Financial Report on Food Security and Nutrition

Introduction

At the 2015 G7 Summit in Elmau, Germany, the G7 announced their commitment to work with partner countries and international actors to aim to lift 500 million people in developing countries out of hunger and malnutrition by 2030 in support of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To support this commitment the G7 also developed its Broad Food Security and Nutrition Development Approach and associated progress indicators.

Some selected indicators (Indicator 1, Indicators 2-1 to 2-6), were developed under Germany’s G7 Presidency in 2015 and were included in the IseShima Progress Report, published under Japan’s G7 Presidency. The G7 Food Security Working Group worked to define the methodology on financial contributions towards food security and nutrition (Indicators 2.7, 3.1 to 3.2) for the following year.

In 2017, the FSWG, under the leadership of the Italian Presidency, published the first annual Financial Report on Food Security and Nutrition building on the work of previous presidencies. The 2017 report presents aggregate data on bilateral and multilateral financial commitments in the food security and nutrition sectors for each G7 member for the year 2015.

Canadian Presidency

This 2018 report is the second annual G7 Financial Report on Food Security and Nutrition and it covers data available up to 2016 inclusively. The 2018 report uses a combination of OECD/DAC validated data for indicators 2.2, 2.4, and 2.5 and self-reported data for indicators 2.1, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.1, and 3.2. As established in the baseline report, the FSWG agreed to report on gross disbursements at current prices.

This report shows a significant level of commitment of the G7 to food security and nutrition, as demonstrated by the US$10.8 billion disbursed as direct assistance in support of global food security and nutrition in 2016, and US$5.2 billion for agricultural development. Furthermore, the report highlights overall improvements in the level of G7 commitments to several of the indicators from 2015 to 2016.

This report also highlights significant G7 multilateral investments, attesting to the importance of the work of the United Nations Rome Based Agencies as well as other multilateral actors committed to achieving SDG2 by 2030. It also underlines the importance of the broad partnership sought at Elmau.

Methodology

In an effort to address minor issues identified when compiling the data for the 2017 report and ensure consistency across countries, the FSWG, under the leadership of the Canadian Presidency, made adjustments to several indicators (2.4, 3.1, and 3.2). Of note was the clarification that Earmarked Voluntary Contributions (EVC) to multilateral institutions for 2016 were reported only if this value was not reported through bilateral contributions elsewhere in the report (in order to avoid double-counting).

Indicator 2.1

Percentage of G7 member programmes on agriculture and rural development that include objectives and expected results to increase the incomes of smallholder farmers

Data Source: G7 self-reporting by G7 members

Definition: Number of committed G7 agriculture and Rural development programmes (CRS Code 311, 32161, 312,313, 43040) in partner countries with objectives and expected results to increase incomes of smallholders . Divided by Total number of G7 agriculture and Rural development programmes (CRS Code 311, 32161, 312,313, 43040); Multiplied by 100

Indicator 2.2

Percentage of resources committed to agriculture that include specific gender objectives

Data Source: OECD DAC database (OECD Stat)

Definition: Volume of commitments dedicated to CRS Code 310 (i.e. 311, 312, 313) that is targeted at gender equality and women’s empowerment (OECD DAC marker for Gender equality and women’s empowerment 1 or 2), divided by total volume of commitments dedicated to CRS Code 310 (i.e. 311, 312, 313); Multiplied by 100

Indicator 2.3

G7 donors’ performance standards for ODA-supported investment instruments are reviewed to be aligned with the VGGT and the Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems

Data Source: Self-reporting by G7 members

Definition: Performance standards for ODA-supported investment instruments are reviewed to be aligned with the VGGT and the Principles for Responsible Investment in Ag and Food Systems.

Indicator 2.4

Percentage of resources committed to agriculture that include climate adaptation and/ or mitigation objectives

Data Source: OECD DAC database (OECD stat)

Definition: Volume of commitments dedicated to CRS Code 310 (i.e. 311, 312, 313) that is targeted at climate adaptation and / or mitigation (OECD DAC marker climate change adaptation 1 or 2; mitigation 1 or 2) , divided by total volume of commitments dedicated to CRS Code 310 (i.e. 311, 312, 313); Multiplied by 100.

Indicator 2.5

Resources committed to nutrition- specific and nutrition-sensitive interventions

Data Source: -Self-reporting based on N4G/SUN tracking of nutrition spending, OECD DAC database (CRS Code 12240)

Definition: 1.A) Absolute levels of commitments for nutrition-specific interventions

1.B) Percentage change in commitments for nutrition-specific interventions compared to baseline

2.A) Absolute levels of commitments for nutrition-sensitive interventions

2.B) Percentage change in commitments for nutrition-sensitive interventions compared to baseline (Nutrition-sensitive: methodology applied according to/ equivalent with “SUN DONOR NETWORK Methodology and Guidance Note to Track Global Investments in Nutrition”).

Indicator 2.6

G7 strategic focus to strengthen linkages between short-, mediumand long-term food security and nutrition support/programmes and to enhance transition between relief and development

Data Source: G7 self-reporting by G7 members

Definition: Existence (in G7 members administrations) of a multi-sectoral strategy to strengthen linkages between short- mediumand long-term food security and nutrition support, and its implementation exist or not.

Indicator 2.7

G7 governments have provided technical support and/or funding to improve and/or expand capacities to collect, analyze, and/or use food security and nutrition indicators in support of SDG2 targets

Data Source: G7 self-reporting by G7 members

Definition: Existence of specific programmes/projects aiming at expanding capacities to collect, analyze, and/or use food security and nutrition indicators in support of SDG2 targets.

Indicator 3.1

G7 members Direct Assistance for agriculture, fishing, food security and nutrition

Data Source: G7 self-reporting by G7 members

Definition: Absolute disbursement by G7 members dedicated to CRS Codes 311, 313, 32161, 520, 72040, 12240

Indicator 3.2

G7 members other assistance with explicit objectives to improve people’s food security and/or nutrition

Data Source: G7 self-reporting by G7 members

Definition: Disbursement by G7 members dedicated to CRS Codes 112, 12220, 12261, 12281, 13020, 140, 16010, 16050, 16062, 210, 23210, 23310, 24030, 24040, 25010, 312, 32165, 32267, 41010, 41030, 43030, 43040, 73010, 74010 with KEYWORDS SEARCH APPROACH (see sheet Indicator 3_Methodology).

Canada

Indicator 2.1

146 programmes / 318 programmes = 46%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 196.23 / 207.063 = 94.76%

Marker 2: USD million 1.41 / 207.063 = 0.68%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Indicator 2.3

No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 63.18 / 207.06 = 30.51%

Mitigation 2: USD million 132.48 / 207.06 = 63.98%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD million 97.62 (decrease by 10.11%)

Nutrition sensitive: USD million 1,309.73 (increase by 2.96%)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Indicator 2.6

Strategy developed and being implemented

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Indicator 2.7

No programmes

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 484.25

Notes/Remarks: 311 = 168.08, 313 = 3.48, 32161 = 6.69, 520 = 41.37, 72040 = 167.01, 12240 = 97.63

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 139.87

France

Indicator 2.1

23 programmes / 29 programmes = 79%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: 213 041 / 445 174) Screening done on AFD projects only, corresponding to 71% of total commitments

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 20.527 / 413.059 = 4.9%

Marker 2: USD million 1.79 / 413.059 = 0.4%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Notes/Remarks: The denominator used only take into account the project marked (0, 1, 2), projects with no mark empty lines) are not taken into account.

Indicator 2.3

Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Notes/Remarks: The French agency for development has developed an ex-ante evaluation grid for agricultural investment projects that are link to land holding and based on recommendations from the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests and the Committee on world Food Security.

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 214.512 / 421.167 = 51%

Mitigation 2: USD million 247.539 /439.496 = 56%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Notes/Remarks: The denominator used only take into account the project marked (0, 1, 2), projects with no mark (emplty lines) are not taken into account.

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD million 14.264 (increase by 177.5%)

Nutrition sensitive: USD million 23.671 (increase by 3.2%)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Indicator 2.6

Process of strategy development ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Indicator 2.7

No programmes

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 372.164

Notes/Remarks: 311 = 318,275 Million USD; 313 = 0,865 Million USD; 32161 = 1,639 Million USD; 520 = 41,775 Million USD; 72040 = 1,344 Million USD; 12240 = 8,264 Million USD

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 53.950

Germany

Indicator 2.1

28 programmes / 91 programmes = 31%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: Limited to programmes funded by BMZ; channel of delivery via GIZ & KfW (not considering support via multilateral channels or non-state actors)

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD 348,349,110 / 397,458,355 = 88%

Marker 2: 0%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Notes/Remarks: Limited to programmes funded by BMZ; channel of delivery via GIZ & KfW (not considering support via multilateral channels or non-state actors)

Indicator 2.3

Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT and the Principles

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD 269,751,137 / 362,265,712 = 75%

Mitigation 2: USD 55,871,621 / 362,265,712 = 15%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Notes/Remarks: Limited to programmes funded by BMZ; channel of delivery via GIZ & KfW (not considering support via multilateral channels or non-state actors)

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD million 49.134 (decrease by 32%)

Nutrition sensitive: USD million 242.483 (increase by 73%)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Indicator 2.6

Process of strategy development ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Indicator 2.7

No programmes

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 1,537.22

Notes/Remarks: Disbursements dedicated to single CRS codes; 311 = 573.68 ; 313 = 4.16; 32161= 2.24 ; 520 = 370.42 ; 72040 = 568.86; 12240 = 18.05 Commitments: 1.768,09

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 101.28 (1,85% of the total amount disbursed, dedicated to the selected CRS codes)

Notes/Remarks: Reporting on indicator 3.2 varies from last year´s reporting (as well as from BMZ´s internal reporting). For the reporting on 2015 GER used an internal marker which determines for each program specifically if FNS is a main or secondary objective. GER will continue to report nationally with this established and differentiated methodology Commitments accordingly: 222.061

Italy

Indicator 2.1

17 programmes / 49 programmes = 34.6%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: For the analysis of this indicator, focussing on project specific objectives and expected results, only projects funded by the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation have been considered. Furthermore in 2016, the delivery capacity of the Italian development cooperation was delayed due to the new operational arrangements and mechanisms required by the Law No. 125 of 11.8.2014, which established, on January 1st, the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 17.54 / 37.346 = 47.0%

Marker 2: USD million 0.24 / 37.346 = 0.7%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Indicator 2.3

Review process started and ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Notes/Remarks: In 2016 a review of the performance standard has been started and is still ongoing.

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 15.60 / 37.346 = 41.8%

Mitigation 2: USD million 20.01 / 37.346 = 53.6%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD million 5.53 (increase by 4.39%)

Nutrition sensitive: USD million 18.78 (decrease by 13.03%)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Notes/Remarks: For the identification of resources committed for “Nutrition Sensitive” interventions, Italy has used the same methodology agreed for Indicator 3.2.

Indicator 2.6

Process of strategy development ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Notes/Remarks: Internal regulation of Italian Cooperation define procedures and tools to be used to articulate Italian humanitarian intervention into three phases, including “linking relief and rehabilitation to development”. In 2016 the drafting process of an official strategy has been started and is currently under development.

Indicator 2.7

Programmes ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Notes/Remarks: Italy supports the FAO programme “Global strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics” started in 2012 and still ongoing.

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 93.27

Notes/Remarks: 311 =55,98 Million USD; 313 =1,96 Million USD; 32161 =1,77 Million USD; 520 =18,39 Million USD; 72040 = 9,14 Million USD;12240 = 6,00 Million USD

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 7.510

Notes/Remarks: This figure is extrapolated from the following codes: 112, 12220, 12261, 12281, 13020, 140, 16010, 16050, 25010, 312, 41010, 41030,43030, 43040, 74010

Japan

Indicator 2.1

615 programmes / 727 programmes = 84.6%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: Limited to Programmes funded by MOFA, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery and JICA

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 276.70 / 684.97 = 40.4%

Marker 2: USD million 1.79 / 684.97 = 0.3%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Indicator 2.3

No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Notes/Remarks: Japan does not currently screen initiatives against the VGGT and the Principles.

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 240.31 / 684.97 = 35.1%

Mitigation 2: USD million 180.83 / 684.97 = 26.4%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Notes/Remarks: Total Adaptation and Mitigation: 36.9% (double counting has been checked)

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD 0.30 million

Nutrition sensitive: USD 23.07 million

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Notes/Remarks: Japan is of the view that a consistent methodology should be used to calculate and report on its nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive commitments in the Elmau Accountability Report and the Global Nutrition Report and has therefore adopted the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Donor Network methodology. To establish the baseline figures for indicator 2.5, Japan used the following methodological approach: 1) For nutrition-specific commitments, Japan used Creditor Reporting System (CRS) purpose code 12240-basic nutrition commitments as reported to the OECD-DAC; and 2) for nutrition-sensitive commitments, Japan used a pre-identified subset of CRS objective codes linked to nutrition-sensitive outcomes (12220, 13020, 14030, 14031, 14032) to identify nutrition sensitive projects. As Japan recognizes these projects as partially nutrition-sensitive, 25% of the total commitments under these CRS codes is reported as the nutrition-sensitive commitments. Note: Since Japan didn’t report on nutrition-sensitive commitments last year, the threshold was not calculated for Indicator 2-5 for this year.

Indicator 2.6

Strategy developed and being implemented

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Notes/Remarks: Based on the Cabinet’s decision on the “Development Cooperation Charter” which includes multi-sectoral strategy, Japan has compiled and been implementing the Country Assistance Policy and the Rolling Plans tailor-made for specific situations of the recipient countries. These Policy and Plans, wherever appropriate, strategically encompass the short-, mid- and long-term assistance, to ensure seamless assistance for enhancing food security and nutrition.

Indicator 2.7

Programmes ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Notes/Remarks: Japan provided technical support for projects aiming at improving agricultural statistics and food security information through international and regional bodies. Japan also offered bilateral technical assistance in this field through JICA.

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 844.50

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 2.65

Notes/Remarks: Japan is of the view that a consistent methodology should be used to calculate and report on its explicit objectives to improve people’s food security and/or nutrition in the Elmau Accountability Report. To establish the baseline figures for indicator 3.2, Japan used the following methodological approach: Japan used Creditor Reporting System (CRS) purpose codes listed under Definition; a keyword search in the project title and summary with “nutrition” and “food security”.

United Kingdom

Indicator 2.1

46 programmes / 104 programmes = 44.2%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: Included: climate resilience programmes (if farmer incomes mentioned); market building programme (if farmer income mentioned); agriculture research programmes (if agriculture productivity mentioned). Not included: social protection schemes (where beneficiaries are subsistence farmers). Data source = disbursement made in 2016

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 228.071 / 491.353 = 46.42%

Marker 2: USD million 8.196 / 491.353 = 1.67%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Notes/Remarks: Note: reporting based on disbursements, for consistency with previous year

Indicator 2.3

Review process started and ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 254.203 / 491.353 = 51.74%

Mitigation 2: USD million 202.790 / 491.353 = 41.27%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Notes/Remarks: Note: reporting based on disbursements, for consistency with previous year

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD million 111.5 (increase by 21%)

Nutrition sensitive: USD million 693.1 (decrease by 25%)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Notes/Remarks: Nutrition specific baseline (2015) = US$ 92.4m. Nutrition sensitive baseline (2015) = US$ 928.3m Note: reporting based on disbursements, for consistency with previous year Note baseline year = 2015 (previous year’s reporting baseline year = 2014)

Indicator 2.6

Strategy developed and being implemented

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Indicator 2.7

Programmes ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Notes/Remarks: Examples include: Improving Statistics for Food Security, Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Dev’t [GB-1-202931] and Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition (GODAN) [GB-1-203202]

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 995.95

Notes/Remarks: 311: US$ 382.46m, 313: US$ 1.75m, 32161: US$ 0.05m, 520: US$ 47.77m, 72040: US$ 409.58m, 12240: US$ 154.39m

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 591.90

Notes/Remarks: This figure is extrapolated from the following codes: 11220, 12220, 13020, 14010, 14015, 14020, 14021, 14030, 14031, 14032, 14081, 16010, 16062, 25010, 41010, 41030, 43040, 73010, 74010.

United States

Indicator 2.1

25 programmes / 68 programmes = 36.8%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: Included are USAID missions that report results in 2016 for the following standard indicators: smallholder incremental sales generated; micro, small, and medium enterprises, including farmers, received agricultural-related credit; contracts existed between smallholder farmers and market channels. Total programmes are calculated as the number of USAID missions reporting results any agricultural related indicators.

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 452.254 / 1,174.387 = 38.5%

Marker 2: USD million 288.942 / 1,174.387 = 24.6%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Indicator 2.3

Review process started and ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Notes/Remarks: USAID has developed performance standards that align with the VGGT and the Principles for Responsible Investments in Ag and Food Systems, but they are not in place at this time.

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 350.363 / 1,174.387 = 29.8%

Mitigation 2: USD million 364.682 / 1,174.387 = 31.1%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD 282,056,157 (20.2% increase)

Nutrition sensitive: USD 3,300,997,889 (25.7% increase)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Notes/Remarks: In the 2017 G7 Financial Report on Food Security and Nutrition, the United States inadvertently reported incorrect data for indicator 2.5. The data reported included spending only from the U.S. Agency for International Development instead of the total for the entire U.S. government. The corrected numbers below were used in the calculation of the percentage increase reported in the 2018 Report. Nutrition Sensitive - 2,627,008,442 Nutrition Specific - 234,612,986

Indicator 2.6

Strategy developed and being implemented

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Notes/Remarks: The US published it’s strategy in 2014: USAID Multi-Sectoral Nutrition Strategy 2014-2025

Indicator 2.7

Programmes ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Notes/Remarks: US is supporting capacity building through the AGRIS program with FAO.

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 4,143.757

Notes/Remarks: 311= 1360.13; 313= 8.361; 32161= 6.071; 520= 553.531; 72040= 2076.44; 12240= 139.272

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 2,775.996

Notes/Remarks: 112: 454.524; 12220: 100.941; 12261: 3.768; 13020: 191.18; 140: 90.086; 16010: 16.596; 210: 2.033; 23210: 0.003; 23310: ; 24030: ; 24040: 2.997; 25010: 113.428; 312: 0.537; 41010: 8.335; 41030: 64.026; 43030: 0.078; 43040: 0.307; 74010: 7.855; Other*: 1719.302;

European Union

Indicator 2.1

32 programmes / 62 programmes = 52%

Thresholds:

1. less than 25%
2. 25-50%
3. more than 25%

Notes/Remarks: Out of the total 62 programmes with relevant codes, 19% are in Neighbourhood countries. Out of the 32 programmes targeting smallholders, 3% are in Neighbourhood countries. Can also be expressed as 50% which are on smallholders and not in Europe (neighbourhood), and 2% which are on smallholders and in Europe (neighbourhood).

Indicator 2.2

Marker 1: USD million 1,591 / 1,806 = 88%

Marker 2: USD million 0.001 / 1,806 = 0%

Thresholds:

1. less than 30% with Marker 1 and 2
2. 30-50% with Marker 1 and 2, with more than 0% with Marker 2
3. more than 50% with Marker 1 and 2, with at least 5% with Marker 2 (“Principal”)

Notes/Remarks: Out of the total 1,806 million USD with relevant codes, 19% are in Neighbourhood countries. Out of the 1,591 million USD on gender sensitive programmes (marker 1), 12% are in Neighbourhood countries. Can also be expressed as 71% which are gender sensitive (marker 1) and not in Europe (neighbourhood), and 11% which are gender sensitive (marker 1) and in Europe (neighbourhood). No programme marked as 2 is in Neighbourhood.

Indicator 2.3

Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT

Thresholds:

1. No review of consistency with VGGT and the Principles
2. Review process started and ongoing
3. Review has taken place and standards are aligned with the VGGT
4. … and the Principles

Notes/Remarks: The EU has developed the Value chain for Development (VCA4D) analysis, which determines the interventions on value chain and private sector development. The methodology takes into account also the use of land and water rights reference to the need of considering the VGGTs, transparency and consultation, compensation. In addition, the Commission developed guidance note to accompany the Application Form For Blending Facilities in 2015, which have been in application since 2016. They help ensuring coherence with the Policy objectives of the Facility and EU Policies, and clarifying the additionally of EU contributions in blending operations (e.g. social and environmental aspects).

Indicator 2.4

Adaptation 1: USD million 1,589 / 1,806 = 88%

Mitigation 2: USD million 690 / 1,806 = 38%

Thresholds:

1. less than 20% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
2. 20-40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2
3. more than 40% with Adaptation and/or Mitigation Marker 1 and 2

Notes/Remarks: Out of the total 1,806 million USD with relevant codes, 19% are in Neighbourhood countries. ADAPTATION: Out of the 1,589 million USD contributing to climate change adaptation, 12% are in Neighbourhood countries. (Can also be expressed as 77% which are contributing to CC adaptation and not in Europe (neighbourhood), and 11% which are on CC adaptation and in Europe (neighbourhood)). MITIGATION: Out of the 690 million USD contributing to climate change mitigation, 32% are in Neighbourhood countries. (Can also be expressed as 26% which are contributing to CC adaptation and not in Europe (neighbourhood), and 12% which are on CC adaptation and in Europe (neighbourhood).

Indicator 2.5

Nutrition specific: USD million 185 (increase by 215%)

Nutrition sensitive: USD million 802 (increase by 46%)

Thresholds:

1. Decrease in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015
2. Same level of 2015
3. Increase in commitments by 10% or more with respect to 2015

Indicator 2.6

Strategy developed and being implemented

Thresholds:

1. No strategy
2. Process of strategy development ongoing
3. Strategy developed and being implemented

Notes/Remarks: The Global Network for Food Insecurity Risk Reduction and Food Crises Response launched in May 2016 with a specific allocation of EUR 539 million, of which EUR 241 million are dedicated to long–term development actions and EUR 298 million to humanitarian aid. In addition, the Global analysis report of food and nutrition security situation in food crisis hotspots was published in March 2016 providing a global overview of the food insecurity situation due to different crises and natural disasters

Indicator 2.7

Programmes ongoing

Thresholds:

1. No programmes
2. Programmes under definition
3. Programmes ongoing

Notes/Remarks: The INFORMED programme (Information for Nutrition, Food Security and Resilience for Decision Making) aims to build the technical and institutional capacities of national and regional institutions to guarantee regular, timely information as well as evidence-based analysis regarding food security, nutrition and resilience situation in pronecrisis countries. The European Commission is also supporting the National Information Platforms for Nutrition (NIPN), an initiative that aims at improving data analysis to better inform strategic decisions towards preventing malnutrition. In addition, the Global analysis report of food and nutrition security situation in food crisis hotspots was published in March 2016.

Indicator 3.1

Total disbursement: USD million 2,382.44

Notes/Remarks: Out of which 1,537.00 million USD through bilateral and 845.43 million USD through multilateral. Out of the total 2,382.44 USD millions, 23% are in Neighbourhood countries.

Indicator 3.2

Total disbursement: USD million 439.62

Notes/Remarks: Out of which 300.33 million USD through bilateral and 139.29 million USD through multilateral. Out of the total 439.62 million USD, 1% correspond to Neighbourhood countries.