Maximizing Nutritional
Benefits of Agricultural
Interventions
Do good, but above all do no harm
Tom Schaetzel
Infant & Young Child Nutrition (IYCN) Project
The Infant & Young Child Nutrition Project
•
USAID Global Health Bureau flagship project
on infant and young child nutrition.
•
Aims to prevent malnutrition for mothers and
children during the critical time from
pregnancy until two years of age.
•
Led by PATH in collaboration with CARE,
The Manoff Group, and University Research
Co., LLC.
Photo: PATH/Evelyn Hockstein
Why IYCN Project and Agriculture?
•
Protect nutritionally vulnerable
groups.
•
Ensure interventions promote
improved nutrition.
•
Avoid working at cross
purposes.
•
Build capacity among our staff
to advise on agriculture and
nutrition.
Photo: PATH/Nicole Racine
A New Era for Agricultural Development
Source: Farming First
A New Era
Initiative
L’Aquila Food Security
Initiative (AFSI)
Funding
$22 billion over 3 years
Global Agriculture and
$900 million over 3 years
Food Security Programme (so far)
(GAFSP)
Cereal Systems Initiative
for South Asia (CSISA)
$30 million
Feed the Future (FTF)
$3.5 billion (more expected
from private sector)
Source: Farming First
Does Increased Agricultural
Production Improve Nutrition?
“…one of the most persistent
of misperceptions…about
technology and economics…is
the idea that as long as
production is rising, any
problems of consumption will
sort themselves out.”
Pacey and Payne, 1985
Photo: © 2008 Monirul Alam, Courtesy of Photoshare
Does Increased Income Improve
Nutrition?
Not everything can be bought…
Health
Clean Water
Education
Gender Equality
Photos: PATH
“Income is a rather dubious indicator of the opportunity of being
well nourished….” (Drèze and Sen, 1989)
Problem
There are trade offs and complementarities
between production/employment goals and
meeting nutritional goals which should be taken
into account…when making program decisions.
(USAID, 1982)
•
How can we maximize the complementarities?
•
How can we minimize the tradeoffs?
Review of Experience
•
What are the characteristics of agriculture
interventions that:
– Improve food security?
– Improve nutrition?
•
What are the characteristics of interventions that
have negative effects?
Negative Food Security Impact
•
Increase un- or under-employment among
population groups already un- or under-employed.
•
Increase food prices when vulnerable households
are net purchasers.
•
Reduce food prices when vulnerable households
are net sellers.
•
Shift cultivation to cash crops when the shift
decreases labor utilization.
Positive Food Security Impact is
More Likely When Promoting…
•
Agricultural tasks normally
performed by women.
•
Small-scale processing.
•
Food disproportionately
consumed by food insecure
households.
Photo: QFP/Mario DiBari
Positive Nutrition Impacts are More
Likely When…
•
Vulnerable households regularly consume the
food commodity being produced.
•
The intervention includes explicit nutrition
counseling.
•
The intervention includes home gardens.
•
The project introduces micronutrient-rich crop
varieties.
Positive Nutrition Impacts are More
Likely When…
•
They are designed to benefit
or protect more nutritionally
vulnerable populations at
project inception.
Photo: PATH
Solutions
•
Include meaningful nutrition
objectives in project design (with
activities supporting them).
•
Protect nutritional considerations
in the design of production/income
projects.
Photo: QFP/Mario DiBari
Introducing Meaningful Nutrition
Objectives
•
Many agricultural projects already include “nutrition”
objectives…
•
What are meaningful objectives?
– Who is vulnerable?
– Who is already worst off?
– What is likely to change?
– What are the intermediate steps to improved
nutritional status?
Incorporating a Nutrition Objective
•
State the objective.
•
Specify a population already suffering from high
malnutrition prevalence.
•
Group should be likely to be affected by the
agricultural intervention.
•
SMART: specific, measurable, attainable, relevant
and time-bound.
•
Choose appropriate indicators (nutrition-related).
Supporting Objectives with Activities
•
Reduce stunting (chronic malnutrition)
– Treating acute malnutrition will have little
impact.
•
Reduce wasting
– May need sanitation, improved health care
in order to show impact.
•
Reduce underweight among women
– May need to incorporate family planning,
women’s workload.
Designing Activities
•
Include nutrition programming expertise on
design team
•
“Nutrition Program Design Assistant”
http://www.coregroup.org/component/content/article/119
Avoiding Negative Impacts: the
Nutritional Impact Assessment Tool
•
Similar to environmental
and gender impact
assessments.
•
Designed for agriculture
program planners to
consider nutrition
impacts on vulnerable
groups.
How does it work?
Step 1 Define population groups at risk.
Step 2 Describe nutrition situation.
Step 3 Create implementation alternatives.
Step 4 Estimate likely outcomes.
Step 5 Modify as needed.
Step 6 Assess and select alternatives.
Step 7 Design mitigation plan.
Step 8 Develop review plan.
Step 1: Define Population Groups
Likely At-risk
•
Functional groups likely to be at risk may
include:
– Small landowning households.
– Households selling labor.
– Female-headed households.
– Socially-excluded households (ethnicity,
caste, occupation).
– Households with chronically ill head.
Step 2: Describe Nutrition Situation for
At-risk Population Groups
•
Obtain (disaggregated) data on any of the
following for children < 2 (or under 5) and for
reproductive-age girls and women.
– Caloric intake (nutrient intake if possible).
– Dietary diversity.
– Nutritional status (anthropometric).
– Vitamin A and iron status (or intake).
•
Identify groups with highest risk.
Step 3: Create Implementation
Alternatives
•
Create at least two alternative implementation
options for meeting the stated project
objectives.
Original plan: Increase household income by
expanding tobacco production.
Alternative 1: Increase household income by
expanding maize production
Alternative 2: Increase household income by
introducing ponds and small-scale
fisheries
Step 4: Estimate Likely Outcomes for
High Risk Groups According to
Alternatives
•
Do the vulnerable groups consume the
commodities?
•
What impact will the intervention have on food
prices? Are vulnerable households net sellers,
or net purchasers?
•
What will be the impact on women’s time?
Women’s labor and income?
•
What will be the impact on vulnerable children’s
diet?
Step 5: Modify Plans as Needed
•
If estimate that substantial negative impact is
likely for a vulnerable group…
– modify project design (or accept alternative)
– repeat impact assessment.
•
Otherwise proceed to next step.
Step 6: Assess Alternatives and
Justify Selection
•
Rank all approaches based on impact score.
•
If the selected approach ranks lower than an
alternative justify the decision for keeping it.
•
The final approach adopted does not
necessarily need to be the one that would
produce the best nutritional impact.
Step 7: Mitigation Plans
•
Prepare a mitigation plan to be implemented if
negative impacts occur.
– Specify activities
– Specify “trigger” points for modifying project.
– Describe budgetary adjustments.
•
Define the process for monitoring nutritional
impacts over the course of the project
– Indicators
– Data collection plan
Step 8: NIA Review Plan
•
Process for review, including timeline and the
groups and/or individuals to conduct the review.
•
Ensures a realistic assessment.
Moving forward
•
Avoid assumptions that production or income
increases automatically improve nutrition
•
Focus attention on nutritionally vulnerable
groups.
•
Help us test/use the Nutritional Impact
Assessment Tool.
•
Contact us for technical assistance.
Thank you
Contact me: [email protected]