Food biofortification : reaping the benefits of science to overcome hidden hunger

Biofortification is a process of increasing the density of minerals and vitamins in a food crop through conventional plant breeding, genetic engineering, or agronomic practices (primarily use of fertilizers and foliar sprays). Biofortified staple food crops, when substituted consistently for non-biofortified staple food crops, can generate measurable improvements in human nutrition and health. This monograph describes the progress made in developing, testing, and disseminating biofortified staple food crops, primarily through the use of conventional plant breeding, summarizing the activities of two consortiums of inter-disciplinary collaborating institutions led the HarvestPlus program and the International Potato Center (CIP). We focus on laying out the evidence base proving the effectiveness and impact to date of biofortified crops. Results of a large number of nutritional bioavailability and efficacy trials are summarized (Chapter 2), crop development techniques and activities are presented and variety releases documented for a dozen staple food crops in low and middle income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Chapter 3), and strategies for promoting the uptake of specific biofortified crops are discussed, concurrent with policy advocacy to encourage key institutions to mainstream the promotion, and use of biofortified crops in their core activities (Chapters 4 and 5). Statistics will be presented on numbers of farm households adopting biofortified crops (Chapters 3 and 4), now available to farmers in 40 low and middle income countries (LMICs). Each section will outline the way forward on additional future activities required to enhance the development and impact the biofortification through conventional plant breeding. No biofortified staple food crop developed through transgenic techniques has been fully de-regulated for release to farmers in LMICs. Yet transgenic techniques hold the potential for a several-fold increase in the impact/benefits of biofortified crops. This potential is described in Chapter 6 which discusses developmental research already completed, including achieving higher densities of single nutrients than is possible with conventional breeding, combining multiple nutrient traits in single events, slowing down/reducing the level of degradation of vitamins after harvesting, and combining superior agronomic traits with nutrient traits in single events. A final chapter summarizes and discusses key questions and issues that will influence the ultimate mainstreaming of biofortified crops in food systems in LMICs and will allow maximization of the benefits of biofortification

Critical review of indicators, metrics, methods, and tools for monitoring and evaluation of biofortification programs at scale

Sound monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems are needed to inform effective biofortification program management and implementation. Despite the existence of M&E frameworks for biofortification programs, the use of indicators, metrics, methods, and tools (IMMT) are currently not harmonized, rendering the tracking of biofortification programs difficult. We aimed to compile IMMT for M&E of existing biofortification programs and recommend a sub-set of high-level indicators (HLI) for a harmonized global M&E framework. We conducted (1) a mapping review to compile IMMT for M&E biofortification programs; (2) semi-structured interviews (SSIs) with biofortification programming experts (and other relevant stakeholders) to contextualize findings from step 1; and (3) compiled a generic biofortification program Theory of Change (ToC) to use it as an analytical framework for selecting the HLI. This study revealed diversity in seed systems and crop value chains across countries and crops, resulting in differences in M&E frameworks. Yet, sufficient commonalities between implementation pathways emerged. A set of 17 HLI for tracking critical results along the biofortification implementation pathway represented in the ToC is recommended for a harmonized global M&E framework. Further research is needed to test, revise, and develop mechanisms to harmonize the M&E framework across programs, institutions, and countries.PR1 Fostering Climate-Resilient and Sustainable Food Supply; IFPRI3; ISI; HarvestPlus; CRP4HarvestPlus; A4NHCGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH

Developing strategies to commercialise biofortified crops and foods

Biofortification (or nutrient enrichment) of staple crops has the potential to contribute to reducing micronutrient deficiencies by increasing micronutrient intakes. In 2019, GAIN and HarvestPlus entered a partnership to lead the Commercialisation of Biofortified Crops (CBC) Programme, which aims to catalyse commercial markets for biofortified crops in six countries across Africa and Asia. During the CBC programme inception phase, information on the value chains and their challenges and opportunities for commercialisation were collected for each country-crop combination through literature reviews and third party-led commercialisation assessments. In this paper, we summarise the processes undertaken to identify the potential opportunities and barriers for commercialisation and describe how the findings were used to develop commercialisation strategies for nine country-crop combinations.Non-PRIFPRI5; HarvestPlus; 2 Promoting Healthy Diets and Nutrition for allHarvestPlusCGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH

Commercializing public agricultural technologies and goods: A framework to identify opportunities for interventions

Commercialisation (i.e., the process of introducing a new product or technology into commerce or making it available in the market) is considered a promising strategy to scale up the consumption of biofortified foods. To inform the development of effective commercialisation strategies, a systematic assessment of country- and crop-specific value chains is essential to identify success factors, barriers, and opportunities. Tools, such as commercialisation frameworks, that can be used to systematically synthesise and analyse such information have been developed but vary widely across different value chains and sectors. A commercialisation framework specific for public agricultural technologies and goods was recently developed. In this paper, we summarise the process of developing that commercialisation framework and its finding, and discuss its implications for, and application in, efforts to scale up biofortified foods. The commercialisation framework for agricultural and publicly developed technologies and goods is made up of both a commercialisation process map and cross-cutting success factors (i.e., supply, demand, policy, finance, and development outcomes), and looks at profitability using a commercialisation framework process wheel. As such, it offers two complementary dimensions (placing profitability at the centre) for identifying bottlenecks and accelerators and can be used to identify where interventions can maximise impact. Case studies on fortified wheat flour in the United States and vitamin A-biofortified cassava in Nigeria were used to illustrate how the framework can be used to synthesise and organise the different information about a food product value chain and subsequently analyse it to inform commercialisation strategy decisions.Non-PRIFPRI5; HarvestPlus; 2 Promoting Healthy Diets and Nutrition for all; 3 Building Inclusive and Efficient Markets, Trade Systems, and Food Industry; 4 Transforming Agricultural and Rural EconomiesHarvestPlu

Using a programme impact pathway to design, monitor, and evaluate interventions to commercialise biofortified crops and foods

Using a theory of change (TOC; a simplified definition of how and why an intervention is expected to work) or a programme impact pathway (PIP; a more detailed description of the causal pathways through which an intervention is delivered) to guide design, monitoring, and evaluation efforts is increasingly being used across various nutrition interventions, yet there are few documented examples in biofortification programmes. During the inception phase of the Commercialisation of Biofortified Crops (CBC) programme, which aims to scale up production and consumption of biofortified foods in six countries in Africa and Asia, a PIP was developed and used to inform the design of commercialisation strategies and their monitoring and evaluation. The objective of this paper is to describe that process. Using a generic TOC for biofortification as a starting point, we developed detailed PIPs for each of the nine country-crop combinations. Within each PIP, we identified the commercial pathway(s) and selected the one(s) with the most potential for impact. We then identified the binding constraint along each pathway and a set of activities and resources to tackle it. This process formed the basis of the country-crop commercialisation strategies and associated workplans. Additionally, we developed a monitoring reference manual that included a set of standardised indicators mapped to the PIP and detailed indicator reference sheets. These tools were contextualised for each country-crop combination and formed the basis of the programme’s monitoring and evaluation plans. Using a PIP to guide the development of programme strategies and measurement of achievements is good practice to ensure that programmes have high potential for impact and that relevant information needed to understand the evolution of results along the PIP is collected throughout programme implementation.Non-PRHarvestPlus; IFPRI5HarvestPlu

Critical review of indicators, metrics, methods, and tools for monitoring and evaluation of biofortification programs at scale

Sound monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems are needed to inform effective biofortification program management and implementation. Despite the existence of M&E frameworks for biofortification programs, the use of indicators, metrics, methods, and tools (IMMT) are currently not harmonized, rendering the tracking of biofortification programs difficult. We aimed to compile IMMT for M&E of existing biofortification programs and recommend a sub-set of high-level indicators (HLI) for a harmonized global M&E framework. We conducted (1) a mapping review to compile IMMT for M&E biofortification programs; (2) semi-structured interviews (SSIs) with biofortification programming experts (and other relevant stakeholders) to contextualize findings from step 1; and (3) compiled a generic biofortification program Theory of Change (ToC) to use it as an analytical framework for selecting the HLI. This study revealed diversity in seed systems and crop value chains across countries and crops, resulting in differences in M&E frameworks. Yet, sufficient commonalities between implementation pathways emerged. A set of 17 HLI for tracking critical results along the biofortification implementation pathway represented in the ToC is recommended for a harmonized global M&E framework. Further research is needed to test, revise, and develop mechanisms to harmonize the M&E framework across programs, institutions, and countries