Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
-
DocumentEvaluation reportEvaluation of FAO cooperation with India in the period 2003-2008
Final Evaluation Report. March 2009
2009Also available in:
No results found.At its May 2005 session, the FAO Programme Committee (PC) made recommendations for the work programme of the Evaluation Service for the period 2006-09. Following a suggestion made by the Committee in 2004 (CL 127/12, paragraph 49), the PC recommended that FAO should undertake “an evaluation drawing conclusions on the basis of evaluations of the totality of FAO’s work with individual countries”. The country evaluation in India was the sixth such exercise conducted by FAO and met the PC’s request at its May 2007 that future evaluations should also include countries other than Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries. -
DocumentEvaluation reportManagement Response to the Evaluation of FAO Cooperation with India in the period 2003-2008 2014
Also available in:
No results found.The timing of the evaluation was fortuitous as the FAO reform gained momentum and India continued to enjoy economic growth while simultaneously grappling with the goal of inclusive development. When the vision of FAO is a world without hunger and India is home to one quarter of the under-nourished people in the world; then India must be a country of vital interest to FAO. Unfortunately at this level, the evaluation was not informative. The previous FAOR when commenting on the draft evaluation re port said “The evaluation appears to focus mainly on the “trees” and far too little on the “forest”. In fact, the term “trees” may be too generous as many of the projects that the report discusses are tiny. Large portions of the report are taken up with inconsequential regional projects” Although the report provides inputs against purpose One (paragraph 4) of the evaluation, they were insufficient to generate debate at the higher-level from which such changes within FAO must be driven. In a sens e this is a lost opportunity. -
DocumentEvaluation reportFollow-up on Sierra Leone FAO Representation Management Evaluation and Recommendations (20 October 2008) 2013
Also available in:
No results found.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
-
BookletCorporate general interestEmissions due to agriculture
Global, regional and country trends 2000–2018
2021Also available in:
No results found.The FAOSTAT emissions database is composed of several data domains covering the categories of the IPCC Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector of the national GHG inventory. Energy use in agriculture is additionally included as relevant to emissions from agriculture as an economic production sector under the ISIC A statistical classification, though recognizing that, in terms of IPCC, they are instead part of the Energy sector of the national GHG inventory. FAO emissions estimates are available over the period 1961–2018 for agriculture production processes from crop and livestock activities. Land use emissions and removals are generally available only for the period 1990–2019. This analytical brief focuses on overall trends over the period 2000–2018. -
Book (series)GuidelineDéveloppement de l’aquaculture. 4. Une approche écosystémique de l’aquaculture. 2011Les dimensions sociales et biophysiques des écosystèmes sont inextricablement liées de telle manière qu’un changement dans une seule dimension est très susceptible de générer un changement dans une autre. Bien que le changement est une conséquence naturelle des interactions complexes, il doit être surveillé et même géré si le taux et la direction du changement risquent de compromettre la résilience du système. “Une approche écosystémique de l’aquaculture (AEA) est une stratégie pou r l’intégration de l’activité dans l’écosystème élargi de telle sorte qu’elle favorise le développement durable, l’équité et la résilience de l’interconnexion des systèmes socio-écologiques.” Etant une stratégie, l’approche écosystémique de l’aquaculture (AEA) n’est pas ce qu’on a fait, mais plutôt comment on l’a fait. La participation des parties intéressées est à la base de la stratégie. L’AEA exige un cadre politique approprié dans lequel la stratégie se développe en plusieurs é tapes: (i) la portée et la définition des limites des écosystèmes et l’identification de la partie intéressée; (ii) l’identification des problèmes principaux; (iii) la hiérarchisation des problèmes; (iv) la définition des objectifs opérationnels; (v) l’élaboration d’un plan de mise en oeuvre; (vi) le processus de mise en oeuvre correspondant qui comprend le renforcement, le suivi et l’évaluation, et (vii) un critique des politiques à long terme. Toutes ces étapes sont informées par les meilleures connaissances disponibles. La mise en oeuvre de l’AEA exigera le renforcement des institutions et des systèmes de gestion associés de sorte qu’une approche intégrée du développement de l’aquaculture peut être mise en oeuvre et compte entièrement des besoins et des impacts d’autres secteurs. La clé sera de développer des institutions capables d’intégration, notamment en fonction des objectifs et des normes convenus. L’adoption généralisée d’une AEA exigera un couplag e plus étroit de la science, la politique et la gestion. Elle exige aussi que les gouvernements incluent l’AEA dans leurs politiques de développement de l’aquaculture, stratégies et plans de développement.
-
Book (series)FlagshipThe State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2023
Urbanization, agrifood systems transformation and healthy diets across the rural–urban continuum
2023This report provides an update on global progress towards the targets of ending hunger (SDG Target 2.1) and all forms of malnutrition (SDG Target 2.2) and estimates on the number of people who are unable to afford a healthy diet. Since its 2017 edition, this report has repeatedly highlighted that the intensification and interaction of conflict, climate extremes and economic slowdowns and downturns, combined with highly unaffordable nutritious foods and growing inequality, are pushing us off track to meet the SDG 2 targets. However, other important megatrends must also be factored into the analysis to fully understand the challenges and opportunities for meeting the SDG 2 targets. One such megatrend, and the focus of this year’s report, is urbanization. New evidence shows that food purchases in some countries are no longer high only among urban households but also among rural households. Consumption of highly processed foods is also increasing in peri-urban and rural areas of some countries. These changes are affecting people’s food security and nutrition in ways that differ depending on where they live across the rural–urban continuum. This timely and relevant theme is aligned with the United Nations General Assembly-endorsed New Urban Agenda, and the report provides recommendations on the policies, investments and actions needed to address the challenges of agrifood systems transformation under urbanization and to enable opportunities for ensuring access to affordable healthy diets for everyone.