8
THE NEED TO STRENGTHEN ACCOUNTABILITY IN NUTRITION
A
T THE 2013 NUTRITION FOR GROWTH (N4G) SUMMIT IN LONDON, MORE THAN 90 SIG- NATORIES MADE SIGNIFICANT AND PUBLIC COMMITMENTS TO NUTRITION-RELATED actions, with the collective ambition of, by 2020,
1. ensuring that at least 500 million pregnant women and children under age two are reached with effective nutrition interventions,
2. preventing at least 20 million children under age five from being stunted, and
3. saving at least 1.7 million lives by reducing stunting, increasing breastfeeding, and treating severe acute malnutrition.
Tracking the commitments by the N4G signatories is inherently important, and
failure to do so would breed cynicism and complacency. This report, an outcome of the N4G event, is meant to enable partners to hold each other accountable for their commitments and demonstrate the delivery of results.
KEY POINTS 56
1. To make the process of preparing this report as accountable as possible, we have, among other things, undertaken external reviews, made statements of competing interest, provided open data access, been inclusive in soliciting contributions, and adopted a focus on country perspectives.
2. Reporting on the Nutrition for Growth (N4G) 2013 commitments was challenging for all groups of signatories. Valuable lessons were learned in this “baseline year.”
3. More than 90 percent of the signatories responded to requests for updates against their N4G com- mitments. Very few signatories were off course on their commitments, although there were many “not clear” assessments owing to vague commitments and responses.
4. In terms of progress against N4G targets, there were no obvious causes for concern from any group, at least at this early stage in the reporting period of 2013–2020. The assessment will be strengthened in 2015 by more data, more streamlined processes, and more motivated participants.
5. Accountability can be built. Civil society actors are particularly important, although they need support to be more effective. National evaluation platforms and community feedback mechanisms are promis- ing ways of strengthening nutrition accountability, but they need to be piloted and evaluated.
6. National and international nutrition research systems driven by countries themselves are likely to pro- mote more accountability at the national level.
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