Why food systems governance must be grounded in human rights

This Nature Food correspondence was written in the lead up to the UNFSS+4 Stocktake in 2025, as a 'parallel' stocktaking of the Summit through a human rights lens. Using selected PANTHER principles (Participation, Accountability, Non-discrimination, Transparency, Human Dignity, Empowerment, Rule of Law) the authors evaluate the Summit through three key tenets of a rights-based approach:

Transparent governance: there is little clarity about how partnerships form, how funding is allocated and how committee members are selected.

Direct participation by affected rights holders: small-scale food providers and workers face substantial barriers to engaging in decision-making, and participants in the Stakeholder Engagement and Networking Advisory (SENA) Group are hand-picked by UN officials.

Accountability grounded in the obligations of duty bearers: the UNFSS's new Corporate Accountability Framework is rooted in voluntarism rather than binding regulation.

The authors argue that the UNFSS’s  private sector-led approach lacks transparency and accountability mechanisms, and risks entrenching the inequitable structures that drive food system injustices. Despite claims to inclusivity, the UNFSS's participatory mechanisms are organised in a top-down ad hoc manner that lack democratic legitimacy and exclude those most affected - majority world food providers and workers.The UNFSS further fragments global food governance, and draws resources away from more legitimate forums such as the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) which is the only UN body that has enshrined a right of small scale food providers and rights holders to participate meaningfully in food governance and policy discussions.