Two key points are missing from this document and their inclusion would substantially improve the guidelines.
First, there is no mention of energy use or energy poverty in the context of food security. I work with a team based in East Africa where there is a direct relationship between lack of access to cooking fuels (generally firewood and charcoal), gender, and food insecurity. The connections between energy, food insecurity, and gender are complex but I would recommend the work of my chief collaborator Dr. Mary Njenga, based at CIFOR-ICRAF, who has been working on this issue in all of its nuance for many years.
The second issue is perhaps more controversial. In the first paragraph of the introduction the guidelines state reference "gender equality and women's and girls' empowerment" as the critical contributing variable under consideration. This phrasing indicates that gender equality is not identical to women's and girls' empowerment but rather is something larger and more inclusive. Unfortunately, over the course of the document it becomes clear that while men and boys may be included in gender equity considerations, gender minorities are not. To be blunt, this document like so many others of its type makes an impassioned plea for gender equality and gender transformation on human rights grounds and then fails to include those who are not cis-gendered, heterosexual, or gender conforming.
I recognize that in many regions of the world, including large portions of Europe and the United States, inclusive conceptions of intersectional gender categories are deeply unpopular. At the same time, using the language of human rights, social transformation, and social justice in guidelines that fail to mention the existence of gender minorities opens the gender-inclusive community up to valid accusations of hypocrisy. Rather than a call for equality, documents written as this one is, increase the isolation of gender minorities around the world. We can and must do better.
Dr. Ruth Mendum