Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Cameroon agriculture-nutrition nexus: actors and key intervention areas


Published on

Presentation made by Florence Fonteh Anyangwe at the Regional forum on cassava in central Africa, on 6-9 Dec 2016, in Yaoundé, Cameroon.

  • Login to see the comments

Cameroon agriculture-nutrition nexus: actors and key intervention areas

  2. 2.  Introduction: justification, objectives, methodology  State of nutrition security in Cameroon  Determinants of nutrition status in Cameroon  Stakeholder identification, clusters & linkages  Some success stories  Some key entry points 2
  3. 3.  FNS is of special significance for the ACP region  Without adequate nutrition it will be difficult to attain the sustainable development goals (SDGs)  A mutual relationship exists between agriculture (food supply) and nutrition and the benefits/casualties are bi- directional.  However, insufficient attention has been paid towards improving the agriculture and nutrition nexus 3
  4. 4.  Malnutrition does not simply arise just from poor access to food, but also from a host of interacting processes (health care, education, sanitation and hygiene, access to resources, women’s empowerment etc) which are indispensable to the AN nexus  Furthermore, a combination of several options (enabling env, research, SH cooperation, capacity bldg, etc) contribute to strengthening the AN nexus and in achieving the desirable FNS outcomes  The effectiveness of roles played by these options vary tremendously between countries and regions 4
  5. 5.  To highlight some indicators of nutritional status and food security in Cameroon  To identify stakeholders, clusters and their interactions  To identify key areas of intervention 5
  6. 6.  Desk top review  Interviews with key stakeholders  Stakeholders’ consultation workshops 6
  7. 7. 7Figure 1: Map of Cameroon, showing administrative Regions Population : 22.3 million Surface area: 475,650 km2 Pop growth rate : 2.5 % GDP/capita : 1426 USD Life expectancy : 55 years HDI : 0.505
  8. 8. Some indicators of nutritional status and food security in Cameroon 8
  9. 9. Indicator Prevalence Very high (>35 %) High (30 – 35 %) Moderately high (15 – 29 %) Low (less than 10 %) Undernou rishment Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia Chad, Mali, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Zambia Cameroon, Kenya, Nigeria Ghana Stunting Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Congo Cameroon, Nigeria, Chad, Mali, Cote d’Iv, Malawi, Gabon, Tanzania, Uganda, Namibia, Ghana,9
  10. 10. 13.6 22.2 18.1 14.6 24.4 29.3 31.7 32.5 3 6 5 5.6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1991 1998 2004 2011 % Underweight % growth retardation % Emaciation 10 Figure 2. Evolution of malnutrition in Cameroon
  11. 11. Micronutrient Children (1 - 5 yrs) Women (15 – 49 yrs) Zinc 69.1 76.9 Folate 8.4 16.6 Vitamin B12 28.1 28.6 Vitamin A 35 21.4 Iron - - 11
  12. 12.  Food security  Education (esp. of women)  Poverty  Health care  Water and sanitation  Gender equality/women empowerment  Enabling environment 12
  13. 13. Indicator Prevalence source % living below poverty line 39.9% NIS, 2012 Life expectancy 55.1 yrs UNPD, 2013 Infant mortality 61/1000 UNPD, 2013 Access to improved drinking water 59.8% NIS, 2012 Use of improved sanitation facilities 52.4% NIS, 2012 Gender inequality index 0.622 UNPD, 2014 Females in secondary school 45.8% NIS, 2014 Govt expenditure on health 5.2% of GDP UNPD, 2014 Govt expenditure on education 3.2% of GDP UNPD,
  14. 14.  Only 20% arable land is cultivated  53% of nat. pop. live in rural areas, where > 50% live below national poverty line  Low productivity, high food exportation to CEMAC, high influx of refugees, result to high food prices  Strategies used: eat cheap (72%); eat less (45%); reduce # meals (33%)  10% of rural households live in persistent food insecurity  Severe food insecurity: FN= 4.1%; N= 3.7%, W= 3.3%  Food insecurity is recurrent in FN & N Regions 14
  15. 15.  The adoption of a National Policy on Food and Nutrition in the year 2006;  The creation of an inter-ministerial commission on food security in 2010;  The admission of Cameroon into the SUN movement in 2013;  The creation of an inter-ministerial commission to combat malnutrition in the three northern regions and the East region in 2014;  The adoption in 2014 of a national policy on gender -2011-2020;  The elaboration of a national policy on food and nutrition (NPFN) – 2015-2034 in 2015. 15
  16. 16. Identification of stakeholders, clusters and interactions 16
  17. 17. SH collaboration is essential to achieve common objectives17 Cluster Stakeholders Policy makers MINSANTE, MINADER, MINEPIA, MINFI, MINRESI MINPROFF, MINATD, MINEE, MINT, MINCOM MINESUP, MINSEC, MINEDUB, MINPMEESA, MINCUL, MINTEL, MINAS Research and training MINRESI, MINESUP, MINEDUB, MINSEC UN system UNICEF, FAO, WFP, WHO, UNDP, UNHCR, UN Women NGOs International: HKI, Plan Int., Counterpart Int, French Red Cross, CARE, SNV, NEPAD National: WHINCONET, Action for Development, PROPAC Business world (Food processors) Oil processors (Diamaor, Mayor, Palm’or, Mula palm); Salt processors (Sasel, Ngwang); Flour processors (SCTM, Grand moulins, La Pasta); SNEC; Water bottling companies (Tangui, Supermont, Semme, Madiba, Sano) Farmer’s /Women’s groups CAMNAFAW, OFSAD, MBOSCUDA Consumer syndicates COSADER, ACDIC, COMINSUD, CAMORIF Donors AFD, M/S Dell foundation, Bill Gates foundation, WB, USAID, DFATD, Sight for life, GEF, CERF, Japanese embassy fund, Belgian government, ADB, EU
  18. 18. Research/ Education 18 Business world Farmer/ women groups NGOs Donors Consumer syndicates Mass media UN- system Policy makers
  19. 19. Low influence-High importance MINPROFF, CAMNAFAW, OFSAD, COSADER, ACDIC, COMINSUD, Action pour le Developpement, PROPAC, MBOSCUDA, UN Women, UNDP High influence-High importance MINSANTE, MINADER, MINEPIA, MINESUP, MINSEC, MINEDUB, MINAS, UNICEF, FAO, WHO, WFP, WB, AFD, ADB, M/S Dell foundation, Bill Gates foundation, USAID, DFATD, Sight for life, GEF, CERF, Japanese embassy fund, Belgian government Counterpart international, French Red cross, HKI, CARE, UNHCR, EU, NEPAD Low influence-low importance SNV, Plan international, MINCUL, MINCOM High influence-low importance MINFI, MINATD, MINEE, MINT, Food processors, CRTV, Cameroon Tribune, The Post, The Messenger, The Herald, Canal 2 International, Equinox19
  20. 20.  Vitamin A supplementation  Iodine supplementation  Micro minerals supplementation 20
  21. 21. Some key entry points (for intervention) 21
  22. 22.  Valorize indigenous foods: evaluate their nutritive values.  Evaluate post harvest losses of major food commodities for both crop and animal foods.  Analyze the value chain of major foods from farm to fork  Establish standards and evaluate safety of locally produced and imported foods.  Creation and updating of data bases (regional and national levels).  Make use of existing grey research data (transform research into practice). 22
  23. 23.  Formal nutrition education: Introduce relevant nutritional components in all educational programs and at all levels  Informal education: education of the population on cultural practices and culinary techniques; recruit and assign adequately trained nutritionists to health centers, hospitals, councils, districts, etc.  Sensitization: use mass media communication tools 23
  24. 24.  Creation of an autonomous national office on food and nutrition (more visibility and autonomy)  Evaluate the cost of malnutrition in monetary terms (demonstrates the cost of inaction).  Identify nutrition champions or goodwill ambassadors (e.g. sports or music stars)  Encourage the creation of and support food and nutrition advocacy groups. 24