Equate and Conflate: Political Commitment to Hunger and Undernutrition Reduction in Five High-Burden Countries
通过专家调查，检验了五个高负担国家中政府减少饥饿的承诺与减少营养不良的承诺是否不同，发现两者确实不同，因此需要更精准的承诺指标来指导政策。
As political commitment is an essential ingredient for elevating food and nutrition security onto policy agendas, commitment metrics have proliferated. Many conflate government commitment to fight hunger with combating undernutrition. We test the hypothesis that commitment to hunger reduction is empirically different from commitment to reducing undernutrition through expert surveys in five high-burden countries: Bangladesh, Malawi, Nepal, Tanzania, and Zambia. Our findings confirm the hypothesis. We conclude that sensitive commitment metrics are needed to guide government and donor policies and programmatic action. Without, historically inadequate prioritization of non-food aspects of malnutrition may persist to imperil achieving global nutrition targets.