Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Gabriel Kanuti Ndimbo, Lecturer in Development Studies, University of Dar es Salaam

Malnutrition among children under five remains one of sub-Saharan Africa’s most persistent public health challenges. Countries and development partners have introduced numerous nutrition programmes. Yet millions of young children continue to suffer from poor nutrition.

Drawing on our expertise in public health, nutrition and health systems research, we conducted a review of recent evidence about child malnutrition from across the sub-Saharan Africa region. The review examined 50 studies published between 2015 and 2025 that covered the forms of malnutrition and intervention strategies for children under the age of five.

The research shows that malnutrition is a complex problem. It isn’t caused solely by a lack of food. Other influences are disease, poor sanitation, climate pressures, limited access to healthcare, gaps in caregiver knowledge, and socio-cultural and behavioural factors.

Our review found that undernutrition – particularly stunting, wasting and underweight – is the main form of child malnutrition in the region. Malnutrition is a broad term that refers to deficiencies, excesses or imbalances in a person’s intake of nutrients. Undernutrition is a specific form of malnutrition that occurs when children do not receive enough essential nutrients to support healthy growth and development.

This finding highlights the need to strengthen existing efforts. At the same time, the wider social, economic and environmental factors that contribute to poor nutrition must also be addressed. Understanding which forms of malnutrition remain most common can help policymakers and practitioners decide how to intervene and what resources they will need. Lasting solutions must combine nutrition support with action on poverty, food systems, health and community needs.

Undernutrition remains a major concern

Stunting was the most frequently reported form of malnutrition in the studies we reviewed. The condition occurs when children are too short for their age, owing to long-term nutritional deprivation.

More than 25% of children under five were reported to be stunted in many African countries. Tanzania, Uganda, Ethiopia, Liberia and the Central African Republic were some of them.

The first two years of life are particularly important. Many children experience nutritional setbacks when exclusive breastfeeding ends and the new foods introduced are insufficient in quantity or quality.

Across the reviewed studies, about 20% of children under five in 12 sub-Saharan African countries were underweight. Nutrition programmes reduced underweight rates. But illness, poor diet, unsafe water, poverty and limited maternal education increased the risk.

---

Read more: South Africa’s food system is failing children – what must change

---

Wasting was also widely reported. This form of acute malnutrition comes with rapid weight loss and increased risk of illness. It is strongly linked to food insecurity, poverty, poor sanitation and limited access to healthcare services.

At the same time, the region is beginning to face another challenge: children who are overweight. It is reported less frequently in the reviewed studies. But childhood overweight is increasing in some countries, especially where urbanisation and changing food systems have increased access to highly processed foods.

Undernutrition and overweight can exist together, creating a double burden.

What interventions work?

Our review grouped responses to child malnutrition into three broad categories: nutrition-specific, nutrition-sensitive and integrated approaches.

Nutrition-specific interventions directly address nutritional deficiencies. They make sure children get more nutritious food (including breast milk). Programmes like this have shown positive results, particularly in treating acute malnutrition and improving child growth outcomes. Screening and treating children in their communities has become an important way to reach families.

---

Read more: Child malnutrition in Kenya: AI model can forecast rates six months before they become critical

---

But that doesn’t solve the underlying causes of malnutrition.

Nutrition-sensitive interventions address wider factors that influence children’s health. Agricultural programmes, water and sanitation improvements, disease prevention, cash transfers and maternal education are examples.

Home gardens can help households to get enough food and a variety of food in their diets. Their effects on children’s physical growth have been mixed, however. Having food does not always mean better nutrition. Care practices such as exclusive breastfeeding and appropriate complementary feeding must improve. In addition, families also need access to nutrition counselling, immunisation and safe water.

Integrated solutions are best

We found that combining approaches may provide the most sustainable results. Integrated programmes bring together direct nutrition support and interventions addressing poverty, food security, health services and environmental conditions.

Examples include programmes that combine breastfeeding promotion, nutrient supplementation, agricultural support and caregiver education. These approaches recognise that children’s nutrition depends on the wider conditions in which families live.

Strong community involvement is also essential. Local knowledge, cultural practices and community participation can determine whether programmes are accepted and sustained over time.

A broader response is needed

Reducing child malnutrition in sub-Saharan Africa will require coordinated action. Governments, communities, health systems, the agricultural sector and development organisations must all get involved.

Policies must address immediate nutritional needs, and also drivers such as poverty, climate change, food insecurity and unequal access to services.

The evidence shows that no single intervention can end child malnutrition. Sustainable progress will depend on combining nutrition programmes with investments in resilient food systems, education, sanitation and healthcare.

Improving child nutrition is an investment in Africa’s future human development.

– Child malnutrition is one of Africa’s biggest health challenges: food aid is only part of the solution
– https://theconversation.com/child-malnutrition-is-one-of-africas-biggest-health-challenges-food-aid-is-only-part-of-the-solution-291163

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Neo Mathinya, Lecturer, University of the Free State

South Africa’s rural development debate often starts with a familiar idea: if rural households have more land, they can produce more food, earn more money and become “emerging farmers” who eventually develop into commercial farmers.

This idea appears in several government policy documents, such as the National Development Plan 2030, the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, the Strategic Plan for Smallholder Support and the Agriculture and Agro-processing Master Plan.

Within these documents and political rhetoric, farming is expected to act as the main engine for economic development in the deprived former homelands of South Africa. This ambition is rooted in South Africa’s history.

Under colonialism and apartheid, laws such as the 1913 Natives Land Act restricted Black land ownership and concentrated much of the Black population in the former “homelands”. These areas became characterised by overcrowding, poverty and inadequate infrastructure, which continue to shape rural livelihoods today.

Current agricultural and rural development policy therefore combines several objectives: redressing unequal access to land, improving agricultural production and food security, creating employment, expanding market participation and developing an inclusive rural economy. This has often meant providing small-scale farmers with land alongside agricultural inputs, infrastructure, finance, training and other forms of support intended to increase production and participation in agricultural value chains.

But research findings from two rural communities suggest that this picture is too simple. Our farming systems research team at the University of the Free State investigated the role farming actually plays in rural households’ livelihoods, the constraints on agricultural production and the alternative farming futures that might be possible.

We engaged with 132 small-scale farming households in two provinces. We used household surveys, life history interviews, farm mapping and focus group discussions. The study locations were Emmaus, near Bergville and the Drakensberg mountains of northern KwaZulu-Natal, and Thaba Nchu, about 60km from Bloemfontein, the capital of the Free State. These communities were selected as they are both in former homeland areas, but differ in their environmental and socioeconomic circumstances.

Our study found that farming remained important to food security and the income of rural households, but it was rarely the main source of income. Instead, households combined farming with wage employment, small businesses, social grants and other activities to make a living.

This matters because rural development policies that focus mainly on increasing agricultural production or expanding access to land (as South Africa’s do) miss the interconnected factors that actually determine whether households can improve their livelihoods. These factors, including labour dynamics, infrastructure, markets, institutions and household aspirations, determine whether people can – and want to – expand farming.

Farming is part of a broader livelihood system rather than a standalone route out of poverty.

Farming is only one part of rural livelihoods

First we conducted a survey of households. This collected a broad range of information about land, production, incomes and so on.

In both survey locations, rural households differed hugely from one another.

Some households had very limited incomes and depended heavily on off-farm sources of income such as social grants, wage employment and small businesses. They often invested these resources back into farming. For most households, farming contributed to food security and provided some income, but it was rarely enough to support the household on its own. Only 16% of households in Emmaus and 19% in Thaba Nchu were able to surpass the South African Food Poverty Line (currently R868 or US$54 per person per month), and off-farm sources contributed the most to their income.

The differences between households matter. A household with a stable income from employment may be able to buy livestock, hire labour, or invest in farming inputs. A poorer household may have land but lack the money or labour needed to cultivate it. The two households may therefore have access to similar agricultural resources but very different opportunities to benefit from them.

The same applies to aspirations. Some households see farming mainly as a way to secure food. Others see it as an income earner. Only 12% of household heads in Emmaus and 36% in Thaba Nchu aspired to farming as a business. Household dependants (aged between 18 and 32) on the other hand (64% in Emmaus and 80% in Thaba Nchu), aspired to education, wage employment or migration.

This means that there is no single pathway from small-scale farming to improved livelihoods. Rural households start from different positions, face different constraints, and aspire to different futures. Treating them as a single category of “small-scale farmers” can lead to policies that work for some households while doing little for others.

The biggest constraint to expansion is labour

Another striking finding was that land was not necessarily the biggest obstacle to increasing production. Many households had access to land but could not use all of it.

Our research identified four obstacles.

Firstly, labour. A household might have land available, but insufficient labour to cultivate it.

---

Read more: African farmers are younger than you think. Here is why

---

Secondly, infrastructure. In Emmaus, for example, poor roads and inadequate water infrastructure limited the potential to expand or diversify production.

Thirdly, in Thaba Nchu, communal grazing land was important to livestock farmers, but conflicts over its use and management undermined productivity.

---

Read more: 17 million South Africans live on communal land – new study of a rural valley offers insights on how to manage it

---

Fourthly, farmers couldn’t necessarily develop alternative farming enterprises. In Emmaus, for example, people like to grow maize and beans to eat themselves, leaving less land for more market-oriented crops and other farm activities.

A farming system can appear productive and profitable on paper and still fail in practice if it does not fit the community’s social and institutional realities.

Rural households also have aspirations beyond farming

One of the most important lessons is that many rural households are not simply waiting for an agricultural intervention. They have their own ideas about what a better future looks like.

Many households in our study viewed farming as a means of survival and social security rather than a long-term commercial career. Younger household members were not all interested in taking over the farm.

---

Read more: Ghana needs more young farmers, but does climate change put them off? Study shows surprising results

---

This does not mean that agriculture has no future in the former homelands of South Africa. Rather, the future of rural livelihoods is likely to involve a combination of activities. Rural development programmes should be designed accordingly.

We need to look at the whole system

This is where a farming systems approach can make a difference. Instead of asking only whether farmers have enough land, fertiliser, water or technology, it asks how these factors interact with the household, labour availability, markets, institutions, natural resources and people’s aspirations.

---

Read more: How young Kenyans feel about farming goes against conventional wisdom

---

Rather than asking only how to turn small-scale farmers into commercial farmers, we should also ask: what combination of opportunities can help rural households build the futures they want?

For younger generations in particular, better opportunities may lie partly outside agriculture.

– More land, better life? South African farming study asks if that’s the road to rural development
– https://theconversation.com/more-land-better-life-south-african-farming-study-asks-if-thats-the-road-to-rural-development-290459

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Djibril Diouf, enseignant-chercheur, Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar

Senegal has made major investments to build, renovate and modernise its sports facilities to host the Youth Olympic Games, set for 31 October to 13 November 2026. New or upgraded venues now stand in Dakar, Diamniadio and Saly. These three cities will host the competitions. But the facilities raise bigger questions than just organising the Games. How should the government finance, manage and maintain them in the long term after the competition?

We put these questions to two researchers, Djibril Diouf, a specialist in public-private partnerships, and Amadou Moctar Ndiouck, an expert in the law and management of sports infrastructure. They argue that the Youth Olympic Games could help reshape Senegal’s model. They also discuss the respective roles of the government, local authorities and the private sector in funding sports facilities.

---

Can the Youth Olympic Games investment bring about lasting change to the way sports infrastructure is funded in Senegal?

For the Youth Olympic Games, the government chose a model of direct, large-scale investment backed by partners such as the West African Economic and Monetary Union and the French Development Agency.

Given the size of their contributions, these partnerships have significantly shaped the Games’ funding model. Yet the model still relies on public money or public-private partnerships. It now includes the long term management of sports facilities. As part of the Games’ legacy, this could open the way for greater involvement by private actors.

What role should the government assign to the private sector in the financing and management of sports infrastructure after the Youth Olympic Games?

From the 1984 Sports Charter to Articles 36 through 51 of the New Sports Code, adopted on 11 May 2026 by the National Assembly of Senegal, the law stresses the duty of the government and local authorities. They must build sports facilities for people involved in sport.

In practice, however, ambitious public policies for infrastructure are rare outside major sporting events. Private sector involvement therefore remains necessary.

The 2021 law on public-private partnership provides an opportunity to develop new approaches to sports infrastructure. This financing model was used for the toll highway and Dakar’s Blaise Diagne International Airport. It could be used to boost private-sector participation in building and managing public sports. It could also ensure both their financial and social profitability.

Private-sector involvement brings extra money when public financing falls short, and supplies technical expertise. This helps keep facilities up to international standards while ensuring they remain accessible to the wider population.

How can Senegal ensure that infrastructure renovated for the Youth Olympic Games is not too expensive to maintain after the Games?

The renovated sports facilities are located mainly in Dakar, Diamniadio and Saly. A single, uniform maintenance model will not work for all three sites. Local realities differ.

Take the Iba Mar Diop Stadium in Dakar, for example. Cheikh Anta Diop University of Dakar must be involved through the National Higher Institute of Popular Education and Sports, which has been headquartered on the site since 1982. Putting both the Iba Mar Diop Stadium and the Olympic swimming pool under the institute’s care would help. That would make maintenance easier and improve financial profitability.

For the Diamniadio site, the Office for the Management of Sports Infrastructure, attached to the Ministry of Sports, is well-suited to manage facilities located far from urban centres. These facilities mainly draw crowds for major sporting events.

The Office for the Management of Sports Infrastructure is a public industrial and commercial entity. It can therefore help sports facilities deliver both financial and social benefits.

In Saly, the facilities sit in a tourist and beach resort area. Private-sector involvement is likely to work best. Private sector operators can bring a professional approach to managing sports facilities. This can improve the quality of services and support long-term sustainability.

Beyond major sporting events, what funding model would allow Senegal to develop infrastructure accessible to all?

Clearly, the funding model based on direct public investment and public-private partnerships focuses on large-scale sports facilities that can host major sporting events. However, since 2025, the Ministry of Sports has launched an experimental local infrastructure programme. It includes building 25 multi-purpose facilities in 25 municipalities across Senegal. This initiative should be welcomed.

Large-scale sports facilities are necessary for major events. Local facilities are equally vital and must be supported. In all communities, physical and sports activities take many forms, including competition, recreation and health. The government and local authorities must fund these everyday needs through their own budgets.

Finally, bilateral international cooperation offers another route. Some countries, such as China and Russia, have often supported the construction and renovation of sports facilities in the global south, including in Senegal.

– Senegal’s Youth Olympics legacy: who pays after the Games?
– https://theconversation.com/senegals-youth-olympics-legacy-who-pays-after-the-games-292703