Police:

Contactez-nous:

Topic: Measurement / Assessment

Download resource

Monitoring commitment and capacity to act on food insecurity and malnutrition

Monitoring commitment and capacity to act on food insecurity and malnutrition: the Food Security Commitment and Capacity Profile methodology

There is a global consensus that strong political commitment by Governments and development partners is key to the elimination of hunger and malnutrition. It is against this background that FAO has developed a methodology to assess and track efforts of national stakeholders to act on food insecurity and malnutrition: the Food Security Commitment and Capacity Profile (FSCCP) ( http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3998e.pdf ).

The methodology provides a tool that helps stakeholders to:

1. Carry out a systematic assessment of political commitment and capacity of countries to act on food insecurity and malnutrition;

2. Engage in evidence-based policy dialogue, planning and prioritization of investments in food security and nutrition; and

3. Monitor performance over time;

The methodology has been applied since 2013 in the context of FAO’s corporate Results Framework (http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/030/mk234ea1.pdf) for planning and monitoring progress of efforts to reduce hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.

The food security commitment and capacity country profile is designed as a balanced score card which provides a concise view of countries’ commitments and institutional capacities in terms of four key dimensions of the enabling environment, namely:

i. Policies, programmes and legal frameworks: i.e. the country has comprehensive policies/ strategies and investment programmes (based on evidence, addressing underlying causes of food insecurity and adopting a twin-track approach) that are supported by a legal framework;

ii. Human and financial resources: i.e. policies/strategies, programmes and legislation that are translated into effective action through the allocation of the necessary financial and human resources and solid administrative capacity of governments;

iii. Governance, coordination mechanisms and partnerships: i.e. the government regards food security and nutrition as an interdisciplinary priority by setting up a high level inter-ministerial unit responsible for the design, implementation and coordination of food security and nutrition responses, while ensuring accountability through its support to independent human rights institutions that provide people with means to file violations of the right to food. Furthermore, a government that takes on a lead role in managing partnerships and coordinated action across a broad range of actors and sectors involved in food security and nutrition at national/decentralized levels, creating space for civil society participation;

iv. Evidenced-based decision-making: i.e. decision-making on food security and nutrition that draws on evidence generated from functional information systems that make it possible to monitor trends; track and map actions; and assess impact in a manner that is timely and comprehensive, allowing for lessons learned to be fed back into the policy process.

For each of these four dimensions, the methodology paper outlines:

1. A set of core indicators and associated qualifiers;

2. The approach to producing a score for each of the qualifiers and indicators;

3. Details on the sources of the required data and information.

4. A survey instrument and secondary data collection tools.

Apart from helping FAO to measure the outcome of its work on food security and nutrition, it is expected that the country profiles will also stimulate debate on how to improve the enabling environment for food security and nutrition and promote more systematic learning and sharing of experiences.

It would be interesting to hear from the experiences of other agencies and sectors that are monitoring political commitment.

Download resource

HLPE - High Level Panel of Experts Reports

On this page you can access al reports prepared by the High Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS).

HLPEcover

HLPE cover

HLPE cover

Price volatility 
and food security

2011
Process and docs

Land tenure and international investments in agriculture 2011
Process and docs

Food security 
and climate change
2012

Process and docs

HLPE cover

HLPE cover

HLPE cover

Social protection 
for food security
2012

Process and docs
Web annex

Biofuels 
and food security

Process and docs

Investing in smallholder agriculture for
food security

Process and docs

HLPE cover

 

Sustainable
fisheries and aquaculture for
food security and nutrition

Food losses
and waste in the
context of
sustainable food systems 

 

 

Download resource

Meat Atlas - Facts and figures about the animals we eat

 
This publication sheds light on the impacts of meat and dairy production, and aims to catalyse the debate over the need for better, safer and more sustainable food and farming.

Download resource

Impacts of foreign agricultural investment in developing countries: evidence from case studies

by Pascal Liu, Senior Economist, Trade and Markets Division, FAO.  
 
Although there has been much debate about the potential benefits and risks of international investment, there is a lack of systematic evidence on the actual impacts on the host country and their determinants. This paper summarizes the results of FAO’s case studies on foreign investment in developing country agriculture.

FAO’s studies on foreign investment in developing country agriculture suggest that the disadvantages of large-scale land acquisitions often outweigh the few benefits to the local community. In countries where local land rights are not clearly defined and governance is weak, large scale land acquisition raises particularly high risks for the local community.  Even from the perspective of the investor, land acquisition is unlikely to be the most profitable business model due to the high potential for conflict and damage to reputation.

Conversely, the studies suggest that investments that involve local farmers as equal business partners, giving them an active role and leaving them in control of their land, have the most positive and sustainable effects on local economies and social development. These inclusive business models need strong external support for supporting farmers and facilitating the investor-farmers relationship in order to succeed. They also require ‘patient capital’, as financial returns to investment are unlikely to materialize in the first years.

Beside the business model, other important factors include the legal and institutional framework in the host country, the terms and conditions of the investment contract and the social and economic condition in the investment area. Strengthening the governance and capacity of institutions in host developing countries is essential to enhancing the developmental impacts of foreign agricultural investment.