Thematic Areas and Pathways of the Reference Framework
The Food Systems and Climate Framework for Public Policies was developed from a systemic perspective to guide the transformation of food systems in the context of the climate crisis. Structured around two axes and 15 interdependent pathways, the Framework recognizes that food and climate challenges require coordinated strategies across different sectors, levels of government, and social actors. Due to its systemic nature, the changes promoted by the Framework's pathways manifest in different dimensions of food systems, requiring indicators from multiple thematic areas for their monitoring.
Considering the need for interdisciplinary action to enable an in-depth discussion on this monitoring, this project relies on the methodological proposal of the Food Systems Countdown Initiative (FSCI), which aims to ensure the representation of experts from five thematic areas:
- Governance
- Resilience
- Nutrition, diet and health
- Environment, production and climate
- Livelihoods, poverty and equity
As the multidimensional and interdependent nature of the Framework's pathways presupposes, there are convergences and interactions between pathways and thematic areas. Thus, each pathway should be analyzed by more than one group of experts, who will contribute complementary perspectives from the thematic area of their daily practice, their field of professional activity, or their domain of knowledge.
For these reasons, the methodology adopted for the workshop proposes that the discussion on the indicators be carried out in two stages:
-
First, a discussion with technical depth, in which each thematic area analyzes the pathways of the Framework with which it has the greatest relationship and identifies the minimum indicators necessary to monitor progress and setbacks in the implementation of the pathways proposed by the Framework;
-
Then, a discussion with a broader perspective, aimed at building consensus among experts from all thematic areas on the set of indicators identified and their interrelationships with all the pathways of the Framework.
To enable the first stage, the discussion with technical depth, it was therefore necessary to distribute the pathways of the Framework among the groups of experts in order to ensure that interdisciplinarity within each pathway was adequately contemplated. This exercise of correspondence between multiple thematic areas in each pathway was done, by consensus, in a synchronous meeting, with representatives of the consulting team; the National Secretariat for Food and Nutritional Security of the Ministry of Development and Social Assistance, Family and Fight against Hunger; and the Institute for Applied Economic Research. Subsequently, the result was also validated by representatives of the National Council for Food and Nutritional Security. Figure 1 illustrates the final distribution.
| Thematic Areas | Axis I — Multilevel Democratic Governance | Axis II — Transition to Healthy and Sustainable Food Systems | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I.1 | I.2 | I.3 | I.4 | I.5 | I.6 | II.1 | II.2 | II.3 | II.4 | II.5 | II.6 | II.7 | II.8 | II.9 | |
| Diets, Nutrition and Health | |||||||||||||||
| Environment, Natural Resources | |||||||||||||||
| Livelihoods, Poverty and Equity | |||||||||||||||
| Governance | |||||||||||||||
| Resilience | |||||||||||||||
| No. of areas | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Figure 1. Distribution of thematic areas by pathway of the Framework on Food Systems and Climate for Public Policies.
This proposal stems from the understanding that the transformation processes of food systems are complex, multidimensional, and interdependent, requiring an integrated reading of the indicators and their multiple connections with the different pathways. Thus, the objective is to explore, from the perspective of diverse specialties, to what extent the available indicators can contribute to highlighting trends, advances, challenges, and gaps related to the transformations that the Framework seeks to promote.
It is expected, therefore, that the final results will transcend the initial organization. This is because there are indicators that simultaneously contribute to monitoring different pathways, such as the food price volatility indicator, which can be affected by actions ranging from funding for the reorientation of food systems to improvements in food supply. Similarly, pathways share expected results and transformation mechanisms, such as governance that guarantees participation and social control. The very logic of food systems demonstrates that changes in one dimension affect the others, making strictly sectoral or linear approaches inadequate.
Therefore, the second stage, consolidation, will seek to build a systemic view of monitoring, identifying convergences, complementarities, and interrelationships between the Framework's pathways and the selected indicators. The objective is to structure an integrated dashboard capable of tracking trends, advances, bottlenecks, and possible inflection points in the transformation processes of food systems.
This perspective also recognizes the inherent limitations of quantitative indicators. Many central aspects of the Framework—such as strengthening governance, coherence of public policies, social participation, climate justice, and institutional capacity—will hardly be fully captured by conventional metrics. For this reason, the dashboard should be understood as a learning, management, and decision-making support tool, complemented by qualitative analyses and periodic evaluations.
In short, the proposed monitoring process seeks to balance two complementary needs: to deepen the interdisciplinary analysis of each pathway of the Framework and, at the same time, to preserve an integrated understanding of food systems. The initial organization of discussions by pathway constitutes a methodological resource to facilitate analytical work, while the final result should reflect the systemic, multidimensional, and transformative nature that guides the Framework.