Once again it has been a pleasure reading the contributions of Forum members over the last week.
Several contributors have echoed themes expressed in the special supplement of Maternal and Child Nutrition. Teopista Mutesi notes that eggs can support improved nutritional outcomes in children. Mary Odusegun notes that eggs can be unaffordable for the poor, and Lawrence Matolo notes that in his home area when he was a child, eggs were so expensive that they were essentially used as currency. Christian Ciza notes the need to intensify production, and Akhila Vasan suggests an aggregation model perhaps similar to the egg hub discussed in the series. Hélène Delisle remarks on the need to combat taboos and unfounded health concerns, and Wajid Pirzada and Peterson Kato Kikomeko advocate for promotion campaigns along the lines of “an egg a day”. Olutosin Otekunrin helpfully summarises several of the messages of the series.
Other contributors have broadened the discussion and pointed us to new evidence in this area.
Santosh Kumar Mishra directs us to some additional sources which beautifully complement the recent series in Maternal and Child Nutrition and shed light on topics which were barely covered there. One paper (Ben Sassi, Averós & Estevez, 2016) reviews recent technological developments which could be applied to animal welfare. Another (Taylor, Omed & Edwards-Jones, 2014) helps us understand the carbon footprint of egg production. This paper concludes that “Eggs represent a relatively low-carbon supply of animal protein, but their production is heavily dependent on cereals and soy, with associated high emissions from industrial nitrogen production, land-use change, and transport. Alternative sources of digestible protein for poultry diets are available, may be produced from waste processing, and would be an effective tool for reducing the industry's GHG emissions and dependence on imported raw materials.”
Rabiu Auwalu Yakasai reminds us that school feeding can be an effective way to guarantee demand for eggs at scale, thereby incentivising new investment by businesses. Vethaiya Balasubramaniam also discusses school feeding, in this case pointing to the successful experience of the state of Tamil Nadu in India. Although less impactful than school feeding as a way to target nutrition to the most vulnerable, governments can also encourage other institutional purchasers—national airlines, for example, or the army—to buy locally and ensure offtake from growing producers. These measures might make prices rise in the short term (as has reportedly happened in several Nigerian states), in the medium term prices should fall as businesses are able to reap economies of scale.
Wilma Freire Zaldumbide emphasises how important it is to involve affected populations themselves in the design of interventions to improve nutrition. This in fact reinforces the findings of Carlos Andrés Gallegos Riofrío, published in the recent supplement of Maternal and Child Nutrition, who designed an intervention “informed by culturally based norms, values and local expectations” and fostered community empowerment.
We would still love to hear from more contributors who have effectively solved issues of animal welfare, demand creation, and price reduction in markets with high burdens of malnutrition.
Saul Morris