Journal of Food Processing & Technology

Direct and Indirect Effects of Food Security and Reductions of Bioavailability

Marilyn Kunstadt^* Department of Food Security, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA
^*Correspondence: Marilyn Kunstadt, Department of Food Security, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA, Email:

Received: 02-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. JFPT-23-20093; Editor assigned: 06-Feb-2023, Pre QC No. JFPT-23-20093 (PQ); Reviewed: 20-Feb-2023, QC No. JFPT-23-20093; Revised: 27-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. JFPT-23-20093 (R); Published: 06-Mar-2023, DOI: 10.35248/2157-7110.23.14.984

Description

Food insecurity may be brought on disseminated, and prolonged by extreme events brought on by climate change, economic or geopolitical shocks, and pest or disease epidemics. They accomplish this by lowering agricultural and fishing output, endangering subsistence, and interfering with public service delivery and food distribution. Instability in politics and the volatility of food prices can also be caused by extreme catastrophes. The bioavailability and access to wholesome foods are decreased as a result of these direct and indirect effects. The magnitude, extent, and complexity of the threats posed by extreme events to global food security can further create cascading and systemic impacts that are difficult to predict or plan and prepare. Despite significant attention being paid to studies on severe events and food security, many important areas are still not related. For instance, significant study has been done on how extreme weather affects crop yields, but little has been done to link this to supply chain disruptions. Similar to this, policy on extreme events and food security has mainly concentrated on isolated interventions, such as dealing with urgent energy, financial, or trade problems, rather than systemic interventions to improve long-term resilience to multiple types of shocks for multiple nations at the same time. Due to their scale, breadth, and complexity, extreme events pose a variety of major challenges to global food security. Systemic consequences that result from these hazards may be difficult to anticipate, plan, and minimize.

Although if study on severe events and food security continues to be a top priority, many crucial areas are still not connected. For instance, there has been a lot of study on how agricultural yields are affected by extreme weather, but less on how supply chain interruptions are related to these effects. Similar to this, policy on severe events and food security has primarily concentrated on specific initiatives, such as those to solve urgent energy, financial, or trade challenges, rather than systemic actions to strengthen long-term resilience to numerous kinds of shocks for multiple nations. Although extreme events and global food security are studied by the scholarly community, our food systems continue to be negatively impacted by civilization. The two main issues that stand in the way of successful action are listed below. First, there is the complexity of causation, or the variety of risks and events that might co-occur, as well as the numerous ways that risks can put society at risk through exposures and vulnerabilities. The relative effectiveness of various proposed remedies is a subject of intense scientific and political debate. Both of these elements need professional elicitation. Such synthesis could help identify issues and solutions that current data or models might not be able to resolve with an acceptable level of certainty, find points of agreement, balance points of view, and ultimately help both researchers and funding agencies best direct their combined efforts and resources to assist society in addressing these significant risks to the food system.

It is also appropriate to do a horizon scan and priority setting exercise given the continuing problems affecting food systems, including COVID-19, harsh weather, and other wars. Nevertheless, these simulations have not been used to determine priorities for extreme events and food security. Priorities and research gaps are frequently set by individual and organisations, which has the effect of potentially obscuring significant transdisciplinary goals. Experts should get together in an effort to reach agreement on research and action goals to lessen the impact of severe events on food poverty. Finding significant dangers and research gaps for knowledge development and implementation must be a crucial component of this. To close these implementation gaps, a more thorough analysis of trade-offs in policymaking, factors influencing the adoption of new management practises or technologies, and an evaluation of the value of various knowledge generation processes, given varying capacities for access and utilisation across various contexts, will be necessary. In this study, we surveyed 69 food system experts from a variety of academic fields and subfields, institutional backgrounds, levels of seniority, and geographic focus to determine the most important risks to the food system and research opportunities. Our findings priorities the risks that severe events pose to global food security and highlight new research issues that emphasise the conceptual and practical difficulties involved in developing, implementing, and managing resilient food systems.