The increasing demand for water, energy and food, and the interdependence of these systems could lead to potential human conflict in the future. This was seen in the food crisis of 2008, which stirred a renewed interest in taking a "systems" approach to managing resources. The initial flurry of activities led to many nexus frameworks, but there remains a gap between theory and its implementation. This paper tries to look at various frameworks and unpacks the concept of nexus in order to develop matrices to help quantify and understand the interlinkages between the nexus systems. It suggests multi-level and multi-system indices to measure the health of nexus systems and to identify the weak links. It is hoped that such frameworks can be used at country level, and eventually be used to measure and rank countries on the health of their systems. The paper suggests a questionnaire that can be used (after modifying for local conditions) to collect country-level institutional and political-economy data (which is difficult to get from online resources) to be used in the framework | A. Sood, A. Nicol, I. Arulingam, 'Unpacking the water-energy-environment-food nexus: working across systems', pp.43p, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), 2019

For the 1.5 billion people living in fragile and conflict-affected situations, livelihood challenges are compounded by climate change, unsustainable resource consumption, poor governance, and weak social cohesion. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) and preparedness are critical components of a comprehensive approach to managing and mitigating the impact of disasters. While anticipatory action (AA) interventions for monitoring socio-ecological risks are gaining prominence, the approaches and risk indicators differ considerably within and between climate, development, and humanitarian communities. There is also a fundamental variance in approaches and risk indicators relating to triggers and trigger components. This diversity underscores the need for a cohesive framework which addresses these disparities. Here we define a novel typology of fragility and risk indicators from a food, land and water system perspective, which supports the evolving nature of anticipatory action.

Land and water are vital resources for sustaining rural livelihoods and are critical for rural development as they form the basis of agriculture, the main economic activity for rural communities. Nevertheless, in most developing countries, land and water resources are unevenly distributed due to historical and socio-economic imbalances, hence the need for land reform policies to address these disparities. However, redistributing land without considering the interconnectedness of land and socio-ecological systems can compound existing food and water insecurity challenges. This study used a mixed research method, integrating both quantitative and qualitative data, to develop a framework to guide policy and decision-makers to formulate coherent strategies towards sustainable land redistribution programmes and achieve the desired outcomes. The approach was vital for integrating the broad and intricate interlinkages between water, land, and environmental resources. Therefore, the framework is based on transformative and circular models for informing strategic policy decisions towards sustainable land redistribution. The focus was on South Africa’s land redistribution plans and the implications on water and food security and rural development. The developed framework is designed to ensure the sustainability of agrarian reform and rural economic development. It is framed to address land and water accessibility inequalities, promote water and food security, and enhance rural development. A sustainable land redistribution increases the adaptive capacity of rural communities to climate change, enhances their resilience, and provides pathways towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Land and water are vital resources for sustaining rural livelihoods and are critical for rural development as they form the basis of agriculture, the main economic activity for rural communities. Nevertheless, in most developing countries, land and water resources are unevenly distributed due to historical and socio-economic imbalances, hence the need for land reform policies to address these disparities. However, redistributing land without considering the interconnectedness of land and socio-ecological systems can compound existing food and water insecurity challenges. This study used a mixed research method, integrating both quantitative and qualitative data, to develop a framework to guide policy and decision-makers to formulate coherent strategies towards sustainable land redistribution programmes and achieve the desired outcomes. The approach was vital for integrating the broad and intricate interlinkages between water, land, and environmental resources. Therefore, the framework is based on transformative and circular models for informing strategic policy decisions towards sustainable land redistribution. The focus was on South Africa’s land redistribution plans and the implications on water and food security and rural development. The developed framework is designed to ensure the sustainability of agrarian reform and rural economic development. It is framed to address land and water accessibility inequalities, promote water and food security, and enhance rural development. A sustainable land redistribution increases the adaptive capacity of rural communities to climate change, enhances their resilience, and provides pathways towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

While water-energy-food (WEF) Nexus is one of the most important, and widely investigated, environmental topics of our time, previous stock taking efforts possess notable limitations, namely (i) their focus is restricted to research articles, and (ii) there is less focus on nexus permutations that begin with energy and food. This paper assembled more than 900 documents and systematically categorized them according to more than 10 key parameters (e.g. scale, methods, limitations), to characterize approaches, achieved outcomes and presence of variables likely to support on-the-ground change. Our results reveal that WEF Nexus activities are often driven by the water sector, undertaken at global and national scale and authored by experts from diverse backgrounds. Among the utilized methods, modelling and review (i.e. systematic) are the most common. While climate change and governance are routinely considered in WEF Nexus documents, gender, stakeholders and capacity are not. These findings highlight areas for improvement in the design of WEF Nexus initiatives.

Jonathan Mockshell and Danielle Resnick, authors of a new Political Economy and Policy Analysis (PEPA) sourcebook, set out how governments can make use of a step-by-step guide to account for power dynamics, conflicting interests, coalitions and networks when developing agrifood policies. The book draws upon dozens of frameworks and tools to support policy development that addresses the dual challenges of food security and climate change. | Non-PR | IFPRI5; 5 Strengthening Institutions and Governance | Development Strategies and Governance (DSG); Transformation Strategies

In what is proclaimed as the ‘fourth industrial revolution’, digital innovation is thought to have the potential to provide solutions to key challenges facing food production and consumption together with the support of sustainability of the underpinning support of land, and water systems. Nowhere is this more the case in less-industrialised countries, which largely have agrarian based economies. Applications of digital innovations include faster and more reliable communication, better collection, analysis, and storage of data, enhancing democratic processes and transparency in governance, affordable financial services and can provide the basis for decision support. However, there is a risk that people with less formal education and skills and little resource endowments as well as particular groups of people such as women will be excluded from participating or benefiting from digital innovation, the so-called digital divide. In addition, there is a risk that people, communities, and societies may be disadvantaged or harmed by digital innovation processes. Digital inclusivity within food, land and water systems are approaches in digital innovation need to include the differing needs and resources of men, women, youth, indigenous communities who produce most the world’s food in smallholder land holdings. Here we provide the state-of-the-art evidence from peer reviewed literature and other literature in support of these statements. On the basis of this and our wider anecdotal experience we present, a holistic multi-dimensional framework for digital inclusivity. The aim of the digital inclusivity index (and supporting tools) is to provide a resource to guide to transform and change development and application of digital innovations. Specifically, it provides governments, funders, researchers, and development agencies a framework on how to assess, minimise and lessen exclusion from digital innovation. This is achieved through increasing awareness of the characteristics of digital exclusion, recognising the needs of the actors that they target with digital interventions which are more inclusive, making interventions more participatory and mitigating any potential harm that can be caused by digital innovation. We also argue that the approach to digital innovation needs to be set within the context of a wide ranging ‘digital ecosystem’ where different actors contribute knowledge and resources, and digital innovation goes beyond the adoption and use of technologies to include changes in preexisting social arrangement and institutions.

Agri-food systems face multiple challenges. They must deal with prevailing structural weaknesses, partly deepened by the disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic, civil conflicts, and climate change. Addressing structural weaknesses – such as inequitable access to healthy and nutritious food for all, loss of livelihoods and incomes, and increasing environmental shocks – requires not only technological, but also institutional innovations, as well as economic and policy responses. While development interventions often focus on technological innovations, they lack attention to the enabling policy environment and the political economy drivers necessary to achieve policy, economic, and social impact at the national level. In addition, solutions often fail to analyze the broader enabling environment in which policies are designed and implemented at the national level. A comprehensive understanding of the policy environment coupled with appropriate technological and institutional solutions can influence the success or failure of development interventions. However, political economy and policy analysis considerations are inadequately explored in the quest to transform food systems. Identifying the right policies and overcoming barriers to the implementation of development interventions fundamentally requires an understanding of the political economy and policy processes that shape policymaking. Despite numerous emerging approaches and frameworks for conducting political economy and policy analysis, practitioners and researchers working across food, land, and water systems lack a consolidated knowledge base. This Political Economy and Policy Analysis (PEPA) sourcebook aims to fill that knowledge gap.