Utilising emerging perspectives at the global and regional level to frame multisectoral nutrition governance landscape in Kenya.

OBJECTIVE: Multisectoral nutrition governance (MNG) is a vital enabling determinant of improved nutrition outcomes. Despite this, it remains to be a complex phenomenon that lacks adequate understanding, especially in developing countries like Kenya. This narrative review aims to discuss the evolution of MNG, the current state of MNG, barriers and challenges, and based on these identify entry points for improvement within the complex governance structure in Kenya. DESIGN: The Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to ensure rigorous and transparent identification of literature and interpretation. SETTING: Kenya and developing countries with similar contexts. PARTICIPANTS: The review included forty-five documents (peer-reviewed articles and grey literature) that reported on MNG in developing countries. RESULTS: We acknowledge that MNG is a complex and evolving determinant of better nutrition outcomes. The paper highlights challenges Kenya and other developing countries face such as inadequate leadership, inadequate coordination, insufficient capacity, inadequate monitoring and evaluation systems, and limited financial resources, among others. For Kenya in particular, there is inadequate understanding of what MNG is and how it can be effectively operationalised and tracked. CONCLUSIONS: To enhance understanding of MNG in Kenya, a country-specific assessment of MNG processes and impact outcomes using standard tools and defined metrics is vital. Such assessment will generate evidence of progress, successes, and challenges that will compel the government and stakeholders to invest more in multisectoral nutrition approaches to achieve its nutrition goals.

Addressing the risk of inadequate and excessive micronutrient intakes: traditional versus new approaches to setting adequate and safe micronutrient levels in foods.

Fortification of foods consumed by the general population or specific food products or supplements designed to be consumed by vulnerable target groups is amongst the strategies in developing countries to address micronutrient deficiencies. Any strategy aimed at dietary change needs careful consideration, ensuring the needs of at-risk subgroups are met whilst ensuring safety within the general population. This paper reviews the key principles of two main assessment approaches that may assist developing countries in deciding on effective and safe micronutrient levels in foods or special products designed to address micronutrient deficiencies, that is, the cut-point method and the stepwise approach to risk-benefit assessment. In the first approach, the goal is to shift population intake distributions such that intake prevalences below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and above the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) are both minimized. However, for some micronutrients like vitamin A and zinc, a narrow margin between the EAR and UL exists. Increasing their intakes through mass fortification may pose a dilemma; not permitting the UL to be exceeded provides assurance about the safety within the population but can potentially leave a proportion of the target population with unmet needs, or vice versa. Risk-benefit approaches assist in decision making at different micronutrient intake scenarios by balancing the magnitude of potential health benefits of reducing inadequate intakes against health risks of excessive intakes. Risk-benefit approaches consider different aspects of health risk including severity and number of people affected. This approach reduces the uncertainty for policy makers as compared to classic cut-point methods.

Maize flour fortification in Africa: markets, feasibility, coverage, and costs.

The economic feasibility of maize flour and maize meal fortification in Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia is assessed using information about the maize milling industry, households' purchases and consumption levels of maize flour, and the incremental cost and estimated price impacts of fortification. Premix costs comprise the overwhelming share of incremental fortification costs and vary by 50% in Kenya and by more than 100% across the three countries. The estimated incremental cost of maize flour fortification per metric ton varies from $3.19 in Zambia to $4.41 in Uganda. Assuming all incremental costs are passed onto the consumer, fortification in Zambia would result in at most a 0.9% increase in the price of maize flour, and would increase annual outlays of the average maize flour-consuming household by 0.2%. The increases for Kenyans and Ugandans would be even less. Although the coverage of maize flour fortification is not likely to be as high as some advocates have predicted, fortification is economically feasible, and would reduce deficiencies of multiple micronutrients, which are significant public health problems in each of these countries.