Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation

Does nutrition-sensitive social protection protection build longer-term resilience? Experimental evidence from Bangladesh

Evidence shows that cash and in-kind transfer programs increase food security while interventions are ongoing, including during or immediately after shocks. But less is known about whether receipt of these programs can have protective effects for household food security against shocks that occur several years after interventions end. We study the effects of a transfer program implemented as a cluster-randomized control trial in rural Bangladesh from 2012-2014 – the Transfer Modality Research Initiative (TMRI) – on food security in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We assess TMRI’s impacts at three post-program time points: before the shock (2018), amidst the shock (2021), and after the immediate effects of the shock (2022). We find that TMRI showed protective effects on household food security during and after the pandemic, but program design features “mattered”; positive impacts were only seen in the treatment arm that combined cash transfers with nutrition behavior change communication (Cash+BCC). Other treatment arms – cash only, and food only – showed no significant sustained effects on our household food security measures after the intervention ended, nor did they show protective effects during the pandemic. A plausible mechanism is that investments made by Cash+BCC households in productive assets – specifically livestock – increased their pre-shock resilience capacity.

Special issue opening editorial: Designing, assessing and scaling approaches for integrated seed sector development

Food systems interventions for nutrition: Lessons from 6 program evaluations in Africa and South Asia

Although there is growing global momentum behind food systems strategies to improve planetary and human health—including nutrition—there is limited evidence of what types of food systems interventions work. Evaluating these types of interventions is challenging due to their complex and dynamic nature and lack of fit with standard evaluation methods. In this article, we draw on a portfolio of 6 evaluations of food systems interventions in Africa and South Asia that were intended to improve nutrition. We identify key methodological challenges and formulate recommendations to improve the quality of such studies. We highlight 5 challenges: a lack of evidence base to justify the intervention, the dynamic and multifaceted nature of the interventions, addressing attribution, collecting or accessing accurate and timely data, and defining and measuring appropriate outcomes. In addition to more specific guidance, we identify 6 cross-cutting recommendations, including a need to use multiple and diverse methods and flexible designs. We also note that these evaluation challenges present opportunities to develop new methods and highlight several specific needs in this space.