Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
-
Working paperMethodological Proposal for Monitoring SDG Target 12.3. Sub-Indicator 12.3.1.a The Food Loss Index Design, Data Collection Methods and Challenges
SDG 12.3.1: Global Food Loss Index
2019Also available in:
No results found.This paper delves into the rationale of the Food Loss Index, presenting the various elements of its methodology. It contains a set of definitional framework and scope of the index, it illustrates the rationale for estimating losses as the percentage of food quantities removed from the supply chain. The final section of the paper summarizes FAO’s approach to food loss data. -
Technical studyMonitoring incidental catch of vulnerable species in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea: Methodology for data collection 2019
Also available in:
Bycatch – a term widely used to refer to the part of catch unintentionally captured during a fishing operation, in addition to target species, and consisting of discards and incidental catches of vulnerable species – is considered one of the most important threats to the profitability and sustainability of fisheries, as well as to the conservation of the marine environment and ecosystems. In the Mediterranean, studies on the incidental catch of vulnerable species cover only a small portion of the total fishing activity. In addition, there are several important knowledge gaps for many types of fishing gear, and several countries and/or subregions, as well as on temporal scales, and only a few measures are in place that address the protection of vulnerable species. Monitoring programmes and surveys on incidental catches, which follow a harmonized methodology allowing for results to be compared across subregions, are necessary to improve knowledge on the issue and to subsequently support the identification of potential mitigation methods and tools, and relevant management measures. This publication and the methodology contained herein aim to provide a framework for the development and implementation of an efficient, standardized data collection and monitoring system for all vulnerable species encountered in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, namely elasmobranchs, marine mammals, seabirds, sea turtles, and macrobenthic invertebrates. -
Technical reportReport on monitoring schemes and data collection on biodiversity for food and agriculture in Eastern Europe and Central Asia 2021
Also available in:
No results found.Biodiversity protection encompasses key aspects directly related to the sustainability of our food systems: BFA provides a diverse and heterogenous biological basis for diverse and resilient production systems, for the pollination of cultures, for increased diversity of food, and is strongly linked to local and indigenous knowledge on local crops and breeds acknowledged as cultural heritage. This study examines the existence of data collection, monitoring systems, and conservation initiatives as well as legislation and policies related to biodiversity for food and agriculture in the three following regions: (1) Central Asia, (2) the South Caucasus countries, Turkey, Belarus and Ukraine and (3) the Western Balkan countries and the Republic of Moldova. From this study, it appears that none of the three studied regions currently have any solid monitoring schemes for agricultural biodiversity, nor do they have a strong legal framework for protecting farmers’ rights to seeds that would allow them, amongst other things, to maintain biodiversity. Conservation actions, policies, and legislation generally concern wild biodiversity conservation (through habitat protection) and crop genetic resources conservation but rarely address biodiversity for food and agriculture or wild biodiversity loss caused by food systems. The three regional reports conducted in the framework of this study reported a general lack of capacities and a particularly low level of involvement of farmers and other food producers in monitoring, data collection, and conservation activities. The combination of these two major observations leads us to the conclusion that the governance of BFA should be transformed to put food producers at the centre of biodiversity monitoring and conservation, in dialogue with scientists and institutional actors. Their specific expertise must be acknowledged and valued in the efforts of preserving the biodiversity that they cultivate and sustain. Beyond this needed shift in the governance of monitoring activities, we highlight the necessity of a regional articulation of monitoring efforts and a specific focus on local threatened varieties and breeds (beyond habitat conservation), while very comprehensively considering BFA and wild biodiversity impacted by food systems. Regarding biodiversity protection, we recommend – in addition to farmer-centered data collection and monitoring system implementation – addressing the root causes of biodiversity loss, adopting a systematic approach in legislations, policies, and actions while supporting agroecology, and fulfilling international instruments that guarantee the rights of producers to grow and raise local varieties and breeds.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
No results found.