Although undernutrition impacts a range of short- and long-term outcomes, nutrition often has low priority on global and national development policy agendas because of overemphasis on technical solutions without adequate consideration of contextual and political factors. An approach is needed for strategic development of nutrition agendas that embraces the contexts influencing policy and program planning and implementation, while addressing salient causes of undernutrition. We describe a simple, comprehensive assessment approach to enable development of sound nutrition strategies and well-grounded effective and appropriate actions for nutrition in a given context. The conceptual framework for this assessment approach incorporates three domains, each essential for defining strategic actions for nutrition: epidemiologic, pertaining to the nutritional situation and the evidence about the efficacy and effectiveness of nutrition interventions; operational, pertaining to coverage, quality, and utilization of nutrition-related interventions and programs as well as capacities, opportunities, and constraints to improving these; and sociopolitical, pertaining to social, political, cultural, and organizational factors at various levels, which may enhance or inhibit efforts to create positive changes in policies and programs. The domains are interlinked, and the sociopolitical domain often underlies the other two domains. Using this framework can reveal important insights for the nutrition policy agenda that were hitherto not considered explicitly in efforts to advance nutrition. This is highlighted in an example from Vietnam and through other papers in this Supplement. Use of this three-domain assessment framework can greatly aid development of feasible and actionable nutrition strategies that are grounded in epidemiologic, operational, and sociopolitical realities.
Black RE, Allen LH, Bhutta ZA, Caulfield LE, de Onis M, Ezzati M, Mathers C, Rivera J; Maternal and Child Undernutrition Study Group. Maternal and Child Undernutrition: global and regional exposures and health consequences. Lancet2008;371:243–60.
2.
Victora CG, Adair L, Fall C, Hallal PC, Martorell R, Richter L, Sachdev HS; Maternal and Child Undernutrition Study Group. Maternal and child undernutrition: consequences for adult health and human capital. Lancet2008;371:340–57.
3.
Walker SP, Wachs TD, Gardner JM, Lozoff B, Wasserman GA, Pollitt E, Carter JA; International Child Development Steering Group. Child development: risk factors for adverse outcomes in developing countries. Lancet2007;369:145–57.
4.
World Bank. Repositioning nutrition as central to development: a strategy for large-scale action. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2006.
5.
ShiffmanJSmithS. Generation of political priority for global health initiatives: a framework and case study of maternal mortality. Lancet2007;370:1370–9.
6.
UNICEF. Strategy for improved nutrition of children and women in developing countries. New York: UNICEF, 1990.
7.
EnglePLMenonPHaddadLH. Care and nutrition: concepts and measurement. World Dev1999;27:1309–37.
8.
GillespieSMasonJMartorellR. How nutrition improves. ACC/SCN Working Paper July. Geneva: United Nations Standing Committee on Nutrition, 1996.
9.
IannottiLGillespieS. Community nutrition programming: lessons learned and experiences from Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. The LINKAGES Project. Washington, DC: Academy for Education, 2001.
10.
Von BraunJRuelMTGulatiA. Accelerating progress toward reducing child malnutrition in India: a concept note for action. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute, 2008.
11.
FajansPSimmonsRGhironL. Helping public sector health systems innovate: the strategic approach to strengthening reproductive health policies and programs. Am J Public Health2006;96:435–40.
12.
GreenACollinsCStefaniniAFerrinhoPChapmanGHagosBAdamsYOmarM. The role of strategic health planning processes in the development of health care reform policies: a comparative study of Eritrea, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe. Int J Health Plann Manage2007;22:113–31.
13.
PelletierDL. Research and policy directions. In: SembaRBloemM, eds. Nutrition and health in developing countries. Totowa, NJ, USA: Humana Press, 2001:523–50.
14.
PelletierDLMenonPNgoTFrongilloEAFrongilloD. The nutrition policy process: the role of strategic capacity in advancing national nutrition agendas. Food Nutr Bull2011;32:S59–69.
15.
WaltGGilsonL. Reforming the health sector in developing countries: the central role of policy analysis. Health Policy Plann1994;9:353–70.
16.
ParsonsW. Public policy: an introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1995.
17.
ClarkTW. The policy process: a practical guide for natural resource professionals. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 2002.
18.
ShiffmanJ. Generating political priority for maternal mortality reduction in 5 developing countries. Am J Public Health2007;97:796–803.
19.
VictoraCGHabichtJPBryceJ. Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. Am J Public Health2004;94:400–5.
20.
GerickeCAKurowskiCRansonMKMillsA. Intervention complexity—a conceptual framework to inform priority-setting in health. Bull World Health Organ2005;83:285–93.
21.
SiddiqiSHaqIUGhaffarAAkhtarTMahainiR. Pakistan's maternal and child health policy: analysis, lessons and the way forward. Health Policy2004;69:117–30.
22.
GarretyK. Social worlds, actor-networks and controversy: the case of cholesterol, dietary fat and heart disease. Soc Stud Sci1997;27:727–73.
23.
BissetSPotvinL. Expanding our conceptualization of program implementation: lessons from the genealogy of a school-based nutrition program. Health Educ Res2007;22:737–46.
24.
KingdonJ. Agendas, alternatives and public policies, 2nd ed.New York: HarperCollins College Publishers, 1995.
Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization. Guiding principles for complementary feeding of the breastfed child. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization, 2003.
27.
IsmailSMaartenINantelG. Improving nutrition programmes. An assessment tool for action, revised ed.Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, 2005. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0244e/A0244E00.HTM. Accessed 5 February 2011.
28.
World Bank. Tools for institutional, political and social analysis of policy reform. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2007.
29.
MathauerI. Institutional analysis toolkit for safety net interventions. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2004.
30.
ReismanJGienappAStachowiakS. A handbook of data collection tools. Companion to: a guide to measuring advocacy and policy. Baltimore, Md, USA: Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2007.
31.
SchifferE. Network analysis case study: multistakeholder water governance in Ghana. In: HollandJ, ed. Tools for institutional, political, and social analysis of policy reform. A sourcebook for development practitioners. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2007:143–5.
32.
SchifferEHauckJ. Net-Map: collecting social network data and facilitating network learning through participatory influence network mapping. Field Methods2010;22:231–49.
33.
World Health Organization. Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Geneva: WHO, 1995.
34.
GibsonR. Principles of nutritional assessment. New York: Oxford Publications, 2005.
35.
Avila-CurielA. General characteristics of food in developing regions—a situational diagnostic assessment. Br J Nutr2006;96(suppl 1):S12–6.
36.
SanghviTShrimptonRde BenoistB. Nutrition essentials: a guide for health managers. A joint BASICS II, USAID, UNICEF, WHO publication. Washington, DC: BASICS II, 1999.
37.
SanghviTDieneSMurrayJGallowayRFrancoC. Program review of essential nutrition actions: checklist for district health services. Washington, DC: BASICS II, 2003.
38.
PotterCBroughR. Systematic capacity building: a hierarchy of needs. Health Policy Plann2004;19:336–45.
39.
PeltoPJPeltoG. Anthropological research: the structure of inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
40.
BernardHR. Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Newbury Park, Calif, USA: Sage Publications, 2006.
41.
CummingsTGWorleyCG. Organizational development and change, 8th ed.Mason, Ohio, USA: Thomson Southwestern Publishers, 2004.
42.
LappingKFrongilloEAStuddertLJMenonPCoatesJWebbP. Prospective analysis of the development of the national nutrition agenda in Vietnam from 2006 to 2008. Health Policy Plann2011; doi: 10.1093/heapol/czr013
43.
MenonPRaabeKBhaskarA. Biological, programmatic and sociopolitical dimensions of child undernutrition in three states in India. IDS Bull2009;40:70–9.
44.
PelletierDLFrongilloEAGervaisSHoeyLMenonPNgoTStoltzfusRJAhmedAMSAhmedT. Nutrition agenda setting, policy formulation and implementation: lessons from the Mainstreaming Nutrition Initiative. Health Policy Plann2011; doi: 10.1093/heapol/czr011.
45.
HoeyHPelletierDL. Bolivia's multisectoral Zero Malnutrition Program: insights on commitment, collaboration, and capacities. Food Nutr Bull2011;32:S70–81.
46.
HillRGonzalezWPelletierDL. The formulation of consensus on nutrition policy: policy actors' perspectives on good process. Food Nutr Bull2011;32:S92–104.
47.
Bryce J, Coitinho D, Darnton-Hill I, Pelletier D, Pinstrup-Andersen P; Maternal and Child Undernutrition Study Group. Maternal and child undernutrition: effective action at national level. Lancet2008;371:510–26.
48.
Jones G, Steketee RW, Black RE, Bhutta ZA, Morris SS; Bellagio Child Survival Study Group. How many child deaths can we prevent this year?Lancet2003;362:65–71.
49.
BryceJel ArifeenSPariyoGLanataCGwatkinDHabichtJP, Multi-Country Evaluation of IMCI Study Group. Reducing child mortality: can public health deliver?Lancet2003;362:159–64.
