasing the work burden on women, without necessarily enhancing their control over incomes or other benefits. Equity and justice really has to be at the centre of the roadmap. Selectively using indigenous knowledges or women's labour will not help achieve the impacts and outcomes we wish to see.

There needs to be real transparency and engagement, not just symbolic participation. Often consultations are online and in mainstream languages, and in a large country like India, this excludes the poor, women, those in rural locations and indigenous peoples. A human rights approach needs to be adhered to, but equally elements of justice. We explored gender justice and what it might look like in the context of food and nutrition security and climate resilience in the thematic paper of the Global hunger index 2024. It focuses on three key justice dimensions: a) recognition of different groups, communities and their needs and vulnerabilities; b) redistribution of resources; and c) representation in decision-making. These themes have been emerging and visible in the stakeholder consultations and need to be placed on the agenda of the UNFSS+4 stocktake.

Buenos días:

Escribo en nombre de  INTERPORC, la Organización Interprofesional Agroalimentaria del Porcino de Capa Blanca de España,  asociación sin ánimo de lucro en la que están representados todos los sectores de la cadena de valor del porcino de capa blanca: producción, transformación y comercialización. 

Antes de entrar a contestar a las preguntas, queríamos hacer unas reflexiones, ya que en este primer borrador se indica que “Una expectativa específica es que el UNFSS+4 abogue por que la transición hacia dietas basadas en plantas y sistemas alimentarios veganos surja como un tema destacado, con mensajes explícitos en los medios de comunicación para aumentar la conciencia pública sobre los beneficios de las dietas basadas en plantas”.

Aunque es legítimo promover dietas basadas exclusivamente en alimentos de origen vegetal, es esencial que el UNFSS+4 evite caer en enfoques excluyentes como una transición global hacia sistemas alimentarios veganos o basados en plantas. La carne y los productos cárnicos son una parte imprescindible de los sistemas alimentarios sostenibles, por razones de salud y nutricionales, asociadas a la propia fisiología del ser humano, ambientales, sociales y culturales.

Argumentamos aquí algunas de las razones, que reflejan las conclusiones de los Diálogos Independientes que INTERPORC organizó en el marco de la Cumbre de los Sistemas Alimentarios:

1. La carne y sus productos son  imprescindibles en la lucha contra el hambre y la malnutrición. Su restricción o eliminación puede acarrear problemas de salud.

La carne y los productos cárnicos una fuente muy rica, única en algunos casos, de proteína de alto valor biológico y de micronutrientes esenciales como hierro, zinc y vitamina B12, especialmente relevantes en poblaciones vulnerables, mujeres (especialmente durante la gestación y la lactancia), niños y adolescentes en crecimiento, así como en personas mayores. Restringir o eliminar el consumo de carne puede conllevar déficits nutricionales si no se realiza con una suplementación adecuada y constante, lo que no siempre es viable ni asequible.

Existen numerosas evidencias científicas que avalan la necesidad de los nutrientes de la carne para una alimentación adecuada y un correcto desarrollo y estado de salud, en los distintos grupos de consumidores (con especial énfasis en niños, mujeres, deportistas...). La evolución humana, se produce en el momento en el que el hombre empieza a comer alimentos de origen animal.

2. La carne debe formar parte de una dieta equilibrada y sostenible

La carne debe formar parte de una dieta saludable dentro de un patrón de consumo equilibrado como la Dieta Mediterránea, reconocida internacionalmente por su combinación de alimentos vegetales y animales de forma racional y moderada.  Su consumo debe realizarse según las recomendaciones dietéticas basadas en la ciencia. Cualquier recomendación debe basarse en evidencia científica y no en ideologías o mensajes alarmistas que polaricen el debate.

3. Garantía de sostenibilidad en su triple dimensión

Un sistema alimentario verdaderamente sostenible debe integrar las dimensiones ambiental, social y económica. El sector porcino europeo, y particularmente el español, ha asumido compromisos concretos para reducir su huella ambiental, aplicando tecnologías como la alimentación de precisión, la gestión eficiente de purines o el uso de energías renovables, con una notable reducción de las emisiones de GEI’s, NH4 y de la huella hídrica.

En lo social, la ganadería genera empleo en el medio rural, fija población y contribuye a evitar la despoblación, algo especialmente crítico en regiones vulnerables.

En lo económico, sostiene miles de pequeñas y medianas explotaciones familiares, especialmente en zonas donde otras actividades agrícolas no son viables. Además, en el caso español, gracias al modelo de integración, la ganadería intensiva supone la garantía de supervivencia para las granjas familiares, que de otro modo estarían condenadas a la desaparición.

4. Sector comprometido con la innovación, la seguridad alimentaria y el bienestar animal

Tanto la ganadería intensiva como la extensiva en Europa cumplen con los más altos estándares en bienestar animal y seguridad alimentaria. El sector porcino español ha ido más allá de las regulaciones, mejorando las condiciones de manejo y salud animal de forma voluntaria con iniciativas como el sello B+ Compromiso Bienestar Animal.

5. No existe una única vía hacia la sostenibilidad

Forzar un modelo único de dieta o sistema alimentario supone ignorar la diversidad cultural, ecológica y socioeconómica del mundo. La transición hacia sistemas sostenibles debe partir de una pluralidad de soluciones adaptadas a los contextos locales. La producción ganadera bien gestionada no solo es compatible con la sostenibilidad, sino que es parte esencial de ella.

Como conclusión, la solución para crear unos sistemas alimentarios sostenibles y resilientes no puede pasar por demonizar ni excluir ningún alimento, sino por hacer que todos formen parte de la solución.  Si se habla de no dejar nadie atrás, no se puede dejar de lado a los ganaderos ni a todas las personas del sector ganadero-cárnico.  UNFSS+4 debe evitar narrativas simplistas que penalicen a sectores productivos responsables y esenciales. En lugar de promover exclusivamente dietas veganas, debe abogar por patrones de consumo informados, diversos, equilibrados y culturalmente respetuosos, donde la carne y los productos cárnicos producidos de forma sostenible sigan siendo parte de la solución para garantizar la seguridad alimentaria, la nutrición y el desarrollo rural.

Algunas de las cuestiones planteadas en las preguntas orientadoras se han tratado en lo dicho hasta el momento, pero las detallamos más a continuación:

En respuesta a la pregunta 1, para transformar verdaderamente los compromisos de la UNFSS+4 en acciones efectivas, es fundamental:

• Formular políticas inclusivas y basadas en evidencia científica, pero también en la experiencia práctica de quienes están directamente involucrados. La voz de agricultores y ganaderos, sin importar su escala, debe ser escuchada en el diseño y evaluación de políticas. No se puede legislar desde los despachos sin una comprensión real del terreno. Cualquier política tiene que ir acompañada de un estudio de impacto, en varios campos.
• Establecer compromisos claros, medibles y con mecanismos de seguimiento robustos. Estos mecanismos deben diseñarse de forma que no añadan cargas burocráticas innecesarias, especialmente para los pequeños  y medianos productores.
• Incluir indicadores que reconozcan el rol multifuncional de la ganadería, como su contribución al reciclaje de nutrientes, la conservación del paisaje y el mantenimiento del tejido rural. También es esencial reconocer y capitalizar los avances ya alcanzados por el sector  (tanto el cárnico como otros) hacia una mayor sostenibilidad.

En cuanto a la pregunta 2, el Centro de Coordinación puede ser clave para fortalecer la inclusión efectiva de actores subrepresentados al:

• Fomentar la participación activa de comunidades rurales y productores, en el caso de la ganadería,  especialmente en regiones donde esa tiene un papel económico, ambiental y cultural esencial.
• Asegurar que las plataformas de diálogo reflejen toda la diversidad del sistema alimentario, incluyendo el papel d e la carne y los productos cárnicos en la sostenibilidad, integrando enfoques de economía circular, bienestar animal y resiliencia territorial.
• Proporcionar apoyo concreto para superar barreras estructurales, como la falta de conectividad digital, recursos financieros o capacitación técnica, que afectan especialmente a las zonas rurales y marginadas.
• Promover mecanismos de financiación específicos, para el acceso a financiación de grupos más desfavorecidos. En regiones como en Europa,  el sector ganadero se  enfrenta una presión normativa creciente para transitar hacia prácticas aún más sostenibles. Esta transformación solo será posible si va acompañada de inversiones suficientes y accesibles.
• Asegurar que las plataformas de participación reflejen la diversidad del sistema alimentario: la carne y los productos cárnicos deben formar parte del diálogo de sostenibilidad, incluyendo enfoques de economía circular y bienestar animal como parte de soluciones transformadoras

En cuanto a la pregunta 3, para lograr una integración coherente y eficaz de los resultados del UNFSS+4 con otras agendas globales, es esencial:

• Basar todas las decisiones en evidencia científica rigurosa y coherente, asegurando que las distintas regulaciones no se contradigan y que se alineen con los objetivos comunes de sostenibilidad.
• Adoptar un enfoque holístico, que ponga a las personas en el centro, y que considere los impactos ambientales, sociales y económicos de las políticas alimentarias. La sostenibilidad no puede entenderse de forma unidimensional.
• Reconocer el papel estratégico del sector ganadero-cárnico en los sistemas alimentarios sostenibles: por su valor nutricional, su accesibilidad, su función vertebradora del territorio rural y su contribución a la lucha contra el hambre y la desnutrición (ODS 2).
• Fortalecer las cadenas de valor alimentarias globales e interdependientes, promoviendo su resiliencia y sostenibilidad, especialmente en contextos de crisis alimentaria y climática.
• Fortalecer políticas de  soberanía alimentaria que garanticen el acceso rápido, seguro y eficiente de la población a alimentos básicos, como la carne y los productos cárnicos, tal como precisan la coyuntura internacional y la necesaria reducción del impacto ambiental.

• Promover alianzas público-privadas e intersectoriales que integren actores de los productores del sistema alimentario (incluido el sector cárnico) en las coaliciones globales, a nivel nacional, regional y global.

Más información sobre las aportaciones de la ganadería y la carne se pueden encontrar aquí:

• https://meatthefacts.eu/
• https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2024.1423925/full

Stanton AV (2024) Plant-based diets–impacts of consumption of little or no animal-source foods on human health. Front. Nutr. 11:1423925, doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1423925

• https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-024-00249-y

Stanton, A.V. Unacceptable use of substandard metrics in policy decisions which mandate large reductions in animal-source foods. npj Sci Food 8, 10 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-024-00249-y

Dear all,

A short reflection from Wageningen University & Research (WUR), based in the Netherlands

From a broader perspective—spanning all three questions—we foresee opportunities in fostering stronger connections and integration between water and food systems.

WUR has consistently emphasized the importance of water, including through the following initiatives:

• Organizing the UN Water Week session "Make water pivotal in food systems", held on 24 March 2023 in New York.

• Publishing the paper “Make water pivotal in the design of food systems” by Hellegers et al. (2024), DOI: 10.1142/S2382624X24710012

• Publishing the longread: Making water pivotal in the design of food systems

To avoid preaching to the choir, we note that other stakeholders also support embedding water considerations into food systems:

• Economics of Water Commission (link):

  “Launch a new revolution in food systems. The Green Revolution more than a half century ago significantly increased agricultural yields and lifted large populations out of poverty. We now need another major transformation in agriculture to reduce reliance on large quantities of water and nitrogen-based fertilizers—supporting planetary sustainability, improving farmers’ incomes, and equitably delivering nutrition. We must achieve radical gains in water productivity—maximizing yield per drop—and preserve soil moisture.”

• European Water Resilience Strategy (link):

  “Sustainable food systems are a key ally for water resilience. The CAP and national Strategic Plans support agricultural practices that enhance water efficiency, circularity, and retention, and reduce nutrient and pesticide pollution. Sustainable agriculture and forest management contribute to water and climate resilience.”

Recommendation
We recommend placing greater emphasis—more than is currently reflected in the draft report—on the water–food systems nexus.

It is vital to align UNFSS +4’s outcomes with other international convening such as UNEA, UNOC and the 3 COPs.

There needs to be transparency around decision making and who makes it. This can be translated in to swift action with regular updates. Currently this is not happening. Members should be invited to be more actively involved, this should focus on recruiting those from marginalised groups as opposed to the usual more vocal and better resourced groups.

It would help if there are regular calls to share plans and invite participation. UNFSS+4 will need a visible presence at COP30 and other event, and actively participate in the wider food systems agendas and groups.

The most obvious method is to provide funding for these groups to attend the event, alongside providing help in securing accommodation, travel and the relevant papers.  This could be funded wither through the UN and through contributions from businesses and the larger international NGOs.

It would be useful to stream the events and discussions so those who can not attend can follow. These will need to be interactive so those watching can actively participate.

One of the challenges with many existing UN events is the over representation of the corporate sectors and lobby groups. There could be limit on their numbers with  % of places reserved for underrepresented actors.

There needs to be targeted outreach to underrepresented groups such as women, youth and indigenous groups. This must be coupled with clear steps to properly and transparently incorporate their inputs into the process and any end products, this has to go be symbolic participation.

There needs to be a recognition of the other global agendas outcomes, targets and future plans. Where possible these need to be included in the goals of UNFSS+4.

There needs to be public commitments to link with the relevant global agendas including UNOC and UNEA. Leaders from these agendas should be recruited to participate and to shape the UNFSS+4 process and then commit to incorporating the outputs in to their own processes.

All decisions must be based on robust and clear science, these should not contradict those of other agendas. Where possible connecting themes and goals can be identified and linked.

To ensure that the momentum generated by UNFSS+4 translates into tangible impacts on food systems transformation, WFP recommends placing strong emphasis on streamlining and strengthening existing coordination mechanisms. Efforts should focus on reinforcing inclusive, government-led platforms that convene diverse stakeholders and enable coherence across sectors and actors.

Clear, government-owned implementation roadmaps with defined roles, timelines, and financing strategies are essential to operationalize national pathways. Unlocking investment and mobilizing adequate financing is critical to move from planning to action. This is especially important in complex and crisis-affected contexts, where investment in scalable, catalytic, transformative, and sustainable solutions is needed to create lasting change and stability.

Continued technical assistance from UN agencies and development partners can help sustain momentum and bridge capacity gaps. Finally, establishing formal links between UNFSS+4 follow-up processes and global accountability frameworks can promote coherence and reinforce accountability, for example through mapping synergies and using common reporting indicators.