Good practices of initiative:
Latin America and Caribbean Without Hunger 2025 Initiative (IALCSH)
Eficacy
This measures how well the objectives and goals set out in the initiative were fulfilled, as well as the extent to which the results achieved are attributable to the actions implemented by the initiative.
| Indicator | Description | Indicator Type | Measure Unit | Base date | Base | Goal | Measure Date | Measure | Compliance | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prevalence of undernourishment in Latin America and the Caribbean | Measures the proportion of people who do not consume the minimum amount of food energy required | Effectiveness | Percentage (%) of the population | 01-01-2015 | 6.5 | 3 | 01-01-2023 | 4.2 | 80 | Link |
| Countries with national food and nutrition security policies aligned with ALCSH | Evaluate the adoption of regulatory frameworks consistent with the initiative's objectives | Effectiveness | Number of countries | 01-01-2010 | 10 | 25 | 01-01-2024 | 22 | 88 | Link |
| Population with stable access to nutritious and affordable food | Measures physical and economic access to quality staple foods. | Effectiveness | Percentage (%) of the population | 01-01-2015 | 70 | 85 | 01-01-2023 | 81 | 90 | Link |
Eficiencia
Efficiency is the assessment of whether a public intervention achieves its objectives while using resources in a way that the costs incurred are proportional to the economic, social, or environmental benefits obtained.
| Indicator | Description | Indicator Type | Measure Unit | Base date | Base | Goal | Measure Date | Measure | Compliance | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Budget execution of programs linked to the CELAC 2025 Plan | Measures the efficiency in the use of public resources allocated to food and nutrition security | Efficiency | Percentage (%) | 2015-01-01 | 72 | 90 | 85 | Link | ||
| Budget execution of national programs related to food and nutrition security | Measures the efficiency in the use of financial resources allocated to SAN programs. | Efficiency | Percentage (%) of execution | 2015-01-01 | 65 | 90 | 83 | Link | ||
| Countries with operational and up-to-date SAN information systems | Assess countries' capacity to generate, systematize, and report data on food security. | Efficiency | Percentage (%) of countries | 2010-01-01 | 30 | 85 | 75 | Link | ||
| Active inter-institutional agreements under the ALCSH initiative | Measures the level of coordination and exploitation of synergies between public institutions and international partners. | Efficiency | Percentage (%) of active agreements | 2015-01-01 | 40 | 90 | 78 | Link |
Sustentaibility
It measures the installed capacities or actions identified to maintain or improve the results of the policy initiative.
| Indicator | Description | Indicator Type | Measure Unit | Base date | Base | Goal | Measure Date | Measure | Compliance | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Countries that maintain specific national budgets for food and nutrition security | Assess the financial sustainability of food security actions in the region. | Sustainability | Percentage (%) of countries | 2022-01-01 | 70 | 85 | 80 | Complies | Link | |
| SAN policies institutionalized through legal frameworks or state policies | It measures the degree of institutional sustainability achieved in the region. | Sustainability | Percentage (%) of policies. | 2022-01-01 | 60 | 80 | 75 | Partial | Link | |
| Active partnerships with regional and multilateral organizations for food security and nutrition | It reflects the technical sustainability and international cooperation of the initiative. | Sustainability | Number of current alliances. | 2022-01-01 | 10 | 18 | 18 | Complies | Link | |
| SAN programs that include climate adaptation or risk management measures | Assess environmental sustainability and resilience to climate change. | Sustainability | Percentage (%) of programs. | 2022-01-01 | 45 | 85 | 82 | Partial | Link | |
| Countries that integrate nutrition indicators into their national monitoring and evaluation systems | It measures technical sustainability through the institutionalization of nutritional outcome monitoring. | Sustainability | Percentage (%) of countries. | 2022-01-01 | 65 | 85 | 82 | Complies |
Learned lessons
Gained knowledge from implementing, evaluating, and managing a policy intervention, including why it was or was not effective and how it could be improved in the future.
| Lesson | Description | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Reducing hunger requires coordinated multisectoral policies | Experience shows that integrating agriculture, health, education, and social protection multiplies the results in terms of food and nutrition security. | Link |
| Sustained political commitment is key to ensuring continuity. | Countries that institutionalized their SAN programs through laws or state policies maintained progress even in the face of changes in government. | Link |
| Generating reliable data strengthens decision-making. | Regional monitoring and integrated information systems have made it possible to better target resources toward areas with the greatest food insecurity. | Link |
| Programs with a territorial focus achieve greater sustainability | Interventions tailored to the local context and involving community participation ensure greater ownership, equity, and continuity of results. | Link |
| Regional cooperation accelerates innovation in public policy | Technical exchanges between countries and South–South cooperation have made it possible to replicate successful models of productive inclusion and child nutrition. | Link |