Making Food Systems Nutrition‐sensitive: an Economic Policy Perspective

• Published date: 01 March 2014
• Date: 01 March 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.18278/wfp.1.1.5
• Author: Per Pinstrup‐Andersen

World Food Policy

72

That food systems aect human nu-

trition should be obvious to all of

us. Without food, we perish. But the

nutrition eect of a food system depends

on its characteristics and the environment

within which it operates and the impact on

nutrition may be inuence d by po licy in-

terventions. Whether an outcome of policy

interventions or not, changes in a food sys-

tem may improve nutrition, e.g., eliminat-

ing iron deciencies, or the nutritional sta-

tus may deteriorate, e.g., causing excessive

intake of dietary energy resulting in obesity

and associated diabetes. Good nutrition is

very important for individuals and societies

and one might imagine that food systems

would be guided by health and nutrition

goals. at is not usually the case. Food sys-

tems are guided by the behavior of agents

in the system pursuing economic goals and

when they conict with health and nutri-

tion goals, the former usually dominates.

is is not a value judgment that one set of

goals is “better” than another but simply an

observation that market-based economies

operate on the basis of supply and demand

and not on needs and compassion.

e question addressed in this article

is which public policy interventions might

make economic goals compatible with nu-

trition goals, that is, reducing or remov-

ing the above-mentioned conict. In other

words, what could governments do to make

food systems more nutrition-sensitive? On

the surface, the answer may appear straight

forward: produce the food people need and

e triple burden of malnutrition, i.e. lack of access to sucient dietary en-

ergy, micronutrient deciencies and overweight and obesity, causes wide-

spread human misery, low labor productivity and large economic losses to

individuals and societies. While most eorts to improve nutrition have fo-

cused on direct interventions, the results have been disappointing. Oppor-

tunities for nutrition improvements through changes in the food system are

large and largely ignored. Merely producing more food does not assure bet-

ter nutrition. Most malnutrition, particularly overweight and obesity but

also much of the existing energy and nutrient deciencies, occurs amidst

plenty of food at the national or global levels. us, assuming that the food

system’s only role in improving nutrition is to produce more food is a falla-

cy. Food policy should pursue improved nutrition along with other food sys-

tem goals, and trade-os among the various goals should be addressed. e

pathways between food systems and nutrition, including those operating

through food availability, incomes, food prices, gender-specic time alloca-

tion, should be identied and household behavior should be fully understood.

Keywords: malnutrition, food system-nutrition pathways, policy interventions

Per Pinstrup-Andersen1

Making Food Systems Nutrition-sensitive: an Economic

Policy Perspective

1 H. E. Babcock Professor of Food, Nutrition and Public Policy, Professor of Applied Economics, Cornell

University, Ithaca, New York and Adjunct Professor, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

73

Making Food Systems Nutrition-sensitive: an Economic Policy Perspective

make sure they eat it. In reality, it is extreme-

ly complicated. Even centrally planned

command economies that tried or at least

pretended to try, have failed. In order to

identify the possible policy interventions,

it is essential to understand the pathways

through which food systems may aect nu-

trition and to pin point the main factors in

each pathway that cause economic and nu-

trition goals to dier. ese factors may be

external to the food system or they may be

integrated into the system. Policy inter ven-

tions may aim to change the socioeconom-

ic environment within which food systems

operate or they may focus on changing sys-

tem-specic physical and behavioral fac-

tors.

One might expect that overall eco-

nomic welfare would be maximized in a

market economy’s food system if every

system agent, including farmers, traders,

and consumers, would maximize his/her

economic welfare. But even in such a sit-

uation, the net positive nutrition eect is

unlikely to be maximized in the absence

of government intervention. e physical

and socioeconomic environments may not

be conducive to the production, trade, and

consumption of the foods needed to assure

good nutrition and the behavior of farmers,

processors, consumers, and other food sys-

tem agents may seek goals other than good

nutrition.

Increasing and more volatile food

prices since 2007 and widespread concerns

about future food supplies and unsustain-

able management of natural resources have

drawn the attention of policymakers to-

wards the world food situation. Although

most recent policy responses have been of

a short-run nature, e.g., fertilizer subsidies,

a consensus is developing—at least rhetor-

ically—among national polic ymakers and

international organizations that invest-

ments in long-term agricultural develop-

ment, such as agricultural research, must

be increased. us, members of the G8 and

G20 have committed large increases in in-

ternational economic support for such in-

vestments and some developing countries

such as Ethiopia and Ghana are planning

large new investments. While most of these

recent initiatives focus on expanded food

supplies, it is now generally understood that

just making more food available will not

assure better food security, nutrition and

health at the household and individual lev-

els (Herforth, Jones, and Pinstrup-Anders-

en 2012; Pinstrup-Andersen 2012a; Hawkes

and Ruel 2006). e International Obesity

Task Force suggests a three-pronged strat-

egy: include nutritional criteria in agri-

cultural policies, undertake health impact

assessment of such policies, and provide

support for agricultural programs aimed

at meeting World Health Organization

(WHO)’s dietary guidelines (Hawkes 2007).

It matter s fo r he alth and nutr ition how the

increasing food supply is brought about, of

what it consists and what happens to it in

the food system.

is is not a new argument (Pin-

strup-Andersen, de Londono, and Hoover

1976; Pinstrup-Andersen 1981; WHO

2004), but its application in the design and

implementation of food system policies

has been very limited. at is still the case.

e rhetoric has gained prominence but

very little action has followed. e recent-

ly established Scaling-up Nutrition (SUN)

Framework calls for action to address mal-

nutrition through agriculture and other

sectors. Several recent documents by the

Department for International Development

(DFID), the European Commission, United

States Agency for International Develop-

ment’s Feed the Future Guide and World

Vision focus on how to strengthen the nu-

trition eects of agricultural development

projects and policies (Herforth 2012; SUN