Epilogue: The significant role of public policy analysis and evidence in informing policy change and informing our future

The SDGs set out to make sure development efforts left no one behind. Yet, the very people the SDGs seek to reach, are disproportionally affected by the developing global crisis. It is not likely that most SDGs will be achieved by 2030. The era of development following the SGDs will likely need to continue focussing on the same elements contained in the 17 SDGs, but with re-imagined priorities and actions. For this reason, the issues set out in this Handbook will endure beyond the SGDs. Analysis of these issues and evidence-based policy advice will become more relevant as we move toward 2030. We will need continuous assessment of the progress made, the impact of policy and programmatic responses to SGDs, and finally, impact assessments of the actions taken during the SDG era. There are limitations concerning the lack of available data, particularly disaggregated data regarding sex, individual (vs household), and vulnerability, confounded by difficulties with conducting comparative studies due to endogeneity challenges. There is no gold standard in measuring food security - different indicators of food security measure different aspects of food security at different levels - individual or household. New indicators are continually emerging to improve measurement accuracy and address these challenges. Most food security indicators are proxies. Nutrition monitoring is expensive, and national surveys are usually carried out at five-year intervals. This means that any panel data assessment is not comparing the same group of under-five-year-old children. Moreover, all household data is static. It only reflects the situation at a moment in time. The context is influenced by seasonality and the period from the last receipt of income.