Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
-
BookletGuidance note: Risk communication and community engagement
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic
2020Information is a form of assistance in itself. Access to accurate information can allow people to make informed decisions to protect themselves. Moreover, understanding drivers of behaviour and integrating that understanding into communication approaches can make information more likely to result in desired action. Preparedness and response activities should be based on protection and related “do no harm” principles and conducted in a participatory manner that is informed by community feedback. Communication efforts must respond to stakeholder concerns, mis/disinformation and behavioral factors. Transparent and consistent messaging in local languages through trusted channels can help address barriers to change. Furthermore, by using community-based networks, engaging key influencers and building local capacities, communication can more effectively mitigate risks to more efficiently establish the authority and trust required to rapidly mount responses. Hence, Risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) refers to the processes and approaches to systematically consult, engage and communicate with communities who are at risk, or whose practices affect risk. The aim is to encourage, enable and include stakeholders in the prevention of and response to risks by adapting communication to local realities. In the case of COVID-19, RCCE enables authorities and communities to work together to promote healthy behaviour and reduce the risk of spreading infectious diseases. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) developed this guidance note to support Pillar IV of the country-level activities under the framework of FAO’s component of the Global Humanitarian Response Plan for COVID-19: “Ensuring food supply chain actors are not at risk of COVID 19 transmission” through risk communication and community engagement (RCCE), together with the World Health Organization (WHO) and national authorities. In alignment with the Organization’s commitments on Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP), this guidance note aims to support country offices in designing and implementing inclusive RCCE initiatives. -
Book (stand-alone)School nutrition education programmes in the Pacific Islands: Scoping review and capacity needs assessment
Final report
2019Also available in:
No results found.The School Nutrition Education Programme (SNEP) is an intervention to educate school students on nutrition and food preparation with the aim of influencing healthy nutrition choice and practice at an age when life time behaviour habits are developing and in the wider community. FAO defines School Food Nutrition Education as consisting of coherent educational strategies and learning activities, with environmental supports, which help schoolchildren and their communities to achieve sustainable improvements in their diets and in food- and lifestyle-related behaviours, perceptions, skills and knowledge; and to build the capacity to change, to adapt to external change and to act as agents of change. This publication is the scopy study and capacity needs assessment and final report for the SNEP project. -
Book (series)Environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture.
Requirements, practices, effectiveness and improvements
2009Also available in:
No results found.This document contains the main outputs of Component 2 of the FAO project “Towards sustainable aquaculture: selected issues and guidelines”. Component 2 focused on environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture, in particular on the relevant regulatory requirements, the practice, the effectiveness and suggestions for improvements. The report includes four regional reviews on EIA and monitoring in aquaculture in Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, Latin America and North Amer ica, a special study on EIA as applied to salmon aquaculture, as well as a global review and synthesis report which draw on the findings of the review papers, covering relevant information from more than 35 countries. In addition, this document provides the Report of the Technical Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment and Monitoring in Aquaculture, held at FAO headquarters in Rome from 15 to 17 September 2008. The global and regional reviews in this study and the associated tec hnical workshop draw on experience from throughout the world in the application of EIA and monitoring to aquaculture development. In practice most aquaculture is small-scale and is not subject to EIA or rigorous monitoring. More emphasis needs to be placed on environmental management frameworks which can address the environmental issues associated with large numbers of small-scale developments – including strategic environmental assessment, risk analysis, management plans for waterbo dies and/or groups of farms, monitoring and response procedures. Where EIA is applied there is mixed experience. Several weaknesses were identified in the regional reviews and at the workshop, including lack of consistency in assessment; lack of appropriate standards; lack of integration between levels and divisions of government; inadequate or ineffective public consultation; lack of assessment skill and capacity; limited follow-up in terms of implementation and monitoring; and exce ssive bureaucracy and delays. There is very little hard evidence on cost effectiveness. Monitoring is of fundamental importance to effective environmental management of aquaculture, and without which EIA itself is largely pointless. The main weakness identified was limited implementation of monitoring requirements as developed in EIA environmental management plans, and limited analysis, reporting and feedback of farm level and wider environmental monitoring programmes into management of individual farms and the sector as a whole. The key to more effective use of both EIA and monitoring procedures will be to nest them within a higher level strategic planning and management framework, including clear environmental objectives and quality standards. More rigorous risk analysis should be used to inform the focus of both EIA and monitoring.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
No results found.