Narratives of nutrition: Alternative explanations for international nutrition practice

Abstract

International public health nutrition is an arm of international development that has recently gained visibility and traction. With growing numbers of actors involved, there are however multiple potential perspectives on what nutrition action means in practice. This empirical study aims to provide fresh insight and a stimulus to debate around research and practice in the world of international nutrition, exploring through literature review, interviews and political and social theory the questions: How has the discourse underpinning nutrition policy and practice evolved internationally over time; and how have changing narratives and interests affected the global agenda for nutrition?
 A dominant discourse in international nutrition currently is of the need for multi-sectoral action for the reduction of child stunting. The paper traces the evolution of this narrative through analysis of conflict among paradigms and among the actors that propagate them; the role of discursive strategies and framings as ‘strategically ambiguous’ to bring diverse actors together, though with sometimes contradictory actions in pursuit of a common stated goal; and the ‘rendering technical’ of complex, often politically-charged processes in order to more simply frame a response.
 There are practical implications of these divergent philosophies, ambiguous language, and contingent knowledge for the nutrition community and its actions to reduce the global burden of malnutrition. Problematizing nutrition issues in certain ways has implications for what is done to address them, so policy makers and practitioners should reflect on the limits that the ascendant paradigms, popular framings, and dominant forms of knowledge might impose on what may be done in their name.