What are the key institutional and governance challenges to the delivery of cross-sectoral and comprehensive social protection policies that protect and promote nutrition of the most vulnerable?
Today, in the country, the Civil Society fraternity focusing on Food and Nutrition Security and poverty for the Vulnerable has grown larger and stronger. The private sector is also in the pipeline and it is synergically playing its role together with the CSOs and government as compared to a decade ago.
With the Uganda Nutrition Action Plan that was lauched in 2011, it would be ideal that Food and Nutrition security efforts take a better direction. The plan, under objective 3, indicates outstanding interventions based on the strategy of Promoting social protection to improve nutrition for the vulnerable. These and more in this plan are ultimately the directions to take to strengthen a muti-sector and multi-institutional collaboration towards a common goal.
However, the UNAP has not taken course due to the uncoordinated institutional structures among the key players inclusive of ministries and the private sector wing. For example, the Council could not operate without the Bill! This precisely is one of the reasons as to why Nutrition is been given less priority by the government. However it is important to acknowledge its efforts to reduce poverty levels under the National Development Plan which addresses food insecurity for all citiznes.
With the joining of the SUN movement (http://scalingupnutrition.org/), it is indicated in the final Uganda Summary report that stakeholders have been seen to tremendously reconsider to undertake their roles under the UNAP and other national obligations.
I think therefore that there has to be institutions specifically meant to spearhead the coordination, planning and implementation of the relevant Nutrition interventions as well as actively involving the government/line ministries for all countries. The effort of the CSOs can't go unnoticed. I strongly support it.
Whether the Nutrition department is under Health sector or Agriculure, Nutrition and Food Security social protection systems should be emphasised and given priority with specific resource allocations. An outstanding case in point is in Nepal where the Multi‐Sectoral Nutrition Plan that was endorsed by the Cabinet with a common results framework where all ministries have agreed on a set of essential nutrition-‐specific and nutrition sensitive interventions.
Thank you once again for this opportunity. I hope that the above is part of what will inform the next course of action.
It is such an opportunity, that I (we) can contribute to the change we desire in our societies as far as poverty and malnutrition are concerned; and this time through focusing on Social Protection.
Firstly, on my side, the ideal benefits of Social Protection measures are always outstanding and execellent on paper. It is the execution of some of these programs that is usually not appropriate. The developing world for so long has and is still (to a large extent) dependant on the developed world as regards social protection interventions. Some countries however have had it upon themselves to
The point here is CORRUPTION in some developing yet most vulnerable countries! It is viral and rapidly eating up all intervention systems today.
You will agree with me that the beneficiaries often times are not involved in the planning as well as monitoring and evaluting hence low sense of ownership as they do not have a say when resources are being swindled away in favour of the non beneficiaries for selfish purposes. Unfortunately, reports have always indicated achievements/success, challenges and recommendations not paying heed to the issues at the roots that hinder hitting targets; chronic inhibitors such as the scam of corruption.
It is therefore my humble request that the policy makers strongly consider the issue of corruption and misuse of resources in the process of desiging, formulating and implementing social protection programs.
Secondly, it is important to acknowledge the Nutrition forcused social protection interventions all around the globe. It is however key that there is a need to strongly consider the sustainability of these programs without compromising the well being of the beneficiaries.
The FAO's Protection to Production project in countries such as Kenya has taken a step to assess not only the quantitative results (food secutrity key indicators inclusive) but also the qualitative results that grantee sustainability of the interventions with continous and generation benefits. See: http://www.fao.org/economic/ptop/programmes/kenya/en/ Individual countries, even with their own local intervention strategies should aim at the long term outcomes. Failure to do this easily nutures a poor culture of dependency in societies were social protection measures are percieved as handouts even in times of no emergencies.
Thanks to Nyasha Tirivayi and the ICN2 Secretariat for the opportunity. I look forward to further discussion.
Regards,
Christine Namukasa
Nutritionist and Head of Research at Hunger Fighters Uganda
Christine Namukasa
Dear Colleagues,
In response to the question at hand:
What are the key institutional and governance challenges to the delivery of cross-sectoral and comprehensive social protection policies that protect and promote nutrition of the most vulnerable?
Today, in the country, the Civil Society fraternity focusing on Food and Nutrition Security and poverty for the Vulnerable has grown larger and stronger. The private sector is also in the pipeline and it is synergically playing its role together with the CSOs and government as compared to a decade ago.
With the Uganda Nutrition Action Plan that was lauched in 2011, it would be ideal that Food and Nutrition security efforts take a better direction. The plan, under objective 3, indicates outstanding interventions based on the strategy of Promoting social protection to improve nutrition for the vulnerable. These and more in this plan are ultimately the directions to take to strengthen a muti-sector and multi-institutional collaboration towards a common goal.
However, the UNAP has not taken course due to the uncoordinated institutional structures among the key players inclusive of ministries and the private sector wing. For example, the Council could not operate without the Bill! This precisely is one of the reasons as to why Nutrition is been given less priority by the government. However it is important to acknowledge its efforts to reduce poverty levels under the National Development Plan which addresses food insecurity for all citiznes.
With the joining of the SUN movement (http://scalingupnutrition.org/), it is indicated in the final Uganda Summary report that stakeholders have been seen to tremendously reconsider to undertake their roles under the UNAP and other national obligations.
I think therefore that there has to be institutions specifically meant to spearhead the coordination, planning and implementation of the relevant Nutrition interventions as well as actively involving the government/line ministries for all countries. The effort of the CSOs can't go unnoticed. I strongly support it.
Whether the Nutrition department is under Health sector or Agriculure, Nutrition and Food Security social protection systems should be emphasised and given priority with specific resource allocations. An outstanding case in point is in Nepal where the Multi‐Sectoral Nutrition Plan that was endorsed by the Cabinet with a common results framework where all ministries have agreed on a set of essential nutrition-‐specific and nutrition sensitive interventions.
Thank you once again for this opportunity. I hope that the above is part of what will inform the next course of action.
Christine Namukasa
Nutritionist and Head of Research Department
Hunger Fighters Uganda
Christine Namukasa
Dear All,
It is such an opportunity, that I (we) can contribute to the change we desire in our societies as far as poverty and malnutrition are concerned; and this time through focusing on Social Protection.
Firstly, on my side, the ideal benefits of Social Protection measures are always outstanding and execellent on paper. It is the execution of some of these programs that is usually not appropriate. The developing world for so long has and is still (to a large extent) dependant on the developed world as regards social protection interventions. Some countries however have had it upon themselves to
The point here is CORRUPTION in some developing yet most vulnerable countries! It is viral and rapidly eating up all intervention systems today.
You will agree with me that the beneficiaries often times are not involved in the planning as well as monitoring and evaluting hence low sense of ownership as they do not have a say when resources are being swindled away in favour of the non beneficiaries for selfish purposes. Unfortunately, reports have always indicated achievements/success, challenges and recommendations not paying heed to the issues at the roots that hinder hitting targets; chronic inhibitors such as the scam of corruption.
It is therefore my humble request that the policy makers strongly consider the issue of corruption and misuse of resources in the process of desiging, formulating and implementing social protection programs.
Secondly, it is important to acknowledge the Nutrition forcused social protection interventions all around the globe. It is however key that there is a need to strongly consider the sustainability of these programs without compromising the well being of the beneficiaries.
The FAO's Protection to Production project in countries such as Kenya has taken a step to assess not only the quantitative results (food secutrity key indicators inclusive) but also the qualitative results that grantee sustainability of the interventions with continous and generation benefits. See: http://www.fao.org/economic/ptop/programmes/kenya/en/ Individual countries, even with their own local intervention strategies should aim at the long term outcomes. Failure to do this easily nutures a poor culture of dependency in societies were social protection measures are percieved as handouts even in times of no emergencies.
Thanks to Nyasha Tirivayi and the ICN2 Secretariat for the opportunity. I look forward to further discussion.
Regards,
Christine Namukasa
Nutritionist and Head of Research at Hunger Fighters Uganda