Recovery with a Human Face
  • E-Discussion 2010-
  • About this e-discussion
  • Books
  • Recent Articles
  • Contact

Recovery with a Human Face

A discussion on alternatives for a socially-responsive crisis recovery
 

February 06th, 2014

2/6/2014

0 Comments

 
The debate on food subsidies tends to revolve around political and macroeconomic considerations which are important but not enough. Household and individual level impacts are rarely explored with adequate attention on nutrition in particular among vulnerable groups such as children and pregnant women -- with a clear focus on the relatively short window opportunity for proper brain development and the foundations of good health early in life. Food subsidies tend to go to cheap, energy rich staple food hence may increase the prevalence of diets poor in proteins and micronutrients. It is widely assumed that the reason why Egypt has one of the highest double burden of both obesity and child stunting in the world has much to do with its long tradition of subsidizing food, which keep the consumption of staples like the baladi bread high. See more on this for example at http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpriwfppn_egypt.pdf
Although there is evidence that social cash benefits help shifting the food intake towards better (higher quality) foods among the poor, much of that impact could either come too late for better anthropometric results (due for example to means tested targeting practices penalizing children early in their lives) or get wasted by poor access to and/or lack of uptake of parallel, nutrition sensitive interventions (good sanitation, hygiene, care practices etc). See more on related links here http://www.unicef.org/esaro/5483_social_protection.html and here http://www.thelancet.com/series/maternal-and-child-nutrition
Reform efforts require, therefore, careful context specific analysis and inputs from economists as well as nutritionist, anthropologists, sociologists and development practitioners. This may help decision makers avoiding the political, economic and population burden of half-baked ad-hoc solutions and endorsing integrated, multi-dimensional response strategies with positive individual and social returns along several dimensions of human development.

Gaspar Fajth, UNICEF


0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    This e-discussion is ongoing by email Apologies if late updates on this website...


    Moderator
    

    Isabel Ortiz
    Director Social Protection ILO

    Picture
    Follow on Twitter 
    To join this e-discussion, send an email to: sympa@socpro.list.ilo.org
    with SUBSCRIBE recoveryhumanface in the subject 

    Archives

    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013

    Categories

    All


    This e-discussion is intended to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and to
    stimulate discussion; 
    the interpretations and p
    ositions expressed by contributors do not reflect the policies of ILO. 

    “We, the Peoples” are the first words of the UN Charter. The UN was founded in 1945 and
    mandated to respond to the needs and rights of all persons, in every country of the world. In this spirit of social justice, a real world recovery means a recovery for all
    persons, not simply the recovery of a few economic indicators and
    companies.

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.