The Hindu : Food security

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, May 04, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Food security

By M. H. Suryanarayana

The actual improvements in food consumption and calorie intake of the poorer groups have been marginal and the non-poor pursue variety at the cost of nutritional intake.

THE ECONOMIC Survey 2001-2002 has called for what can be called a "PSP-revolution" for promoting production of non-cereal foods in India. It would involve (i) increasing the production (P) of non-cereal foods such as fruits and vegetables; (ii) appropriate storage (S) facilities for fruits, vegetables, milk products and animal products; and (iii) processing (P) facilities for agricultural products which are perishable. This is based on the assessment that: (i) with sizeable stocks of cereals generated in the mid-1990s, cereal availability is no longer a constraint on economic policy; and (ii) consumer preferences have changed from cereals to non-cereals.

This would raise the following questions: (i) is it really true that there has been a shift towards non-food consumption and within food away from cereals? (ii) if so, what are the implications for policy planning on cereal production (and procurement)? and (3) if not, what do the figures actually say/not say?

The Economic Survey cites the National Sample Survey findings, which show that over the years (i) there has been a decline in the share of consumption expenditure on food and within food, the share of foodgrains has fallen; and (ii) there has been an increase in the share of "other" food items such as fruits and vegetables, and milk, meat, fish and eggs. For instance, in rural India the share of grain in total consumer expenditure declined from 63 per cent in 1972-73 to 48 per cent in 1987-88 and finally to 44 per cent in 1999-2000. In urban India, too there was a similar decline: from 42 to 33 and then to 32 per cent over the same years. On the other hand, other food items, fruits and vegetables, for instance, came to account for a larger proportion of household consumer expenditure: rising from 10 to 13 and to 15 per cent in the rural areas. Similarly, for milk, meat, eggs and fish the share increased from 13 to 19 and to 20 per cent in rural India. There was a similar shift towards fruits and vegetables, milk, eggs and fish in urban India.

These are striking changes. But is the interpretation of a change in the consumer preference a correct one? There are two major problems with this data on changes in household consumption expenditure shares and what it says about the changes in consumer preferences. To begin with, the expenditure shares are measured in current prices (the prices that obtained in each of the years of the surveys) and part of the changes could be due to changes in relative prices. That is, foodgrain prices were rising more slowly than the prices of other food commodities, then the declining share of foodgrains in household consumption expenditure need not necessarily mean that people are moving away from foodgrains. Second, and more important, the reported estimates refer to consumption shares of the total rural and urban population. Hence, they present an average picture. They do not convey any information on the consumption pattern and hence the food security status of the poorer classes. How far could movements in relative prices have exaggerated the extent of changes in expenditure shares of different consumption categories? This question can be answered by looking at the shares based on commodity-wise consumer expenditures at current as well as at constant prices, depending on the data available on price indices.

Consider, for instance, the consumption pattern of the bottom 10 per cent of the rural population. When measured at current prices, what the poorest group spent on cereals as a proportion of total expenditure decreased from 62 per cent in 1972-73 to 42.5 per cent in 1988-89; a fall of more than 19 percentage points. When the same data is examined at constant prices, the fall is much less: from 59 per cent in 1972-73 to 51 per cent in 1988-89; a fall of only 8 percentage points. For this group at the bottom, total consumption at constant prices increased by 28 per cent between 1977-78 and 1988-89. But commodity groups such as (a) meat, fish and eggs, (b) pan, tobacco and intoxicants, (c) clothing and footwear and (d) fuel and light, which show a rise in consumption shares at current prices, reveal a decline when measured in constant prices. The commodities, which largely accounted for the increase in overall consumption (at constant prices) are (i) cereals and cereal substitutes, (ii) fruits, vegetables and nuts (iii) durables and miscellaneous goods and services followed by (iv) edible oils, (v) beverages and refreshments, (vi) milk and milk products. A similar feature is perceptible for other poor decile groups in both rural and urban sectors.

What about the intake of calories, a form of food intake? Available estimates for the rural and urban populations (average for all cases) show a decline in calorie intake over time. The average per capita daily intake of calories declined from 2,511 in 1961-62 to 2,266 in 1972-73, increased to 2,328 in 1973-74 but fell again to 2,221 in 1983, to 2,153 in 1993-94 and 2,149 in 1999/2000 in rural India; the corresponding estimates for urban India are 2,063, 2,107, 2,003, 2,089, 2,071 and 2,156 respectively. Experts attribute such a decline in calorie consumption to the pursuit of a variety in consumption — diversification of the consumption basket in favour of non-food items. This is the average picture. But this is not really true of all sections of the population. The poorer decile groups' pursuit of variety consisted largely of complementary food items such as fruits, vegetables and milk. In fact, with the increase in total income and consumer expenditure (at constant prices), the share of food for the rural poorest decile group declined only marginally from 83 to 80 per cent and that of non-food increased from 17 to 20 per cent between 1977-78 and 1988-89. Within the food group, there was a reallocation involving a decline in cereal shares and increases in the shares of milk and milk products, edible oils and fruits, vegetables and nuts and durables and services. Among the non-food items, durables and miscellaneous goods and services increased their share. Such a pursuit has not been at the cost of calorie intake for the poorest four decile groups in rural and urban India. Between 1972-73 and 1999-2000, their calorie intake increased but the increases have not been sufficient to ensure the threshold minimum. It is only the richer segment of the population which opted for variety in its consumption basket at the cost of calorie consumption in the rural areas. The reduction in calorie intake of the rich has been more than the increases in that of the poor. This is why, as a consequence, the average calorie intake has declined in the rural areas.

What has been the cost in terms of outcome indicators such as health status? Perhaps, with improvements in public health facilities, people tend to use more efficiently the limited amount of calories they consume. In sum, the findings that the actual improvements in food consumption and calorie intake of the poorer groups have been marginal and the non-poor pursue variety at the cost of nutritional intake would call for nutrition support programmes for the poor and nutrition education programmes for the non-poor (for food security).

(The writer is Professor, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai)

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

A balancing act

The voter's right to know

A different summit

Food security

Communal raj and criminal society

Use of Article 355

'Fatwa' politics is not the answer