In Malawi’s rural districts of Ntcheu and Kasungu, the Agrifood tool was used to support the integration of nutrition goals into government agricultural extension services. This work was led by researchers from the Department of Agricultural Extension at Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources (LUANAR), in collaboration with LSHTM.

“We often talk about what is ‘good’ to grow. This helped us talk about what is good and nutritious.”
— Agricultural Extension Staff

Traditionally, agricultural extension services in these areas have focused on promoting staple crops like maize to improve food security. While effective for increasing calorie intake, this approach gave limited attention to improving overall diet quality or addressing nutrient gaps.
To explore more nutrition-sensitive options, LUANAR researchers brought together stakeholders from multiple sectors—including district-level agricultural and health extension staff, environmental officers, and community members such as farmers and caregivers. Participants began by identifying relevant decision-making criteria, such as nutritional value, agronomic suitability, income potential, and environmental sustainability, and then prioritised them in small groups.

Using the Agrifood tool, they evaluated a range of food combinations based on these shared criteria. The analysis revealed that the foods currently promoted by extension services would result in diets low in key nutrients. More nutrient-dense combinations were identified, but they often came with trade-offs—being less profitable, harder to produce, or more environmentally demanding.

“We’ve talked about nutrition before, but this was the first time I saw how our food choices compare side by side. It made the gaps very clear.”
— Health Worker, Kasungu

The tool helped make these trade-offs visible, allowing stakeholders to weigh options transparently. Together, they identified feasible food combinations that struck an acceptable balance across all priorities. They also proposed supporting strategies, such as crop diversification, small-scale irrigation, and food substitution, to help mitigate constraints.
Participants reported that the process fostered meaningful cross-sector collaboration. Agricultural staff gained a deeper understanding of nutrition priorities, while nutrition stakeholders better appreciated the operational and environmental realities of agricultural programming. One community member commented that the results “spoke to their reality,” and several stakeholders expressed interest in continuing the collaborative approach in future planning.

“It was good to have agriculture and health in the same room, looking at the same data. We don’t usually plan together like this.”
— District-level Nutritionist