Effective Public Investments to Improve Food Security
The world has made significant progress in reducing hunger over the past decade. But hunger remains a major challenge. This policy brief identifies the most effective and efficient ways to invest in improving food security.
The world has made significant progress in reducing hunger over the past decade. But hunger remains a major challenge. This policy brief identifies the most effective and efficient ways to invest in improving food security.
It is derived from a longer peer-reviewed article entitled: Can interventions in the agricultural sector improve food security? A Systematic Review of Available Evidence.
A key message is that context matters. Where interventions had no or negative impacts on food security, the reason for failure was often the lack of consideration of broader community challenges, gender inequality and wealth inequity – whereas the successful interventions stressed the importance of prior analysis or a baseline assessment. Improved food security is often the result of multiple, well-designed interventions. The focus is less about finding the right intervention, and more about ensuring that interventions are designed and implemented with the particular context in mind. An important research gap exists regarding evidence on the efficiency of interventions relative to their costs.
You might also be interested in
Ending Hunger: What would it cost?
The International Institute for Sustainable Development and the International Food Policy Research Institute joined forces to estimate what it would cost to end hunger, and the contribution that donors need to make.
How Can We Work With Nature to Tackle Drought and Desertification?
Drought is one of the most devastating and pervasive challenges exacerbated by climate change. However, we can work to reduce its effects through nature-based solutions for land restoration and climate-smart agriculture.
Sustainable Asset Valuation of Land Restoration and Climate-Smart Agriculture in Burkina Faso
This integrated cost-benefit analysis demonstrates the potential of nature-based infrastructure to restore land and combat desertification, aiding communities with climate change adaptation and producing wide-reaching socio-economic benefits.
Carbon Offset Deals and the Risks of “Green Grabbing”
Governments must ensure land-based investments for carbon removal respect the access and tenure rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.