World Food Policy Volume 2, Number 1, Spring 2015 | Page 82

The Negative Side of the Agricultural–Nutrition Impact Pathways: A Literature Review

most of these representations are
based on the UNICEF causal model of
malnutrition (1990). In that sense, the
starting point is the “individual” and
its health/nutrition status. The different
causes/factors affecting its nutrition
are organized in different levels from
household, community, supply chain,
country, and the world. These specific
models disentangle the drivers linked
to food, food systems, and agriculture.
That is, on the basis proposed by Headey,
Chiu, and Kadiyala (2011, 5) that we
propose our own model: the nutritional
status of individuals (on the right-hand
side in Figure 1) results from the quality
and amount of food intake, and their
health status. These two factors are
highly dependent on two drivers at the
level of the household: most of the care
time1 and household food consumption,
and on many drivers at the level of the
general health environment (natural
surroundings, hygiene, health services,
etc.) that are not on the scope of this
study. In addition to minor changes
brought to Headey et al.’s model to make
it more reader friendly and less specific
to the case of India which was studied
by the authors, we introduced two
main changes: the total time of women
detailed by the types of activities, and the
production factors at the household level.

The important factors at the level
of the household depend on variables
that are analyzed in classical agricultural
household and food consumption microeconomic literature: i.e., during one
period of time the household has to
decide to spend its money and affects

its time in a specific way according to
its “preferences” and resources (income,
savings). In the model we propose,
we represent a simplified budget of a
household (central rectangle) to illustrate
the choice between food expenditures,
health and care expenditures, and
other expenditures. Of course, one can
imagine a more detailed model where
the household affects its money between
beans or meat, cereals, beers or cigarettes,
school or shampoo, smartphone or radio,
etc., the list can be infinite and worth
to be discussed. By drawing a different
arrow from the production of food to the
household food consumption box, we
stress the possibility of self-consumption
in the household. We also chose to
disaggregate the time of women who are
the main caregivers and whose health
depends on their activities. Most of the
women have to deal with different kinds
of income generating activities as well
as “home” activities such as food and
meal processing. They also have to take
care of themselves and of their children.
Last, but not least, in most agricultural
families, they have to work on the family
farm with no immediate wage, but in
advance of a share of the harvest. The
nature (money, products) and the amount
of this share depends on the local social
rules of sharing in-between the families.
And, as we are dealing with agriculture
activity, the harvest as well as this share
are highly risky.

At the left side in the household
level box, we drew two boxes concerning
the production side of the agricultural
households (though this figure does not

1

Child care practices encompass food, health care, stimulation, and emotional support required for
the development of the child. They are ensured by a care provider (usually the mother).

81