Journal Abstract

This study investigates Bangladesh’s transition from a closed, politically driven nutrition governance model to an open, evidence-informed one, comparing the 1997 Food and Nutrition Security Policy with the 2015 National Nutrition Policy. Using qualitative process-tracing, key informant interviews, and document analysis, it examines how scientific evidence, political context, and actor coalitions shaped policy outcomes. Findings reveal a structural shift from a partisan, production-focused framework toward a multisectoral, evidence-based approach. While development partners utilized novel epidemiological data to contest established assumptions, technical evidence alone was inadequate; political consensus ultimately dictated its adoption, suggesting that in the absence of backing from significant political figures, even the most persuasive data may not effectuate policy alterations. Drawing on the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and the policy pathways model (PPM), this study provides an empirical refinement of both within a centralized South Asian setting. It illustrates that external actors effectively engage in nutrition policymaking only when scientific evidence strategically aligns with the governing elite's evolving political priorities, which often include economic growth, public health initiatives, and international relations considerations.