Civil Society Participation in Global Food Security Governance: Deconstructing the Discourse of Evidence-based Policy Making
Authors: - Kamasa Dorothy 
Published: February 2024

Food security has been described as a very tough problem, suggesting that there is no single or simple solution to the problem of food insecurity. Meanwhile, there is a growing body of academic literature on food security that proposes solutions. Global governance is marked by a participatory turn, meaning that
there are increasing numbers of global governance processes working to develop processes and mechanisms to enhance the participation of non-state actors in governance and policy making processes.
Given this trend, it is not surprising that participation in governance processes has become an interesting site of investigation for research. The result has been the development of a growing body of literature analysing diverse aspects of increased participation, which calls for evidence-based policy making are
increasing evidence in global food security policy processes, and beyond. For example, the follow up and review process for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to be “rigorous and based on evidence, informed by country-led evaluations and data which is high-quality, accessible, timely, reliable and
disaggregated” (UN General Assembly, 2015, paragraph. 74). Evidence-based policy has become pervasive as a universal recipe for transparency, accountability, and good governance. However, its declamatory pervasiveness within public policy buries conglomerate discourses, signification, and
practices around what counts as evidence, how and by whom it is utilised, and what impact it has on scholars, researchers, and policy officers. This research furnishes an overview of comprehensive reviews of literature and analyzes special issues of global food security, and policy frameworks. The conquest of
evidence-based policy as a discourse, highlighting its close relationship with food security policies, the political, cultural context of its initial emergence in the global world, and its discourses. Evidence-based policy is customarily articulated as a means of speaking truth to power, separating facts from their human
contexts. Global discourses on the governance of food security span competing approaches. For example, a neoliberal approach advocates commercialized, industrial agriculture, while food sovereignty and resilience are part of an alternative discourse to food security that prioritizes locally-based
agroecological food production. Understanding how global discourses play out locally and how they impact the environment and biodiversity is important to identify appropriate pathways towards sustainability. In addition to their effects on food security, different approaches could reinforce or impede the success of biodiversity conservation because of the strong interdependence of food security
and ecosystems. I examined alternative approaches to food security and biodiversity conservation pursued by 30 stakeholders from local to national levels. Agricultural intensification, commercialization, and profit were widely considered important, while support for agroecology and resilience was largely restricted to non-governmental organizations. Except for supporters of the agroecology and resilience approach, biodiversity conservation was considered as a secondary goal. In conclusion, it is important to acknowledge plurality of food security approaches because local conditions are characterized by a
multiplicity of stakeholder interests, and because food security is a complex problem that requires a multidimensional approach. However, major contradictions among existing approaches need to be reconciled, and the agroecology and resilience approach should be strengthened to ensure the sustainable achievement of food security and biodiversity conservation.