A/HRC/22/50/Add.1 stabilizing function and no longer meet the specific requirements of small producers, leading to further concentration in the grains sector. 27. In contrast, the various supply management schemes in dairy, poultry and eggs, present advantages both for food producers and taxpayers. These legislated marketing tools have been designed to impose disciplines on sellers at a commodity-specific level and to replace a farmer-against-farmer competitiveness with a united and concerted effort by farmers to sell collectively for mutual advantage. Orderly marketing has helped ensure that a fair amount of market power remains in the hands of farmers, ensuring the viability of a number of food sectors. It has also enabled remote areas to keep farm production and processing facilities, mitigating the distribution costs to consumers living in those areas. At the same time, supply management schemes allow quotas to be traded without controls along the lines of highest bidders among licensed producers. Values may therefore go up dramatically and capitalization costs for farmers rise accordingly, limiting new entry in the sector. The system should be strengthened for its advantages, but reformed with a view to a greater equity and to facilitate entry of new farmers. 28. The Special Rapporteur believes that far greater attention should be paid to the need to allow local food systems to develop. The 2007 Status Report by Agriculture and AgriFood Canada noted that “the increasing consumer interest in local food around the globe could shut Canadian producers out of the export markets we have come to rely upon,” making it imperative for Canada to create its own markets for locally-grown food. It further noted that “Canada’s historical focus on an export food system has impeded efforts to build a healthy domestic food system;” and that the policy framework “is a significant barrier to local food systems.”25 29. The Special Rapporteur concurs. He expresses the hope that these concerns will be considered in the elaboration of Canada’s next five-year agricultural policy agreement, Growing Forward 2 (2013-2018). This initiative presents an opportunity for the Government to meet the country’s considerable environmental, public health and food insecurity challenges, and to respond to the expectations expressed by the food movement by ensuring active and meaningful participation in the process of shaping the new policy. V. Food accessibility: protecting access to food for the poorest A. Social protection 30. Poverty affects some 3 million Canadians. In 2010, 550,000 children lived in foodinsecure households. In First Nations families, one in four children lives in poverty. Poverty is one of the leading factors that impede access to adequate food, as acknowledged by the Government in its Fifth Progress Report on Food Security: In Response to the World Food Summit Plan of Action (2008). Social protection plays an important role in improving food security. As such, establishing a comprehensive social protection system is one policy measure to enable the poorest and most disadvantaged to realize their right to adequate food, among other rights. In the absence of a national poverty reduction strategy, the Special Rapporteur is encouraged to learn that out of the 13 provinces and territories, 11 have adopted or are committed to adopting poverty reduction strategies. 25 10 Act in force at the time. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sectoral Policy Directorate, Local and Regional Food Economies in Canada: Status Report, March 31, 2007.