The documentation of case studies to demonstrate that alternative approaches are possible will be one key civil society tool for advocating positions at the WFS:fyl.
There are five issues for case study documentation identified for priority attention.
The issues and their facilitating groups responsible for receiving contributions of case studies and preparing the draft documents are described below.
The first group listed has primary responsibility but is responsible to work in collaboration with the others to identify relevant case studies.

1.    International Code of Conduct on the Right to Adequate Food

The idea of developing an International Code on the Human Right to Adequate Food originated in the NGO preparation of the World Food Summit (WFS, Rome - 1996). This continuing effort to secure a new legal instrument to give the final documents from the WFS more strength, as the implementation and promotion of the right to adequate food must become a central objective of all States and other relevant actors in order to end hunger and malnutrition. While the right to adequate food is firmly established as a fundamental right, it needs to be further elaborated to facilitate its implementation.
Addressing this issue is an ambiguous task as the right to food is a concept that cannot be applied by NGOs/CSOs on their own, disregarding legislation and government action. What can be done in this case is to show what kind of advocacy work has been done, what national governments and parliaments have assumed and the impacts of positive action.
Particular attention should be given to identify the practical policies, either applied or proposed by NGOs/CSOs, and how they can ensure this right.
Three key topics to be covered include: proposing new commitments for implementing the results of the WFS; calling for a rights approach to development work; and identifying what can be done at national level.
FIAN is currently writing a paper which will address these and other issues, and will identify 2-3 case studies for each region.
Facilitators: Michael Windfuhr, FIAN, Germany (jh1@aixterm1.urz.uni-heidelberg.de) and Biplap Halim, IMSE/ANFEC, India (bipimse@cal.vsnl.net.in )

2.    Food Sovereignty

Food sovereignty is the right of each nation and its peoples to maintain and develop its own capacity to produce the people's basic food, while respecting productive and cultural diversity.  Food sovereignty is a pre-condition for a genuine food security.
Key issues in the concept of food sovereignty are:
a)    Political power is the right of each nation to determine it's own food and agriculture policies
b)    Local food producing capacity for local and regional markets
c)    Participation by producers in decision-making processes

Questions to be addressed include the concept of fair trade, including no-dumping, national governments policies regarding relations with international markets, and the consequences for food security at the national level. In the case of policies that have protected national food security, it is important to know about them and the reactions these governments have had to face both nationally and internationally. Recommendations should address how we can develop and defend policies which are protective and supportive of local, regional markets.
IATP will work in consultation with Via Campesina and other groups active on this issue, perhaps the most contentious and difficult of all of the commitments agreed by governments at the WFS in 1996 as it deals with trade and globalisation.  This is an area where civil society may not be completely in agreement on recommendations, and this should be recognised in the document prepared.
Facilitators: Steve Suppan, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, US (ssuppan@iatp.org)
and Paul Nicholson, Via Campesina (pnicholson@ehne.org ); Tony Tujan, Asia-Pacific Research Network, Philippines.

3.    Agricultural Production Models

This group will draw on extensive materials already prepared, ensuring examples from every region. The case studies should define what agroecology and other sustainable agricultural practices are, what kind of food security we are talking about and for whom, the impacts of industrialized agriculture on food security, and the impacts on food security of 'assets-based” best practice, including on environment, community, human capital and the economy.
The case study will document the principles and impacts of different agroecological methods of production, showing in different agro-ecosystems the comparison between industrial and agroeecological methods, and results such as similar or increased yields, increased biodiversity, better economy of inputs, enhanced quality of life for producers and community structure.

Facilitators: Jean Marc von der Weid, AS-PTA, Brazil and CGIAR NGO-Committee, (aspta@ax.apc.org); Jules Pretty, Center for Environment and Society, University of Essex, UK (jpretty@essex.ac.uk); Miguel Altieri, University of California, Berkeley; Anamarija Slabe, Institute for Sustainable Development, Slovenia (anamarija.slabe@itr.si); Linda Elswick, International Partners for Sustainable Agriculture, US (ipsa@igc.org)  and Sarojeni V. Rengam, Malaysia (panap@panap.po.my) (in cooperation with Farhad Mazhar, UBINIG, Bangladesh and Luis Gomero, RAAA, Peru)

4.    Access to productive resources (land, water and genetic resources; land reform and security of tenure)

Focal points will address factors related to various resources, discussing policy issues and identifying practical examples related to land, water, and genetic resources as well as land reform and security of tenure. Concerns to be addressed will include the need for decentralized access to water; how recommendations can become policy; how traditional agriculture preserve agricultural biodiversity and how to re-introduce agrobiodiversity as a specific strategy. Both animal genetic diversity and crop diversity will be included. The facilitating groups will note such issues as the erosion of agrobiodiversity and the privatization of it; the GMO threat and negative impacts on food security; the experiences with conservation of biodiversity and how have these affected food security.
The links between food security and conflict over land and resources, as well as urban-rural migration particularly since the Green Revolution and experiences with agrarian reform. Both the expense and cost of impact of reduced access to land on food security will be documented, comparing and contrasting the impact of the World Bank model on the privatization of land with other models.

Groups identified to facilitate are:
Land/Land Tenure: Peter Rosset, Food First, US (rosset@foodfirst.org); Bruce Moore, The Popular Coalition to Eradicate Hunger and Poverty, Italy (bmoore@ifad.org);  Michael Windfuhr, FIAN, Germany (jh1@aixterm1.urz.uni-heidelberg.de) and Via Campesina (cpe@cpefarmers.org)
Genetic Resources: Mr. Elfrieda, Biowatch, South Africa (esp@intekom.co.za), Pat Mooney, RAFI, Canada (rafi@rafi.org ); Henk Hobbelink, GRAIN, Spain (henk@grain.org); and Patrick Mulvany, IITG, UK (Patrick_Mulvany@CompuServe.com ) or
(patrickm@itdg.org.uk); Neth Dano, SEARICE and Rafael Mariano, KMP, Philippines

Water: Anil Agarwal, Centre for Science and Environment, India (cse@cseindia.org)

5.    Democracy and civil society involvement

Community empowerment and the national institutional arrangements to foster its capacity and legitimacy are essential. At the same time, it is crucial that governments acknowledge their full responsibility and take effective action towards obtaining food security for all. The existence of international mechanisms should aim to support economic, cultural, social and political processes of democratization at the country level, rather than encouraging their marginalization.
Facilitators:  Elena Mancusi-Materi and Franck Almaric, Society for International Development (SID), Italy (elenam@sidint.org) (francka@sidint.org); Irene Fernandez, Tenaganita, Malaysia; Fathima Burnad, c/o APNLD, Thailand.



Terms of Reference (TOR) - Guidelines

A 6-8 page paper will be developed for each of five issue areas analyzing the situation of food security and addressing the political context. The following structure should be used consistently for all five areas:
1.    Stocktaking - review of commitments made at the 1996 World Food Summit
2.    Document experiences of civil society in this area since the Summit
3.    Identify experiences/actions of governments since 1996
4.    Identify experiences/actions of governments blocks (ie EU) and inter-governmental institutions as relevant to the issue area (WTO, FAO, UNEP, CBD, etc.)
5.    Propose recommended policy alternatives that are viable and feasible approaches to addressing the problem of food security

The actual case studies identified to support the recommendations being made in the 6-8 page paper will be the second part of the documentation. This should not be lengthy as the level of translation and printing support is unknown.
The document should be prepared with a view towards serving several purposes: the NGO public forum, the official process within FAO, the WTO Qatar meeting, and the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.
Gender concerns should be integrated throughout the analysis and case studies cited. Relevant new issues not on the agenda at WFS should also be raised, including GMOs, intensive livestock feeding operations and new food safety concerns such as mad cow and hoof and mouth diseases, etc.
The five issue areas will be developed independently by the facilitating groups responsible.
Jean Marc von der Weid of AS-PTA, Brazil, and the CGIAR/NGO Committee is the international coordinator of case study preparation. He will work with a small synthesis committee to ensure that the material developed is coherent and comparable prior to final production. A draft will be made available to Regional Coordinators prior to regional meetings.
FAO will provide translation of the 6-8 page synthesis piece for each issue area in French and Spanish, but not necessarily any additional pages of case study material.
Timeline/Calendar

Beginning immediately with the 6-8 page synthesis of each issue area's concerns, each facilitating group is to identify and draw upon as much existing case study material as possible. There is no time or need to conduct new research.
Groups at national and regional level should have access to the information for their preparatory work as soon as possible. A draft document should be prepared before the end of August, when the first of the regional preparatory meetings for CFS is to occur. The six-eight page paper should be developed first, with additional case studies for documentation second. A final text will be prepared after the preparatory meetings in each region have been completed.  National and regional processes may produce additional examples which would be useful to include in the final documentation.