CHAPTER-4

WILL DEMAND OUTSTRIP AVAILABILITY ?

4.1 An Assessment of the Demand

42 Measurement of Poverty

43 Estimates of Poverty

43.1 For the period upto 1977-78

4 3 3 For the period 1977-78 onwards

4.4 Nutrition Level

4.5 Composition of Target Group

4.6 Measurement of the Demand

4.6.1 M ethod-I

4.6.1.1 Population Trends

4.6.12 Poverty Ratios

4.6.2 Method - II

4.7 A Comparison of the Demand and Availability

91

CHAPTER-4

WILL DEMAND OUTSTRIP AVAILABILITY ?

4 .1 A n A s s e s s m e n t o f t h e D e m a n d

rpO say that India is self-sufficient in foodgrains or the public agencies have 1 surplus stocks, over and above the buffer, may invite ridicule, since it is common knowledge that millions of Indians do not have enough to eat. India has been classified as one of the low-income countries in the World Devel opment Reports of World Bank. There is a consensus among econo mists that a large number of Indians live below the poverty line. It is obvious from the plan documents and other averments of the Government of India that many of the programmes are directed to help this target group and raise them above the poverty line. It is also logical that any food lying idle with the Government or can be procured or imported as a part of a planned package, will have to be first made available to this target group. It has also been our thesis that when used as a strategy of development, it is more fruitful to the poor,than the income raising programmes. To arrive at this target group for our strategy of food for development, we have to analyse the magnitude of poverty and the consumption of the poor and their nutritional standards.

4 .2 M e a s u r e m e n t o f P o v e r ty

Though there is awareness that millions of Indians are poor in l adia, the es­timates about the exact percentage, is a different matter altogether. The figures about the number of persons, who can be termed as poor, varies with various assumptions and standards. The main way of calculating poverty is in­come method. There are two ways of going about i t Both the ways depend on "poverty line". In developed countries, poverty line is used to demarcate a sec­tion of the population at the bottom of the income scale, including such groups as the aged, the handicapped and the unemployed, who are somehow left out of the normal functioning of the economy. In developing countries,

92

poverty line is defined in absolute terms, usually as the income level required to maintain a minimum standard of living1

India has adopted the second method for defining the poverty line. But cal­culation of income for the different strata of society, is a difficult job. It is especially so, since most of the rural population and a good chunk of the urban earn their living in unorganised sectors. Besides, the levels of living dif-

. ferentials can be studied with the help of the size distribution of consumer expenditure. Unlike the size distribution of income, a fairly comparable series for the size distribution of consumer expendi ture (at current prices) is available from the National Sample Survery (NSS) Organisation2. Hence , Povery line is defined in terms of consumer expenditure.

To arrive at the minimum consumer expenditure, which will differentiate the poor and the non-poor, the minimum calorie requirement is taken into ac­count. What is the minimum calorie requirement, is itself subject of a raging controversy. We will analyse it when we study the nutritional health of the tar-

. get population.

4 .3 E s tim a te s o f p o verty

4 .3 .1 . F o r th e P e rio d u p to 1 9 7 7 -7 8

A systematic way to study the increase of poverty in India was started by the setting up of a high level expert group of the Planning Commission in July 1962 by the Govemmet. According to the recommendations of this study group, a per capita monthly consumer expenditure (PCMCF) of Rs.20 at 1960-61 prices was considered to be the desirable national minimum (Rs.25 for urban areas and Rs.18.9 for rural areas). This level of monthly per capita consumer expenditure was also accepted as a minimum desirable consump­tion stardard in the Fourth Plan Document. It was also adopted for the Fifth Plan, duly corrected for inflation. Table 4.1 gives an estimate of the extent of poverty for the years 1956-57 to 1977-78, taking the poverty line to be per capita monthly consumption expenditure of Rs.15 in rural areas and Rs.20 in urban areas in 1960-61 prices.

The main findings based on the figures (Table 4.1) of Ahluwalia for rural areas are three-fold. First, there was no discernible trend between the mid- 1950s and the yearly 1970s in

1 R.M.Sundaram, op.cit.,p_502 Suresh D. Tendulkar, Economic In equality in an Indian Perspective: Andre BetaiUe (ed)

Equality and Inequality - Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1983.

93

Tab le 4.1

T ren d s in E x ten t o f P o v e rty

Year Price Poverty line Extent of povertyIndex (Rs./month in —-----------------------

current price) Percentage Number of population (millions)

CPIAL ..’A’ - Rural Areas .....1956-57 97 14.6 54.1 1781957-58 101 15.1 50.2 1681958-59 - . - 46.5 1591959-60 102 15.3 44.4 1541960-61 100 15.0 38.9 1381961-62 103 15.5 39.4 1421963-64 118 17.7 44.5 1671964-65 148 213 46.8 1801965-66 155 23.3 53.9 2111966-67 190 28.5 56.6 2261967-68 206 30.9 563 2301968-69 185 27.8 51.0 2121969-70 193 28.9 49 2 2081970-71 192 28.8 47.5 2051971-72 200 30.0 41.2 1811972-73 225 33.8 43.1 1921973-74 286 42.9 46.1 2081977-78* 323 48.5 39.1 186CPIIW MM.’B’ - Urban Areas ___1960-61 100 20.0 40.0 321961-62 102 20.5 39.4 321963-64 111 22.1 42.5 371964-65 125 25.0 45.7 421965-66 136 27.3 46.4 441966-67 151 30.2 48.3 471967-68 172 . 34.4 48.3 - 491968-69 171 34.2 45.5 471969-70 177 35.4 44.4 481970-71 186 37.2 41.5 461972-73 202 40.0 44.6 ! 531973-74 250 50.0 38.7 1 481977-78* 321 64.0 40.8 59

Note: CPIAL = Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers

94

CPIIW = Consumer Price Index for Industrial Workers Source: For Rural: Montek S. Ahluwalia, "Rural Poverty Agricultural

Production and Prices: A Re-examination in Agricultural Change and Rural Poverty Variations on a Theme by Dharam Narain (eds), John W. Mellor and Gunvant Desai, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1986, p.59, Table 7.1).

For Urban : R.M. Sundaram, "Growth and Income Distribution in India", Sage Publishers, New Delhi, 1987, p.158.

* From Sixth Five Year Plan

rural poverty, even after allowing for changes associated with agricultural per­formance. The percentage of population in poverty declined through the fif­ties, rose to a peak in 1967-68 and then declined substantially, though unevenly, through the seven ties. The absence of any time-trend is confirmed by the following result ?

POV = 48.97 - 0.19t R2 = 0.04

Secondly, unproved agricultural performance measured as an increase in the net domestic product in agriculture per head of rural population at 1960-61 prices (NDPARP) was definitely asso dated with reduced incidence of rural poverty. Thirdly, over the period as a whole there has been a tendency for the extent of poverty to decline, but the tendency has been so slight that it is not suffident to affect the growth of population, so that there has been an in­crease in the number of poor people.3 4 There is almost no appredable varia­tion in the percentage of people below poverty line in urban area, centering round a mean of 45.8%.

In 1970, the concept of using maximum necessary calories was used to calcu­late the extent of poverty. Dandekar and Rath undertook a study and accord­ing to their calculations, based on the country level data of consumer expenditure of the 10th round (1960-61) of National Sample Survey (Central) sample, the level of consumer expenditure, which secures a diet adequate at least in respect of calories works out to Rs.170 per capita per annum for rural householders and Rs.271 per capita per annum for urban house holds. This level of consumer expenditure corresponded to an intake level of 19.80 seers of foodgrains (cereals, cereal substitutes and pulses) in the rural areas and 15.61 seers in urban areas (one seer is approximately equal to 450 gms)5

3 S.Ahluwalia, op.cit., p.954 R.M .Sundaram, op.cit., p.505 V.M.Dandekar and Nilakanth Rath, "Poverty in India, Dimensions and Trends,"

Economic and Political Weekly, VoLVI, No.122,1971.

95

They found 40% of the population in rural areas and 50% in urban areas to be below the poverty line.

Another estimate for the same period has been calculated by S.P. Gupta and K.L. Dutta. They defined poor as all persons whose consumption expendi­ture is below the per capita expenditure out- off point (estimated at Rs.76 for the rural and Rs.88 for the urban sector at 1979-80 prices).

Table 4.2

Year Poverty Ratio People below Poverty Rate of growthLine (millions) of GOP at

Rural Urban Rural Urban Totalfactor cost

1960-61 56.8 47.9 . 202.21 3756 23957 6.861961-62 562 45.9 204.23 37.00 24123 3551963-64 53.8 43.4 203.47 37.24 280.71 3.691964-65 47.4 42.9 182.68 38.01 220.69 7.881965-66 49.9 48.0 196.30 43.97 240.27 -5211966-67 492 445 197.05 42.05 239.10 0.981967-68 452 415 189.60 4050 225.10 8.741968-69 48.4 39.4 201.88 39.75 241.63 2.691970-71 46.8 375 198.85 36.83 237.68 6551971-72 47.8 36.7 207.13 39.53 246.66 5561972-73 50.5 40.1 228.26 46.52 274.78 0.291973-74 47.6 40.7 219.91 48.84 268.75 4.701977-78 51.5 38.2 254.92 53.86 308.78 4.91

Notesi) Poverty ratios for rural and urban areas are estimated from NSS con­

sumer expenditure for various and these are after adjusting the NSS consump­tion estimates to CSO levels of consumption.

ii) Monthly per capita consumption for Rural and urban areas have been adopted from the NSS consumption expenditure distribution and these are also adjusted to CSO consumption distribution and these are connected to 1960-61 index estimates. Afterwards these are connected to 1960-61 index.

iii) GDP at factor cost have been adopted from NAS Feb. 1983.

Source: S.P.Gupta & K. KJDutta .Poverty calculation in Sixth Plan, EPW, Nov. 1983.

96

According to these estimates there appears to be reduced incidence of pover­ty in the sixties, but with a tendency to rise again in the eighties in rural areas. In urban areas, a tendency of reduction in poverty, though not pronounced, can be seen. But the startling fact is that there is a negative correlation be­tween incidence of poverty and growth rate of G.D.P.(-0.3973). This may give credence to the argument, that development has bypassed the poor.

4.3.2 For the Period 1977-78 onwards

The task force in minimum needs and effective consumption constituted by the Planning Commission (1979), defined the poverty line as "the per capita monthly expenditure of Rs.49.09 in rural areas and Rs.56.64 in urban areas at 1973-74 prices, corresponding to the per capita daily calorie requirements of 2400 in rural areas and 2100 in urban areas"6 Based on this, the Sixth Plan mid- term appraisal estimated the population under poverty line as 51% in 1979-80 and 1981-82 as 41.5%7

An attempt has been made by the Planning Commission to estimate the change in the incidence of poverty from 1977-78 to 1983-84. The updated poverty line for 1983-84 is Rs.101.8 per capita month in rural area and Rs. 117.50 in urban areas. On the basis of the information collected in NSS surveys 32nd round (1977-78) revised and 38th round (1983) provisional, it is estimated that the percentage of persons below the poverty line declined from 483 in 1977-78 to 37.4 in 1983-84. The estimates for rural and urban areas and the targets for the Seventh Plan period has been given in table 43.

Table 4 .3

Poverty Estimate and Targets for Seventh Plan Period (percentage)

1977-78 1983-84 1984-85* 1989-90*Rural 51.2 40.4 39.9 28.2Urban 38.2 28.1 27.7 193”Combined 483 37.4 36.9 25.8

* TargetsSource: A Technical Note on the Seventh Plan of India (1985-86), pp.l 1-12.It is the aim of the Government of India to reduce the number of people living below the poverty line to only 5% of the total population by 1999-2000.

6 A Technical Note on the Seventh Plan of India, 1985-90, Perspective Planning Division, Planning Commission, June, 1986, p.10.

7 Mid-term Appraisal, Sixth Plan, pp.14-15

97

The above claims of achievement of GOI have not gone unchallenged by economists like Raj Krishna, Sundaram and Tendulkar and others. Accord­ing to the planners the trend of decline in poverty from 51%, the revised es­timate of 1979-80 to 41.5% in 1981-82, has been due to a few main factors viz. growth and different direct poverty alleviation programmes like IRDP, NRES and RLEGP as stated in Mid-term Appraisal of the Seventh Plan. Fitting relationship between poverty ratio and income per capita for 12 observations between 1960-61 and 1973-74, Raj Krishna established that the rural poverty ratio was statistically stable around 58.2%, the urban ratio around 49.7% and the total poverty ratio around 56.6%, while income per capita was growing at the average annual rate of 1% a year during 1960-61 to 1973-74. He asserted that, if in the past the growth of average income left the poverty ratios un­changed, there is no reason why it should suddenly begin to reduce the pover­ty ratio by more than 9% per year in the first two years of Sixth Plan.8 Simi larly, K. Sundaram and Suresh D. Tendulkar questioned the reasoning in the mid-term appraisal of Sixth Plan on the ground of under-enumeration of population and the naive assumptions regard mg the impact of anti-poverty programmes, ignoring leakages. They concluded that the estimated poverty in 1981-82 would be 46.50% or 329 million poor instead of 41.50% or 280 mil­lion poor 9

In spite of these criticisms, the fact is that there is a decreasing trend in the poverty ratio in the most recent years. It may not be due to the growth of in­come or poverty oriented programms.. It may be due to increased agriculture production. This trend is noticed in the private consumption figures also. Over the entire period of three and a half decades per capita rural consump­tion expenditure has been rising at a poor rate of around 1.4% per annum. It was 1.8% per annum in the first decade and 12% per annum in the second and 0.9% in the third decade. But, because of the above-average annual growth rate of real income during the recent years, the growth of real per capita consumption expenditure has improved to 1.7% per annum between 1975-76 and 1985-86. Another interesting factor, as can be seen from the Table 22 is that of a steady structural change in the private consumption ex­penditure in real terms over the past 35 years, when the share of food con­tribution has declined from 68% to 54.9% while those of clothing, transport, furniture and household equipment have more than doubled. Since the propensity to consume food decreases with the rise in income, this may indi­cate an overall rise in income levels and hence reduction in poverty.This trend of reduction in poverty ratios can be noticed even in the state-wise figures. Arranging the states in the ascending order of poverty incidence for the years 1977-78 and 1983-84 we get the following figures for poverty ratio,

8 Raj Krishna, Economic and Political Weekly, VoLXVHI, No.47, Nov. 19, 19839 P.K. Sundaram and Suresh D. Tendulkar, "Poverty in mid-term appraisal", Economic and

Political Weekly, V ol.XVm No.45 and 46, Nov. 5-12, 1983

98

and Lorenz ratio.(See Tkble 4.4 ) Comparing the two figures for the two years, we may explain the general fall in poverty ratio, as a result of the fall of the national poverty ratio. But inter- changing of the ranks, show that some states have gained more while some have gained less. This may be due to the capacity of the various states to absorb the benefits of the anti-poverty programmes or the inequality in the distribution of incomes.

T ab le 4 .4

P o ve rty a n d L o re n z R a tio s o f V a rio u s S ta te s o f In d ia

(1977-78 figures for poverty ratio given in ascending order)

S.No. State Poverty Ratio - Lorenz Ratio

1977-78 1983-84 Rank for 1977-78 1983-84 1983-84

1. Punjab 16.4 13.8 2 03013 0.29312. Haryana 253 15.6 3 03852 038413. Himachal Pradesh27.0 133 1 03630 038564 . J & K 33.4 163 4 03407 032825. Rajasthan 33.6 343 8 0.4346 033536. Gujarat 38.9 243 6 03058 036707. Andhra Pradesh 43.6 36.4 11 03104 038138. Assam 473 233 5 03126 030659. Kerala 48.4 26.8 7 03554 0341310. Uttar Pradesh 49.7 453 15 03071 0300211. Maharashtra 50.6 34.9 9 0.4323 0.333612. Karnataka 50.8 35.0 10 03349 0.322813. West Bengal 523 393 12 03146 0320614. Tamil Nadu 52.8 39.6 13 03345 0339215. Bihar 563 493 17 03619 0372216. Madhya Pradesh 58.9 463 16 03527 0304017. Orissa 65.1 42.8 15 03137 03002

Source: Table 3.6 of Technical Note, op.dt, p.97

One fact emerging out of these discussions about poverty trends is that while the surpluses available with government agencies are increasing, the target group population isjshrinking percent age-wise. If we accept the projections of the population and poverty ratio in absolute terms also the number of people below poverty line will be coming down from 284.6 millions (37.4% of 761 million) in 1983-84 to 215.9 millions (25.8% of 837 millions) in 1989-90 to 49.3 millions (5% of 986 millions) in 1989-90 to 493 millions (5% of 986

99

millions) in 2000 A.D. These figures, of course, assume a sustained and suc­cessful supplementation of anti-poverty programmes.

4 .4 N u tritio n L eve l

Before attempting to assess the size and nature of the target it is necessary to study the nutritional health of the population, especially the target group. A widely accepted definition of malnutrition is that it is a pathological state, general or specific, resulting from a relative or absolute deficiency or an ex­cess in the diet of one or more essential nutrients.10 Normally undemutrition is studied by observing and analysing its manifestations in various forms.

There are three main approaches to survey the extent of the incidence of un­demutrition. The first method is to use clinical and bio-medical evidence to determine, whether an individual exhibits symptoms associated with dieting inadequacies and/or imbalance and then estimate proportion of the popula­tion exhibit ing such symptoms. The second is the use of anthropological in­dicators such as body weight, height, skinfold, measurement etc. to judge the nutritional status of an individual in relation to some standards relating height to age, weight for age, height to weight, etc. These two are outcome based approaches, in that, they identify an observed outcome such as depar­ture from some standard relationship between anthropometric measures or a clini cal symptom with nutritional status. Obviously, in the absence of other supporting evidence, it is often difficult to judge, whether observed outcome is due to dietary inadequacy and imbal ance or due to a whole host of other factors, of which dietary inadequacy may be one and not necessarily the dominant factor. The Pan American Health Organisation apprently found that nearly half the population o f Barbadoss, Costa Rica, Guyana, Jamaica and Panama suffered from some degree o f malnutrition by conventional standards, yet in each country life expectancy at birth was 70 years or more* 11

The third method is, by judging nutritional standards by compar ing actual in­take of a nutrient by an individual with some stand ards. In this method of calculating under-nutrition, it has been defined as a pathological state, arising from an intake of inade quate amount of food and hence o f energy, over a considerable period, with reduced body weight as its principal manifestation. This definition assumes that energy intake, i.e. energy content o f food intake measured in kilo calories or mega jOulos per day, is well defined. But this is not so.12

10 Scrimshaw et al, Interaction of Nutriion and Infection, Monograph No. 57, World Health Organization, Geneva, 1968

11 T.N. Srinivasan, *Under-riutrition-agriculture in a turbulent world, op.cit., p.40 .12 T.N.Srinivasan, op.cit., p.100.

100

In the sixties and earlier, malnutrition was often thought to reflect primarily a shortage of protein and in some cases vita mins and minerals. Later studies by P.V. Sukhatame of Indian diets, convincingly concluded that calorie deficiency was of much greater concern for Indians. A study by World Bank has come to the conclusion that, "They (nutritional deficiencies) are usually caused by under nourishment - a shortage of food - not by an imbalance be­tween calories and proteins, there may often be shortages of specific micro- nutrients and of protein, especially among young children. But given the typical composition of the diets of the poor, to the extent calorie requirement (as estimated by the FAO and the WHO) are met, it is likely that other nutri­tional needs will also be satisfied".13

With the pioneering work for India by Dandekar and Rath, linking poverty line with minimum requirement of calories; calorie became the catchword and other nutrients were ignored14

An idea about the human energy nutrition will help is to under stand the con­troversy over the using of minimum calories as a measure of undemutrition and the consequent number of under- nourished in a country. L. Sarbey has explained it with a schematic diagram15 Figure 4.1

13 Poverty and Human Development, Oxford University Press, DBRC-World Bank, 1980, p.2714 Rajaram Dasgupta, "Nutrition Debate - Statistical Battle or Ideological Conflict ?'

Economic and Political Weekly, VoLXXI/19, May 10,198615 L. Sarbey, "Undernutrient Energy Requirements an adoption: A physiologist’s point of

view," Economic and Politi cal Weekly, Vol.XVm , No.48, Nov. 26,1983

In this figure the net flow of energy Jf is used for three purposes viz. for com­bustion, for work to maintain structures and for external work. Each of the above processes use the heat flows, Ji, J2 and J3 respectively. (Jf = JH -J2+J3) Jl, passing through a combuster, produced heat flow Jq’. J2is used to pro duce internal structures and the heat flow Jq” is produced in the process. The dissipation of structures used is the heat flow Jq"’. The flow J3 is used to produce external work. Jew and at the same time the heat flov, Jq"" is produced. Besides a quanti ty of energy is also accumulated in the

. body.The first law of Thermodynamics states that energy is conserved and in the present system, it can be expressed as

Jf -DE/DT = Jew + Jq . . . ( 1)

DE/DT where - = rate of energy accumulation in the body

Jq = Jq’ + Jq" + Jq"’ + Jq""

The first law, however, has nothing to say about the relative contribution of Jew and Jq and, in particular, has nothing to say about the amount of work J2 needed to maintain a particular set of dissipative structures nor about the amount of work J3 needed to provide a certain amount of external work.Thus it must be assumed that a ‘surplus’ of energy taken in any one day can,

(i) be accumulated as DE/DT (reflected in a weight increase)

(ii) appear as an increase in any one of the heat flows without any increase in DE/DT or in Jew.

Conversely a ‘deficit’ in energy intake can be compensated by a decrease in DE/DT or in Jew but also by an increased efficiency in the transformation of internal and external work. The latter mechanism would be an example of adaptive regulation or simply "adaptation" in this case, an adaptation of ener­gy transformation efficiency in a low intake.

It is this last adaptative mechanism of the body which led nutri tion experts like TN. Srinivasan, Sukhatame and others, to declare that an assessment based on minimum level of intake does not give a true picture. To support

102

this many examples have been cited. A study by Widdowson, E.M.16 showed a coefficient of variation of 20% in intakes of individuals of the same age, sex and similar activity patterns even after allowances were more for differences in body weight. It is now being recognised that an individual can remain in good health and in energy balance with intakes varying over a wide range.17 It has been found that there are individuals, indeed whole population groups, who maintain energy balance at astonishingly low intakes with no apparent consequences in terms of their health or activity.18

Sukhatame, in his Lai Bahadur Memorial Lecture in 1973, accused the others of oyer estimating the problem of under-nutrition using the unscientific way of, a fixed norm of intake. His thesis is based on various studies he had con­ducted. They con firmed the suggestion that the body regulates its energy balance on a range of intakes by varying the efficiency of utilization of in­takes. Poverty or undemutrition, if measured in terms of average intake will therefore be over-estimated. The cut-off level should be the lower limit of the range mean -2 SD to mean + 2 SD, which in statistical language under the assumption of normal distribution, contains 95% of the population. Krishna)! too maintained that while using uniform threshold value bias arises from (a) errors of inclusion: any person whose intake is below the fixed threshold but above his individual tolerance level is counted wrongly among the undernourished, (b) errors of exclusion: any person whose intake is higher than the fixed thereshold but below his individual tolerance level is counted wrongly among those who are not undernourished.

Using the above analysis, three sets of measurement of undemour ished has been derived by Bharat Dogra19 They are P8, P ° and P1̂ respectively for Suk- hatme, Dandekar and Krishnaji.

P*5 = P (X < M -2S .D ) ... (1)

PK = P(X <M -2S .D .w ) ... (2)

P® = P ( X < M ) ... (3)

where

16 E.M.Widdowson, "A Study of Industrial Challenges Diets,* special report services, Medical Research Council, 257, MNSO, London, 1947

17 P.V.Sukhatme and S. Margen 'M odels for Protein Deficiency”, American Journal of Climatic Nutrition, VoL31,1978,1237-56.

18 J.V.G AJDundn, "Energy Balance in Man with Partial lar Reference to Low Intakes”, Bibukia Nutrition Director, VoL27,1979,1-10

19 Bharat Dogra, "Measuring link in nutrtition,” Economic and Political Weekly, VoLXX, No J6 , Sept. 7,1985

103

M = the requirement of the reference person S.D. = standardS.D.w = intra-person variation of reference person

since S.D .> S.D.w, < P K < P ° ... (4)

The threshold so defined by Sukhtane i.e. M - 2S.D. is uniform for all per­sons, and all above this threshold are adequately nourished. Also as men­tioned by Sukhtane himself, S.D.W declines as time period increases or in other words tends to zero. So, for a long period, (let long period average in­take be Y) measurement of undernutrition in (2) is reduced to,

P = P ( Y < M) ... (5)

Compared to this Dandekar and Rath employed P ° = P ( X < M ) with actual intake X replacing long term average intake Y. Since actual intake in NSS is based on 30 days observation and if it be seen as long period PD as described in (3) Is more approprite for measurement o f undemutrition. P8 will under estimate under- nutrition20

Thus the Dandekar and Rath method of assessing under-nutrition has come to stop in India.

Following this method let us see what are the minimum calories require­ments prescribed by various experts and the Government of India. Based on die Indian Council of Medical Research recommen dations, the computed figures for the Indian population, weight for age, sex, occupation, physiologi­cal stress was calculated in 1981 by the same ICMR Committee, which set the Recommended Daily Intake. The figures stood at 2150 calories and 45.2 gms of protein. This figure amounts to 2400 calories per consumer unit per day (NSS data is usually given in consumer units). This figure is itself controver­sial, as mentioned earlier. Some nutritionists used 1900 calories as the mini­mum standard (1 3 times the basal metabolic Rate (BMR). The Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations recommended 2210 calories for India21 Dasgupta ̂ worked out 2356 calories per day per capita to be the national minimum require m ent Clark23 used the norm >f 1650-1790

20 Bharat Dogra, op.dt^ p,14321 The Fourth World Food Survey, FAO of UN, Rome, 1977.22 Rajaram Dasgupta, Nutritional Situation in India: A Statistical Analysis," EPW, Vol-XIX,

No. 34, August 25,1984.23 C.Clark, "Extent of Hunger in India, * Economic and Political Weekly, 30 September, 1972

104

calories daily intake to determine the extent of nutri tional deficiency existing in the country and Sukhatame used 1900 to 2100 for the same purpose.24 We can see that the norms of Government of India are quite liberal.

Let us have a look at the various surveys conducted to assess the extent of un- demutrition in India. Hindustan Thompson Associates Limited conducted a nutritional survey of Calcutta for U.S. Agency for International Develop­ment. The results are given in table 4.5. Eightyseven percent of the persons indicated in the Calcutta sample show an average calorie intake of less than 2100 calories. The calories derived from foodgrains are higher than other sur­veys.

A diet survey carried out by the National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau, cover­ing nine states provides information on average calorie intake per consump­tion unit (made adult equivalent) for three broad income groups25 This survey shows that 97 percent of the sample fall below the 2100 calorie mini­mum (Table 4.6).

T a b le 4 .5

A v e r a g e D a l ly P e r C a p i t a In t a k e o f C a lo r ie s

b y E x p e n d i tu r e C la s s , C a lc u t t a , 1 9 6 9 - 7 0

Expenditure Percent of Total Source of Caloriesclass sample calories------------------------------(Rs.peryear) Foodgrains Other foods

Less than 180 4.6 1,162

b>* 00 88a

180-240 5.7 1,296240-360 12.6 L345

1388 158b360-480 15.6 1328480-720 213 1,677 1372 305720-960 12.0 1,864

l,393c 497c960-1200 10.9 1,918

1200-1500 4.7 2,0451500-1800 42 2,122

24 P.V.Sukhatame, "The Calorie Gap," Indian Journal of Nutrition and Dietics, 1973,10, p.198

25 Fred H. Sanderson and Shyamal Roy, op.cit^pJ53.

105

Table 4.5 cont....

Expenditure Percent of Total Source of Caloriesclass . sample calories ------------------------------(Rs.peryear) Foodgrains Other foods

1800-2100 1.9 2,1452100-2400 . 1.4 2,320 l,372d 868'2400-3000 2.6 2,2613000-3600 1.0 2,6963600-4800 0.8 2,952Over 4800 0.7 2,658 '

All classes 100.0 1,724 1,330 394N ote: a expenditure of less than Rs.240 per year

b expenditure of Rs.240-480 per year c expenditure of Rs.720-1200 per year d expenditure of over Rs.1,200 per year

Source: Hindustan Thomson Associates Ltd. for U.S. Agency for- Intemational Development, A Study of Food Habits in Calcutta (Calcutta: Hindustan Thomson for USA, 1972, p.20 and tables A-60, p.76; A-65, p.81; and A-69, p.85. Data include meals taken outside the home by regular mem­bers of die household Household employees are excluded (H. Sanderson and Shyamal Roy, Food Trends etc. bp. cit, p33, Table 6.6, p.86).

T ab le 4 .6

A v e ra g e D a lly C a lo r ie In ta k e o f R u ra l P o p u la tio n o f N in e S ta te s 6, b y In c o m e , In d ia , 1 9 7 0

Income percapita(Rsjyear)

Percent of households in sample

Calorie intake per consumption unitb

Calorie intake1 1 * '“ ^

unit

Under 365 61.5 2,046 1,637

365-780 ' 24.9 2,306 1,845

730-1825 11.1 2,455 1,964

0-1825d 97.5 2,159 1,727

Notes

106

(a) Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh.

(b) The NNMB Report Table 4, state averages weighted on the basis of share of rural population of each state in total for nine states.

(c) Ratio of average per capita calorie intake to average adult male intake (0.8), based on GOI, Ministry of Planning, Dept, of Statistics, NSCO, "The NSS, 26th round, July 1971-June 1972", Calorie and Protein: Content of food items consumed per diem per consumer unit, All India, Rural nos.258/10(NSSO), 1976.

(d) Those with incomes over Rs.1,825 per year were not included in the results.

Source: National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau, "Report for the period en­ding 31st August 1974" (Hyderabad, India, National Institute of Nutrition and the Indian Council of Medical Research, 1975), Tables 2 ,4 .

Fred H . Sanderson and Shyamal Roy, op .d t, p 53, Tables 6 ,7 , p.86.

The third survey was conducted by National Sample Survey Organi zation on the request o f Food and Agricultural Organisation in 1911-71. The results are summarised in the Table 4.7.

107

Average Daily Consumption of Calories Per Capita, by Expenditure Class, Rural and Urban

Population, India 1971-72 (Urban de

tails given iii

parentheses)

Expenditure

Composition of

Class

Calories Consumed

Class

............................................

....

....

....

....

....

....

....

...

1 a

(Rupees

Number of

Number of

Percent

Per con-

Per

Per capita by food group

per year)

persons

consumer

of sample

sumor

capita

....

....

....

....

....

....

....

.units

persons

unit

I II

III

IV V

Less than 180

281

1 2216

4.6

1493

1176

1051

61 14

23

27(1104)

(872)

(1.2)

(1228)

(970)

(845)

(33)

(20)

(32)

(41)

180-252

7206

5721

11.9

1957

1436

1266

74

24

35

36(4784)

(3763)

(5.2)

(1582)

(1245)

(1064)

(52)

(32)

(46)

(52)

252-288

4902

3886

8.1

2287

1814

1588

99

35

48

43(4397)

(3495)

(4.8)

(1821)

(1448)

(1219)

(70)

(42)

(62)

(56)

288-336

6692

5295

11.0

2431

1923

1646

117

53

54

52(71

35)'

(5680)

(7.8)

(1970)

(1568)

(1296)

(77)

(52)

(74)

(70)

336-408

9736

7761

16.1

2734

2179

1848

138

69

68

56(11852)

(9482)

(13.0)

(2130)

(1704)

(1366)

(95)

(73)

(88)

(81)

408-516

10667

8518

17.6

3127

2495

2060

165

106

86

77(16060)

(12900)

(17.6)

(2343)

(1874)

(1456)

(114)

(103)

(94)

(108)

516-660

8441

6752

13.9

3513

2810

2256

219

151

101

82(15125)

(12210)

(16.6)

(2622)

(2124)

(1564)

(145)

(142)

(145)

(129)

108

Expenditure

Composition of Class

Calories Consumed

Class

.....

....

....

....

...-...

....

....

....

......

....

....

Motes: a = Food Group;

I = Cereals, potatoes, sugar, joggery & cereal substitutes;

II * Pulses, nuts & seeds;

III = Milk and milk products, meat, eggs & fish; IV » Edible oils; V = Fruits, vegetables, spices and

prepared food.

Source: GOI, Ministry of Planning, DO Statistics, NSSO.

The National Sample Survey, 26th round, July 1971-June 1972.

Calorie and Protein content of food iterns, consumed per diem per consumer unit, All India,

Rural, Mo.258/10

(NSSO,

■ a

(Rupees

Number of Mumber of

Percent

Per con-

Per

Per capita by.food group

per year)

persons

consuner

of sample,

sumer

capita

....

...-..

....

....

..--

units

persons

unit

I II

III

IV V

......

.-...

......

.....

-i--..

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..:..

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

660-900

6015

4880

9.9

4016

3257 ,

2488

301

219

128

122(14045)

(11408)

(15.4)

(2872)

(2332)

(1593)

(163)

(209)

(184)

(183)

900-1200

2434

1979

4.0

4574

3719

2744

361

312

160

142(7842)

(6516)

(8.5)

(3190)

(2648)

(1632)

(183)

(260)

(229)

(344)

Over 1200

1697

1369

2.8

6181

' 4988

' 3294

496

565

257

376(9092)

(7636)

(9.9)

(3750)

(3150)

(1614)

(225)

(412)

(315)

(584)

All Classes

60601

49198

100.0

2724

2168

1787

159

99 75

48(91436)

(74139)

(100.0)

(2539)

(2049)

(1456)

(131)

(152)

(134)

(176)

109

1976). Figures are rounded. Sanderson & Roy, Ibid, Tables 6-8 and 6-9, pp.88-89.

Average calorie consumption levels are about 100 calories lower for the urban population (2,049) than for the rural population (2,168); both are close to the minimum nutritional standard of 2,100 calories. From the survey it can be derived that about 35 percent of the rural population and about half of the urban population consume less than the 2,100 calorie minimum.

The diet Atlas of India (1971 revision) published by the National Institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad, summarises data on intake of calories and proteins in various states more during the prior decade by the state nutrition depart­ments and published in their nutrition survey reports. The states having calories above 2100 were, Punjab (2832), M.P. (2779), U.P. (2307), J & K (2265) and Karnataka. The remaining seven states listed (Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Bihar, Kerala, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu) were low in­take regions falling gradually in that order from 2044 to 1498 average calories. Protein figures followed calorie levels closely; the same top six states varied in intakes from 98 to 66 grams a day and the bottom she from 63 to 36 grams.

In current times National Institute of Nutrition in its Annual Report for 1981 had studied ten states (Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala), analysing 2500 house holds and 19,000 individuals. The result arranged ac­cording to the income is shown in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8

Per Capita Income Calories Proteins(Rs./year) ------------------ ---------------------

Mean ISD Mean ISD

Upto 360 360-540 540-720 720-1080 1080-1800 Above 1800

2,347 77032,353 642.72,532 67732,561 819.72,718 823.22,812 676.7

61.0 243859.6 20.7964.0 23.18653 24.10693 223871.0 25.77

Source: K.T. Acharya, op.dt., p. 110Annual Report, NIN, 1982, p.180

27 K.T-Achaiya.'We are eating better," Economic and Politi cal Weekly, XVII, N os.l and 2,June 1-8,1983

110

Though the standard deviation both for calories and proteins are certainly large, they do not detract from the exceptionally high averages. There is a considerable improvement over the daily figures,of about 2000 calories and 55 grams of protein a decade earlier28

The National Nutrition Monitoring Board’s data puts the average intake of those having no land at all to be between 1824 to 2312 calories and 44.2 to 64.2 grains of protein. Even for this group, their intake compared favourable with the national stipulated average intake of 2150 calories and 45.2 grams of protein. It seems remarkable that even the landless groups in ten states are close to these intakes and even exceed them in some states which a decade earlier were average low intake regions.

Though the level of nutrition based on minimum prescribed intake level, has improved over the years, there is a substantial number of persons under­nourished. Since in India the method of assessment of poverty is closely con­nected with nutrition levels, the poverty figures described earlier, closely resemble the figures of undernutrition.

4 .5 Com position o f the Target G roup

The general target group for our coniderations will be the people below the poverty line to start with. As we have observed the surplus stocks in the country have been increasing along with the increase in agricultural produc­tion while the projected poverty ratios (by the Planning Commission) are going down. For better utilisation of food for development we may have to include part of the lower middle class (above the poverty line) also in the tar­get group in the later years.

As we will see later the critical issue in using food for development, is the identification of the various strata of the target group and thus their needs. Our target group comists of those who are under-nourished. But under­nourishment has different effect on different people. Growing children re­quire not only more calorie per kilogram of body weight than do adults, but also proportionally more proteins and other nutrients. A shortage in such nutrients will result in a reduction of activity level, which in turn may impair the development of their mental rapacity. Deprivation of the unborn child is perhaps, most critical, since low birth-weight babies have a low survival pos­sibility under usual conditions in most developing countrie30. As suggested

i ' jK.T. Acharya,op.cit.( p.110Nutritional News,1982,VoL3,No.2,Natioiia1 Institute o f Nutrition Hyderabad Shubh Kumar .Income Approach to measuring poerty -variation of a theme by Dharam Narain,(Eds)John W. MeDor and Gunvant Desai,Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1986

111

by experts like Sukhatme, reduction in body size may be the adaptive response for uncertainly of food, for the survival of the species. But the cost of such an adaptation will be more for some sections of the population, who are engaged in work, requir ing high energy expenditure, perhaps agricultural and other labourers, who form a significant portion of our target group.

Thus, we can divide our target group into four broad categories - (a) children below the age of 14, (b) pregnant and lactating women, (c) old, in- firm and others who are unemployable, and (d) those who are employed or un­employed but employable.

This stratification is for the purpose of effective distribution only. Since the assessment of the demand will include all the groups strata-wise demand is not attempted here. However, distribution of the available food asset, among the various strata of the target group, is a problem which has to be tackled. A modest attempt has been made in chapter-7.

4.6 Measurement of the Demand

The demand for foodgrains of the target group can be assessed in two ways. Both the methods depend on consumption details. In the first method the desirable limit of consumption is fixed, and based on it the demand of the tar­geted population is worked o u t In the second method, the past consump­tion trend of the target group is studied and projections of the demand is made for future consumptions.

4.6.1 Method-!

The desirable limit of consumption is derived from the desirable limit of in­take of nutrients in terms of calories and then con verting them into foodgrains intake by using the ‘no waste’ equations between calories and foodgrains. Many attempts have been made to obtain this desirable limit But invariably in all cases the entire calorie requirement has been converted into foodgrains requirement using the conversion ratio. For example Dan- dekar and Rath assessed the minimum desirable level of con sumption to be 616 grams/day in rural areas and 515 grams/day in urban areas and converted it into a requirement of 225 kg/year in rural and 188 kg/year in urban areas, using the conversion ratio, one gram yielding 33 calories. But one cannot for­get that though the major portion of the food basket consists of food grains, there are also other items, which supply their own con tribution of calories. Food and Agricultural Organisation of United Nations had worked out the daily consumption of calories and protein as derived from Principal food in India (Table 4.9).

112

Table 4.9

Daily Consum ption o f C alories and Proteins asDerived from Principal Foods, India

Food stuff No. of Grams ofcalories protein

Total vegetable foods 1,943 44.8

Total foodgraiiis 1,507 40.5

- Cereals 1371 32.4 „-Rice 665 125-Wheat 344 10.0- Coarse grains 362 9.9-Pulses 136 8.1

436 43- Storchy roorts & tubers 36 05- Sugar and sugar products 199 05- Nuts, oilseeds & vegetable oils 130 0.7- Vegetable, fruits and misc. 71 2.6

(spices, stimulants eta)Total animal foods 102* 5.7

-M eat 7 0.6-Egg 0 0.0-Fish 5 1.0- Dairy products 88 4.1All Foods 2,045 505

* includes 2 calories from animal fats other than butter.Source: Unpublished data supplied by the FAO and reported in

Fred H. Sanderson and Shyamal Roy, op.cit,p.53, Table 1.1, p.2.

From the table 4.8 it is clear that cereals (rice, wheat and coarse grains) pro­vide 1371 calories out of total 2,045 calories and 32.4 grams. Out of total 50.5 grams of protein, i.e. 67% of the total calories only is provided by the cereals.

Keeping this iij view let us analyse what will be the desirable limit of con- sumption. i

Level fixed by Dandekar and Rath: Considering that daily calorie require­ment for a person is 2250 calorie and assuming that each gram of foodgrain

113

consumed yields 3.3 calories, and Rath worked out the desirable level (basic minimum) of foodgrain consumption at 616 gram per day per capita for the rural popula tion and 515 grams per day per capita for the urban population. The yearly basic requirement was worked out to be 225 kilogram per capita and 188 kilogram per capita respectively. If we assume that 67% of this re­quirement will be supplied by the cereals, the yearly basic requirement of cereals will work out to 151 kilograms per capita in rural areas and 123 kilograms per capita in urban areas.

Level fixed by Madalgi: On the basis of data available from nutritional re­search Madalgi, pointed out that the conversion should be 3.5 calories per gramme. His estimates per capita per day was 519 grams and 429 grams for rural and urban population respectively. On a yearly basis it worked out to be 187 kg and 157 kilogram respectively. Hence the basic require ment of cereals worked out to be 125 kilogram per year per capita in rural areas and 105 kilogram per year per capita in urban areas.

Standard fixed by Indian Council of Medical Research: The ICMR adopted the norm of 350 grams/capita/day on an average for the ration. This works out to an yearly requirement of 128 kilograms per capita. The cereal require­ment works out to be 86 kg/year/capita for the entire nation.

Standard fixed by Vyas and Bandopadhyay (1975): Vyas and Bandopadhyay (1975) worked out the year per capita requirement to be 178.7 kg for the rural areas and 130.7 kg for the urban areas. Under this estimate the yearly requirement o f cereals will be 120 kg/capita in rural areas and 88 kg/capita in urban areas.

The above four results have been reported in Arvind Gupta, "Public Distribu­tion of Foodgrains in India," Centre for Manage ment in Agriculture, IIMA, 1977.

Standard fixed by P.V. Sukhatme: P.V. Sukhatme, after innumerable studies on the required nutritional standard for the Indian population and iafter taking into account the adaptability of the human energy consumption sys­tem, arrived at the figures of 2100 calories in the rural areas 1900 calories in the*i-ban areas as the desirable limits of consumption. If we use the FAO calorie conversion factor of 1 kilogram of foodgrains yielding 3285 calories or 1 gm of foodgrains yielding 33 calo ties, desirable limit of consumption will be 636 grams/capita/day in rural areas and 576 grams/capita/day in urban areas. This will work out to the yearly requirement of 232 kg/capita and 210 kg/capita in rural and urban areas respectively. The correspond ing require-

114

ment of cereals in rural and urban areas will be 155 kg/capita and 141 kg/capita respectively31

Standard fixed by C. Clark: C. Clark in his work "Extent of Hunger in India"32 used the norm of 1790 calories/capita/day as the desirable minimum limit in rural areas and 1650 calories/capita pay in urban areas, using the FAO calories conversion factor, the yearly requirement of foodgrains will be 198 kg/capita in rural areas and 183 kg/capita in urban areas. The corresponding figure for cereal requirement 133 kg/capita/year and 123 kg/capita/year.

Standard adopted by Government of India: As we have seen Government of India has accepted that a minimum re quirement of 2100 calories in urban area and 2400 calories in rural areas is needed; converting this into cereal equivalent to get a neededconsumption level of 636 gm/day/capita in urban areas and 727 gm/day/capita in rural areas. This works out to a re quirement of 155 kg/year/capita in urban areas and 178 kg/year/capita in rural areas. If we adopt the principle that only 67% of the calories consumed are derived from cereals, the requirement per head per year will be 155 kg in urban areas and 178 kg in rural areas.

Two other factors necessary for calculating the demand in this method (as well as the second method) are the population trends and the trend of pover­ty ratios. ,

4.6.1.1 Population trends

It can be seen from the above studies that the requirement of desirable mini­mum is higher in rural areas than urban areas. It will be necesary to study the differential growth rates of rural and urban populations (since we are going to study the demand of cereals). Besides, while the rate of population growth is generally going down, the rate of growth of urban population may be in­creasing. This will have an impact on the demand of food grains.

The 1981 census put the population of India at 685 millions. The population grew at a rate of 3.2 percent during the decade 1961- 1970. According to the census assessment the rate of population growth was 22 percent in the next decade also.33The latest projections taken in Seventh Five Year Plan is that

31 P.V. Sukhatme,op.dt.,p.l0432 C.Clark, op.dL, p.10433 Statistical Outline o f India, op.dt., p.10, p 33

115

the rate will be 2.1% from 1984-85 to 1989-90 (32.6 -11.9 = 2.07) and 1.9% from 1989- 90 to 1999 - 2000 A.D. (29.1 -10.4 = 1.87).

The World Bank’s recent assessment of the population growth in 1980-2000 is 1.8 percent.34 The Population Division of the UN Secretariate gives the population growth rate of India as 2.4% for 1981-91 and 1.9% for 1991-2001 5 Since all these figures compare favourably, we take the projection adopted

by Seventh Five Year Plan document.

According to 1981 census the urban population of India stood at 160 million. The definition of ‘urban’ adopted in the 1981 census, was as follows: (a) All statutory towns with a municipal corporation, municipal board, cantonement board or notified town area etc. (b) all other places with (i) a minimum population of 5000, (ii) at least 75% of male working population engaged in non-agricultural and allied activities, and (iii) a density of population of at least 400 per sq.km (1000 per sq.mile). This formed 233% of the total population. The growth rate of urban population was 23% during the decade 1951-61, and 33 percent during 1961-70. During 1971-81, the growth rate rose to 3.8 percent The World Bank assessment of the urban population growth rate for 1973-1983 is 42 percent36 The Seventh Plan37 envisages a growth rate of 3.6 percent per annum for the eighties and nineties to reach 315.4 nullton in 2000 A D . Sanderson and Roy38 have stated, "Since we believe that the trend toward industrialization and urbanization is likely to continue despite the increased emphasis on rural development in current government planning, we have assumed a slight accelera tion of the annual rate of growth of the urban population, from an estimated 4 percent in the 1970s to 43 percent in the 1980s and 5 percent in the 1990s". Obviously the assumption that the urban population will grow at 3.6% only in the 80’s and 90’s is a very modest one especially, when there had been a speedy increase in the growth rate in all the previous years, reaching 3.8% during 1971-81.We will not be way of the mark if we assume there will be 5% increase in the present and next decade. Thus, we assume that the urban population will grow at an annual rate of 43% in the eighties and 4.8% in the nineties.

4 .6 .1 .2 P o v e r ty r a t io s

The trend of poverty ratios has been extensively discussed in the early part of this chapter. As already stated the assessment of poverty ratio is a controver-

----------------------------- gj-----

34 World Development Report, Interaction al Capital and Economic Development, World Development Indica tors, Oxford University Press, 1985, Table 19, p.210

35 Fred H . Sanderson and Shyamal Roy, opxiL, p.5336 World Development Report,op.dL, p.11637 Seventh Plan VolJL, opxiL, p.53, p.66738 Sanderson and Shyamal Roy, opxiL, p.53, p.93

116

tial exercise. According to the VI Plan mid-term appraisal and the Seventh Plan document, the fall in the poverty ratio is from 51% in 1979-80 to 41.5% in 1981-82, to 37.4% in 1983-84. This means that povety ratios have been fall­ing at the rate 4.8 percent and 2 percent per year respec lively. Suresh Ten­dulkar and K. Sundaram have argued that the poverty ratio cannot be less than 46.5% in 1981-82, reducing the first rate to 2.5% only. It cannot be for­gotten that much empha sis has been placed on anti-poverty programmes, which directly benefit our target group. Perhaps, the impact of these pro grammes on poverty are over estimated, especially when one sees that a reduction from 25.8% to 5% is expected to be achieved in the five years be­tween 1989-90 to 1990-2000, a reduction rate of above 4% per annum. But at the same time it cannot be denied that the percentage of people below the poverty line has been falling.

Leaving aside the tall claims of the VI Plan achievements and the rejoinders, let us go back to the year 1977-78, when the poverty ratios for rural and urban areas stood at 51.2 percent and 38.2 percent respectively (see table 42).Based on the consumption figuresTor 1977-78 and 1983-84, The Seventh Plan (a technical note to Seventh Plan) has arrived at the figure 40.4% and 28.1% for rural and urban areas respectively for the year 1977-78 and 1983-84, a reduction of 21% in rural areas and 26% in urban areas. In other words 1.8% of the population has been raised above the poverty line every year.Looking at all these factors and to the determination o f the government, we can safety assume that there will be a reduction o f 2% o f the population per annum o f the people below poverty line in both rural and urban areas.

Thus the poverty ratios will be as in Table 4.9

T ab le 4 .1 0

P o v e rty R a tio s P ro je c tio n fro m 1 9 8 6 to 2 0 0 0 A .D .

Year Rural Urban

1986 34.4 22.41987 32.4 20.41988 30.4 18.41989 28.4 16.41990 26.4 14.41991 24.4 12.41992 22.4 10.41993 20.4 8.41994 18.4 6.41995 16.4 4.4

117

Thble 4.10 cont...

Year Rural Urban

1996 14.4 2.41997 12.4 0.41998 10.4 0.01999 8.4 0.02000 6.4 0.0

Notes (i) The poverty ratio is assumed to have stood at 40.4% in rural areas and 28% in the urban areas in 1983-84.

(ii) It is assumed that 2% of the population will be brought above the poverty line per annum.

Combining the estimates of population and the estimates of pover ty ratio the size of the targetted population is given in the table 4.10.

T a b le 4 .1 1

S iz e o f th e T arg e t P o p u la tio n s (p e o p le b e lo w p o v e rty lin e )fro m 1 9 8 6 to 2 0 0 0 A .D .

Year Population Target Population(in millions) (in millions)

Rural Urban Total Rural Urban Total

1986 569 192 761 196 43 2421987 576 201 777 187 41 2281988 583 210 793 177 39 2161989 590 219 809 168 36 2041990 595 228 823 157 33 1901991 601 239 840 147 30 1771992 606 251 857 136 26 1621993 611 262 873 125 22 1471994 616 276 892 113 18 1311995 621 289 910 102 13 1151996 625 303 928 90 7 971997 630 318 948 78 1 791998 634 333 967 66 0 661999 637 349 986 54 0 542000 641 366 1007 41 0 41

118

Notes i) Population is assumed to increase at the annual rate of 2.1% in the eighties and 1.9% in the nineties.

ii) Urban population is assumed to increase at the assumed rate of 43% in the eighties and 4.8% in the nineties.

iii) Poverty ratios are taken from table 4.9

The last part of this exercise will be to find out the require ment of cereals based on the various assumptions of desirable limits of consumptions Table 4.11). It is proposed not to con sider the standard of 350 grams/capita/day of ICMR, since it is too low and may not give adequate calories, especially since the diet of the poor person is not a balanced one (Table 4.12).

119

Demand for Cereals for the Target Population (1986-2000) by Method-I

155 kg/capita/yr

HI 133

“123

«178 155

Rural

Urban

Rural

Urban

Rural

Urban

(d) P.V.

Sukhatma

(e) C. Clark

(f) Govt, of India

151 kg

/capita/yr

123

125

105

120 88

(a) Oandekar & Rath

Rural

Urban

(b) Madalgi

Rural

Urban

(c) Vyas & Bando-

Rural

padyay

Urban

Rote: Desirable limits of consumotion

42 40 38 36 33 31 28 25 23 201

170.2 14.2

0 12

0

10

0 7

7 7 6 6 5 5 4 3 3 2

35 33 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 7

31 30 29 26 25 24 21 20 17 16 13 10.1 9 7 6

5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 0. o 0 0

26 25 24 22 21 20 18 17 15 14 12 10. 9 7 6

0.1

12.136 35 33 31 29, 27 25 22 21 18 15

30 29 27 26 24 23 21 19 18 16 14 12 8 8 6

1 12

0.1 9.1

0 8

0 7

0 528 26 24 23 22 21 18 17 16' 13

24 22 21 20 19 18 16 15 14 12 11 9 8 7 5

30 27 26 25 24 21 19 18 16 14 12 8. 8 7 5

0.' 0 0 0

25 23 22 21 20 18 16 16 14 13 11 8 8 7 5

0.1

12.1

0 10

0 8

0 635 33 32 29 28 26 24 22 19 17 15

30 28 27 25 24 22

21

. 19 17 15 14 12

10 8 6

43 41 39 36 33 30 26 22 18 13 7 1 0 0 0

196 187 177 168 157 147 136 125 113 102 90 78 66 54 41

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000Year

Target

Requirement

in million tonnes

Population

....

....

....

....

....

....

----....

....

.........................

Oandekar

and

Madalgi

V & B

P.V.

Sukhatme

C. Clark

Govt, of India

Rath

R U

R U

Tot.

R U

Tot.

R U

Tot.

R U

Tot.

R U

Tot.

R U

Tot.

120

4.6 .2 Method-H

Metbod-II relies on finding the actual consumption over the years and arrive at the likely consumption level of the population and hence the target popula­tion, in the later years. Many attempts have been made to study the various consumption figures available rom N.S.S. rounds and arrive at the standard consumption.

Gulati and Krishnan (1975)

The standard of 100.8 kg/capita/year was derived on the basis of the weighted average of consumption of the rural and urban popu lation falling under the lowest expenditure category reported by the N.S.S. 19th round relating to the year 1965. This figure pertains to the consumption of cereals in both rural and urban areas.

Arvind Gupta40

Norm-I: Norm-I corresponds to the N.S.S. 17th round figures of consump­tion. The per capita consumption figure is the average of physical consump­tion responded for the first three expenditure categories and one half of the fourth expenditure category. Computed this way, the figure for the urban areas is not exactly the actual consumption like in the case of rural areas, but on average, which is an over-estimate of the actual consumption of thelowest 10% of the urban population. The actual consumption figures arrived at for the rural and urban areas worked out to be 152.4 kg/capita and 109.4 kg/capita for 1961. As we can see from the table 4.9, the cereal part of the foodgrain consumption comes to be about 90%, Hence the actual consump­tion of cereals can be taken as 137 kg/capita and 98.5 kg/capita per year in the rural and urban areas respectively.

Norm-II: An exactly similar method was followed with the N.S.S. round 19th figures of 1965. The actual yearly consumption figures arrived at were 111.48 kg/capita and 86.07 kg/capita in rural and urban areas respectively. The cor­responding cereal figures will be 10039 kg/capita/year and 77.5 kg/capita/year.

40 Arvind Gupta, op.dt., p.114.

121

R. Kannan and T.K. Chakrabarthy41

R. Kannan and T.K Chakrabarthy assumed that the all India per capita con­sumption of different commodities during the base year 1970-71 to be the same as per net availabil ity for consumption, which is derived by following the commodity flow method with the help of the accounting relationship. Final consumption = Production + Import - (Intermediate uses + capital formation + exports + increase in stocks). As such the per capita demand of cereals turned out to be 161.8 kg/year in rural areas and 129.1 kg/year in urban areas.

S. Narayanan

S. Narayanan used the equation Yn = Yo + e ig i + e2g2 + ... + ekgk

where

Y n- The forecast value

Y o- The estimated demand in the base yearek - Elasticity o f the demand for the particular foodgrain with reference tothe independent variable kgk- Growth rate in the independent variable k

to forecast the demand for cereals. The independent variables were per capita total consumption expenditure, family size, own price and the ratio of the price off the item to the price o f its substitute. His projections for the demand for the vulnerable sections (all India) were 59 million tonnes for 1983-84,61 million tonnes for 1985-86,63 million tonnes for 1987-88 and 65 million tonnes for 1989-90. The important factor to note here is that the demand has been estimated for poor at 1972-73 poverty line and hence no consideration is given for the decline in the number of poor over the years.

41 R.Kaxman and TJLChakrabartliy, "Demand projections for selected food items in India, 1985-86 to 2000-01, Economic and Political Weekly, VoipCVH, Review o f Agriculture, Nos.52 and 53, D ec24-31,1983

42 S.Narayanan, op.du, p.72.

122

Sanderson and Shyam al Roy43

Sanderson and Roy expressed per capita demand of foodgrains as a function of income and hence of consumption. It is assumed that per capita income will rise to 3.2 percent in the 1980s and to 4.4 percent in the 1990s. The rural and urban demands have been assumed to rise at the same rate. Income has been associated with consumption expenditure and the consumption expendi­ture to calories consumed. The per capita consumption of foodgrains were worked out to be 210 kg/year for the rural areas for the years 1990 and 2000 and 129 kg/year and 126 kg/year for urban areas. The corresponding figures for per capita consumption for rural and urban areas respectively will be 189 kg/year and 116 kg/year for the year 1990 and 212 kg/year and 113 kg/year for the year 2000. The demand for the target population as calculated in table 4.13 will be (29.7 + 4) 33.7 million tonnes in 1990 and (9+0) 9 million ton­nes in 2000.

The demands so projected under Method-II is given in Table 4.13.

43 Sanderson and Shyam al Roy, op.rit, p.53

123i

Table 4.13

Demand of Cereals for the Target Population from

(1985-86 to 2000) by Method-II

Note: (a) Standard consumption : 100.8 kg/yr/capita for both rural and urban

(b) A.

Gupta - Norm I

: R: 137 kg/yr/capita

U: 98.5 kg/yr/capita

(c) A. Gupta - Norm II

: R: 100.37 kg/yr/capita

U: 77.5 kg/yr/capita

<d> R.K. & TKC - R.Khanna &

T.K. Chakrabarthy

: R: 161.8 kg/yr/capita

U:129.1 kg/yr/capita

(e) S & S - Sanderson Si

l

63 6534

30

38 35 34 33 29 28 25 23 20 19 16 13.1

11 9 7

32 30 29 27 25 24 22 20 18 17 15 13 11 9 7

23 22 21 20 19 17 16 15 12 11 10 8.1 7 5 4

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 11 10 9 8 7 5 4

31 30 28 27 25 23 22 19 18 15 13 11.1 9 7 6

27 26 24 23 22 20 19 17 16 14 12 11 0 7 6

24 23 22 21 19 18 16 15 13 12 10 8 7 5 4

102 13

90 7

78 1

66

0 54

041

022 18125 113196 43

187 41

177 39

168 36

157 33

147 30

136 26

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

S&NS & S (e)

R.K. & (d)

T.K.C.

Arvind (c)

Gupta

Norm-11

Arvind (b)

Gupta

Norm-1

Requi rements

RUT

G & K (a)

Year Target

Population

124

Shyamal Roy

at 1972-73 poverty level

Comparing the figures arrived at by the tw o methods, wc can see that the demand by the second method is lower. This is logical since the second method is based on actual consumption, whereas the first one is based on desirable limits of consumption. This proves out the fact that the poor do not eat as much as they are required to eat and hence suffer from malnutrition. Since it is our endeavour to see that the poor get at least minimum require­ment, to escape from malnourishment, we will only consider the figures ar­rived at by method-I. The average of the total demand arrived at by the various experts comes to 33.67 m. tonnes for the year 1986, with a standard deviation of 4.64. Even taking the outer limit 2 SJD.the demand will be 42.95 m. tonnes. Since it compares very favourably with the figures arrived at by taking the standard prescribed by Government of India (42 million tonnes), it will be reasonable to assume the demand projected on the basis of the mini­mum requirements assumed by Government of India.

4 .7 A C o m p a r is o n o f th e D e m a n d a n d A v a ila b ility

We have seen that the projections made in the seventh five year plan, regard­ing production of foodgrains are not unreasonable objectives, to achieve.The planners have assumed that there will be annual compound growth rise of 25% in the year 1984-85 to 1989-90 and 2.4% in the years 1989-90 to 1999- MOO44

We have seen that there is a strong correlation between net production and procurement (9098). Linearly regressing net production and procurement figures for years 1975 to 1985, they obey the following equation.Y = -113908 + 03277 x, where V represents net production. Working out the trend for the coming year (1986-2000) we get the Table no.4.14.

44 Seventh Plan, V oU , op.cit., p.54

125

T a b le 4 .1 4

A n E s tim a te o f A v a ila b ility a n d D e m a n d fo r th e T a rg e t G ro u p (1 9 8 6 -2 0 0 0 )

Year Net Procure- Stock Require- Surplus/ produc- ment available ment deficittion for distri­

bution

l (vLsJy

Opening stock + procurement - buffer stock

1986 1543 20.8 40.0 42 -2.01987 1582 24.6 24.6 40 _, -15.41988 162.1 253 253 38 -1231989 1662 263 263 36 -9 31990 1702 27.4 27.4 33 -5.61991 1742 283 283 31 -2.71992 178.4 292 292 28 + 121993 182.7 302 302 25 + 5 21994 187.1 312 312 23 + 8 21995 191.6 322 322 20 + 1221996 1962 333 333 17 + 1631997 200.9 34.4 34.4 142 +2021998 205.7 353 353 12 +2331999 210.6 36.7 36.7 10 +26.72000 215.6 37.7 37.7 7 +30.7

In the table 4.13, the availability in the first year (1986) is more since the stock in hand was 262 m. tonnes. A buffer stock level of 10 m. tonnes has been assumed. It is also assumed that all the available stocks have been dis­posed off in the first year, since the requirement is more in that year. Hence in subsequent years die availability equals the procured stock.H ie same figures can be expressed in the form of a graph also. (See Graph 4.1).

126

.-O

fct>

IIIV

IA1f

c U

t- A

VA

ILA

UIL

II V

AIM

U U

CIV

IAl't

O

Gra

ph 4

*

1986

19

88

1990

19

92

1994

19

96

1998

20

0019

87

1989

19

91

1993

19

95

1997

19

99

-----

---^

------

--

AVA

ILA

BIL

I

—4—

REQ

UIR

EMEN

FOR

TH

E TA

RG

ET G

RO

UP

(198

6-20

00)

127

YEA

RS

At first sight, we can say that all the poor can be fed easily with the available food stock with a comfortable buffer of 10 m. tonnes, from 1992 onwards. This is based on two assumptions viz. the production of foodgrains go up at the rate of 2.5 percent and the population of poor comes down by 2% every year. We have no quarrel with the first assumption. But the second one depends on the success of anti-poverty programmes to a great extent, among other things. If these programmes are not effective, the number of poor may not come down as predicted and hence the demand will remain higher. But at the same time, since the anti-poverty strategy, according to our thesis, will also depend on the distribution of foodgrains, the opening stock in the years will be more than the buffer stock limit

Hence we can conclude that if we are planning direct intervention with food, as a strategy for the development of the target popu lation, availability will not be a constraint In fact even if the number of poor does not come down as predicted, there will be enough to distribute, as we can see from the widen­ing gap between the two curves, estimated to be 30.7 m. tonnes in 2000 A D . Perhaps the definition of the target will have to be revised in the later years, by raising the standard from mere minimum to something more.

But the real constraint will be the delivery of this available stock to the target group. It will be our effort to study how the government has gone about it in the past in the next two chapters.

128