Order

Food production in 2050 will be sufficient, globally, but many of the poor will remain food insecure. The primary cause of food insecurity will continue to be poverty, rather than inadequate food production. Thus, policies and investments that increase the incomes of the poor will remain the best ways to extend food security to all. Investments that promote growth in sustainable agriculture and provide non-farm employment opportunities in rural areas of lower income countries will be most helpful. There will be sufficient water, globally, to achieve food production goals and sustain rural and urban livelihoods, if we allocate and manage the resource wisely. Yet, water shortages will constrain agricultural production and limit incomes and livelihood opportunities in many areas. Policies and investments are needed to extend and ensure access to water for household use and agricultural production. Challenges requiring the attention of policy makers and investors include increasing urbanization and increasing demands for land and water resources. Policy makers must ensure that farmers retain access to the water they need for producing food and sustaining livelihoods, and they must create greater opportunities for women in agriculture. They must also motivate investments in new technologies that will enhance crop and livestock production, particularly for smallholders, and encourage the private sector to invest in activities that create employment opportunities in rural areas.

Despite evidence of women’s roles and expertise in the management of water, energy, food, and the environment (WEFE), the WEFE literature is almost silent on gender issues. In the context of climate change, achieving more inclusive management of natural resources is vital; yet women continue to be underrepresented as professionals in WEFE sectors, and largely absent in leadership positions. Using Nepal as a case study, this paper explores the enduring barriers to their exclusion, and entry points for greater equity among professionals in these sectors. To do so, we draw on key informant interviews with 34 male and 31 women professionals from government, civil society, non-governmental organizations and consultants, as well as a roundtable discussion with 20 women professionals specifically focused on gender barriers in these sectors in Nepal. Drawing on Gaventa (2006)’s power cube, this paper examines how power dynamics within and between the public and the private spheres create a web of barriers that conflate to sideline women professionals. While women have reached the “closed space” as defined by Gaventa (i.e., are recruited to professional positions in WEFE sectors), different sources of “hidden” and “invisible” power at play in the public and private spheres continue to limit their participation, influence and decision-making. We argue that the continued marginalization of women professionals calls for a focus on understanding the power and intersectionality dynamics that sustain exclusion. This focus is critical for the development of strategies to increase the voice and leadership of women professionals in WEFE decision-making.

Despite evidence of women’s roles and expertise in the management of water, energy, food, and the environment (WEFE), the WEFE literature is almost silent on gender issues. In the context of climate change, achieving more inclusive management of natural resources is vital; yet women continue to be underrepresented as professionals in WEFE sectors, and largely absent in leadership positions. Using Nepal as a case study, this paper explores the enduring barriers to their exclusion, and entry points for greater equity among professionals in these sectors. To do so, we draw on key informant interviews with 34 male and 31 women professionals from government, civil society, non-governmental organizations and consultants, as well as a roundtable discussion with 20 women professionals specifically focused on gender barriers in these sectors in Nepal. Drawing on Gaventa (2006)’s power cube, this paper examines how power dynamics within and between the public and the private spheres create a web of barriers that conflate to sideline women professionals. While women have reached the “closed space” as defined by Gaventa (i.e., are recruited to professional positions in WEFE sectors), different sources of “hidden” and “invisible” power at play in the public and private spheres continue to limit their participation, influence and decision-making. We argue that the continued marginalization of women professionals calls for a focus on understanding the power and intersectionality dynamics that sustain exclusion. This focus is critical for the development of strategies to increase the voice and leadership of women professionals in WEFE decision-making.

Delivering access to sufficient food, energy and water resources to ensure human wellbeing is a major concern for governments worldwide. However, it is crucial to account for the ‘nexus’ of interactions between these natural resources and the consequent implications for human wellbeing. The private sector has a critical role in driving positive change towards more sustainable nexus management and could reap considerable benefits from collaboration with researchers to devise solutions to some of the foremost sustainability challenges of today. Yet opportunities are missed because the private sector is rarely involved in the formulation of deliverable research priorities. We convened senior research scientists and influential business leaders to collaboratively identify the top forty questions that, if answered, would best help companies understand and manage their food-energy-water-environment nexus dependencies and impacts. Codification of the top order nexus themes highlighted research priorities around development of pragmatic yet credible tools that allow businesses to incorporate nexus interactions into their decision-making; demonstration of the business case for more sustainable nexus management; identification of the most effective levers for behaviour change; and understanding incentives or circumstances that allow individuals and businesses to take a leadership stance. Greater investment in the complex but productive relations between the private sector and research community will create deeper and more meaningful collaboration and cooperation.

In spite of the 30% increase in the food supply since 1961, significant changes are anticipated over the coming decades that will increase the challenges facing smallholders. Climate change, rapidly growing population and increasing pollution all add to the risks of water and food security. This is happening at a time when water resources management is shifting away from government planning and control to a more adaptive and flexible model involving more stakeholders, whereby farmers and smallholders are increasingly involved in decision‐making and governance of water resources. Many governments, however, continue to look to their smallholders to increase food production and to find ways to produce more with less. Farmers, thus, will need to find new ways of learning and rely more on their own resources, on the private sector and on support from civil society organizations and non‐governmental organizations. This paper examines the changing nature of farmer support services, focusing on the role played by emerging non‐institutional actors. As water becomes the limiting resource for food production, it is crucial to understand how food markets are growing and can incentivize smallholders to produce more, and critically, how farmers are finding new ways of acquiring the knowledge and expertise they need.

The attainment of food and water security rank high on the agendas of governments in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region and sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Although the objectives are similar, the underlying drivers, resource endowments and opportunities for achieving them are different. Differences between two regions in natural resource endowment and investment capital stock can, in theory, lead to mutually beneficial trade to achieve desired objectives. Concerns about the recent food crises coupled with the disparity in land and water endowment and investable capital between MENA and SSA have led in recent years to investment in agricultural land in the latter by a number of MENA countries with the aim of producing food. At the same time, many SSA countries seek these investments to infuse capital, technology and know-how into their agricultural sector to improve productivity, food security and rural livelihoods. However, these recent foreign direct agricultural investments have to date performed poorly or have been abandoned without achieving the initial objectives of setting them up. Based on research conducted in selected sub-Saharan countries, this paper analyses the reasons for the failure of these investments. It then reviews a few successful agricultural investments by private sector companies with a long history of operation in SSA. Juxtaposing lessons distilled from failed and successful case studies, the paper argues that large-scale agricultural investments that take advantage of this accumulated knowledge are needed and do have a critical role to play. Such investments, when they also incorporate ecosystems management practices and smallholder inclusive business models in their operations, can serve as appropriate instruments to reconcile the food and water security objectives of both the MENA region and SSA, while promoting sustainable intensification of agriculture and improved rural livelihoods in SSA.