What is on the table and what is missing?

In 2023, a parliamentary investigation into food security took place in Australia. This implies that the government is asking for public and expert advice on key issues to make better decisions.

The survey sparked 188 submissions of experts from the food system, including farmers, health experts, community organizations and advocacy groups. This reflects both the extent of the problem and the vast expertise that Australia could rely to remedy it.

Two years later, the federal government now uses these advice to develop a national food security strategy, called Feeding Australia. The final survey report contained 35 recommendations to stimulate productivity, resilience and security of the Australian food system to be better prepared for climate change, natural disasters and other disruptive events.

Household food security impacts:

• Help people lead a healthier life
• Reduces the burden of significant infrastructure (such as hospitals)
• improves mental well-being
• creates equity and stability in communities
• satisfied a human right.

Australia is at an important time. Significant changes and strengthening food security could help millions of Australians in the future.

And yet, while the investigation marks a step forward, our analysis of expert bids reveals that several key areas have been left without drawing up.

Key problems of experts

Our analysis revealed that experts shared many key concerns about the preparation for food security in Australia.

National Food Security Policy: The stakeholders strongly supported the need for a coordinated national policy. Many submissions have called for total government collaboration and a “national food plan”. They also demanded the surveillance and the responsibility of falling into a new role of “Minister of Food” in the government.

Cost of living and food insecurity: Another coherent theme was the link between the cost of living crisis and food insecurity (fighting to pay food). This is due to the fact that social benefits are below the poverty line, stagnant wages and housing costs. Research shows that a household in eight is affected by food insecurity.

Experts also stressed that relief of emergency food, although necessary as a crisis response, is not a long -term solution. Instead, they called for structural reforms. This includes the increase in government’s advantages above the poverty line and the expansion of affordable housing. These suggestions are supported by current research.

Sustainability and climate resilience: Environmental concerns were also central. Many submissions have underlined the need for Australian agriculture to move on to regenerative practices. These may include the limited or not plowing of the soil, using underground coverage crops to support water retention or rotary livestock to avoid ground damage. This would reduce dependence on herbicides and synthetic fertilizers, a strategy also supported by recent research.

For many experts, the adaptation of climate change goes hand in hand with food security. Many submissions have urged the action to protect agricultural land from urban sprawl, improve funding and education for urban agriculture and prepare climatic shocks such as droughts and floods.

What was missing?

While the 35 recommendations of the survey for a national food security strategy responded to many of these key concerns, there have been gaps.

For example, there was no mention of the fundamental “right to food” of Australians – which was legislated into 120 other countries.

Also missing: the need for clearer food labeling and stronger commercial regulations on food to protect people’s health and the environment.

Roadmap for secure food in Australia

Submissions underline a roadmap for real food safety – one that is fair, durable and resilient. A national strategy can rely on these submissions and be informed by best practices internationally.

Here are our four recommendations, drawn from our research:

1. LEGIFERE THE RIGHT TO FOOD:Recognizing food as a human right would provide a legal framework to guide all political decisions. This would allow the government’s responses to food insecurity to go beyond the dressing approaches and to align themselves with the main international standards.

2. Establish a national food framework and a governance framework:Massively observations have called for a fully funded national food plan and throughout the government, in addition to a dedicated minister for food and a national food security council made up of various stakeholders.

But to ensure success, the future strategy must include measurable objectives, declaration requirements and annual financing. In addition, it should be focused on health, sustainability and equity objectives.

3. Address of the structural engines of food insecurity:Housing poverty and insecurity must be treated as problems with food policy. The increase in income support payments, investment in affordable housing and the guarantee of access to food resources in the local community (including in distant, regional and First Nations communities) are essential.

4. Transform food and sustainability food systems:Our health depends on healthy ecosystems. As such, a national food security strategy must invest in regenerative agriculture. This would protect agricultural land, encourage local food savings and ensure that harmful industries are properly regulated.

It should also increase investments in our national food transport and infrastructure systems (such as storage and storage).

And we have to limit the power of the supermarket duopoly on food supplies and costs. This would guarantee more equitable results for farmers and buyers.

The national food security survey has generated a multitude of evidence and ideas to move forward. However, the final report has left many of the most urgent problems not treated.

To really secure the food future of Australia, government action must prioritize the systemic engines of insecurity, inequalities and ecological decline.

This article is republished from the conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.