Staple crops biofortified with increased vitamins and minerals : considerations for a public health strategy

Biofortification of staple crops has been proposed as a strategy to address micronutrient malnutrition, particularly with respect to insufficient intake of vitamin A, iron, zinc, and folate. The World Health Organization, in collaboration with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Sackler Institute for Nutrition Science at the New York Academy of Sciences, convened a technical consultation entitled "Staple Crops Biofortified with Vitamins and Minerals: Considerations for a Public Health Strategy" in April 2016. Participants of the consultation reviewed the definition of biofortification of staple crops, patterns of crops production, processing, consumption, seed varieties, and micronutrient stability and bioavailability, as well as farmers' adoption and acceptability of the modified crops. Also discussed were economic, environmental, safety, and equity aspects of biofortified crops, as well as legal, policy, regulatory, and ethical issues for the implementation of biofortification strategies in agriculture and nutrition. Consultation working groups identified important and emerging technical issues, lessons learned, and research priorities to better support the evidence of improved nutrition and unintended adverse effects of biofortification. This paper provides the background and rationale of the technical consultation, synopsizes the presentations, and provides a summary of the main considerations proposed by the working groups

Re-Imagining School Feeding : A High-Return Investment in Human Capital and Local Economies

Analysis shows that a quality education, combined with a guaranteed package of health and nutrition interventions at school, such as school feeding, can contribute to child and adolescent development and build human capital. School feeding programs can help get children into school and help them stay there, increasing enrollment and reducing absenteeism. Once children are in the classroom, these programs can contribute to their learning by avoiding hunger and enhancing cognitive abilities. The benefits are especially great for the poorest and most disadvantaged children. As highlighted in the World Bank’s 2018 World Development Report (World Bank 2018), countries need to prioritize learning, not just schooling. Children must be healthy, not hungry, if they are to match learning opportunities with the ability to learn. In the most vulnerable communities, nutrition-sensitive school meals can offer children a regular source of nutrients that are essential for their mental and physical development. And for the growing number of countries with a “double burden” of undernutrition and emerging obesity problems, well-designed school meals can help set children on the path toward more healthy diets. In Latin America, for example, where there is a growing burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), school feeding programs are a key intervention in reducing undernutrition and promoting healthy diet choices. Mexico’s experience reducing sugary beverages in school cafeterias, for example, was found to be beneficial in advancing a healthy lifestyle. A large trial of school-based interventions in China also found that nutritional or physical activity interventions alone are not as effective as a joint program that combines nutritional and educational interventions. In poor communities, economic benefits from school feeding programs are also evident—reducing poverty by boosting income for households and communities as a whole. For families, the value of meals in school is equivalent to about 10 percent of a household’s income. For families with several children, that can mean substantial savings. As a result, school feeding programs are often part of social safety nets in poor countries, and they can be a stable way to reliably target pro-poor investments into communities, as well as a system that can be scaled up rapidly to respond to crises. There are also direct economic benefits for smallholder farmers in the community. Buying local food creates stable markets, boosting local agriculture, impacting rural transformation, and strengthening local food systems. In Brazil, for example, 30 percent of all purchases for school feeding come from smallholder agriculture (Drake and others 2016). These farmers are oftentimes parents with schoolchildren, helping them break intergenerational cycles of hunger and poverty. Notably, benefits to households and communities offer important synergies. The economic growth in poor communities helps provide stability and better-quality education and health systems that promote human capital. At the same time, children and adolescents grow up to enjoy better employment and social opportunities as their communities grow

Investing in school systems: conceptualising returns on investment across the health, education and social protection sectors

Public policies often aim to improve welfare, economic injustice and reduce inequality, particularly in the social protection, labour, health and education sectors. While these policies frequently operate in silos, the education sphere can operate as a cross-sectoral link. Schools represent a unique locus, with globally hundreds of millions of children attending class every day. A high-profile policy example is school feeding, with over 400 million students worldwide receiving meals in schools. The benefits of harmonising interventions across sectors with a common delivery platform include economies of scale. Moreover, economic evaluation frameworks commonly used to assess policies rarely account for impact across sectors besides their primary intent. For example, school meals are often evaluated for their impact on nutrition, but they also have educational benefits, including increasing attendance and learning and incorporating smallholder farmers into corporate value chains. To address these gaps, we propose the introduction of a comprehensive value-for-money framework for investments toward school systems that acknowledges the return to a common delivery platform—schools—and the multisectoral returns (eg, education, health and nutrition, labour, social protection) emerging from the rollout of school-based programmes. Directly building on benefit-cost analysis methods, this framework could help identify interventions that yield the highest gains in human capital per budget expenditure, with direct implications for finance ministries. Given the detrimental impact of COVID-19 on schoolchildren and human capital, it is urgent to build back stronger and more sustainable welfare systems