United Kingdom, the United States, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, and the World Bank Group.6
and summarized in Figures 7.1 and 7.2.
Nutrition-specific commitments and disbursements The United States, the World Bank, and Canada made the larg- est nutrition-specific commitments in 2012.
For the 13 donors, commitments to nutrition-specific in- terventions increased from US$665 million in 2010 to US$925 million in 2012, a change of 39 percent, led by substantial increases from the World Bank (more than 450 percent between 2010 and 2012), Canada, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Founda- tion.
Nutrition-specific disbursements were much lower than commitments but did increase from US$334 million in 2010 to US$480 million in 2012, an increase of 44 percent.
Nutrition-sensitive commitments and disbursements
The United States, the World Bank, and the EU made the largest nutrition-sensitive commitments in 2012. Nutrition-sensitive commitments declined by 14 percent, from US$5.95 billion in 2010 to US$5.13 billion in 2012. This
The data are reported in Appendix 4
change is reported by the World Bank to be almost entirely due to an extraordinary spike in its nutrition-sensitive commitments in 2010, when large projects were approved to support the Mexican social protection program Oportunidades.
There was also a 3 percent decline in the US government’s nutrition-sensitive commitments between 2010 and 2012. The US government reports that its figures fluctuate substantially from year to year because of the significant emergency compo- nent of its spending. The US government also notes that some nutrition-sensitive declines are driven by congressional appropri- ations reflecting declines in areas such as HIV programming and water and sanitation infrastructure.
Nutrition-sensitive disbursements were not reported by the US government, World Bank, or Children’s Investment Fund Foundation for 2010 or 2012. As a consequence the nutrition- sensitive disbursement totals for the 13 donors are much lower than their commitments. For the 10 donors that report nutrition-sensitive disbursements, these disbursements in- creased from US$937 million to US$1.112 billion, or 19 percent.
Total commitments and disbursements
With the sizable declines in US and World Bank commitment figures, total commitments fell from US$6.62 billion to US$6.06 billion, a decline of 9 percent.
FIGURE 7.1 NUTRITION-RELATED SPENDING COMMITMENTS OF 13 DONORS 6,617 5,953 5,130 1,262 1,112 937 6,056 1,523 FIGURE 7.2 NUTRITION-RELATED DISBURSEMENTS OF 10 DONORS
480 334 925 665 2010 2012
Nutrition-specific commitments
Source: Authors.
Note: The 13 donors are Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Ger- many, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, and the World Bank.
50 GLOBAL NUTRITION REPORT 2014 2010 2012
Nutrition-sensitive commitments
2010 2012 Total commitments 2010 2012
Nutrition-specific disbursements
Source: Authors.
Note: Data exclude the United States, the World Bank, and the Children’s Invest- ment Fund Foundation for nutrition-sensitive disbursements.
2010 2012
Nutrition-sensitive disbursements
2010 2012 Total disbursements
MILLIONS OF US$
MILLIONS OF US$
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118