This document summarizes an approach to assessing nutrition-sensitive landscapes in multi-functional terms. The objectives are to 1) characterize current landscapes and their production, environmental, and nutrition performance, 2) explore trade-offs and synergies of interventions, and 3) identify improvements in farming, diets, and ecosystem services. The approach uses an InDEED cycle of integrated design, evaluation, and delivery. Case studies in Western Kenya and Northwest Vietnam will characterize current crop production, food sourcing, and preliminary results in the Mambai and Masana landscapes of Vihiga County, Kenya. Further data collection and modeling will build on initial farm designs and landscape aggregation to evaluate interventions.

1. Multi-functional assessment of nutrition-sensitive landscapes
Nester Mashingaidze et al.
4 March 2015
Humidtropics

2. Introduction
• Vulnerable populations are often food insecure
• Food security:
– Sufficient calories
– Diverse nutrients
• Sources of food
– farm production
– market
– Landscape
• Nutrition-sensitive landscapes
– optimise production, NRM and nutrition

3. Objectives
1. Characterise the current landscape and
determine landscape performance in terms of
production, environmental outcomes and
nutrition.
2. Explore trade-offs and synergies of proposed
interventions at landscape level.
3. Identify and test entry points for improvements
in farming, diets and ecosystem services
provided by the landscape

4. Approach: InDEED Cycle

5. The case studies
• Western Kenya
– Densely populated (1 044 persons km-2)
– Food crops (maize, beans)
– Cash crops (tea, vegetables)
– Food insecurity, land degradation, poverty
• Northwest Vietnam
– Low smallholder agricultural productivity
– Degradation of natural resources
– Low income and access to markets
– Malnutrition

6. Site selection
1. Review of secondary sources & experts
2. Field visits to 10 sub-locations
- Mambai: tea-based & Masana: maize-based
3. Participatory mapping 4. Transect Walk

7. Landscapes in Vihiga County
• Mambai landscape
- river + ‘forest’
- Impactlite survey to
10 households
• Masana sub-location
- circumcision forest
-10 households
surveyed

8. Preliminary results
• Soil fertility Masana > Mambai
• Majority of land holdings < 0.5 ha
- Some Hhs had fields away from landscape
Mambai (50%) & Masana (30%)
• No major forests, nearby lakes or dams
• Hh size: Masana 5(±2.5) and Mambai 4.5 (±1.4)

9. Crop production
• Crop species: Mambai slightly > Masana
• Masana: maize > banana > napier
• Mambai: maize > tea > eucalyptus
• Vegetables < 0.04% of cropped area

10. Food – produced and purchased
• All farms produced food crops
– Beans purchase Masana > Mambai
– Banana purchase low
– Low consumption of traditional vegetables?

11. Way forward
• Building of farms into FarmDesign on-going
• Farms to be aggregated in LandscapeIMAGES
• Field visits for additional data collection
• Modeling and community feed backs

12. FarmDesign N cycle

13. Thank you
Insert photo here
. C. Timler 2014