Farm production diversity, household dietary diversity, and nutrition: Evidence from Uganda's national panel survey.

Improved food security and nutrition remain a notable global challenge. Yet, food security and nutrition are areas of strategic importance regarding the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals. The increasingly weakening global food production systems pose a threat to sustainable improved food security and nutrition. Consequently, a significant population remains chronically hungry and severely malnourished. As a remedy, farm production diversity (FPD) remains a viable pathway through which household nutrition can be improved. However, evidence is mixed, or unavailable on how FPD is associated with key nutrition indicators like household dietary diversity, energy, iron, zinc, and vitamin A (micronutrients). We use the Uganda National Panel Survey (UNPS) data for rural households to analyze differential associations of sub-components of FPD on dietary diversity, energy, and micronutrient intake. Panel data models reveal that indeed crop species count, and animal species count (sub-components of FPD) are differently associated with household dietary diversity score (HDDS), energy, and vitamin A sourced from markets. Moreover, when volumes of these nutrition outcomes were disaggregated by source (own farm vs. markets), the animal species count was only positively significantly associated with nutrition outcomes sourced from consumption of produce from own farm. Associations were insignificant for nutrition indicators sourced from markets except vitamin A. The crop species count, however, consistently showed a strong positive and significant association with energy, and all studied micronutrients sourced from own farm produce consumption, as well as those sourced from markets except Vitamin A, which was negative but insignificant. Therefore, inclusive, pro-poor, and pro-nutrition rural policy initiatives in the context of rural Uganda and similar ones, could more widely improve household nutrition through prioritizing crop species diversification on own farms because crops fetch wider nutrition gains.

Circular bioeconomy in African food systems: What is the status quo? Insights from Rwanda, DRC, and Ethiopia.

Increasing global food insecurity amidst a growing population and diminishing production resources renders the currently dominant linear production model insufficient to combat such challenges. Hence, a circular bioeconomy (CBE) model that ensures more conservative use of resources has become essential. Specifically, a CBE model that focuses on recycling and reusing organic waste is essential to close nutrient loops and establish more resilient rural-urban nexus food systems. However, the CBE status quo in many African food systems is not established. Moreover, scientific evidence on CBE in Africa is almost inexistent, thus limiting policy guidance to achieving circular food systems. Using a sample of about 2,100 farmers and consumers from key food value chains (cassava in Rwanda, coffee in DRC, and bananas in Ethiopia), we explored existing CBE practices; awareness, knowledge, and support for CBE practices; consumers' opinions on eating foods grown on processed organic waste (CBE fertilizers), and determinants of such opinions. We analysed data in Stata, first descriptively, and then econometrically using the ordered logistic regression, whose proportional odds assumption was violated, thus resorting to the generalized ordered logistic regression. Results show that communities practice aspects of CBE, mainly composting, and are broadly aware, knowledgeable, supportive of CBE practices, and would broadly accept eating foods grown CBE fertilizers. Households with heads that used mobile phones, or whose heads were older, or married, or had a better education and agricultural incomes were more likely to strongly agree that they were knowledgeable and supportive of CBE practices and would eat CBE foods (foods grown on processed organic waste). However, the reverse was true for households that were severely food insecure or lived farther from towns. Rwandan and Ethiopian households compared to DRC were less likely to eat CB foods. Policies to stimulate CBE investments in all three countries were largely absent, and quality scientific evidence to guide their development and implementation is currently insufficient.