The Food and Nutrition Security Enhancement Project (FANSEP) aims to improve agricultural productivity and nutrition practices of targeted smallholder farmers in Nepal. The project represents a second investment by the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP) in Nepal, following the recently completed Agriculture and Food Security Project (AFSP). FANSEP covers a new set of areas not reached by AFSP and aims to build on the successes made by AFSP, tailoring project interventions to the populations where they are most successful. In contrast to AFSP, smallholder productivity support will be explicitly targeted to poorer households while others will be eligible for more commercially oriented support directed to producer associations.
FANSEP is being implemented in hill and Terai (plains) agro-ecological zones. The project will be implemented over five years (2018-2023) in a total of 16 rural municipalities (Gaupalikas) of eight districts spanning three provinces. These districts are Dhanusa, Mahottari, Siraha, and Saptari from Province 2, Dhading, Dolakha and Sindhupalchowk from Bagmati Province, and Gorkha from Gandaki Province. The project aims to improve the livelihoods of crop and livestock farmers, women engaged in household and kitchen garden production, and pregnant and nursing women.
The project consists of the following complementary components:
(a) Technology Adaptation and Dissemination
(b) Income Generation and Diversification through Market Access and Climate Risk Management
(c) Improving Nutrition Security
(d) Project Management, Communication and Monitoring and Evaluation
Component A focuses on improving productivity and post-harvest management of crops and livestock by promoting introduction of appropriate technologies through improved extension services, including Farmer Field Schools (FFS). In relation to this component, the IE aims to test the overall effectiveness of the project in improving smallholder’s income and nutrition as well as comparing types of interventions within the component side by side to measure relative effectiveness.
Component B aims to diversify income generation of targeted smallholders by increasing resilience to climate and natural disaster shocks, improving competitiveness and reducing transaction costs by investing in market infrastructure and building market linkages. This will be achieved through two main avenues: firstly, organizing/strengthening producer groups and enhancing their capacities for leadership, decision-making, risk-management, book keeping, and preparation of simple business plans (among other skills). Second, market linkages will be created through Productive Alliances (PAs) between producer organizations and private agribusiness firms (such as agro-vet, traders, commercial farms, MSMEs). This will involve a sort of “business school” as well as provision of matching grants.
Component C aims to address underlying causes of malnutrition by making the system responsive to these causes and promoting adequate, safe, diversified, and nutrient-rich food. The project will support a set of activities at community and local government level, building on experience from AFSP to strengthen institutional capacity and implement Nutrition Field Schools (NFS) and home nutrition gardens. NFS will follow a theory of behavior change, using skill-based nutrition education over the course of a two-year period per group, including sessions on identification of locally available nutrient-dense foods, cooking demonstrations, food safety, home nutrition gardens, and hygiene education. The target group for the NFS will be existing mothers’ groups, the Female Community Health Volunteers (FCHV), 1000 days women, and other influencers/change agents. A complementary package of Information Education and Communication (IEC) materials will be disseminated on various media platforms. The IE will work with the operational team to track FIES and other food security indicators at the household level.
Research questions
The proposed research questions look to inform project targeting and delivery, and to measure impacts as they relate to the Project Development Outcomes and relevant Results Framework indicators. The most important driver for the questions were priorities from the government perspective and key areas for learning. An additional consideration for the design of the questions was key gaps in the literature, with a view towards informing the larger community of practice within the GAFSP portfolio and across implementing institutions.
Overall Question: What is the impact of the FANSEP on the most food insecure and vulnerable households in a community? Additional research questions are:
- Does a Proxy Means Test developed using algorithms based on previous IE data successfully identify and target the most food insecure and/or marginalized households in a community? - Targeting Effect
- What extension model and which specific interventions deliver take-up of and changes in agricultural and livestock practices in the most efficient manner? - Comparative Effect
- Does an intensive Nutrition Field School in addition to household involvement in component A interventions, have a larger impact on improving dietary diversity and FIES score than receiving one component alone? - Complementary Effect