The measurement of food consumption and expenditure is a fundamental component of any analysis of poverty and food security, and hence the importance and timeliness of devoting attention to the topic cannot be overemphasized as the international development community confronts the challenges of monitoring progress in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In 2014, the International Household Survey Network published a desk review of the reliability and relevance of survey questions as included in 100 household surveys from low- and middle-income countries. The report was presented in March 2014 at the forty-fifth session of the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC), in a seminar organized by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Food Security, Agricultural and Rural Statistics (IAEG-AG). The assessment painted a bleak picture in terms of heterogeneity in survey design and overall relevance and reliability of the data being collected. On the positive side, it pointed to many areas in which even marginal changes to survey and questionnaire design could lead to a significant increase in reliability and consequently, great improvements in measurement accuracy. The report, which sparked a lot of interest from development partners and UNSC member countries, prompted IAEG-AG to pursue this area of work with the ultimate objective of developing, validating, and promoting scalable standards for the measurement of food consumption in household surveys. The work started with an expert workshop that took place in Rome in November 2014. Successive versions of the guidelines were drafted and discussed at various IAEG-AG meetings, and in another expert workshop organized in November 2016 in Rome. The guidelines were put together by a joint FAO-World Bank team, with inputs and comments received from representatives of national statistical offices, international organizations, survey practitioners, academics, and experts in different disciplines (statistics, economics, nutrition, food security, and analysis). A list of the main contributors is included in the acknowledgment section. In December 2017 a draft of the guidelines was circulated to 148 National Statistical Offices from low- to high-income countries for comments. The document was revised following that consultation and submitted to UNSC, which endorsed it at its forty-ninth session in March 2018 (under item 3(j) of the agenda, agricultural and rural statistics. The version presented here reflects what was endorsed by the Commission, edited for language. The process received support from the Global Strategy for Agricultural and Rural Statistics. The document is intended to be a reference document for National Statistical Offices, survey practitioners, and national and international agencies designing household surveys that involve the collection of food consumption and expenditure data.

This meeting report is an outcome of the WHO-UNICEF Technical Expert Advisory Group on Nutrition Monitoring (TEAM), which was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The goal of the consultation was to promote increased communication, coordination and collaboration for the purpose of accelerating progress towards identifying or developing a parsimonious set of metrics for global monitoring of healthy diets for individuals over 2 years of age. Eighty-five participants took part in the consultation, representing a wide range of institutions and roles in the data value chain.

The most complete review of human nutrition, ideal for those looking for a deeper grounding in the subject before pursuing a career in the discipline.

Telescoping errors occur if survey respondents misdate consumption or expenditure episodes by including events from outside the reference period in their recall. Concern about telescoping influenced the design of early Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS) surveys, which used a two-visit interview format to allow a bounded recall. This design fell out of favor although not for evidence-based reasons. Recent guidelines to harmonize food data collection in low- and middle-income countries by using one-week recall increase the relevance of telescoping because errors spread over a shorter period will loom larger. To provide evidence on telescoping, we conducted a survey experiment in Ethiopia, randomly assigning a balanced sample – either a two-visit bounded recall or a single visit unbounded recall. The average value of reported food consumption is 16 percent higher in the unbounded single visit recall relative to the two-visit bounded recall. Put differently, in this experiment, telescoping errors amount, on average, to an entire extra day worth of consumption being included in the report for the last seven days. Most of the error is explained by difference in reporting of spending on less frequently consumed, protein-rich foods, so apparent diet diversity and dietary quality indicators are likely to be overstated when using unbounded recall.

This book offers an essential, comprehensive, yet accessible reference of contemporary food security discourse and guides readers through the steps required for food security analysis. Food insecurity is a major obstacle to development and achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. It is a complex issue that cuts across traditional sectors in government and disciplines in academia. Understanding how multiple elements cause and influence food security is essential for policymakers, practitioners and scholars. This book demonstrates how evaluation can integrate the four elements of food security (availability, access, nutrition and resilience) and offers practical tools for policy and programme impact assessment to support evidence-based planning. Aimed at researchers, postgraduates and those undertaking professional development in food studies, agricultural economics, rural development, nutrition and public health, the book is key reading for those seeking to understand evidence-based food security analysis.

This book aims to contribute the knowledge and understanding of nutritional impact of food systems. Focus is also be given to food systems elements status identification, policy analysis to examine potential effects of different policy options throughout the food system, in particular policies in agriculture, food marketing and trade, social protection, gender, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on food industry, nutrition, and environment and education etc. Good practice and lessons learnt to strengthen the beneficiary countries’ evidence-base for addressing nutrition related challenges from the food system perspective.

The INFORMED programme, implemented by FAO from 2015 to 2019, was designed to contribute to “increasing the resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises and contributing to the reduction of food insecurity and malnutrition”. The programme’s increased focused on Early Warning for Early Action (EWEA) was very relevant to fill existing gaps with a comparative advantage for FAO in slow onset and food chain crises contexts. Promoting the use of pre-agreed plans and pre-identified anticipatory actions, the project effectively improved risk analysis and decision making, including through the Global Report on Food Crises, and increased access to appropriate financing instruments, while the EWEA country toolkit initial positive spinoffs remain to be built on.Efforts to support resilience measurement and analyses by applying the resilience index measurement and analysis (RIMA) methodology are relevant given the significant investments in resilience programming and the continuing methodological gaps. However, although RIMA provides a basis for creating evidence on resilience investments, and FAO has been an important pioneer in resilience measurement, a wider system supporting resilience analysis is needed, based on a range of methodologies, responding to the information needs of decision-makers. Also, RIMA baseline lacks sufficient detail to allow articulating the feasibility of possible response options and have a practical impact on planning decisions; it has not demonstrated its added value over pre-existing food security, nutrition and risk indicators to help target interventions, and is not well adapted as an impact evaluation tool.Assessing INFORMED results against its intention to support knowledge production and sharing, to promote the replication of good practices and circular learning, the evaluation questioned the choice of creating a new knowledge management platform versus adopting a collaborative approach building on similar initiatives’ strengths. Poor strategic choices represented a fundamental constraint to reach intended objectives, such as, an insufficient understanding of users explaining the difficulty to trace the uptake and use of knowledge products. Nevertheless, the evaluation recognized the progressive investments in knowledge management and sizeable accomplishments of a relatively small team.The evaluation suggests strengthening capacities for the production and dissemination of forecast, scenario-based early warning as a basis for early action; developing a corporate strategy for partnering to strengthen early warning system capacities at various levels; promoting the use of a toolkit of approaches and investing in a knowledge management function dedicated to capturing and disseminating lessons on the effectiveness of EWEA and resilience interventions.

As the nature of global malnutrition changes, there is a growing need and increasing urgency for more and better information about food consumption and dietary patterns. The past two decades have seen a dramatic increase in the number, availability, and analysis of the food consumption data collected in a variety of multipurpose household surveys, referred to collectively as household consumption and expenditure surveys (HCESs). These surveys are heterogeneous, and their quality varies substantially by country. Still, they share some common shortcomings in their measurement of food consumption, nutrient intakes, and nutrition status that undermine their relevance and reliability for purposes of designing and implementing food policies and programs. This review crafts a strategic approach to the unfinished global agenda of improving HCESs’ collection of food consumption data. Starting with the priority studies recommended by a 100-country HCES review (Smith, Dupriez, and Troubat 2014), it focuses on a strategic subset of those studies that deal most directly and exclusively with the measurement of food, and that are of fundamental importance to all HCES stakeholders in low- and middle-income countries. Drawing from the literature, this study provides a more detailed, more circumspect justification as to why these particular studies are needed, while identifying key hypotheses, explaining why these studies are of growing urgency, and demonstrating why now is a propitious time for undertaking them. The review also identifies important study design considerations while pointing out potential challenges to successful implementation stemming from technical capacity, economic, administrative, and political considerations. Six key studies are rank ordered from a global perspective as follows, taking into account (1) the likely shared consensus that a topic is an important source of measurement error in estimating consumption; (2) the perceived urgency of the need for addressing a particular source of measurement error; (3) the perceived likelihood of success—that is, that the efforts will improve the accuracy of measurement; (4) whether or not the study entails modifying the questionnaire; (5) the ease with which a study may begin; and (6) the extent to which the study is independent of necessary negotiations with existing HCES stakeholders because of the types of changes it is likely to entail (in either the questionnaire or the way the data have traditionally been processed).