Poster presented at the SAIFRN 2015 conference on November 23-24. Visit our webiste for more: www.poshan.ifpri.info

1. Understanding actor networks for nutrition policy: Findings from a network
analysis study in India
NEHA KOHLI1, SHRUTHI CYRIAC2, NOORA-LISA ABERMAN3, MAMATA PRADHAN4, RASMI AVULA1 , PURNIMA MENON1
1Poverty, Health and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), New Delhi, India; 2St. John’s Medical College,
Bangalore, India; 3IFPRI, Lilongwe, Malawi; 4University of East Anglia, Norwich, U.K
INTRODUCTION SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
CONTACT INFORMATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
METHODS
RESULTS
AIMS
REFERENCES
In India, child nutrition outcomes continue to be disappointing: in
2013, close to 30% of children were underweight (RSOC 2015). In
order to address this, there is a need to improve policy and program
decisions; key actors are important in the shaping of these policies
(see global health literature such as Shiffman (2010) and Pelletier et
al., (2011)). In India, a complex set of actors influence policy agenda
setting, framing and implementation, likely due to the diversity of
formal and informal interactions and information flows across
sectors, including government, development partners, NGOs and
Civil Society Organizations.
The aim of this study was to understand the policy landscape for
nutrition and identify stakeholders who play a role in shaping
maternal and child policy and program decisions related to nutrition
at national level and in four states in India: Uttar Pradesh, Bihar,
Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. The overarching question for the
study was: “Who is influential in shaping policy and program
decisions for nutrition at the national and state level in India?” We
tried to understand: 1) What is the nature of information flows
between actors? 2) Who are the most influential actors?, and 3)
Which actors are supportive of nutrition in the network?
 Net Map toolbox was used to understand the policy landscape
and actor engagement for nutrition. Net Map is a participatory
interview method (https://netmap.wordpress.com/about/), results
of which are based on perceptions of interviewees in the group.
 We invited those knowledgeable about the nutrition landscape for
interviews, and divided them into groups: 1) National level: 3
group interviews in 3 days with 30 interviewees 2) State level: one
group interview in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha and
Bihar with 10, 15, 10 and 16 interviewees respectively.
 Net Map interviews conducted by two trained facilitators. They 1)
Wrote on a sheet of paper the overarching question: “Who is
influential in shaping policy and program decisions for nutrition?”
2) Placed actors on name tags 3) Drew links between actors,
marking influence scores and support levels based on discussion
within the group 4) Took notes of discussions.
 Links, along with influence scores and support levels, were fed
into Visualyzer via an excel sheet for analysis.
 Quantitative data from Visualyzer was analysed along with
qualitative data from notes
Commonalities across networks
1) Diversity of type of actors engaged in the network.
2) Only a few actors have a high number of links
while the majority have only a few.
Differences across networks
1) The most highly linked actor varies. For example,
while at the national level the government is the
most highly linked actor, at the state level, it is the
RTF in MP and Development Partner (UNICEF) in
UP and Bihar.
1) The nature of information flows varies at the
national and state level. At the national level the
most highly linked actor mostly receives
information and at the state level the most highly
linked actor reaches out more to other actors in the
network. Only in Odisha was the government found
to be an equal recipient and provider of
information.
2) The nature of information flows and support and
influence levels of actors varies across networks.
For each case, the study helped identify a distinct set
of actors in the policy network who could be engaged
with to mobilize knowledge and evidence about
nutrition at both the national and state level
 At least 40 actors were identified in each network (in MP this
number was as high as 87).
 At both national and state level: Specific government departments
were major influencers but at state level, other groups such as
civil society organizations and development partners were almost
as influential as government actors.
 The analysis helped identify stakeholders who supported nutrition
but were not influential, and vice versa.
 At the national level, technical evidence appeared to influence
policy decisions, a substantial disconnect was seen between
research organizations and policy makers
 State-level findings: (1) extensive mutual exchange of information
between actors in Odisha; (2) extensive provision of technical
information by actors in MP.
Neha Kohli (n.kohli@cgiar.org), Senior Research
Analyst, Poverty Health and Nutrition Division, IFPRI
Purnima Menon (p.menon@cgiar.org), Senior
Research Fellow, Poverty, Health and Nutrition
Division, IFPRI
 Save the Children and Public Health Foundation of
India for organizing and assisting the Net Map
interviews in UP and MP, respectively.
 Department of Women and Child Development for
hosting and DFID-TMST, Bhubaneswar for assisting
the Net Map interview in Odisha.
 Alive & Thrive and Gates Foundation for hosting the
Net Map interview in Bihar.
 Financial support from the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, through Partnerships and Opportunities
to Strengthen and Harmonize Actions for Nutrition in
India (POSHAN), managed by the International Food
Policy Research Institute.
 RSOC 2015, Rapid Survey on Children. UNICEF:
New Delhi
 Shiffman, J 2010. Issue attention in global health:
the case of newborn survival. Viewpoint. Lancet.
375, 2045-49
 Pelletier, D.L; Frongillo, A.E; Gervais, G; Hoey, L;
Menon,P; Ngo, T; Stoltzfus, J.R; Ahmed, A.M.S;
and Ahmed, T 2011. Nutrition agenda setting, policy
formulationmand implementation: lessons from
them Mainstreaming Nutrition Initiative. Health
Policy and Planning 2012;27:19–31
 Aberman, N.L; Pradhan, M; Cyriac, S; Singh, K;
Kadiyala, S; and Menon, P. 2013. Nutrition
Stakeholders in India: Insights From a Network and
Influence Mapping Exercise. POSHAN Research
Note 3. New Delhi: IFPRI.
http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/
id/128089
 Kohli, N; Pradhan, M and Menon, P. 2013. The
landscape of nutrition stakeholders in Odisha.
POSHAN Research Note 5. New Delhi:
IFPRI.http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p1573
8coll2/id/128178
STUDY LIMITATIONS
 Potential selection bias of interviewees was
mitigated by careful selection.
 Possible power play among interviewees was
minimized by careful facilitation.
 The Net Maps are not decisive maps of all the
actors. Yet, they provide a snapshot of important
and commonly perceived actors and interactions.
 Results may not be relevant in the current context. If
the map were to be drawn today it may look
different.
Network No. of
Actors
Types of Links Most highly linked actors
India 56 Technical Information
Advocacy
Ministry of Women and Child Development,
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
Uttar
Pradesh
55 Research
Advocacy
UNICEF
Madhya
Pradesh
87 Technical support
Funding
Right to Food Network (RTF)
Odisha 55 Technical Information
Funding
UNICEF
Department of Women & Child Development
Bihar 79 Research
Advocacy
UNICEF
CARE
Key findings - national level:
 MWCD is a recipient of both information and advocacy
 Supreme Court has high influence but is not significantly linked
 Strong evidence source: A diverse advocacy group
 Indian Council of Medical Research: trustworthy source of data
 Link disconnect between research organizations and policy makers.
RESULTS
Key findings - Uttar Pradesh:
 Government officials are recipients of both research and advocacy
 Type of Information reaching government: field based evidence; not
reaching government: implementing interventions on large scale
 State Principal Secretaries: Highly influential; not supportive of nutrition
 State’ s Chief Secretary: Highly Influential & supportive, not highly linked
Key findings - Madhya Pradesh:
 RTF (a group of civil society organizations and activists) and Government
are mostly recipients of technical information
 Civil society and government staff are of high influence but more
knowledge flow needed from government to grassroots
Key findings - Odisha:
 Recipient and provider of technical information: UNICEF and government
 Mutual exchange of information between actors
 Majority supportive of nutrition including government who is also influential
Key findings - Bihar:
 UNICEF and CARE are at the core of the research and advocacy flow
 Most actors are largely supportive of nutrition but have low levels of
influence in the network
 Media and RTF are strong advocates of nutrition