The world is at risk, according to current evidence and actions, of not achieving the goal of ending global hunger by 2030, but the ambition remains vital and achievable in the longer term. To point the way toward overcoming hunger, GHI reports have long recommended policy actions backed by evidence. Now, after 20 years of tracking hunger through the GHI, it is useful to look back at past policy recommendations to see what enduring lessons can offer guidance going forward.
The recommendations put forward over the two decades explore a broad range of solutions for ending global hunger, from strengthening governance and accountability to investing in climate resilience and food systems transformation. In all cases, they make it clear that intent must be accompanied by sustained political will, policy change, and action. Our position remains the same: Hunger exists not because we lack the solutions, but because we have yet to fully implement them.
National Policy, Law, and Institutional Governance
The most common policy recommendations included in the GHI relate to national policy, law, and institutional governance. Over the years, the recommendations evolved from an emphasis on trade and market reforms to a deep focus on rights, equity, and accountability, and more recently the integration of conflict sensitivity.
The earlier GHI recommendations focused on stabilizing global markets, liberalizing trade, and reforming biofuel policies that competed with food production. Legal reform, particularly around gender equity, began to enter the discussion, alongside calls to empower local actors and improve food access mechanisms.
Starting in 2012, recommendations shifted attention toward regulatory oversight and pro-poor development. They emphasized increasing transparency in food commodity markets, improving access to local markets, and promoting regional integration. The role of data, early warning systems, and community capacity building became increasingly important, reflecting a move toward institutional preparedness and decentralized solutions.
A major turning point came around 2017, when the governance conversation began to incorporate human rights frameworks and social equity. Governments were urged to protect citizens from harmful business practices, broaden participation in decision-making, and align trade and agricultural policies with environmental sustainability. Conflict sensitivity, land rights, and the needs of displaced populations entered governance priorities, signaling a recognition of food insecurity’s political and structural roots.
In the past few years, the recommendations have emphasized the enforceability of the right to food through national law, institutional accountability, and the dismantling of structural inequalities. While conflict and crisis became more central, the humanitarian–development– peace nexus framing called for linking humanitarian assistance with long-term development and peacebuilding. This period underscored inclusive governance, the integration of climate and gender justice, and stronger international legal frameworks. Governments were called on to harmonize efforts across sectors, strengthen local governance, and respond effectively to crises through legal and financial mechanisms tied to hunger early warning systems.
Rural Development and Agricultural Support
Recommendations on rural development and agricultural support progressed from productivity-centered strategies to inclusive, resilience- focused food systems that account for climate, conflict, and equity.
Initial GHI recommendations called for prioritizing rural development, with a focus on building infrastructure, improving access to inputs such as fertilizer and seeds, and increasing productivity. Investments in agricultural research and value chains were framed as key to food security and economic development.
Later recommendations transitioned toward scaling up effective technical solutions. While productivity remained important, there was a growing emphasis on addressing the specific needs of women and youth in agriculture and promoting environmentally sustainable practices.
Coming into 2020, recommendations increasingly called for supporting small-scale producers, improving rural livelihoods, and linking rural and urban markets. Policy recommendations progressively recognized the role of sustainable food systems, nutrition-sensitive agriculture, and climate adaptation. Most recently, recommendations highlighted the need to take account of conflict and fragility when considering rural development. For contexts affected by insecurity or displacement, the recommendations emphasized enhancing the adaptability of local food systems, boosting resilience, and recognizing the role of agriculture in peacebuilding and recovery efforts.
Multisectoral Strategies and Approaches
The earlier editions of the GHI stressed the importance of multisectoral investments, particularly in education, health, and nutrition. The proposed approach focused on strengthening basic services, especially for women and children, and linking these with broader development goals such as food access and agricultural support. From 2012, thinking shifted toward addressing structural drivers of food insecurity, such as resource scarcity, poverty, fragility, and weak governance. The recommendations began to highlight the value of combining food, water, health, education, and governance initiatives into cohesive strategies while emphasizing the need to understand interconnections and invest in resilience at multiple levels.
Building on this thinking, from 2017 to 2020 the GHI advocated for strategies that address additional drivers of food insecurity such as conflict, inequality, and environmental degradation. Recommendations stressed aligning humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding frameworks to break cyclical vulnerability. In the past four years, the GHI further reinforced a systems-based, equity-driven model, asking governments and donors to align investments across sectors through a common food systems lens. This period emphasized institutional coherence and joint planning, especially for vulnerable and crisis-affected populations.
SHIFTS IN GHI POLICY THEMES ACROSS TWO DECADES:
Word Size Reflects Frequency of Recommendation
Development Financing and Aid Effectiveness
The evolution of recommendations related to development financing and aid effectiveness reflects a global shift from short-term emergency assistance toward long-term, integrated investments that align with national priorities and address structural causes of food insecurity and malnutrition. Over time, there has been growing recognition that sustainable food and nutrition security requires not just more development assistance but smarter, more accountable, and better-coordinated financing strategies that empower local actors and strengthen resilience.
Early recommendations stressed the need for long-term planning in development programs and encouraged development donors to support national efforts to build agricultural productivity and food access. From 2012, there was a marked transition toward promoting pro-poor insurance schemes and social protection that could withstand shocks. Coordination between donors and national governments was identified as a key priority for ensuring effectiveness. Recommendations also called for aligning development financing with the Sustainable Development Goals. National governments and donors were urged to make inclusive, equity-driven investments in rural development, education, and health systems, particularly for those most at risk of being left behind.
In more recent years, there has been a sharper focus on shared responsibility and coordination among development actors. Transparent systems for tracking commitments and results also became a prominent recommendation.
Evidence, Data, and Accountability
The importance of investing in research, monitoring, and local data collection systems was a core message from the first GHI report in 2008. Data was framed as essential for identifying food insecurity trends and informing targeted interventions. True to the design of the GHI, recommendations encouraged the use of common indicators, better alignment between agencies, and the incorporation of nutrition data into broader development tracking systems. These recommendations later evolved into calls for greater transparency in reporting food security and nutrition data, including public access to information. Citizen-led accountability efforts were increasingly seen as powerful tools. More recent recommendations stressed that data systems must reflect the needs of the most vulnerable and inform political decision-making that triggers action—especially in crises.
Anticipating Risk and Climate Action and Building Resilience
As the GHI evolved, it increasingly framed anticipatory action and climate resilience as central pillars of food systems transformation. Initial recommendations in response to the impact of extreme weather events and food price volatility emphasized the need for expanded emergency preparedness and humanitarian response, particularly in the face of extreme weather events and food price volatility.
From around 2012, recommendations began incorporating disaster risk reduction as integral to long-term food security. Recommendations from 2017 went on to advocate for designing climate- smart food systems that reduce emissions, promote biodiversity, and support communities—particularly women and smallholders—in adapting to climate change.
More recently, GHI reports have called for tackling interconnected risks—climate, conflict, pandemics, and economic shocks—in a holistic way. Governments were urged to strengthen local resilience and prioritize those most exposed to climate vulnerability. Coordination across sectors and levels of governance became a critical theme.
Inclusive, Equitable, and Locally Led Development
Tackling food insecurity involves not only ensuring equitable access to resources but also empowering communities—especially women, smallholders, and Indigenous groups—to shape food systems.
Up to 2011, the early GHI recommendations laid the groundwork for understanding how to address systemic barriers to progress, with calls to reduce gender disparities, especially in education, health, and food access. These early years highlighted the link between women’s empowerment and improved household nutrition. Thinking was later expanded to include structural factors: recommendations urged the removal of discriminatory laws and practices and called for increased participation of women and other excluded groups in decision-making. They also emphasized strengthening local food systems and resilience as key to sustainable food and nutrition outcomes. Local governments were increasingly seen as essential partners in delivering effective, legitimate responses. In the past few years, GHI reports have emphasized the need for strong local leadership, inclusive governance, and meaningful participation across all levels. Communities, civil society, and local actors were positioned as central to building equitable, sustainable food systems, particularly in fragile or conflict-affected settings.