This report proposes a framework to understand how good nutrition
governance can contribute to positive changes directly related to
nutrition outcomes. It is based on a study comparing government
nutrition strategies in six countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia,
India, Peru and Zambia.
Existing works around nutrition have acknowledged the importance of
governance organisations and institutions to improve the quality of
nutritional outcomes (Pelletier 2002, 2011; Natalicchio 2002; REACH
2009; WHO 2009). This paper makes two contributions to existing
It provides a qualitative account of how formal political dynamics and
informal practices influence the management of government efforts to
reduce undernutrition, and how the political management of such
interventions impact the effectiveness of nutrition programmes and
It brings a comparative perspective to understanding why or when, some
countries that have strongly committed to reducing malnutrition, can
effectively deliver on improved nutrition outcomes while others make
insufficient or no progress at all. The comparative approach is helpful
to illustrate, e.g. why some countries with strong civil society
activism are more successful at mobilising effective political support,
whereas strong civil society is less effective in other countries.
Mejía Acosta, A.; Fanzo, J. Fighting Maternal and Child Malnutrition: Analysing the political and institutional determinants of delivering a national multisectoral response in six countries. A synthesis paper. Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK (2012) 39 pp.
Fighting Maternal and Child Malnutrition: Analysing the political and institutional determinants of delivering a national multisectoral response in six countries. A synthesis paper.