Exploring opportunities for GLDC crops as functional foods - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Exploring opportunities for GLDC crops as functional foods

Costanza

conti

,

andy

hall,

caroline

hambloch

Key messages

SHOULD GLDC INVEST in Breeding novel FUNCTIONAL FOOD TRAITS IN MANDATE CROPS?Value of global market for functional foods $275 billion by 2025GLDC crop have existing functional properties (micro nutrients).Novel nutritional traits relevant to SDG agenda. However pathways to nutritional, health and income benefits to poor people are multiple, complex and require major investment and multi-scale collaboration, including policy. Improved nutrition can not always be reconciled with improved farm incomes.

Pathway 1. Crops already produced and consumed by the poor

:

no-regrets strategy

, but tensions and trade offs between nutrition and income outcomes need to be understood and managed.

Pathway 2. Create new domestic market opportunity:

Possible, but major concerns on scaling niche products for broad impact

, tension between benefits for high vs low income groups. Best left to local development agencies working at a community scale.

Pathway 3 Miracle crops for international markets:

No standout successes

. Standards and regulation needed to promote procurement from small holders. Exposes small holders of risks of international markets and competition from farmers in the global north.

Conclusion: focus on no-regrets strategy based on existing production and consumption patterns of the poor. Align with wider nutritional and health initiatives,

let others

do the heavy lifting. Avoid the allure of novel traits and miracle crops

1. introduction

Global South in midst of nutrition transition: increased consumption of foods high in fats, sugar and salt due to demographic changes, urbanization, economic development (HLPE, 2017) Double burden of malnutrition: coexistence ofOvernutrition (overweight and obesity) andUndernutrition (stunting and wasting) at all levels of the populationConsumption of diversified and balanced foods can safeguard against malnutrition and non-communicable diseases

What is the potential of producing GLDC crops with novel functional food traits to tackle global nutritional challenges?

2. DEFINITION

Definition of functional food: satisfactorily demonstrated to affect beneficially one or more target functions in the body, beyond adequate nutritional effects, to either improve health and well-being and/or reduce of risk of disease.Must remain food and demonstrate its effects in amounts that can normally be expected to be consumed in diet, i.e. not pill/capsule, but part of normal food pattern (Diplock et al., 1999)

Types

Definition

Example

Fortified products

Food fortified with additional nutrients

Juices fortified with vitamins,

Enriched products

Food with added new nutrients or components not normally found in a particular food

Probiotics and prebiotics

Altered products

Food from which a deleterious component has been removed, reduced or replaced with another substance with beneficial effects

Fibres as fat releasers in meat,

alflatoxin

free ground nuts

Non-altered products

Foods naturally containing increased content of nutrients or components

Natural foods

Enhanced products

Food which one of the component has been naturally enhanced through special growing conditions, new feed composition, genetic manipulation or otherwise.

Eggs with increased omega-3 content achieved by altered chicken feed , golden rice, orange fleshed sweet potato

3. Functional foods in the global market 

The rapid advances in biotechnology and functional foods confront us with a need to address the benefits of these with regard to improving health and managing or decreasing disease risks. (Hite and Bernstein, 2012)The global functional foods market size was estimated at USD 161.49 billion in 2018 and is projected to reach USD 275.77 billion by 2025 (https://www.grandviewresearch.com/press-release/global-functional-foods-market)

4. Potential and pitfalls

FFs generally sold at higher prices than usual foods



larger margins of profit for companies

Sector attractive to various players along the supply chain such as food manufacturers

(

Siró

et al., 2008)

.

Developing FFs is expensive in nature, as it requires in depth knowledge of both products

and

consumer purchasing attitudes (Grand View Research, 2019).

high reported failure rates in this category,

given the m

any marketing and technological challenges faced by product developers

Figure 2. Reasons behind the rapid global growth of the functional food markets. Adapted from

Vergari

,

Tibuzzi

and Basile (2010).

What opportunities are there for GLDC crops in the functional foods markets and for nutrition more generally?

South-Asian diets are traditionally rich in pulses, with GLDC crops being consumed daily. Lentils, chickpea and pigeon pea are normally part of at one to two meals daily, and are usually consumed together with rice and vegetables (FAO, 2019). GLDC crops already represent a viable and healthy dietary option, especially among the poorest sections of the population. Sorghums and millets contain valuable micro-nutrients including iron

However, micro and macro nutrients deficiencies are only part of the solution to improved diets and health outcomes as this is compounded by poverty and other health issues, gender dynamics and problems of food access and affordability. These issues have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Raising income in urban centres and in the global north is creating market interest in functional food could present an opportunity for GLDC crops because of their inherent traits but also as a commodity that could be bred with novel traits: for example high oleic oil ground nuts or golden sorghum

BUT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD? WHAT ARE PATHWAYS THAT LINK SMALLHOLDER FARMERS TO OPPORTUNITIES AND HOW FEASIBLE ARE THESE?

OPPORTUNITY AND PATHWAY

Nutritious GLDC CROPS PRODUCED AND CONSUMED BY THE POOR



Promotion and awareness



Breeding to introduce varieties with functional properties

Nutritious GLDC CROPS CREATE NEW DOMESTIC MARKET OPPORTUNITIES



Promotion campaigns create demand



Policy changes encourage novel uses/ stimulate demand



Preferences of higher income consumers create demand

GLOBAL DEMAND FOR FFS CREATES NEW INTERNATIONAL MARKETS FOR GLDC CROPS



Global/regional value chains source GLDC to supply rich country demand for functional foods

ANTICIPATED OUTCOME

Improved nutrition of small holder farmers producing GLDC crops

New market demands will lead to improved profitability/increased income for GLDC farmers

demand for FFs and PBM grows globally, creating new high value markets opportunities for small scale farmers

ASSUMPTIONS

Farmers are mainly consuming the GLDC crops that they produce (surpluses will be sold to other poor consumers)

people are willing to change dietary patterns

improved diets will led directly to improved nutrition and health

Consumers change food preferences

Niche products create sufficient demand to increase prices to farmers

Farmers have access to and can grow varieties preferred by the market

Willingness of private sector to invest, develop and produce foods with functional properties

Government willing and able to integrate the poor in the value chain and insulate the poor from shocks

Farmers have access to and can grow varieties preferred by the market

Willingness of private sector to invest, develop and produce foods with functional properties

Private sector or big multinational will not capture the market

NECESSARY CONDITIONS

the government is willing to set up an integrated set of policies that enable promotion including health campaigns

the private sector will supply new seed varieties

Willingness of consumers to pay for niche products

The private sector will supply new seed varieties adapted to niche products

Export policy, collective marketing and governance of global value chains actively supports procurement from the smallholder sector (

eg

fairtrade

coco)

 TRADE OFFS

Nutritious crops for self consumption may compete with cash crops grown for the market

Farm household may have better nutrition but it won’t deal with other dimensions of health such as poverty (won’t increase farm incomes) and may not match with farmers aspirations

Farmers who do not adopt these crops are worse off

Small farmers might be worse off compared to medium large scale farmers

Price raises make nutritious food unaffordable by poor non-farm consumers

If not supported properly, scaling can endanger poor producers (cant compete) and consumers (can’t afford) instead of benefitting them

Pathway 1: Crops produced and consumed by the poor: the case of

Orange Flesh Sweet Potato (OFSP)Orange Flesh Sweet Potato (OFSP)Improved vitamin A intake in rural and poor communities in several regions Policies: product ownership remains with small/medium size farmers Committed leadership for innovation for over 20 years: critical for scalingStrong evidence base: prerequisite for obtaining donor support for scaling

Common vision for diverse organizations involved in scaling

Four dimensions addressed for scaling

Technical

: evidence of benefits

Organizational:

research go beyond traditional mandate of breeding/applied research; focus on facilitation and dissemination in collaboration with partners

Leadership

combined with institutional environment drove organizations to adapt and change

Institutional

supportive policies and institutions

Pathway 2: Creation of new domestic market opportunities:

the case of amaranth in east africa

High quality protein, also rich in fibre and unsaturated fatty acids

Not really any adverse effect from the introduction of Amaranth, whose promotion benefitted to certain segments of the population .

However, the crop diffusion has remained limited to niche markets

especially in urban areas,

by specific consumer groups, such as high‐performance athletes, malnourished children, and people suffering from diabetes and coeliac disease.

Pathway 3 Creation of new International Markets

: the case of quinoaQuinoa was marketed as the “miracle grain” of the Andes. Quinoa went global, and international sales soared  for small-scale quinoa farmers, the rising popularity of the crop could represent a significant opportunity. However, as quinoa popularity and demand increased globally (especially from consumers in the US, Canada, Australia and the UK) this generated unanticipated consequences (Perez, Nicklin, and Paz, 2011):Demand for quinoa pushed up prices  Now “more expensive than chicken” quinoa has become too expensive for locals, who rather have to consume cheaper junk food

medium and large-scale farmers started to commercialize their quinoa production

 risk of establishment of monocultures, less diversified production, more reliant on volatile global markets

Increased mechanization of processes (e.g. use of tractors, pesticides etc.)



concerns over long-term sustainability of quinoa production, and its effects on soil health and biodiversity

Pathway 3 Creation of new International Markets

: The case of plant-based MeatsIncreasing global demand for plant-based meats (PBM): increasing awareness of environmental sustainability, health and safety concerns, animal rights/welfare of meat consumption; but mainly in Global North2018: US plant-based foods retail market grew five times faster than total US retail food salesDespite growing demand,

critical issues remain

Willingness to replace meat with substitutes remains low

Consumer awareness of environmental impact of meat production remain low

Little political effort to reduce meat and dairy consumption in the Global North

Is this an opportunity for GLDC crops? PBM mostly based on pea protein isolated extracted from yellow peas

Pigeon pea not used as protein source: yellow peas often preferred due to relatively neutral color and flavor

Is this an opportunity for

poor producers in low income

countries?

PBM likely to expand in areas with existing food manufacturing (plant/machinery, labor skills, supply chain infrastructure)

Often cited opportunities for Australian and US farmers to grow legumes and grains for PBM

How to become competitive vis-à-vis industrial producers (US, Australia)?

Conclusion: no current realistic prospect for poor producers to be integrated into the PBM value chain

Recommendations

Pathway 1. A no-regret strategy

GLDC crops:already have a range of desirable nutritional properties are widely consumed by smallholders and poor consumers more generally.there are already domestic and, in some cases, established export markets for these crops.

A no-regrets strategy would be to further enhance the existing functional properties of these crops.

Pathway 2 The scale challenge of promoting niche product

Can create new high value market for smallholdersNutritional benefits more targeted at higher income groups, national benefits may not spill over to poor consumers unless specifically targetedIntroducing FFs in niche markets could be a pathway, but the potential to scale these niches remain uncertain. Best left to local development agencies work on community scale initiatives

Pathway 3. The fallacy of miracle nutritional crops

Global value chain will not preference the procurement of high value crops from small holders unless regulations and standards are in place to promote this (e.g. fair trade, provenance labeling etc )Farmers in the Global North have a comparative advantage in producing ”miracle crops” e.g. quinoaInternational competition and fluctuating prices and policy and regulatory shifts make this a risky strategy for smallholders

Opportunities abound, but there is a need for realism about the feasible of these and an understanding of the impact pathways and scaling logics associated with these opportunities

There are 4 consideration in investing in GLDC crops to improve nutritional properties areFeasibility -- is there a likelihood that the opportunity can be made to work for the poor, given the power dynamics and risks and uncertainty in global markets ? Can income and nutrition trade-offs be reconciled?Scalability -- is an opportunity an that can trigger wider transformations in agri-food systems that enables scaling beyond pilots and niches? Is the opportunity more in the domain of local agency acting at a community scale?Humility – is this something that can be led by crop improvement originations or does it need to be part of a consortium approach with national and international agencies with broader nutritional and health mandates?Probity -- is this an opportunity that puts smallholder farmers at risk (e.g. from global market competition) and what trade-offs might arise that will require further policy, regulatory or technology responses to mitigate down sides

References:

Diplock, A., Aggett, P., Ashwell, M., Bornet, F., Fern, E. and Roberfroid, M., 1999. Scientific Concepts of Functional Foods in Europe Consensus Document. British Journal of Nutrition, 81(4), pp.S1-S27.FAO. 2019. The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2019. Rome, Italy.Grand View Research, 2019. Functional Foods Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By Ingredient (Carotenoids, Prebiotics & Probiotics, Fatty Acids, Dietary Fibers), By Product, By Application, And Segment Forecasts, 2019–2025. [online] Available at: <https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/functional- food-market> [Accessed 21 April 2020].Hite, A. H. and Bernstein, L. H. (2012) ‘Functional foods: Needs, claims, and benefits’, Nutrition

. Elsevier, pp. 338–339.

doi

: 10.1016/j.nut.2011.08.016.

HLPE. 2017. Nutrition and food systems. A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome

Perez, C.,

Nicklin, C. and

Paz, S., 2011.

Food crisis, small-scale farmers, and markets in the Andes. 

Development in Practice

, 21(4-5), pp.566-577.