1 / 20

Breakout Session 2 – New Products and Nutrition Update on USAID’s Food Aid Quality Review

Breakout Session 2 – New Products and Nutrition Update on USAID’s Food Aid Quality Review Patrick Webb Tufts University IFADC, Kansas City August 2010. Processors Pledge to Cut 1.5 Trillion Calories by 2015. 16 companies join first lady's efforts to combat obesity. May 2010.

mcoffey
Download Presentation

Breakout Session 2 – New Products and Nutrition Update on USAID’s Food Aid Quality Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Breakout Session 2 – New Products and Nutrition Update on USAID’s Food Aid Quality Review Patrick Webb Tufts University IFADC, Kansas City August 2010

  2. Processors Pledge to Cut 1.5 Trillion Calories by 2015 16 companies join first lady's efforts to combat obesity. May 2010 Food & beverage processors pledged to lower the calories of current products to reduce customer consumption by 1.5 trillion calories by 2015, compared with 2008. Bumble Bee Foods, Campbell Soup Co., Coca-Cola, ConAgra Foods, General Mills, Hershey, J.M. Smucker Co., Kellogg, Kraft Foods, Mars, McCormick & Co., Nestle USA, PepsiCo, Post Foods/Ralston Foods LLC, Sara Lee Corp. and Unilever USA.

  3. Currently, just over half-way through 2-year contract • Broad-based consultation underpins the process • Preliminary recommendations now emerging • Draft reports/recommendations posted Fall 2010 • Final report due March 2011 i

  4. This review of ‘quality’ in Title II food aid is not just about • nutrient composition. It requires attention to: • Products (formulation of products, food safety) • Practices (how programs use food aid, what goals) • Processes (how products are reviewed, quality assurance) ii

  5. Nutrition programming addresses manygoals: • Preventing undernutrition in at-risk populations • Treating severe and/or moderate wasting • Treating (or protecting against) micronutrient deficiencies • Facilitating recovery during/after medical treatment (e.g. HIV) • Promoting growth in young children • No one food product can meet all nutrient needs, all goals. iii

  6. Preliminary recommendations on products: • FBFs more effective than often portrayed. Keep in tool-box • with upgraded formulations. • Lipid products offer value-added (more effectiveness • despite higher unit cost). Add to tool-box, consider • home fortificants, shipped premix, further new products. • More attention needed to quality of overall food basket; • (i.e. cereal fortification. Don’t use FBFs as the only means • of delivering ‘quality’). Upgrade basic tools in tool-box. iv

  7. Photo credit: M. Farrell vi

  8. Photo credit: P. Webb vii

  9. Photo credit: P. Webb viii

  10. Photo credit: P. Webb ix

  11. Haiti Emergency Operations Plan (2010) x

  12. US CSB – development US CSB – emergencies Source: INTERFAIS v

  13. CORN SOY BLEND Photo credit: P. Webb xi

  14. Nut butter – animal protein product revolution xii Photo credit: P. Webb

  15. Preliminary recommendations on practices: 4. Where nutrition intent explicit, more precision needed in product selection and usage (no one-size-fits-all, generic approaches to ‘malnutrition’). 5. Higher value products should be used with defined nutrition intent (guidance to be formulated). 6. More focus needed on cost-effectiveness of programming alternatives, not just price per ton. xiii

  16. Vitamin A • US$1 of polished rice delivers no (zero) Vitamin A. • US$1 pulses delivers 500ug Vitamin A. • US$1 WSB delivers 6,600ug Vitamin A. • US$1 of home fortificant powder=44,000ug Vitamin A

  17. Iron • To deliver 100% RDA, 1 sachet powder = US$0.21/child • To deliver 100% RDA using rice = US$7.00/child • To deliver 100% RDA using pulses = US$3.50/child • To deliver 100% RDA using WSB = US$1.50/child

  18. Preliminary recommendations on processes: • 8. New products should be responsive to field needs/intent. • 9. Field testing of new products should be required, and not • based only on acceptability. • Many questions around optimal packaging, ‘where to put’ • nutrients in a ration, food safety standards. xiv

  19. Broad Conclusions • Products: • Enhanced products have higher cost, but also higher impact • $/outcome matters, not just $/ton • A single product can’t meet all needs; combinations required • Practices: • Enhanced programming means better tailoring of foods to intent • Feasibility of programming new productsneeds testing • Processes: • More convergence internationally on product formulation • US ‘whole of government’ approach includes nutrition • Coordination can be enhanced across food aid agenda to improve • not just products, but review of new foods, quality control, etc. xv

More Related