The_GFSP_ Mycotoxins_and_Aflatoxin_ 17 Nov 13_PACA

Report
GFSP Overview
Accra, November 2013
The Global Food Safety
Partnership
 Reduce risks to consumers and businesses
 Improve skills, efficiencies and public health
 Create economic opportunity
Global Food Safety Partnership
Breaking New Ground
Formally established December 2012 at the first GFSP
stakeholder conference in Paris
Builds on earlier collaboration 2009-2011 with APEC FSCF PTIN
First partnership supported by the World Bank combining public
and private money with public and private implementation
Dual Approach
5-year initial capacity building work plan with defined
activities
In parallel, use the experience to learn and develop a new
cooperation model for future collaboration
Operational Structure
Advisory
Working
Groups
Industry
Donor
Advisory
Council
National Governments
International Organizations
Contributions
GFSP
Secretariat
Universities
NGOs
Other Stakeholders
Other inputs
Multi Donor
for:
Trust Fund
 Harmonization of
Training
 Improving Outcomes
from Training
 Ensuring Best Practices
for Monitoring and
Evaluation
 Cross-sector
Coordination &
Collaboration
 Developing a
Common Baseline for
Training Standards
Service Providers
Preparing for the future
Organization & Management
 Implemented by contracted service providers, themselves
often stakeholders as well
 Use of Advisory Working Groups (WGs)





IT/Learning Systems
Food Safety Technical
Communication
Monitoring and Evaluation
Governance (to be formed in 2014 to shape GFSP governance after initial
5-year period)
 Combined WG co-chairs meetings
 Donor’s Advisory Council
 Secretariat (hosted at World Bank)
Financing Sources
US$ 1 m
Program
design and
pilots
World Bank
US$ 1.2m
Advisory
Working
Groups
Multi-Donor
Trust Fund
US$ 45-50 m
Initial
contributions
(pending)
Global
scaling up
Donor’s Advisory Council
• GFSP Secretariat will convene a Donor’s Advisory Council
(DAC) to provide an additional mechanism for direct
consultation and advice on the Partnership. The DAC has
been established to advise on:
– High level stakeholder engagement
– Fund raising
– Inputs to the Secretariat regarding funding priorities (topics,
countries, sectors)
– Emerging issues
• The DAC will meet in the week of 9-13 December 2013 at
the 2nd GFSP Conference to be held in Singapore.
Current Partners
Governments (Donors)
Canada
Denmark
Netherlands
United States
Multilateral & International
Organizations
Governments (Pilot countries)
China
Indonesia
Malaysia
Vietnam
Zambia
Industry and Associations
FAO
Network of Aquaculture Centers
in Asia-Pacific (NACA)
UNIDO
WHO
World Bank/IFC
Mars Inc.
Waters Corporation
Cargill
Food Industry Asia (FIA)
General Mills
Grocery Manufacturers
Association (GMA)
Current Partners cont…
Universities, NGOs and In-kind and Implementing Partners
Food and Environment Research Agency (FERA), UK DEFRA
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ)
Global Aquaculture Alliance/Responsible Aquaculture
Foundations (GAA/RAF)
GLOBALG.A.P
International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI)
Institute of Food Technologists (IFT)
International Union of Food Science and Technology (IUFoST)
Massey University
Michigan State University
Network of Aquaculture Centers of Asia-Pacific (NACA)
Orange House
Advisory Process
Feedback on current
work program
Issues and
Opportunities
Advice
sought
Advisory
Working
Groups
GFSP
Secretariat
Decisions on:
• Projects
• Activities
• Funding
Advice
Provided
Stakeholder
feedback on
GFSP progress
and issues
GFSP Coordinated Approach for
Greater Impact
Separate Independent (variably
linked) actions
Collective and Cohesive Approach
(More Collaboration, Coordination,
Communication, Connection)
GFSP 1st Current Work Plan
• GFSP Secretariat reviewed Roadmap and 5-Year Plan
and revised 1st Year Plan for mid-2013 to mid-2014.
• The Roadmap describes three pillars of engagement by
the GFSP:
• Training Program Implementation
• Global and Regional Scaling up
• Program Facilitation
#1
Training Program
APEC/FSCF+
Supply chain
management
Incident
management
Laboratory
competency
Risk analysis
Food safety
regulatory system
On-farm quality
assurance
#2
Global Scaling up
Country
Capacity Building
Needs Assessments
East Asia
South Asia
Latin America
East Europe &
Central Asia
 Africa
 Middle East
 “Responsive
activities”




#3
Program Facilitation
Learning Platform
Open Education Resources
Curriculum Development
Food Safety
Technical
Communication
Monitoring and
Evaluation
GFSP Secretariat
Country Selection Criteria
Country
policy
environment
Partner
priorities
and cost
sharing
Countries are
selected using
criteria based on
each category
Public-Private
commitment
Potential for
scaling up
APEC
countries
1st Year Workplan
Implementation
• Phased implementation based on available
funding
• Currently about US$2M available in multi-donor
trust fund
• Enough to implement 40% of Year 1 workplan
(total budget: US$5M)
Activities already planned
for 2013-2014
GFSP activities recently completed, underway,
or planned for implementation during 2013 and
Q1,2 of 2014
–
–
–
–
–
–
Supply Chain Management (SCM)
On-farm Quality Assurance and GAP
Food Safety Incident Management
Laboratory Competency
Risk Analysis - Risk Assessment
Food Safety Regulatory Systems
..but what about taking a
risk-based approach?
Pros
• Consistent with best practices
in food safety
• Focuses attention
• May garner more poltical,
technical, financial support
• Interests public, private, civil
society all at once
• Facilitates testing and
tweaking of GFSP collaborative
model
• May be more doable in
medium term
• May have positive spinoffs for
broader food safety system
Cons
• Requires picking a “winner”
among many real risks that
compete for attention and
resources
• Will not solve many other
real problems
• Externalities not proven for
food safety (although there
is evidence for avian/human
influenza and HIV/AID)
Pilots under consideration
• Food Safety in Aquacultural Supply Chains
Pilots under consideration
• Food Safety in Aquacultural Supply Chains
• Food Safety for the Dairy Industry
Pilots under consideration
• Food Safety in Aquacultural Supply Chains
• Food Safety for the Dairy Industry
• Pathways for Global Mycotoxin Preventioon
and Control
Why mycotoxins?
Mycotoxins represent a core challenge within
the food safety field
Agriculture
Food Safety
Mycotoxins
Health
Nutrition
Why start with aflatoxins?
• They matter greatly to agriculture, health and nutrition
• They simultaneously affect poverty/hunger,
productivity, commerce/trade, and economic growth
• The challenge straddles the developed, emerging, and
developing economies
• It is a global problem, growing in scope
• The science is advancing rapidly
• Awareness is also rising
• They require a concerted effort backed
by significantly more resources
Why start with aflatoxins?
• They matter greatly to agriculture, health and nutrition
• They simultaneously affect poverty/hunger,
productivity, commerce/trade, and economic growth
• The challenge straddles the developed, emerging, and
developing economies
• It is a global problem, growing in scope
GFSP
• The science is advancing rapidly
can add
• Awareness is also rising
• They require a concerted effort backed
value!
by significantly more resources
Opportunities and issues
relating PACA
• How to coordinate approaches and programs
while avoiding duplication
Opportunities and issues
relating PACA
• How to coordinate approaches and programs
while avoiding duplication
• How to leverage and multiply respective
resources
Opportunities and issues
relating PACA
• How to coordinate approaches and programs
while avoiding duplication
• How to leverage and multiply respective
resources
• What is the best division of roles and
responsibilities going forward
Opportunities and issues
relating PACA
• How to coordinate approaches and programs
while avoiding duplication
• How to leverage and multiply respective
resources
• What is the best division of roles and
responsibilities going forward
• How to achieve a win-win situation

similar documents