 |
Letters to Field ExchangeDear editors,With very much interest I read issue 8 of Field Exchange. However, I cannot agree with the article on increasing protein to poultry (I was anyway wondering why you included this article, as it has hardly a link to emergency nutrition). These moist places which attract insects, also attract mosquitoes, and so increase the risk of malaria. I think the old advice of a compost heap/pit is much better. Chicken can find plenty insects in compost (ask my chicken), and at the same time the compost has many other well-known benefits. I hope you can include an article on the impact of the big bellies of malnourished children on Weight for Height. In our TFC we have sometimes children with a red MUAC and physical signs of malnutrition, but with >80% WfH, I suppose this is caused by the weight in the big belly. I wondered how this would influence the data of nutrition surveys? In my last survey I did not find high levels of malnutrition, but all children had big bellies. Is there any information on the impact of big bellies on nutrition survey results? Maybe you can also write an article about the software programmes for analysing nutrition surveys. Epi-info/Epi-nut is becoming rather out-dated. I still use it to calculate the percentage malnourished children. After wards I export the data to Excel for further statistics, e.g. to check if there are significant difference between age groups. But I'm no computer wizard and I hope someone has good tips on how to use Epi-nut more efficient, or on how to do the whole survey in Excel, or maybe new programmes are available? I know it is probably easier for me to ask these questions, than for you to find people who want to write articles about these subjects. Thank you anyway for all the other interesting articles, they are often very useful, and they make me feel I stay at least a bit updated out here in the bush. With warmest regards, Dear Field Exchange, I thought I would respond to your special focus editorial in Field Exchange Issue 8, regarding targeting. I thought the article very interesting, and it was particularly the last paragraph where you speak of the need to investigate the feasibility and means of targeting food aid, and the implications for the design and methodology of food security assessments, that I am reacting to. For a long time I have felt that food and nutrition information was being collected in many situations without regard for the organisational context in which the data were collected, which meant it was of limited use in informing decisions. In fact, other articles in the same edition appear to mention this. Having just completed my PhD on the introduction of new health information management strategies in low-income countries I have found this lack of organisational consideration was also a problem in my case studies. I utilised a theoretical framework which is useful in understanding the processes which take place when new information management strategies are introduced. The idea is that various forces within an organisation (Technology, Structure, Management Tools and Processes, Business Strategies and Polices, Individuals and Roles) exist in dynamic equilibrium, and that if one changes the others must change to re-establish that equilibrium. In practice this framework can be used to guide the introduction of new ways of collecting and processing data and using information, and I believe it is of relevance to the design of food security assessments, nutritional surveillance and other food and nutrition information systems. This way the data collected could better inform operational, planning or policy decisions. Of course, the introduction of organisational change is very complex and I am not suggesting the above formula alone is sufficient but that it may have an important role in enhancing the role of information systems in food security analysis and response. Dr Jean Gladwin, |