Which choice of delivery model(s)works best to deliver fortified foods?

Abstract

Micronutrient deficiencies (MNDs) occur as a result of insuffcientintake of minerals and vitamins that are critical for body growth, physical/mental development, and activity. These deficiencies are particularly prevalent in lower-and middle-income countries (LMICs), falling disproportionately on the poorest and most vulnerable segments of the society. Dietary diversity is considered the most effective method in reducing this deficiency but is often a major constraint as most foods rich in micronutrients are also expensive and thereby inaccessible to poorer members of society. In recent years, affordable commodities such as staple foods (e.g., cereals, roots, and tubers) and condiments (e.g., salt and oil) have been targeted as vehicles for fortification and biofortification.Despite efforts by manycountries to support such initiatives, there have been mixed experiences with delivery and coverage. An important but little understood driver of success and failure for food fortification has been the range of business models and approaches adopted to promote uptake. This review examines the different models used in the delivery of fortified food including complementaryfoods and biofortified crops. Using a keyword search and pearl growing techniques, the review located 11,897 texts of which 106 were considered relevant. Evidence was found of a range of business forms and models that attemptto optimise uptake, use, and impact of food fortification which are specific to the food vehicle and environment. We characterise the current business models and business parameters that drive successful food fortification and we propose an initial structure for understanding different fortification business cases that will offer assistance to future designers and implementors of food fortification programmes.