Un article consacré à la réforme du Comité de la sécurité alimentaire mondiale (CSA). Parmi les principaux résultats de cette réforme figurent une participation inédite de la société civile et la création d'une interface science-politique, deux processus permettant une meilleure définition et structuration des débats menés par le CSA sur les questions de sécurité alimentaire.
Points clés [en anglais] :
- A POLICY FORMATION PROCESS THAT GENERATES A DIVERSITY OF OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES
The Committee on World Food Security was created in 1974 as an intergovernmental forum. The evolution of food and nutrition security issues and the renewal of interest from international institutions globally pushed the CFS bureau to propose a reform in 2009. This reform allowed room for involvement by both civil society and a science-policy interface in the CFS policy cycle to facilitate the production of global guidelines on the various aspects of food security. The CFS should now enter the second phase of reform, based on developing accountability and shared best practices.
- A USEFUL MECHANISM BETWEEN CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE HLPE AND CIVIL SOCIETY
The science-policy interface represented by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition produces two reports a year on topics chosen by the CFS. These reports facilitate, clarify and structure the debates in the Committee. Civil society is self-organized through the Civil Society Mechanism, a coordinating committee that intervenes in the CFS session as a non-voting stakeholder. Civil Society also participates through a virtual commenting platform during the redaction period of the HLPE reports.
- A NEW INSTITUTIONAL CULTURE: LESSONS LEARNED FOR GLOBAL GOVERNANCE
The reformed CFS now represents a new way of considering food security global governance by involving all stakeholders and a science-policy interface in the discussions in this field. The second phase of the reform could mean even more in terms of developing new governance practices. This unique institution must now reflect on what it has built over the last four years and enhance the institutional culture it has created in order to maintain its position as the main forum on food and nutrition security issues and inspire new governance experiences. This paper makes an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the institution based on qualitative interviews with CFS stakeholders.
