Approaches to linking agriculture and nutrition programmes

6Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Malnutrition continues to be a problem of staggering proportions throughout the world. Many programmes and policies have been used to reduce the number of malnourished, with mixed results. The purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual framework for identifying the factors influencing individual nutritional status and a range of possible interventions. A review of the most common interventions for mitigating malnutrition both at the household and individual level, and lessons learned, are presented. Finally, guidelines for creating linkages between nutrition and agricultural projects are suggested. Experience gained from past interventions provides three 'rules of thumb' in the design of successful policies and programmes to mitigate malnutrition:. 1)Use existing infrastructure, programmes, and projects rather than creating a new organization.2)Build on certain types of agricultural projects which are amenable to coupling with nutrition objectives. © 1994 Oxford University Press.

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The effects of household food production strategies on the health and nutrition outcomes of women and young children: A systematic review

210Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Risk factors for undernutrition of young children in a rural area of South Africa

65Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Facilitating factors and challenges of the implementation of multisectoral nutrition programmes at the community level to improve optimal infant and young child feeding practices: A qualitative study in Burkina Faso

12Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kennedy, E. T. (1994). Approaches to linking agriculture and nutrition programmes. Health Policy and Planning, 9(3), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/9.3.295

Readers over time

‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘17‘18‘21‘2401234

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 10

53%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 8

42%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7

39%

Social Sciences 6

33%

Medicine and Dentistry 4

22%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

6%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0