Printer Friendly

Policy on food security in India impact of government food.

Introduction

World's Development Report (1986) defined food security as "access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life." Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 1983) defined food security as "ensuring that all people at all times have both physical and economic access to basic food they need."

From these definitions, the following points emerge:

* Food security involves the adequate physical availability of food to the entire population in the country.

* People have enough purchasing power so that they can acquire the food they need.

* For healthy life, the food available should be adequate in quality as well as quantity to meet nutritional requirement.

The main components of the food security system in India are promoting domestic production to meet the demands of the growing population as also to reduce under-nutrition among quite a large section of the population; providing minimum support prices for procurement and storage of food items operating public distribution system; and maintaining buffer stocks so as to take care of natural calamities resulting in temporary shortage of food, and to act as a countervailing mechanism against traders and businessmen who try to push up prices, especially during periods of shortages of food.

A nation may acquire self-sufficiency in food at a point of time, but the concept of food security necessities that, timely, reliable and nutritionally adequate supply of food should be available on a long terms basis. This implies that a nation has to ensure the growth rate in food supply so that it takes care of the increase in population as also the increase in demand resulting from increase in the income of the people.

From this point of view, the four stages of food security may be visualized for a developing country like India are (i) as Stage one is the most basic need from the point of view of human survival is to make an adequate quantity of cereals available to all, (ii) stage two as the adequate availability of cereals and pulses; (iii) stage three includes cereals, pulses, milk and milk products, and (iv) stage four includes cereals, pluses, milk and milk products, vegetables and fruits, fish, eggs and meat.

Staatz ((1990) defined food security as the ability to assure, on a long-term basis, that the food system provides the total population access to a timely, reliable and nutritionally adequate supply of food. Thus defined, food security has four essential components. (i) food availability, (ii) food accessibility, (iii) food utilization, and (iv) food security. Food availability concerns with the availability of sufficient quantities of food of appropriate qualities, supplied through domestic production or imports.

Food accessibility requires adequate resources. These resources are primarily monetary, but may also include traditional rights, e.g., to a share in common resources. The access to food, therefore, depends on factors like household incomes and individual wages, food prices, consumer credit, etc. Food utilization through adequate diet, water, sanitation and health care bring forth the importance of non-food inputs in food security.

Food security means minimizing the probability that in difficult times, food consumption might fall below requirements." Food security implies access by all people at all times to sufficient quantities of food to lead an active and healthy life". Srinivasan (2007) noted that this requires not just adequate supply of food at the aggregate level but also enough purchasing capacity with the individual household to demand adequate levels of food. Broadly speaking, there are three major aspects of our food problem:

(i) Quantitative Aspect,

(ii) Qualitative Aspect, and

(iii) Economic Aspect of lack of purchasing power with the People.

The quantitative aspect is related with the supply of food grains. In the past, the shortage in domestic production used to be made good with imports from abroad. During the last few years, domestic production has increased, with a consequential fall in imports and virtual elimination of the imports of food grains in some years. Thus, there has been improvement in the quantity of situation in India.

The Quantitative Aspect

The growth in the agricultural sector though lower than in the non-agricultural, nonetheless remained higher than the growth of population. Between 1950-51 and 2006-07 production of food grains increased at an average annual rate, of 2.5 percent compared to the growth of population which averaged 2.1 percent during the period. As a result, India almost became self--sufficient in food grains and there were hardly any imports during 197677 to 2005-06, except occasionally. The rate of growth of food grains production however decelerated to 1.2 percent during 1990--2007, lower than annual rate of growth of population, 1.9 percent. The growth rates of production could have been much higher, particularly in respect of rice, had an appropriate incentive structure been provided to the rich farmers and had they been allowed to under take exports. According to the economic survey 2007-08, the area under food grains had an average annual decline in the area under food grains during this period from 127.8 million hectares in 1990-91 to 121.6 million hectares in 2005-06. Because of chronic food shortages that the country faced in the years following independence, the focus of food policy was to achieve self sufficiency. The period after the Third Plan has been marked by rapid strides in food grains production (particularly wheat and, in recent years, rice as well). This is revealed from the Table-1.

This has enabled the economy to overcome the problems of food grains shortages and build up large stocks of food grains to counter any scarcity conditions. As noted by Radhakrishna (2005) India achieved self-sufficiency in food grains in the 1970s and has sustained it since then. It improved its capacity to cope with year-to-year fluctuations in food production by building up large buffer stocks through the agency of FCI (Food Corporation of India) and supplying these stocks to the people through the PDS. During some of the recent years, the buffer stocks considerably exceeded the minimum norms causing the problem of 'excess stocks'. As a result, 'excess stocks' were as much as 38.7 million tones. However, stocks have subsequently declined. In fact, stocks of food grains stood at 18.8 million tones on January 1, 2006, lower than not only the stock of 21.7 million tones on January 1, 2005, but also the buffer stock norm of 20 million tones. The main reasons for the decline in stocks was the lower stock of wheat. The Government of India has already pressed the panic button and in a bid to booster wheat stocks has increased the procurement price of wheat to Rs. 850 per quintal in 2007-08 (which is higher by Rs. 100 per quintal than the previous year) on the one hand, and had asked State Trading Corporation to import 3 million tones of wheat this year to bridge any shortfall in production in 2006-07 also, State-run firms and private traders had imported 6.5 million tones of wheat after production fell to 68.6 million tones.

Progress on Foodgrains Front reveals the following:

(a) Between 1950-51 and 2006-07 food grains production had increased from 51 million tones to 213 million tones more than four-old increase; the production of food grains, however, declined to 174 million tones in 2002-03, a massive 38 million tones decline compared to the previous years.

(b) The various components of cereal production indicate that whereas cereals accounted for 84 percent in foodgrains in 1950-51, their share has increased to 94 percent in 2006-07, the share of pluses, however, has declined from 16 percent to just 6 percent during the same period.

(c) Within cereals, the share of the two "superior cereals-rice and wheat which was only 53 percent in 1950-51 had improved to 78 percent in 2001-02. During the same period, the share of coarse cereals had declined from 30 percent to 18 percent. This indicates that even the weaker sections favour rice and wheat as against coarse cereals they normally consumed earlier.

The production is not likely to rise as neither area under wheat is likely to increase nor are any further increases in productivity in evidence (in fact, wheat productivity after touching the level of 2762 kgs per hectare in 2001-02 has tended to decline and was only 2607 kgs per hectare in 2005-06). As far as rice is concerned, its production in recent years has been more than consumption except 2002-03. However, rice output has not grown strongly with yields stagnating at 2000 Kgs per hectare sine the late 1990's. Even area under rice has tended to fall (it was 45.2 million hectares in 1999-2000 and 41.9 million hectares in 2004-05 though it rose again to 43.5 million hectares in 2005-06). Accordingly, many observers believe that rice production is also beginning to plateau. As far as vegetable oils and pulses are concerned, India already imports these in large quantities. For instance, vegetable oil imports were 49.85 percent i.e. half of total consumption in 2004-05, while pulses imports were 8.83 percent of total consumption in the year.

India ranks 94th among 188 countries on the global Hunger Index, 2007. The Index is prepared by the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute, using three indicators, viz., (i) the proportion of people who are calorie-deficient, (ii) child malnutrition, and (iii) child mortality. The data reveal that annual net imports were of the order of 4.1 million tones during 1950-51, they increased to 10.3 million tones during 1965-66. They were around 6.4 million tones during 1966-71. They declined thereafter and since 1976, food imports were negligible. After 1995-96, India became a net exporter of cereals. In fact, India's exports of cereals during 2005-06 were 7.2 million tones. (Kumar and Parikh 1997).

Data about per capita availability of cereals and pulses indicates an over-all improvement in per capita availability of food grains from about 345 grams per day to 422 grams between 1951 and 2006. This has two components--cereals and pulses. The per capita availability of cereals increased from 334 grams to 390 grams but the availability of pulses has declined deeply from 61 grams per day to 31 grams per day--indicating the growing poor quality of food.

There are more issues of concern. Analysis point out that while population growth and shift in food habits away from coarse grains with the rise in incomes will push the consumption of wheat considerably in years to come (to about 82 million tones in 2009-10 and 90 million tones in 2014-15). Tenth plan has drawn attention to the changes in consumption pattern that have taken place in post-Green Revolution period. It states: "Between 1972-73 and 1993-94, the food basket has become much more diversified, with the share of cereals seeing a dramatic decline of ten percentage points in most regions. At the all India level, cereal consumption in the rural areas declined from 15.3 Kg per capita per month in 1972-73 to 13.4 kg per capita per month in 1993-94. The corresponding decline in the urban areas was more modest from 11.3 kg to 10.6 kg over the same period. At the same time, consumption of milk and meat products as well as vegetables and fruits has increased. Such changes are a natural outcome of economic development".

In recent years, India was in a pitiable situation with bulging go downs 64.7 million tones in June 2002 and rotting food grains on the one side and nearly 300 million people at various degrees of starvation in the country. On the other, operations of the FCI are inefficient, staffing patterns and management practices are poor. It is unable to control pilferage and corruption. It lacks storage space, and the grain quality is poor. Nevertheless, the importance in safeguarding interests of both farmers and consumers remains highly relevant in the absence of an alternative.

The Qualitative Aspects

The qualitative aspects indicate the lack of nutritive elements in diet. Proteins, vitamins and minerals are important elements of a balanced diet. Nearly 836 million of India's 1.1 billion live on less than Rs. 20 per day and 300 million on less than half this amount. Continuing general inflation for decades has eroded, the purchasing power of the rupee forcing the masses to cut on their food intake. Little wonder India is amongst the countries that have a very large proportion of undernourished people. Evidence indicates that half the children below five years of age are malnourished. The National Health Survey Report (NFHS-3), the Global Hunger Index and the State of the World's Children Report 2008 by UNICEF has pointed out the abysmal levels of malnutrition prevalent amongst small children in the country. The same is true of a large proportion of women and poor adults in rural and urban areas. A study by Praduman Kumar, cited in India Development Report 2008 by UNICEF has pointed out the abysmal levels of malnutrition prevalent amongst small children in the country. The same is true of a large proportion of women and poor adults in rural and urban areas. A study by Praduman Kumar cited in India Development Report 2008, states that the number of undernourished persons in various farm categories in rural India have increased in absolute numbers from 39.2 million in 1993-94 to 42.8 million in 1999-2000. The rise in undernourished has been the sharpest amongst marginal farmers from 105.5 million to 122.0 million respectively (Reddy and Mishra, 2008).

The nutrient content in the food of an average Indian is deficient, i.e., an average Indian is malnourished. Some studies and surveys have been conducted in the past to measure the nutrient content in the Indian Food. These revealed that well over 90 percent of the calorie supply of undernourished households comes from cereals, starchy roots, sugar and pulses, whereas in other countries, these supply only 57 percent of the calories and the remaining supply is from animal products. Besides, an average Indian gets 55 gams of proteins, whereas, in the developed countries it exceeds even 100 gms. The low nutrient content of food is responsible to a large degree for the low efficiency of an average Indian.

Over the last four decades or so beginning with mid 1960s, no doubt, there are clear signs of improvement in this regard. The average intake has gone up by over 12 percent during this period, from an average of 1981 calories per person per day during 1961-63 to 2235 presently. Also, there has been a very rapid increase in consumption of non-crop-based commodities like eggs, milk and forest-based products.

There has been a decline in the per capita availability of cereals and pulses to 412 grams per day for wheat and 32 grams per day for pulses in 2006 from 435 grams and 41 grams respectively in 1990 (economic survey, 2007-08, Government of India, Table A-22).Various studies and the data from the NSS (2004-05) have brought out the decline in per capita intake of calories and protein in both rural and urban areas. The decline in the availability of food grains is made worse with the precarious levels of employment mostly at subsistence levels.

The decline in average calorie intake is evident from Table-3. This decline has been sharp since 1999-2000 both in rural and urban areas. There is an attempt to explain this by stating that in recent years, there has been diversification of dietary practices which has led to lower intake of cereals. This is an unrealistic argument considering the prevailing agrarian crisis, lack of quality employment and increased incidence of malnutrition amongst large number of people. If one were to look at the per capita daily availability and consumption of food items such as dairy farmers sell milk and milk products by depriving their children of the same.

Facts about the qualitative aspect

* According to the Global Hunger Index, 2007, India ranks 94th among 188 countries. Only Bangladesh has worse levels of hunger than India in South Asia.

* According to the World Food Programme, nearly 50 percent of the world's hungry people live in India.

* About 35 percent of India's population over 350 million is food-insecure, consuming less than 80 percent of the minimum energy requirement.

* Nearly 9 out of 10 pregnant women between 15 and 49 years are malnourished and anemic.

* Anemic in pregnant women causes 20 percent of infant mortality.

* More than 50 percent children under five are moderately or severely undernourished and anemic.

* Almost 2.5 million children under 5 years die every year in India. Uttar Pradesh alone contributes to 28 percent of these under 5 deaths.

The National Family Health Survey-III (NFHS-III), nutritional status of children in Table-4 presents the following

The Table-4 shows that three in four Children in India are anemic and one in three is stunted. The nutritional status of children is the worst in Uttar Pradesh. This is clear from the following facts: (i) 70 percent of children under 3 years of age in Uttar Pradesh are undernourished. (ii) the prevalence of stunting, wasting and being underweight in UP is 52 percent, (iii) the state is characterized by a high infant mortality rate (IMR) of 72/1000 live births, and (iv)UP contributes to 26.3 percent of all infant deaths that occur in India.

During the last 50 years, there has been substantial reduction in moderate and severe under-nutrition in children and some improvement in nutritional status of all segments of population. Milder forms of chronic energy deficiency still persist in many parts of the country; serious malnutrition and even widespread starvation among children and the aged has become common in tribal belts in Maharashtra and Orissa, essentially because there is no purchasing power.

While discussing about the draft of Food Security Bill National Advisory Council concerns about addressing the nutritional needs of the most vulnerable and suggesting eight different entitlements for those sections such as nutritional support schemes for infants, pre school children, school children, welfare hostel students, adolescent girls, pregnant women, street children, the homeless, the aged and infirm, the differently-abled, those living with leprosy, TB and HIV/AIDS etc., together with community kitchens and feeding destitute. (Gupta, 2010).

Distribution of Foodgrains

The PDS (Public Distribution System) functioning through a wide network of fair price shops aims primarily at protecting the interest of the vulnerable sections of population against high prices. The PDS has been in vogue since the beginning of planning with varying intensities: the off-take from this system increasing during the lean production years or during the period when statutory rationing had been introduced in large cities of the country. During the period when only informal rationing has been in vogue, the off-take from this system has declined. The is inadequate to carve the vulnerable sections of the society. Rural poor are not included in this system though at the time of acute shortage they are helped directly by this programme. Moreover, the PDS is restricted to wheat and the rice only. While inferior food-grains which are the main food of the poor people are ignored. Generally the urban people are more benefited by this scheme, since; price under this scheme is always lower than the market prices. There are also regional disparities in PDS benefits. Delhi which account for less than one percent of the national population consumes 6 percent of the national off take. Where as states like Bihar, U. P, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh got only 9.73 percent of all India PDS supplies in 1980 which have large population and much target incidence of poverty. Ever since the dismantling of the universal PDS in the mid 1990s on the advice of the world bank/IMF combine attempts are being made to reform the PDS and the institutions engaged in implementing the programme. The government argues the PDS system has to be reformed due to a tremendous hike in subsidy and leakages in the distribution system. Both these claims are totally misplaced as the misallocation and diversion are policy induced and reflect a faulty delivery mechanism leaky and defective implementation.

There are also leakages from the PDS in the form of losses in the transport and storage and diversion in the open market. Ever since the dismantling of universal PDS of grains in 1997, the government has implemented policies which are inimical to food security. The Economic Survey, 2007-08, maintains that the rate of growth of food-grains decelerated to 1.2 percent during 1990-2007 which was lower than the annual rate of growth of population at 1.9 percent. (GOI, 2008). The Report admits that there has generally been a shortfall in the achievement of target of food-grains, pulses and oilseeds during 2000-01 to 2006-07. The actual production of food-grains on an average was 93 percent of the target. Actual production, however, was only 87.7 percent of target for pulses and 85.3 percent of target for oilseeds (GOI, 2008).

Buffer Stocks

The effectiveness of the government operation in the food-grains market depends to a large extent on the size of stocks. The size of stocks is determined by two considerations. One is to meet the current needs, i.e. to hold a quantity of stocks adequate to maintain the supply line throughout the year; the other aspect is to have some stock which would enable the Government to maintain the supply line even in a year of crop failure. The first consideration helps to even out seasonal fluctuations in supply; the second helps to even out annual fluctuations in supply; the former may be described as normal stocks the later buffer stocks.

The primary objective of buffer stocks is price stabilization. However, it must be underlined that price stabilization does not mean price rigidity. The objective, as Khusro puts it "can be to eliminate unduly low-price through of the post-harvest period, especially in a good year, and to eliminate the unduly price peaks of the off-season, especially in a bad year. The price though affect the producer and the peaks affect the consumer adversely. The food grains stocks, however, remained consistently higher than the buffer requirement during 2004-05, on account of good procurement of rice and wheat and relatively lower off take in the previous year. As on 1st April 2005, the stock was 17.4 million tones against the buffer norms of 16.2 million tonnes. The present stock position of food grains as on Jan 1, 2008 is 19.2 million tonnes comprising of 11.5 million tonnes of rice and 7.7 million tonnes of wheat which along with projected arrivals of wheat imports will be adequate for meeting the requirements under targeted public distribution system (TPDS) and welfare schemes during the current financial year. Production is not enough to go for a universal system in PDS even while boasting we have so much grain, we can cash in on high global prices. The government has recorded the highest ever production of about 235 million tonnes of food grains in 2008-09. So much we can not store half of it and it is rotting. (Sainath, 2010).

The government has failed to recognize the complementary role that private storage can play in stabilizing prices. It assumes that private storage is a result of speculative activities and has a destabilizing influence on prices. It, therefore, places restrictions on private storage.

A planned import has failed to recognize the complementary role that private storage can play in stabilizing prices. It assumes that private storage is a result of speculative activities and has a destabilizing influence on prices. It, therefore, places restrictions on private storage.

Planned imports of food-grains can add to efficiency in domestic production. Self-sufficiency should be viewed as capacity to buy commodities internationally rather than capacity to produce everything domestically. India will not be a viable economy if it starts to produce everything and anything domestically. Government has stunned imports, except when they become inevitable. This issue needs be revised.

India had built up 'mountain of food-grain'. The drought of 2002-03, which in a way made the task of disposal of excess stocks somewhat easier, kept the food managers pre-occupied with the pressing needs of the relief operations. With the stock level gradually reducing through the year, the problem of surplus stocks took a backseat with the onset of a goodmonsoon, and the year 2003-04 set the stage for new challenges in food management. In other words, when it comes to food, India still lives season to season alternating between mountains of food and food deficits. The blame can clearly be laid on the management of the food economy for its lack of foresight to ensure integrated decision taking that would ward of this kind of situation. The system has not been good enough for the demands of the equity objective. For example, the poor states have not been able to distribute a big share through the PDS which was their due. The PDS has also been criticized for its inability to benefit coarse grain producers because of the non-inclusion of coarse grains in its network. Besides imports, other measures contemplated by the government include reduction in wheat allocations to the states, allocation of coarse grains instead of wheat, removal of food-grains from the Sampoorna Grameen Rozager Yogtia (SGRY) scheme as part of wage payment, decrease in allocations for drought-hit areas, increase in the prices of food-grains for both above poverty line and below poverty line card holders in the PDS, reduction in quotas for both APL and BPL by 5 kg from the present 35 kg; and prevention of sale of wheat in the open market by state agencies; which is usually done to control prices. Taken together, these proposals constitute an ironical assault on the right to food. The price of cereals, pulses and vegetables are rising to unheard of limits. The stable situation has worsened through high incidence of farmer's suicides and the rate of agricultural growth being around one percent (against the targeted four percent in the Tenth plan).

Food subsidy

In recent years, the government has been talking about the rising food subsidy. Food subsidies comprise subsidies to comprise: subsidies to farmers through minimum support prices (MSP) and purchase operations of the FCI, consumer subsidies through the PDS and subsidies to FCI to cover all its costs. The significance of retaining food subsidies to provide affordable food grains to vast sections of the Indian population should be underestimated. The need for such subsidies is a creation of the policies and plans that push social exclusion below subsistence levels for most of the Indians.

According to the Economic survey 2006-07, the food subsidy bill as percent of gross domestic product declined from 0.91 percent in 2003-04 to 0.83 percent in 2004-05 and to 0.66 percent in 2005-06. The food subsidy declined in money terms from Rs. 23071 crore in 2005-06 and Rs. 23828 crore in 2006-07. In real terms this is a substantial decline over the past three years when inflation is taken into account (GOI, 2008). It is interesting to note that once the buffer component is separated, the net subsidy as proportion of GDP remained more or less stable around 0.43 percent during 2001-02. This further supports the finding that fluctuation in food subsidy is more a function of the quantity procured and the stock of foodgrains maintained during the year. Food subsidy proper remained more or less stable as proportion of the GDP. By fulfilling the obligation towards distributive justice, the Government incurs food subsidies. Food subsidy showed an annual increase of above 30 percent during each of the three years namely 2000, 2001-02 and 2002-03 but is relatively stable since 2003-04.

The food subsidy imposes a heavy-burden on the exchequer. Though the total amount of subsidy has continued to rise, stock-wise allocations of subsidies do not seem to be related to the poverty levels. The ratio of the percentage allocation of subsidies as given by the off take of food grains under TDPS and the proportion of people below poverty line is less than one for many of the poorer states as shown in the following table.

Conclusion

The objectives of Food Policy of India is to maintain remunerative prices to farmers; enthuse farmers to use modern inputs and technology; stabilize prices due to market distortions; provide price support when there is a rapid fall in food grain prices; attempt through administrative means to keep down prices when there is a strong upward pressure; use the agricultural price policy to resist general inflationary forces in the economy. Build and maintain a buffer stock of food-grains to facilitate government operations; and to supply vulnerable classes with food grains at below market prices; to avoid localized and widespread famine and open under-nutrition; these objectives should be consistent and help achieve broader economic goals; sustained overall economic growth with stability growing per capita consumption of food grains; check year-to-year fluctuations in food grins availability; self-sufficiency in food grains so that imports can be minimized and eventually eliminated. The denial of the right to food for a large section of the Indian population reflected in increased malnutrition, stunted growth, ill-health and loss of energy and therefore productivity is an issue that deserve more attention. If countries were to be graded in terms of provision of food security to their citizens, India would rank presently along with Ethiopia at the lower-end. In this context following strategies can be adopted. Strategies

1. Long term food policy has to be evolved which should be stable and provide more food security to the people.

2. Food for work programmes should be used for increasing employment opportunities in the country more effectively.

3. There must be uniform PDS for the people (both for BPL and APL people) so that the food grain off take from ration shops may increase substantially.

4. Complete computerization of the entire PDS which means computerization of the godowns of the FCI to the ultimate beneficiary is essential to ensure greater transparency of the entire PDS.

5. The FCI must properly evaluate the capacities of its godowns and procure only that much of grains that can be properly preserved to distribute grain at "no cost" or very low cost instead of allowing it to rot in godowns is a welcome step indeed

6. Steps to be taken to strengthen the PDS in tribal and drought prone areas of the country. The cost of storage, handling of food grains, etc; should be reduced as far as possible.

7. The government of India must take some short and longer measures to properly store and preserve the food grains. The permanent solution lies in constructing adequate storage facilities.

References

Ganesh Kumar, A. and Kirit S. Parikh (1997): 'A Stock Trade Policy for National level Food Security for India', Mimeo, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai.

Government of India, Economic Survey (2007-08) New Delhi: Ministry of Finance.

Ruddar Datt, K. P. M. Sundharam, (2010): 'Food security in India', Indian Economy (S. Chand & Co. Ltd, New Delhi), p 491

Reddy, D N and Srijit Misra (2008): 'Crisis in Agriculture and Rural Distress in Post-Reform India', in R. Radhakrishna (ed.) India Development Report 2008, New Delhi: Oxford University press.

Srinivasan P. V. (2007): 'Agriculture and Food Security in India' Shovan Ray (ed), Hand Book of Agriculture in India, New Delhi, p. 130.

Sainath, P. (2010): 'Food Security by Definition', The Hindu, dated Aug 27, 2010.

Smita Gupta (2010): 'NAC Meet Tomorrow to Discuss draft of Food Security Bill, The Hindu, August 29.
Table 1: Food Grain Production and Growth rates in India

Year Output Plan / Period Growth Rate
 (Million Tonnes) (percentage)

1950-51 50.80 I 4.7
1960-61 82.00 II 3.5
1970-70 108.40 III -2.2
1980-81 129.60 IV 2.5
1990-91 176.40 V 5.3
2000-01 196.10 VI 6.3
2006-07 217.28 VII 3.6
2007-08 227.32 1990-92 0.6
2008-09 235.00
 VIII 3.2
 IX 3.05
 X 3.68
 XI 2.25

Source: Target and The Hindu dated August 27, 2010

Table 2: Net Availability of Cereals and Pulses

Year Population Net Net Net
 (millions) production (1) Imports (2) availability

1950-51 363 40.1 4.1 44.3
1960-61 442 60.9 3.5 64.6
1970-71 551 84.5 2.0 84.0
1980-81 689 104.1 0.5 104.8
1990-91 852 141.9 -0.6 145.7
2000-01 1033 162.5 -4.5 145.6
2005-06 1103 162.1 -7.2 157.4

Year Net Cereals Pulses Total
 Availability
 (millions tones)

1950-51 8.0 334.2 60.7 394.9
1960-61 11.1 399.7 69.0 468.7
1970-71 10.3 417.6 51.2 468.8
1980-81 9.4 417.3 37.5 454.8
1990-91 12.9 468.5 41.6 510.1
2000-01 11.3 366.2 30.0 416.2
2005-06 12.7 390.9 31.5 422.4

Source: Economic Survey (2006-07)

Note: Net Availability of cereals = Net production = net imports-
changes in government stock of cereals

Table 3: Changes in the Per Capita Intake of Calories, 1993-2005

 1993-94 1999-2000 2004-05

Rural 2153 2149 2047
Urban 2071 2156 2020

Source: NSS Report No. 513 in Aspects of India's Economy, Nos.
44-46, April 2008

Table 4: Nutritional Status of Children

Category of children Percentage

Under Nourished 42.4
Stunted 37.0
Wasted 17.0
Not Fully Immunized children 51.0
Anemic Children 77.0

Source: The National Family Health Survey--II

Table 5: Nutritional Status of Children Uttar Pradesh

Nutritional Status Percentage

Under Nourished 52
Stunted, Wasted Under Weight 52

Source: The National Family Health Survey-III

Table 6: Growth of Food Subsidy in India (other than sugar)

Year Food Subsidy (Crores) Annual Growth (percentage)

2000-01 12010 30.5
2001-02 17494 45.7
2002-03 24176 38.2
2003-04 25160 4.1
2004-05 25746 2.3
2005-06 23071 -10.4
2006-07 23828 3.3
2007-08 25425 6.7

Source: Economic Survey (2007-08)

Table 7: Allocation of Subsidies and Population Below Poverty Line
Food Subsidy for Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS)

State Percentage subsidy Percentage Ratio of
 of total food of people below percentage
 poverty line of people
 below
 poverty line

Bihar 3.5 12.2 0.3
Punjab 0.4 0.7 0.54
Jharkhand 2.4 3.9 0.6
Rajasthan 2.8 4.5 0.6
Madhya Pradesh 5.5 8.3 0.7
Uttar Pradesh 14.8 19.6 0.8
Maharasthra 8.0 10.5 0.8
Haryana 0.9 1.1 0.9
Orissa 4.9 5.9 0.8
Gujarat 2.6 3.0 0.9
Goa 0.1 0.1 1.0
Chhattisgarh 3.2 3.0 1.1
West Bengal 7.6 6.9 1.1
Karnataka 6.6 4.6 1.4
Delhi 1.3 0.6 1.8
Kerala 3.3 1.6 2.0
Tamil Nadu 11.4 4.8 2.4
Andhra Pradesh 10.2 4.2 2.4
 100 100

Source: Economic Survey (2007-08)
COPYRIGHT 2012 Centre for Indian Development Studies
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2012 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Kalabarani, S.P.; Birundha, V. Dhulasi
Publication:Political Economy Journal of India
Geographic Code:9INDI
Date:Jul 1, 2012
Words:5834
Previous Article:Quality of life in urban areas: some issues.
Next Article:Buy back of shares-a financial analysis.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters