Globally, diet quality is poor, with populations failing to achieve national dietary guidelines. Such failure has been consistently linked with malnutrition and poorer health outcomes. In addition to the impact of diet on health outcomes, it is now accepted that what we eat, and the resulting food system, has significant environmental or planetary health impacts. Changes are required to our food systems to reduce these impacts and mitigate the impact of climate change on our food supply. Given the complexity of the interactions between climate change, food and health, and the different actors and drivers that influence these, a systems-thinking approach to capture such complexity is essential. Such an approach will help address the challenges set by the UN 2030 Agenda for sustainable development in the form of the sustainable development goals (SDG). Progress against SDG has been challenging, with an ultimate target of 2030. While the scientific uncertainties regarding diet and public and planetary health need to be addressed, equal attention needs to be paid to the structures and systems, as there is a need for multi-level, coherent and sustained structural interventions and policies across the full food system/supply chain to effect behaviour change. Such systems-level change must always keep nutritional status, including impact on micronutrient status, in mind. However, benefits to both population and environmental health could be expected from achieving dietary behaviour change towards more sustainable diets.

Engaging communities is a key factor in efficient response to public health emergencies (PHE). Previous and recent outbreaks have shown that civil society organizations (CSOs) can mobilize the communities to better prepare and respond to a PHE. Consequently, the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Africa (AFRO) implemented an initiative to partner with community leaders by engaging CSOs. The Civil Society Organization Initiative (CSO Initiative) aims to work directly with well-established community-based organizations to accelerate whole-of-society preparation and response. Twenty-three CSOs from 12 WHO African Region Member States have been supported financially and technically to implement effective community-based interventions to respond to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. After 1 year of implementation (2021), the successes, challenges, and recommendations for maximizing future engagements with CSOs are outlined. As the COVID-19 outbreak is again underlining, partnering with established CSOs to engage diverse social groups from various communities can help provide a timely and efficient response to a PHE.

Donor organizations and multilaterals require ways to measure progress toward the goals of creating an open internet, and condition assistance on recipient governments maintaining access to information online. Because the internet is increasingly becoming a leading tool for exchanging information, authoritarian governments around the world often seek methods to restrict citizens’ access. Two of the most common methods for restricting the internet are shutting down internet access entirely and filtering specific content. We conduct a systematic literature review of articles on the measurement of internet censorship and find that little work has been done comparing the tradeoffs of using different methods to measure censorship on a global scale. We compare the tradeoffs between measuring these phenomena using expert analysis (as measured by Freedom House and V-Dem) and remote measurement with manual oversight (as measured by Access Now and the OpenNet Initiative [ONI]) for donor organizations that want to incentivize and measure good internet governance. We find that remote measurement with manual oversight is less likely to include false positives, and therefore may be more preferable for donor organizations that value verifiability. We also find that expert analysis is less likely to include false negatives, particularly for very repressive regimes in the Middle East and Central Asia and therefore these data may be preferable for advocacy organizations that want to ensure very repressive regimes are not able to avoid accountability, or organizations working primarily in these areas.

This study was conducted to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Sustainable and Healthy Eating (SHE) Behaviors Scale. The original scale included eight factors and thirty-four items related to the SHE behaviors of adults. The research was carried out in three stages with a total of 586 participants aged 19 to 50 years. The Cronbach alpha coefficient was used to evaluate internal consistency reliability and the test–retest method was applied. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to determine the factor structure. The model obtained with EFA was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The Cronbachαcoefficient of the scale was found to be excellent at 0·912, and the intra-class correlation coefficient was found to be good at 0·832 using the test–retest method. Considering the suitability of the data for factor analysis, the Kaiser–Meier–Olkin coefficient was 0·859, and the significance level of the Bartlett test of sphericity was less than 0·05 (χ2=3·803,25; P < 0·05). As a result of EFA, the items of the scale were found to be distributed in seven factor dimensions. The factor loadings of the items were between 0·516 and 0·890, and the factors explained 67 % of the variance. Considering the fit indices obtained as a result of the analysis of this model with CFA, it was seen that the model had an acceptable fit (χ2/sd = 2·593, comparative fit index = 0·915, Tucker–Lewis index=0·902, standardised root mean square error = 0·0754 and root mean square error of approximation = 0·067). In conclusion, the Turkish version of the SHE Behaviors Scale has credible reliability and construct validity to assess the sustainable and healthy eating behaviours of the Turkish adult population.

In low-income countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)—where data is scarce and national statistics offices often under-resourced—aggregated and anonymised mobile operators’ data can provide vital insights for decision-makers to promptly respond to both prevailing and new pandemics, such as COVID-19. Yet, while research on possible applications of mobile big data (MBD) analytics for COVID-19 is growing, there is still little evidence on how such use cases are actually being adopted by governmental authorities and how MBD insights can effectively be turned into informed public health actions in times of crises. This four-part commentary paper aims to bridge such literature gaps, by sharing lessons learnt from the DRC, whereby Congolese public health authorities, through a steep learning curve, have initiated a public–private sector dialogue with local mobile network operators (MNOs) and their ecosystem partners to leverage population mobility insights for COVID-19 policy-making. After having set the scene on the policy relevance of MBD analytics in the context of the DRC in the first section, the paper will then detail four key enablers that contributed, since March 2020, to accelerate Congolese authorities’ uptake of MBD, thus effectively increasing preparedness for future pandemics. Thirdly, we showcase concreate use-cases where “readiness-to-use” has actually translated into actual “usage” and “adoption” for decision-making, while introducing other use cases currently under development. Finally, we explore challenges when harnessing telco big data for decision-making with the ultimate aim to share lessons to replicate the successes and steer the development of MBD for social good in other low-income countries.

In the present world, International Consensus Frameworks, commonly called global frameworks or global agendas, guide international development policies and practices. They guide the development of all countries and influence the development initiatives by their respective governments. Recent global frameworks, adopted mostly post-2015, include both a group of over-arching frameworks (eg, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction [SFDRR]) and a group of frameworks addressing specific issues (eg, the Dhaka Declaration on Disability and Disaster Risk Management). These global frameworks serve twin purposes: first, to set a global development standard, and second, to set policies and approaches to achieve these standards. A companion group of professional standards, guidelines, and tools (ie, Sphere’s Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards) guide the implementation and operationalization of these frameworks on the ground.

This paper gathers these global frameworks and core professional guidelines in one place, presents an analytical review of their essential features, and highlights the commonalities and differences between and among these frameworks. The aim of this paper is to facilitate understanding of these frameworks and to help in designing development and resilience policy, planning, and implementation, at international and national levels, where these frameworks complement and contribute to each other.

This Special Report describes an important and evolving aspect of the discipline and provides core information necessary to progress the science. Additionally, the report will help governments and policy makers to define their priorities and to design policies/strategies/programs to reflect the global commitments. Development practitioners can pre-empt the focus of the international community and the assistance coming from donors to the priority sectors, as identified in the global agenda. This would then help governments and stakeholders to develop and design a realistic plan and program and prepare the instruments and mechanisms to deliver the goals.