Assessing Public Financing for Nutrition in Sri Lanka (2014-2018)
Relative to other countries in the region, Sri Lanka has invested modestly on nutrition programs and interventions. Current nutrition programs in Sri Lanka need to be reviewed, both in terms of design and beneficiaries, and prioritized in terms of effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and good practices. The resource allocation for nutrition-specific interventions deserves revisiting, considering that these investments are driven by the nutrition agenda, and are more responsive to real needs. Mainstreaming nutrition in other sectors is also necessary, to ensure more voice in decision making, and to strengthen multisectoral engagement and coordination in nutrition. Targeted programs can be more cost-effective than blanket coverage as long as the targets are well selected, and a prioritization exercise is conducted to consider negative side effects. Nutrition awareness-raising programs and educational and promotive activities may deserve more allocation.
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Brief biblioteca |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2021-10
|
| Subjects: | PUBLIC HEALTH EXPENDITURE, NUTRITION, NUTRITION POLICY, MALNUTRITION, |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/undefined/650791637560706465/Assessing-Public-Financing-for-Nutrition-in-Sri-Lanka-2014-2018 http://hdl.handle.net/10986/36625 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Relative to other countries in the
region, Sri Lanka has invested modestly on nutrition
programs and interventions. Current nutrition programs in
Sri Lanka need to be reviewed, both in terms of design and
beneficiaries, and prioritized in terms of effectiveness,
cost-effectiveness, and good practices. The resource
allocation for nutrition-specific interventions deserves
revisiting, considering that these investments are driven by
the nutrition agenda, and are more responsive to real needs.
Mainstreaming nutrition in other sectors is also necessary,
to ensure more voice in decision making, and to strengthen
multisectoral engagement and coordination in nutrition.
Targeted programs can be more cost-effective than blanket
coverage as long as the targets are well selected, and a
prioritization exercise is conducted to consider negative
side effects. Nutrition awareness-raising programs and
educational and promotive activities may deserve more allocation. |
|---|