CGIAR Research ProgramAgriculture for Nutritionand Health (A4NH)
Outline• A4NH research portfolio and fit within the CGIAR (John)• IDOs, indicators and metrics – effect of interventions a...
CGIAR Research Agenda
Common IDOs across CRPs• Productivity (crop/system/ food system)• Food security• Nutrition and Health• Income• Gender• Cap...
Draft A4NH Results FrameworkImproved dietqualityReduced exposure tocauses of agriculture-associated diseaseEmpowerment of ...
Aflatoxin: a coordinated CGIAR agendaMAIZEControl Technologies- Bio-control- Breeding / resistancePost-Harvest Technologie...
Biofortification – Orange-Flesh Sweet PotatoesA4NH RTBBreeding /germplasmdevelopment Leads high-throughputdiagnostics for...
IDOs, indicators and metrics
Indicators for strategic goalsAnthropometry(eg stunting,BMI)AAD disease statusMicronutrientstatus of targetpopulationsImpr...
IDO Indicator Metric(s)Better dietqualityDietary diversity Individual dietary diversity score;prevalence of low dietary di...
Indicator Size of impact onindicatorScale of impactIDO: Better diet qualityDietary diversityIntake of selectedmicronutrien...
2011CassavaProvitamin ADR Congo, Nigeria2012BeansIron (Zinc)DR Congo, Rwanda2012MaizeProvitamin AZambia2012Pearl MilletIro...
IDO: Better diet qualityIndicator Size of impact onindicatorScale of impactIntake of selectedmicronutrient(s) by womenand ...
Return on investment:example of ex-ante analysis• Meenakshi et al 2010- (multi-country global); Stein et al 2011(LAC); upd...
CropCountry (or region) Provitamin A Iron ZincPess. Opt. Pess. Opt. Pess. Opt.Cassava Congo, DR 3 32Nigeria 3 28NortheastB...
Crop (micronutrient)Country R&D costs(years 1-8)Adaptivebreeding(years 5-10)highassumptionDissemination(years 11-18)highas...
Crop Country (or region) Provitamin A Iron ZincPess. Opt. Pess. Opt. Pess. Opt.Cassava Congo, DR 123.8 7.6Nigeria 137.4 7....
Integrated agriculture and nutrition programsKey outputs:• A critical body of evidence onwhat works, how, and at whatcost ...
IDO: Better diet qualityIndicator Size of impact on indicator Scale of impactDietary diversity Mean dietary diversity incr...
Scaling up: a frameworkVISION/GOALImpacts (outcomes, benefits)CAPACITY ELEMENTSINSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTSACTIVITIESSparksC...
Quantitative(scaling out)SpreadReplicationNurtureIntegrationFunctional HorizontalVerticalPolitical From service delivery, ...
Other research areas
23Internationalagriculturalhealth researchHumanhealthAgro-EcosystemsAnimalhealthHEALTH STAKEHOLDERS• International organis...
Mapping & measuring the multiple burdens of FOOD BORNE DISEASE
THE CORE PROBLEMTHECAUSESLost opportunities for smallholders in marketsLimitedaccess toinputsInappropriatescale &technolog...
One Health approaches showing how to better understand andmanage zoonoses and emerging infections• Published special editi...
Inputs into productionFood productionFood storage and processingFood distribution and transportFood retail and labelingVal...
20058738525538513024Bangladesh: Food Group Shares ofTotal Food Supply (kcal/capita/day)Grains, Roots, and TubersLegumes an...
LEVERAGING AGRICULTURE FOR NUTRITIONIN SOUTH ASIA (LANSA)DfID funded Research Programme ConsortiumThe core question that L...
LANSA’s Research Agenda• Three Research Pillars:• Pillar 1 : How enabling is the wider context in linking agriculture andf...
DRAFT: Theory of change for A4NH policy flagshipBetter cross-sector policies, programs andinvestmentsPolicy and practiceco...
1Policy and practicecommunitiesincorporate newknowledge intodiscourse, attitudes,behavioursPolicyrecommendationsResearchup...
Figure 1: Partnership typesPartnersNationalMinistries ofagriculture and foreignaffairs, donors (globaland country missions...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

A4NH – Presentation for Discussion with Donors and Partners – June 2013

9,158 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
9,158
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5,085
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
39
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

A4NH – Presentation for Discussion with Donors and Partners – June 2013

  1. 1. CGIAR Research ProgramAgriculture for Nutritionand Health (A4NH)
  2. 2. Outline• A4NH research portfolio and fit within the CGIAR (John)• IDOs, indicators and metrics – effect of interventions and going toscale (biofortification, integrated programs) – Nancy and Stuart• Research areas we want to accelerate (impact pathways / theory ofchange / research strategy and role (as appropriate)– Food safety and Agricultural disease risk – Delia– Value chains and healthy diets – Maximo– Cross - sectoral policy processes – LANSA (Prakesh) and otherstrategic issues (Stuart)– Nutrition and health-sensitive landscapes – John• Partnerships (John)– Private sector– Country capacity – CAADP / SUN (initial discussions)
  3. 3. CGIAR Research Agenda
  4. 4. Common IDOs across CRPs• Productivity (crop/system/ food system)• Food security• Nutrition and Health• Income• Gender• Capacity to innovate• Risk Management (adaptive capacity)• Policies – enabling environment/ institutions• Environment• Future Options• Climate
  5. 5. Draft A4NH Results FrameworkImproved dietqualityReduced exposure tocauses of agriculture-associated diseaseEmpowerment of womenand poor communitiesBetter cross-sector policies, programs andinvestmentsFood safetyBiofortificationCross-sectoralprocessesNutrition-sensitivelandscapesImprovednutritional statusImprovedhealth statusValue chains &healthy dietsIntegrated programsCRP strategicgoalsCRP IDOsCRPResearchPortfolioAgriculturaldisease risk
  6. 6. Aflatoxin: a coordinated CGIAR agendaMAIZEControl Technologies- Bio-control- Breeding / resistancePost-Harvest Technologies- Storage and HandlingSurveillance/Diagnose MaizeMaize Value Chains- Organization of chains- Integration of control- Standards and certification- Economic incentives andrisk assessment- Impact assessmentGRAIN LEGUMESControl Technologies- Bio-control- Breeding / resistancePost-Harvest Technologies- Storage and HandlingSurveille/Diagnose G_nutsG-nut Value Chains- Organization of chains- Integration of control- Standards and certification- Economic incentives andrisk assessment- Impact assessmentAG/NUTRITION/HEALTHUnderstanding ag /nutrition / health effectsRisk assessment (ag-health)– analysis and assessmentof mitigation technologiesMethods ag-health impactsPrioritization and impactassessment of ag-healthrisks and impacts- In value chains- Cross-sectoral metricsand policy processes
  7. 7. Biofortification – Orange-Flesh Sweet PotatoesA4NH RTBBreeding /germplasmdevelopment Leads high-throughputdiagnostics for vitaminlevels (NIRS) platform and other minerals formost biofortified crops Leads overall breedingprogram. Supports and uses highthrough put diagnosticsfor vitamin levels andother quality traits.Nutritional efficacyand bioavailabilitystudies Primary responsibility  No roleDelivery andEvidence / Advocacy Leads on the nutritionevidence and publicdelivery related toimproving nutrition andhealth in targetpopulations; Leads on key agriculturevalue chain deliveryValue chaincoordination, foodprocessing, foodindustry (like RwandaSuperfoods) andassessing nutritionand health outcomes Joint work, focus onlooking at incentives andarrangements as theyrelate to consumption andimproving nutritionalquality (including gender), Standards for biofortifiedproducts, and food safety. Joint work on processingand foods . Joint work, taking thelead among key valuechain actors related toagri-business, with aparticular focus ongender relations as RTBcommercializationincreases. Joint work onprocessing and foods.
  8. 8. IDOs, indicators and metrics
  9. 9. Indicators for strategic goalsAnthropometry(eg stunting,BMI)AAD disease statusMicronutrientstatus of targetpopulationsImprovednutritional statusImprovedhealth status• Standard burden measures of prevalence or Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) lost• Goal-level indicators collected as part of research butchanges at scale unlikely. A4NH to actively seek jointefforts to reduce stunting in some sites.
  10. 10. IDO Indicator Metric(s)Better dietqualityDietary diversity Individual dietary diversity score;prevalence of low dietary diversity (<4 on a 7 food-groupscale for infants and young children (WHO indicator); and<4 on a 9 food-group scale in adults)Intake of selected foods andmicronutrient(s)Nutrient intake from consumption of target food(s)/totalnutrient intake from all foods consumed ; prevalence of lowmicronutrient intakeReducedexposure tocauses ofagriculture-associateddiseasesExposure to pathogen/hazard in targetfood at point of consumptionPrevalence of pathogen in food X quantity consumed percapita by target beneficiariesDirect exposure to pathogen/hazard inagri-food systemPrevalence of target disease in animal population on farm,at slaughter, at marketReduction in disease emergence and transmissionsopportunitiesEmpowermentWomen’s empowerment in agricultureindex (WEAI)Value of the index and main sub-indicesDegree of participation in decisionsrelated to food, nutrition, and healthScale constructed from responses to individual questionsBetter policies,programs, andinvestments# of countries whose policies or policyprocesses were influenced by A4NHoutputs# of CRPs /development programs/publichealth programs/donor investmentportfolios that are influenced by A4NHoutputs# of countries or programsMeasure of degree of influence (TBD)
  11. 11. Indicator Size of impact onindicatorScale of impactIDO: Better diet qualityDietary diversityIntake of selectedmicronutrient(s) bywomen and childrenIDO: Reduced exposure to causes of AADsExposure topathogen/hazard intarget food at pointof consumptionIDO: Empowerment of women and poor communitiesWEAI and othersBetter policies, programs, and investmentsMeasuring contribution to changes in IDO indicatorsDirectbenefits tobeneficiariesEnablingenvironmentMeasured incontrolledsettingswhereattribution ispossibleDocumentedthroughtracking ofresearchoutcomes(KAS andpractices) bybeneficiaries,implementers,enablers
  12. 12. 2011CassavaProvitamin ADR Congo, Nigeria2012BeansIron (Zinc)DR Congo, Rwanda2012MaizeProvitamin AZambia2012Pearl MilletIron (Zinc)India2013RiceZincBangladesh, India2013WheatZincIndia, PakistanBiofortificationResearch outputs: high micronutrient varieties of verified nutritionalefficacy and strategies to enhance their adoption and impact
  13. 13. IDO: Better diet qualityIndicator Size of impact onindicatorScale of impactIntake of selectedmicronutrient(s) by womenand children25 million micronutrient deficientpeople by 2018 in 8 target countries inAfrica and AsiaIDO: EmpowermentWEAI and others To be determinedBetter policies, programs, and investments# of countries that enact biofortification programs# of breeding programs that include nutritional content in varietal evaluation criteriaSome estimates of the size and scale of impact on IDOindicators for Biofortification
  14. 14. Return on investment:example of ex-ante analysis• Meenakshi et al 2010- (multi-country global); Stein et al 2011(LAC); updated global study coming out end of 2013• Change in micronutrient intake estimated based on changes in:• Micronutrient content of target crop• Processing losses• Per capita consumption of crop by target group• Expected adoption rate of biofortified varieties (proxy for% of consumption that is biofortified)• Using modeling framework developed by Stein et al (2005) torelate micronutrient intake to health outcomes, estimatereduction in DALYs lost to micronutrient deficiencies due towork of HarvestPlus and partners
  15. 15. CropCountry (or region) Provitamin A Iron ZincPess. Opt. Pess. Opt. Pess. Opt.Cassava Congo, DR 3 32Nigeria 3 28NortheastBrazil 4 19Maize Ethiopia 1 17Kenya 8 32Sweetpotato Uganda 38 64Beans Honduras 4 22 3 15Nicaragua 3 16 2 11NortheastBrazil 9 36 5 20Rice Bangladesh 8 21 17 33India 5 15 20 56Philippines 4 11 13 43Wheat India 7 39 9 48Pakistan 6 28 6 37Reduction in DALY burden of micronutrient deficiency through biofortificationunder pessimistic and optimistic scenarios, by nutrient and country (%)Source: Meenakshi et al 2010
  16. 16. Crop (micronutrient)Country R&D costs(years 1-8)Adaptivebreeding(years 5-10)highassumptionDissemination(years 11-18)highassumptionMaintenancebreeding(years 11-30)highassumptionCassava(provitamins A)DR Congo 249 800 960 200Nigeria 303 1,200 2,663 185Northeast Brazil 387 1,000 1,468 100Maize (provitaminsA)Ethiopia 314 600 545 60Kenya 301 600 474 100Sweetpotato(provitamins A)Uganda 317 736 1,882 147Beans (iron & zinc) Honduras 223 140 41 20Northeast Brazil 382 1,400 1,468 200Rice (iron and zinc) Bangladesh 300 200 285 100India 779 1,600 1,950 200Philippines 247 100 101 200Wheat (iron & zinc) India 749 1,600 1,150 200Pakistan 483 1,200 575 200Key biofortification costs, by category, nutrient and country ($000 per year).Source: Meenakshi et al 2010
  17. 17. Crop Country (or region) Provitamin A Iron ZincPess. Opt. Pess. Opt. Pess. Opt.Cassava Congo, DR 123.8 7.6Nigeria 137.4 7.9Northeast Brazil 1006.5 126.5Maize Ethiopia 289.0 10.7Kenya 112.7 18.4Sweetpotato Uganda 29.5 8.6Beans Honduras 401.6 65.5 1494.3 160.2Nicaragua 439.2 64.5 5939.6 576.4Northeast Brazil 133.9 20.0 1899.7 152.6Rice Bangladesh 17.9 4.8 6.8 1.5India 16.7 3.4 5.7 1.3Philippines 234.4 54.5 55.0 12.2Wheat India 9.8 1.1 10.6 1.3Pakistan 14.0 2.0 48.6 4.6Cost per DALY saved with biofortification, under pessimistic and optimistic scenarios,In general, biofortification is a “very cost effective”intervention according to World Bank criteria.
  18. 18. Integrated agriculture and nutrition programsKey outputs:• A critical body of evidence onwhat works, how, and at whatcost to improve nutrition forwomen and children during first1000 days• Innovations in program design,implementation, and evaluationthat can be scaled up• Improved awareness and capacityin partners, implementers andenablers
  19. 19. IDO: Better diet qualityIndicator Size of impact on indicator Scale of impactDietary diversity Mean dietary diversity increased by 1 foodgroup;Low dietary diversity in young children (6-24mos) and in women reduced by 10%Intake of selectedmicronutrient(s) bywomen and childrenReductions in % of mothers or youngchildren at risk of inadequate intake ofspecific micronutrientsIDO: EmpowermentWEAI and others To be determined.Better policies, programs, and investments# of countries that integrate nutrition in their agricultural policy# of development organizations that incorporate evidence from A4NH into their agriculture-nutrition programmingSome estimates of the size and scale of impact in IDO indicators for Integrated programs
  20. 20. Scaling up: a frameworkVISION/GOALImpacts (outcomes, benefits)CAPACITY ELEMENTSINSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTSACTIVITIESSparksCONTEXT;- local- wider
  21. 21. Quantitative(scaling out)SpreadReplicationNurtureIntegrationFunctional HorizontalVerticalPolitical From service delivery, to……..community capacity development, to….…..policy reform, to…social movementsOrganizational Internal managementFinancial viabilityInstitutional diversificationTaxonomy of scaling up
  22. 22. Other research areas
  23. 23. 23Internationalagriculturalhealth researchHumanhealthAgro-EcosystemsAnimalhealthHEALTH STAKEHOLDERS• International organisations• Regional organisations• Private sector health provision• Public health• Veterinary public health• NGOs & CBOs• Conservation• EnvironmentRISK CREATORS• Agriculture, intensification• Natural resource management• Industry• Urbanisation• ETC
  24. 24. Mapping & measuring the multiple burdens of FOOD BORNE DISEASE
  25. 25. THE CORE PROBLEMTHECAUSESLost opportunities for smallholders in marketsLimitedaccess toinputsInappropriatescale &technologiesLack ofmarketinformationDysfunctionalpricing &marketsInappropriate food-safety assessment,management & policyThreatened marketaccessLimited valueadditionLowproductivityHealth risksin foodLostincomeFood insecurityHidden hungerWHOLE VALUE CHAININPUTS &SERVICESPRODUCTION MARKETINGPROCESSING CONSUMPTIONHigh wastage &spoilageUnsafefoodPoverty DiseaseTHEIMPACTSCRP 4.3CommodityCRP
  26. 26. One Health approaches showing how to better understand andmanage zoonoses and emerging infections• Published special edition on assessing& managing urban zoonoses• Starting new project on pathogenflows in Nairobi• Investigating irrigation, climatechange & disease shifts• Made first estimate of DALYs forRVF in Kenya• Developing & testing novelcysticercosis diagnostic• Operating platform for pathogendiscovery & bio-repository• Discovered virus in novel host:implication for human heath?• Supporting 2 EcoHealth/OHResource Centers in SE Asia• Assessed barriers & bridges touptake of EH/OH by frontline staff• Integrated human & livestock diseasesurveys: Kenya, Laos, Vietnam, China• Slaughter house surveys: Kenya,Uganda, Thailand, Vietnam
  27. 27. Inputs into productionFood productionFood storage and processingFood distribution and transportFood retail and labelingValue Chain ApproachConsumerProducerSupply sideTest & evaluatesolutionsDemand sideCharacterize diets, marketaccess and constraints toconsumption of nutritious,safe foods (valueaffordability, signallingTest new tools to improveknowledge, awareness,and demand for nutritionand safety along the valuechainIdentify bottlenecks andproduction constraints toimproved nutrition andsafety in the entire valuechain (capabilities:technologies, policiesand institutions, valuecreation
  28. 28. 20058738525538513024Bangladesh: Food Group Shares ofTotal Food Supply (kcal/capita/day)Grains, Roots, and TubersLegumes and NutsDairy ProductsFlesh FoodsEggsFruits and VegetablesSugarsOils and FatsMiscellaneous1257268696521519316863Tanzania: Food Group Shares ofTotal Food Supply (kcal/capita/day)Grains, Roots, and TubersLegumes and NutsDairy ProductsFlesh FoodsEggsFruits and VegetablesSugarsOils and FatsMiscellaneousData Source: FAO Food Balance Sheets, 2009
  29. 29. LEVERAGING AGRICULTURE FOR NUTRITIONIN SOUTH ASIA (LANSA)DfID funded Research Programme ConsortiumThe core question that LANSA will address is:“How can South Asian agriculture and related food policiesand interventions be designed and implemented to increasetheir impacts on nutrition, especially the nutritional statusof children and adolescent girls?”
  30. 30. LANSA’s Research Agenda• Three Research Pillars:• Pillar 1 : How enabling is the wider context in linking agriculture andfood systems to other determinants of nutritional status?• Pillar 2 : How can the nutrition impacts of agriculture and agri-foodvalue chains be enhanced through appropriate strategies andpolicies?• Pillar 3 : How strong is the evidence that agricultural interventionscan be pro-nutrition?• Cross cutting themes:• Gender• Innovation systems• Fragility
  31. 31. DRAFT: Theory of change for A4NH policy flagshipBetter cross-sector policies, programs andinvestmentsPolicy and practicecommunitiesincorporate newknowledge intodiscourse, attitudes,behavioursPolicyrecommendationsstrengthening(external)Engagement platforms & approaches include:- media, multimedia, social media- strategic consultations and policy review fora- two-way communication (face to face)- one-way dissemination (papers, reports)Key flagship IDOIntermediate outcomeASSUMPTION: Champions identifiedamong key decision-makers find waysto take forward key messages withintheir own sector and beyond.ASSUMPTION: Decision-makers areinterested and/or incentivised toimprove the way they find, appraiseand use evidence.ASSUMPTION: Stakeholders acrosssectoral domains (agriculture,nutrition, health, gender) engage withA4NH evidence.ASSUMPTION: Policymakers &practitioners are motivated toreduce undernutrition and poverty.Improved nutritional status Improved health status Strategic goals
  32. 32. 1Policy and practicecommunitiesincorporate newknowledge intodiscourse, attitudes,behavioursPolicyrecommendationsResearchuptakeandcapacitystrengthening(external)Engagement platforms & approaches include:- media, multimedia, social media- strategic consultations and policy review fora- two-way communication (face to face)- one-way dissemination (papers, reports)Policy influence plans developedContext, policy, stakeholder, capacity, knowledge mappingValue chains Ag-associateddiseaseBiofortificationIntermediate outcomeamong key decision-makers find waysto take forward key messages withintheir own sector and beyond.ASSUMPTION: Decision-makers areinterested and/or incentivised toimprove the way they find, appraiseand use evidence.ASSUMPTION: Stakeholders acrosssectoral domains (agriculture,nutrition, health, gender) engage withA4NH evidence.practitioners are motivated toreduce undernutrition and poverty.Political economy analysesResearch workstreams/flagshipsIntegratedprogramsPolicy research,analysis andengagement
  33. 33. Figure 1: Partnership typesPartnersNationalMinistries ofagriculture and foreignaffairs, donors (globaland country missions)Ministries of agriculture,rural development, socialdevelopment and healthFarmer associations,national agriculturalboards, consumerassociations, privatesector companiesTISS, IIDS, NationalUniversities, PHFIRegionalWAHO, RECs, FARA,AU-NEPAD, AfDB, ADBMost of the globaldevelopmentimplementersSACIDS, FARA,RUFORUM,GlobalSCN, SUN, REACH,WHO, WFP, FAO, OIE,World BankGlobal HorticultureInitiative, CRS, HKI, WV,Concern Worldwide, Savethe ChildrenAdvanced researchinstitutes , EMBRAPA,universities, other IARCsENABLERSPolicy/decision makers, e.g. inter-gov’t, gov’t, international, regional,subregional, civil society, etc.DEVELOPMENTIMPLEMENTERSGov’t, UN, NGOs, civil society, farmersgroupsVALUE CHAIN ACTORS &REPRESENTATIVESPrivate sector, public/privateinitiatives, associationsand groups RESEARCH PARTNERSInternational and nationalacademic, research institutionsPrivateSectorCountry publicsector programsand policies

×