Unlocking Insights from IPBES Nexus & Transformative Change Reports: A Youth Perspective on Food Systems by Bine Liem

In December 2024, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) held its eleventh plenary in Windhoek, Namibia. Here, after three years of hard work by more than 100 authors, the IPBES member states and community fought for the approval of the summaries of the Transformative Change Assessment and Nexus reports. These reports dive into the state of play in the world of biodiversity. The IPBES platform is independent, science-based and highly appreciated for its research on biodiversity and ecosystem services.

The Transformative Change Assessment report discusses the underlying causes of biodiversity loss and how to integrate transformative chance into society. The Nexus report dives into the interlinkages between food, water, biodiversity and health in the context of climate change. Both reports deliver messages we don't like to hear: the Earth is on fire, and we need to take action now. The reports echo messages from the 2024 Living Planet Report by the WWF; that we are approaching irreversible tipping points. We need to take action now or we might endure the irreversible adverse consequences.

One of the areas where action has to be taken is our food systems. Food systems are gaining more attention in the discussion of biodiversity loss and climate change, and rightfully so. This is partially reflected in the reports. Food systems are inherently connected to daily life and the things we do. It is not only about what we eat, but about the whole system around it: how the soil is taken care of, whether fair prices for produce are being paid and the variation of produce available to us. In this blog, I will specifically look into the interlinkages between the reports and a food systems approach. This all will be done through a youth perspective lens, as I was privileged enough to attend the 11^th session of the IPBES plenary.

Transformative Change Assessment report and Food Systems

The Transformative Change Assessment (TCA) report focusses on “a fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values”. It highlights areas where transformative change is currently happening and how it can be stimulated for a just and sustainable future. The report mentions a few catalysts for transformative change that will be further unpacked below.

When reading the final version of the report, it is abundant in references to ‘food security’ – food systems is a term used less in the report. The increased attention to food security has been an obvious development taking recent events into account: the war between Ukraine and Russia, weaponized hunger in Gaza and the COVID-19 pandemic. With how the concept of food security is currently applied, it lacks complexity and certain nuances. In operationalization of practice and policy regarding food security, it is less about the cultural, spiritual and communal value of what food can have. Food security’s focus is not on where the food is produced or how it is transported, but more on trade, profit and value. Factors for trade and way of production weigh heavily in the debate regarding the sustainability of food. Whilst these factors are not taken into account in the concept of food security, they are integrated in the concept of ‘food sovereignty’.

Food sovereignty is the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. This complexity of multiple layers in which food finds it value with peoples, is not properly reflected in the reports as food security is the preferred term over food sovereignty. Combining the concept of food sovereignty and a food systems approach would be a more nuanced approach in which both the economical and the communal, cultural and spiritual values of food are attended to.

Digitalization of food systems is a new opportunity described in the report that would potentially embed transformative change. Along with digitalization of food systems, smart energy and water management, biomimetics and financial technologies were mentioned. However, these terms are not clearly defined. This makes it difficult to anticipate potential effects or consequences.

In the report, nature's contribution to people is a topic which is discussed extensively. Nature “produces” food, water, fuel and fiber. This perspective does not leave room for other interpretations than that nature's only service is to people. Nature's contribution's counterpart, Mother-Earth centric action, is also integrated in the report. Though, there is a significant difference between the two. As one centers that nature provides for people, and the other sketches that nature is part of people. In many different Indigenous languages, there is no word to separate “us” from “nature”. In the TCA, nature’s contribution to people is clearly preferred over Mother-Earth centric action.

The report also views education as a catalyst for transformative change. A best practice example is highlighted: the Vegetable Academy in Germany. Here, young children (8-12) focus on creating school gardens, practicing cooking skills and (re)establish connections to nature and food. Participants of the academy experience how food is produced and where it comes from. The children take responsibility for their school gardens and gain a better understanding of the impact of their actions on the environment. Premature connections to food early in life might pay off in the future. However, it is important to keep in mind that this project cannot be applied everywhere due to certain limitations and boundaries.

Finally, agroecological transitions are mentioned as best practices. Agroecology has been around for centuries, and “it's making a return”. Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) have been applying agroecological practices to protect and conserve their land long before it gained popularity. IPLCs repeatedly demonstrate their key role in biodiversity conservation.

Nexus report and Food Systems

As the report's title suggests, it explores the interlinkages between water, food, health, and biodiversity. While the report emphasizes the crucial role of biodiversity in food systems, this one sided emphasis also raises the question of why the reverse—that food systems are essential for biodiversity—seems less discussed. The two are intertwined and connected in a way in which separation is not possible. The Nexus report tries to prioritize one over the other, whilst in reality they are one and the same.

The Nexus report did not create these siloed approaches. The report itself observed fragmented governance of biodiversity and food systems. This results in conflicting objectives and duplication of work done. Siloed approached also feed into policies that are short-term, contradictory, non-collaborative and non-inclusive.

As in the TCA, the Nexus report has a growing acknowledgement and interest for IPLCs and their responsibility in biodiversity protection and food systems. Their efforts have been partially successful. They will develop fully when more concentrated efforts are made to address the interlinkages among the nexus elements and their direct and indirect drivers. Indirect drivers, such as economic, demographic, cultural and technological change (overconsumption and waste) and direct drivers, land- and sea-use change, unsustainable exploitation, pollution, invasive alien species and climate change, can both be connected to the agroecological practices IPLCs apply to their lands.

What the Nexus report does really well is recognize the impacts of overconsumption patterns in diets. Overconsumption does not only relate to food systems, but also to natural resources, especially in marine ecosystems and unsustainable energy demand including but not limited to fossil fuels. The connection between overconsumption and food systems is the reduction of red meat consumption and adopting a sustainable and healthy diet that contributes to human health and well-being. Overconsumption is a key element of the balance described in the report, which highlights the ongoing tension between overconsumption and food security. According to the report, food insecurity is just as pressing of a problem as overconsumption, particularly in developing countries.

Overall analysis and youth perspective

One way in which the TCA and the Nexus report are trying to break our current pathway towards the potentially irreversible tipping points is by breaking through siloed approaches. Siloed and fragmented approaches cause double the work, whilst half the impact is being achieved. Collaboration between all sectors should be stimulated, so that collective action and the enabling environment including relevant policies start working for us, instead of against us.

Another concept which I touched upon earlier in the blog, are the concepts of food sovereignty and food security. To me, and hopefully after explaining to you, there is a distinct difference between the two. I prefer using the concept of food sovereignty over food security, as it also highlights the independence, culture and stability of the producers. IPBES still uses food security, and I wonder whether, and if when, they will switch to food sovereignty. Relating to this, food systems are gaining more and more momentum on IPBES’ platform and in its reports, but more attention should be paid as they fulfill a key role in biodiversity conservation.

Prior to the 11^th IPBES plenary, a youth assembly was held. The results of the assembly were presented on the stakeholder day prior to the start of the plenary. I was so enthusiastic to see so many youths actively involved there, but disappointed to see them leaving during the negotiations. The youth perspective was extremely lacking during the negotiations, whilst they were needed harder than ever – there were only five youths attending the plenary, and I was one of them. More youth should be involved in both the assembly as well as the plenary – as a youth perspective is necessary throughout the entire process of IPBES.

The IPBES platform is a science-based platform which finds evidence in research. However, over the last years, a trend has been observed in which the platform is politicizing. Member States come with a hidden agenda at which they are not fighting for the best science-based evidence, but for the interest of their countries. Despite this development, I still believe these reports are worthy of our time and efforts as they provide crucial insights on where we can collectively take actions. Such actions should also come from the food system actors, as I have mentioned throughout this blog. There is still a lot to win by strengthening the linkages between biodiversity and food systems transformations. The published reports are strong, scientific, evidence-based reports and should be read by all interested people, related policy makers and ministers and their offices. Because in the end, we should all feel responsibility to work on these challenges together.