FOOD SECURITY AND GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION

1.Ahana Sarkar2.Ritabrata Bose3.Sraya Das4. Suraj Khatri

Chhetri

MAULANA AZAD COLLEGE

INTRODUCTIONWhat is Food Security?

According to Food and Agricultural Organization (F.A.O) of the U.N.O, Food security implies that,

"Food Security exists when all people, at all times, should have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life".

The 1996 World Food Summit definition of food security is “Food security is the peoples’ right to

define their own policies and strategies for the sustainable production, distribution and

consumption of food that guarantees the right to food for the entire population, on the basis of

small and medium-sized production, respecting their own cultures and the diversity of peasant,

fishing and indigenous forms of agricultural production, marketing and management of rural areas,

in which women play a fundamental role.”

Equitable access to food refers to both access to the supply (or availability) of food and to the

entitlement to food i.e. the resources, financial and natural and human ability to obtain food.

Food insecurity occurs when food is either unavailable and/or where there is a lack of entitlement

to food. Insecurity takes two basic forms:

Transitory food insecurity: this generally refers to extreme cases of famine caused by war,

flooding, drought, crop failure, pest infestations, and loss of purchasing power in farming

communities and market failures through high food prices. Such problems can also trigger

production and subsistence food crises threatening a populations access to food;

Chronic food insecurity: long term and deep-rooted food insecurity is largely driven by

endemic poverty. People are subject to a continual problem of poor diet through an inability

to acquire their basic food requirements, either because they are unable to buy it or to

produce it for themselves. Food security implies access by all people at all times to

sufficient quantities of food to lead an active & healthy life. It thus has two dimensions: (1)

Production of enough food and (2) to check whether the entire population have sufficient

purchasing power to demand for the food. M.S Swaminathan, the great agricultural

scientist said, “In a country where 60 percent of the people depend on agriculture for their

livelihood, it’s better to become an agricultural forced based of Food Security rather than a

nuclear force.

2

I. Food Security in India: Review of Literature

Since the ancient period, Indian people had to face recurrent famines specially due to lack of

communication and transport. But in those days, maximum emphasis was given not only to

agriculture but also to maximize the food production. At the same time, the producer was advised

not to hold on keeping the surplus but to share the surplus amount with others who are in need.

With the improvement in communication and transport system in the modern period it’s unlikely

that famines will occur again. Upto 1969, India was facing the challenge of feeding her growing

population and was dependent on the ignominious PL-480 wheat import from U.S.A. She could

improve the situation since 1969 through Green Revolution by the introduction of High Yielding

Variety (HYV) seeds in wheat and then paddy with the help of irrigation, chemical fertilizers and

pesticides. However, the Green Revolution was subjected to the law of diminishing returns

especially in the 1980s. There are also many negative consequences of it. Naturally, the

government felt that a second Green Revolution is necessary. But the present situation is more

dangerous as agriculture leading to displacement of small and marginal farmers. Thus, it will be

better if we pay attention to alternative system of agriculture of sustainable type. This will depend

on organic farming, small irrigation, retention of biodiversity as far as possible. It’s also necessary

to adopt a few subsidiary measures to achieve food security in the future and avoid food security

in the future.

Upanishad, teaches us to follow certain inviolable rules of FOOD SECURITY:

“Annam Na Nindayate. Tad Bratam.” (Don’t despise anna. This is your inviolable rule of life

or brata.)

“Annam Na Parichaksita. Tad Bratam.” (Don’t neglect anna. This is the inviolable rule of

life.)

Annam Bahu Kurbita. Tad Bratam.” (Increase anna manifold. This is your brata.)

Article 47 of the Constitution of India states that, “The State shall regard raising the level of

nutrition and standard of living of its people and improvement in public health among its primary

duties”. Successive Five-Year Plans laid down the policies and strategies for achieving these

goals [Tenth Five Year Plan, 2002-2007]. Food security in the past referred to the overall regional,

national or even global food supply and shortfalls in supply compared to requirements, but with 3

increased observation of disparities in the sufficiency of food intake by certain groups, despite

overall adequacy of supply the term has been applied more recently mostly at a local, household,

or individual level and has been broadened beyond notions of food supply to include element of

access, vulnerability and sustainability. There are two things which are essential for food security,

production/import of foodgrain (i.e. physical availability) and household-level purchase of

foodgrains (i.e. economic accessibility). Since household is the logical social unit, the question of

access to food should be seen at the household level. Similarly, one should keep in mind that

household food security should be considered a necessary but not sufficient condition for food

adequate nutrition. Stated in a different way, food security at the household or even individual level

is an “input” not an “outcome”—hence the distinction between food security and nutrition security.

From the entitlement perspective, one can say that the problem of food security does not lie

entirely on per capita availability of food, but also on the economic access to food or what is

termed as entitlement.

The entitlement of a person stands for the set of different alternative commodity bundles that the

person can acquire through the use of the various legal channels of acquirement open to someone

in his position. In a private ownership market economy, the entitlement set of a person is

determined by his original bundle of ownership (what is called endowment) and the various

alternative bundles he can acquire starting respectively from each initial endowment, through the

use of trade and production (what is called his exchange entitlement mapping). A narrow

interpretation of ‘entitlement thesis’ would suggest that given the ‘endowments’ a household could

access food from any place. In other words, entitlement could be equated to accessibility. Hence

household’s economic access to food is directly related to income and indirectly related to the

labour supply (initial endowment) or the employment status of the earning members. Speaking on

the availability of foodgrain, one can say that in the case of India, the households can rely either

on the public distribution system (PDS) or the open market. PDS in India has undergone major

changes in the year 1992 (in the form of Revamped Public Distribution System) and in 1997 (in the

form of Targeted Public Distribution System), thus converting the universal system into a targeted

one. Some of the factors behind the reforms have been the weaker sides of the universal PDS

such as: urban bias of the PDS, limited accessibility of the PDS by the poor, regional disparity in

the PDS, inefficiencies of the PDS (in terms of mounting food subsidy) and leakages from the

PDS.

The rationing system was first introduced in 1939 as a wartime measure to combat inflation in food

grain prices arising out of shortages, in Bombay. This was later extended to six other cities and a

few regions due to the shock of Bengal famine of 1943. The famine of 1943 led to the appointment 4

of first Foodgrains Policy Committee, which recommended procurement of foodgrains from surplus

areas, rationing for equitable distribution and statutory price control for checking the price rise. The

Department of Food under the Government of India was created in 1942, which helped in food

matters getting the serious attention of the government. However, before Independence the

rationing system was confined to the urban areas. After Independence, Foodgrains Procurement

Commission of 1950 besides making other recommendations suggested the rationing in all the

towns with a population of more than fifty thousand, with informal rationing in other towns and

some regulated supply of grains in rural areas. The Foodgrain Inquiry Committee of 1957

suggested maintenance of food buffer stocks and amongst other measures recommended setting

up of a foodgrains stabilization organization to undertake purchase and sale operations of

foodgrains. In order to tackle mass discontent on account of food scarcity, the government entered

into the PL-480 agreement with the USA for the import of 31 lakh tonnes of rice in April 1956.

Imports under PL-480 became a regular feature for a long period that did not help the government

to build up sufficient buffer stock. India’s concern for food security led the policy makers to adopt

measures for food availability—both physical and economic. For increasing the physical

availability of foodgrain, India had to resort for the adoption of new technology. India adopted the

high yielding varieties programmes during the mid-sixties. The government introduced an intensive

development programme in 7 districts selected from 7 states in 1960 and this programme was

named Intensive Area Development Programme. This programme was later extended to the

remaining states by selecting one district from each state for intensive development. In October

1965, the net was extended and 114 districts out of 325 were selected for intensive development

and the programme was labeled as Intensive Agricultural Areas Programme. In the face of

skyrocketing food prices from the early 1960s the Congress government started a system of public

procurement and distribution of foodgrains from 1965 aka Public Distribution System (PDS), and

at the same time it pushed the HYV fertilizer technology in irrigated areas. The main agency

providing foodgrains to the PDS is the Food Corporation of India (FCI) set up in 1965. The

essential commodities supplied through the PDS are rice, wheat, sugar, edible oils, kerosene and

coal (soft coke). A small quantity of coarse cereals and cloth is also distributed in some states.

The objectives of PDS have changed from time to time. During the period 1945-1970s the main

objective of PDS was to protect the urban consumer, ensure food availability through rationing in

major urban centres, and thereby, to prevent speculation and undue rise in prices. From the 1970s

onwards, the objectives have become rather ambiguous. One of the suggestions, which have

come, owing to the inefficiency of the PDS, is to go for food stamps programme. The suggestion is

to dismantle the PDS and FCI and move to a system of well-targeted food stamps whereby the

beneficiaries pay a part of their purchases from the market in terms of these stamps. Thus the

food stamps are redeemable for the purchases of foodgrains and other essential commodities at 5

unsubsidized prices. Such a strategy has the advantages of higher food consumption effects and

lower administrative and budgetary cost of operations. Since 1991, food subsidies in India have

come under attack from the policy-makers. Arguments have been given to reduce food subsidies

to control inflation. In the context of structural adjustment, suggestions have been made for

altering the public food delivery. Most of the suggestions relate to methods of including or methods

of excluding certain number of persons from the system of public distribution (Swaminathan,

1996). The Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) induced the government to restructure the

PDS by targeting specific areas with special reference to ‘the population living in the most difficult

areas of the country, such as, drought prone areas, desert areas, tribal areas, certain designated

hilly areas and urban slum areas’ The major objectives of the Revamped Public Distribution

System (RPDS), introduced by the government in 1992, were: (i) to increase coverage of the

population in the target areas; (ii) to improve the access of income poor consumers to the PDS;

(iii) to increase the range of commodities supplied by FPSs, and (iv) to provide selected

commodities at prices lower than in the general PDS. Adopting an approach, what could be

termed as, help for all the people living in poor areas, the government shortlisted 1752 blocks

under the RPDS to improve the food availability situation in these backward areas. The offtake of

both rice and wheat has increased steadily from 1992-93 to 1996-97 under the RPDS. The offtake

of cereals under RPDS aggregated to 3.5 million tonnes during 1993, 3.6 million tonnes during

1994 and 4.1 million tonnes in 1995, but it was considerably lower than the assessed requirement

of about 8 million tonnes for these areas. The TPDS was introduced in June 1997 in an attempt to

limit the mounting cost of subsidy, and at the same time, ensuring that the BPL population does

get subsidized food grains. Under this system subsidized foodgrains are provided only to people to

below the poverty line. There are arguments in favour of universalism and against targeting. First,

there is the argument for universal entitlements on the basis that all individuals have certain basic

rights. In a poor country, majority of people lack these basic rights. Secondly, targeting in itself

involves private and social costs and these costs may be high. The most obvious costs are the

costs of administration, and cost due to loss of quality. Social costs arise when targeting excludes

the needy (what is commonly referred to as a Type-II error and termed ‘informational distortions’

by Sen). Targeting may also lead to ‘incentive distortions’ whereby people alter their behaviour in

response to targeting, leading to losses in social output. Social costs can also be attached to the

invasiveness of targeting (as the identification procedure can involve probing and policing people’s

lives). In short, the costs of targeting can be sizeable and may outweigh the fiscal gains to be

obtained from targeting.

Anthropometric indices (height, weight and BMI) are widely used for the assessment of the

adequacy of energy intake. Body weights and heights of children reflect their nutritional and 6

growth status; weights and heights of adults represent the cumulative effect of dietary intake over

a long period. The BMI is the most widely used anthropometric index for the assessment of the

nutritional status in adults as it reflects the effect of both acute and chronic energy

deficiencies/excess. BMI, however, does not clearly bring out the entire extent of chronic under-

nutrition. For instance those who are stunted and have low body weight may have a normal BMI.

An increase in energy intake will result in improvement in BMI both in adults and in children, but in

adults and children with severe stunting, improvement in dietary intake will not result in an

improvement in height. Continued over-consumption of energy especially in stunted individuals

could lead to over-nutrition, obesity and increased risk of non-communicable diseases. BMI has

been used to assess energy deficiency as well as energy excess. The currently used norms

(<18.5—undernutrition>25 overweight) were evolved on the basis of data from the developed

countries where adverse health consequences of under-nutrition have been shown to be

associated with BMI values below 18.5 and the health hazards of over-nutrition have been

reported with BMI of over 25. Household food security and nutritional status are not the same

things. This is because nutritional status depends not only on household level food security but

also on gender norms and access to health care etc. Micronutrient deficiency—especially

deficiencies in iron, iodine and vitamin-A—are even more widespread worldwide than that of

protein-energy malnutrition. Besides being important causes of disability in themselves,

micronutrient deficiencies often underlie other types of morbidity. Iron deficiency is the most

common cause of anaemia worldwide. The consequences of iron deficiency are more serious for

women. Iodine deficiency disorder (IDDs) occur when iodine intakes are less than physiological

requirements (about 150 micrograms daily per person) over a long period. In India about 200

million people are estimated to be at risk of IDD. Vitamin-A deficiency (VAD) occurs when body

stores are depleted to the extent that physiological functions are impaired. Depletion occurs when

the diet contains over a long time too little vitamin-A. to replace the amount used by tissues or for

breast-feeding. The South-East Asia Region of WHO (including India) has the highest prevalence

of Vitamin-A deficiency, as well as the largest number of people affected.

II. Objectives of Food Security

On July 27, 2010, Mr. Sharad Pawar, the Minister of Food & Agriculture reported in the Lok

Sabha that 11,278 tons of food grains (wheat and rice stock) worth Rs. 6.86 crores (Rs. 69 million)

were found damaged in government go-downs (F.C.I depots) as on July 2010. The F.C.I had 57.8

million tons worth of food grains on July 1, 2010, against the buffer norm of 31.9 million tons.

7

Amongst all the states, the biggest culprit in such food damage was Punjab (7066 tons) followed

by West Bengal (1846 tons) & Gujarat (1457 tons).

With the emergence of Amartya Sen’s vision of development illustrated by the concept of

ENTITLEMENT (that generates the capability of an individual to command certain goods &

services) in the 1980s attention related to Food Security then shifted from ‘FAD Hypothesis’

towards Entitlement approach. Taking a cue from Sen’s notion of Entitlement, the World Bank in

1986 defined Food Security from the viewpoint of ‘accessibility’ to food and asserted that Food

Security is “Access by all people at all times to enough food for an active and healthy life.”

The horrifying 1943 Bengal Famine was not due to lack of food but due to lack of entitlement, as

defended strongly by Nobel Laureate, Amartya Sen.

Within the ambit of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court of India has laid down

the right of food as a fundamental right. Thus, the right to food and safe drinking water is a basic

human right in India.

“Food should be provided to all as a matter of right without including any humiliation on the poor.” – (Parikh, 1998) The objectives of food security, thus, are:

Objective of ensuring production of adequate food grains.

Objective of maximising stability in flow of food grain supply.

Objective of securing access to available supplies on the part of needy people.

The dimensions of Food Security are:

At the national level, Food security ensures availability of food grains in adequate quantity.

At household level, Food Security ensures availability of food grains needed for healthy and

active life.

At the intra-household, Food Security ensures availability of adequate food grains to every

member of the family for maintaining a healthy life.

Availability and absorption of food are two different concepts. Both are necessary

simultaneously to attain Food Security.

India has three stages of Food management:

Stage of procurement of food grains from farmers at remunerative prices.

Stage of distribution of food grains to the consumers, especially to the poor.

Stage of maintaining a buffer stock of food grains.

8

III. Food Security: Methodology

The 1996 World Food Summit (WFS) called to reduce by half the number of undernourished

people by the year 2015. At the same time, the Millennium Declaration (MD) in 2000 integrated

hunger and poverty reduction by setting the MDG target of “halving, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger” (target 1.C).

Monitoring ProgressFor the purpose of monitoring progress towards the WFS and MDG, FAO has been estimating and

regularly updating the number and proportion of population below the minimum level of dietary

energy consumption (MDG indicator 1.9). Such estimates, produced at global, regional and

country level, are presented annually in the FAO State of Food Insecurity in the World (SOFI)

report, which was first issued in 1999.

Methodological frameworkFAO methodological framework for estimating the prevalence of undernourishment consists of a

frequency distribution of individual food consumption (expressed as dietary energy) and a cut-off

point for intake inadequacy defined on the basis of minimum requirement norms. The population

with food consumption below the minimum energy requirement is considered underfed or food

deprived.

As the empirical distribution of individual food consumption derived from existing surveys is not, in

general, representative of the distribution of annual average per capita food consumption in the

population, FAO continues relying on a theoretical model to represent the latter.

The distribution of food dietary energy consumption in the population is assumed to be log-normal

and is fully characterized by two parameters, related to the average quantity of food available for

human consumption, and to a measure of variability (Coefficient of Variation) in food consumption

within the population.

The average food available for human consumption (Dietary Energy Supply, DES) is derived from

the Food Balance Sheets, which are regularly prepared and updated by FAO and available for

nearly all the countries.  

IV. Food Security: A Discussion

9

To maintain the need of food for the growing population and to meet the minimum food

requirement, various steps have been taken in these directions.

Biotechnology is used to modify different crops genetically to increase the yield per hectare.

Genetically modified crops require less water compared to other crops.

Biotechnology made the crops more resistant to insects’ pests and diseases.

Biotechnology benefits both rich and poor farmers and make the environment safe and free

from pollution.

Problems:

In spite of surplus food-grains stock, it is also a reality that a vast number of people do not

have enough money to feed themselves twice a day. Even in 1999-), 20% of the people of

India were below the poverty line.

Though the percentage of people below poverty line declined substantially from 36% in

1993-94 to 20% in 1999-2000, yet in absolute number it was 210 million which by no

means is a small number.

There has been a gradual shift from cultivation of food crops to cultivation of fruits,

vegetables, oil seeds, and crops which act also as industrial raw materials. This had led to

the reduction in net sown area under cereals, millets and pulses.

The use of more and more land for construction of factories, ware-houses and shelters has

reduced the land under cultivation and now fertile land for farming, is no longer available.

The productivity of land has started showing a declining trend. Fertilizers, pesticides and

insecticides, which once showed dramatic results, are now being held responsible for

reducing fertility of the soil.

Food crisis is not a new phenomenon at all. The classical economists explained food crisis

in terms of the Malthusian Theory of population. Now the Malthusian theory has been

discarded but the shadow of Malthus has still been haunting us. Even after considerable

economic development taking place in many countries of the world and even after the

development of newer technologies in agriculture, the world is still reeling under severe

food crisis. The prices of food items have been increasing not only in India but also in the

developed countries like the U.S.A & the U.K. two main factors responsible for this are: (1)

shortage in supply and (2) An increase in the price of crude oil in the international market.

Whereas, the factors responsible for price-hike of food in India are (1) per capita

production of food grains in India has increased at the rate of 0.7 percent per annum over

10

the period 1990-2007 & (2) Though the government has earlier built up a buffer stock in

food grains to meet any temporary deficit in production, a major position of it stored in

warehouses had been damaged while the rest has been sold off to foreign countries.

According to Food and Agricultural Organization (F.A.O) of the U.N.O, “Food security exists when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet the dietary needs and food preference for an active and healthy life.”

V. Role of Government & Government Intervention:

“Good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in

eradicating poverty and promoting development” (Kofi Annan) So, how could the “good food security governance” be understood?

The following working definition is hereby proposed:

Food security governance relates to formal and informal rules and processes through which

interests are articulated, and decisions relevant to food security in a country are made,

implemented and enforced on behalf of members of a society.

The issue of food security is widely discussed now. It has become a major concern of every

government. India is an agro-based country and agriculture is the mainstay of the population of

our country. Since ancient times, agriculture is concerned to be the backbone of our economy.

Rev. Thomas Robert Malthus, way back in 1798 studied the relation between world population

and food. According to Malthus, human population if not checked/controlled, grows in

Geometric Progression (G.P) while food supply grows only in Arithmetic Progression (A.P).

Thus, according to the Malthusian thinking, time will come sooner or later when population will

outgrow food supply. It is actually happening now.

Government intervention in food grain marketing in India began in a big way in the mid-

1960s. It was meant to create a favourable incentive environment for the adoption of new

technology based on high yielding varieties of wheat and rice which were seen to possess vast

potential for raising grain production. India was then facing a severe food shortage. This made

necessary to create a stable environment for farmers adopting new seeds. At the same time it

was to be ensured that increase in production benefitted consumers. Several measures were

11

initiated to achieve the twin objectives of raising food production and improving food

availability.

These included:

Price assurance to producers using the system of minimum support prices (MSP)

implemented through obligatory procurement.

Inter and intra price stability through open-market operations.

Maintaining buffer stocks, and

Distribution of food grains at reasonable prices through the Public Distribution System.

These policies have been helpful in several ways. From a situation of massive shortages,

India has emerged as a grain surplus country and food security has been attained at the

national level. A strong base has been created for grain production and meeting grain

demand in the medium term. Prices of basic food items have remained relatively stable.

The policy has had a positive impact on farm income and led to an economic transformation

in the well-endowed, mainly irrigated regions. However, policy measures adopted since the

beginning of economic reforms in 1991 have created a situation that is unstable for fiscal

resources and is having an adverse impact on the demand for cereals which are the basic

staple for India’s vast populace. Large quantities of food grains have been accumulated in

public stocks, amounting to more than one-fourth of the annual production of rice and wheat

in the country, even as every fifth Indian is reported to be underfed according to the

minimum calorific requirement (2400 in rural & 2100 in urban) for a healthy and active life

(World Bank, 2002).

Another ominous consequence of government intervention in the food market is the rising

burden of food subsidy which is becoming fiscally unsustainable. There are also concerns

related to regional equity, efficiency, quality and imbalances in production. This examines

the reasons for the mounting grain stocks in the country and analyses its implication for

food security, consumers and private trade.

Thus, government intervention in food-grain markets meant primarily for promoting food

security has reached a stage where consumers are being deprived of basic food when a

large proportion of the output is diverted from the market to government warehouses. High

prices for grains paid to producers, completely ignoring demand side factors and costs

involved in building and holding grain stocks have put them outside the reach of

consumers. Stocks are being liquidated by releasing them trade for export at a heavy

12

discount. This implies a sort of taxation for domestic consumers and provides a perverse

incentive for private trade to withdraw from the primary market.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, we can say that food is the first and foremost basic necessity. Absence of

food security leads to social and political instability which is not conducive to economic

crisis and for ensuring sustainable food security.

Four dangerous things are taking place in India:

Agricultural production is declining.

Small and marginal farmers who have borrowed money from money lenders are

committing suicides in large numbers all over the country.

Prime agricultural land is being diverted all over India in the name of ‘development’

by the government and passed onto powerful builders.

Rural poverty is growing, creating a sense of despair and anger among the rural.

India is now in a dangerous position. On the one hand, India is shining -- malfunctioning

and service sectors are growing & financial markets are booming. On the other hand, there

is growing darkness and deepening gloom in the agricultural sector. The second Green

Revolution should come and come fast. The growing disparity in incomes and wealth

between the urban and rural areas should be rapidly reduced. Otherwise the growing rural

poverty, misery and the consequences anger will surely destroy and the shining urban

India.

It should be remembered that in the 1990s, Soviet Union disintegrated, not because of the

American CIA, but because of the continuous failure of Russian agriculture. The Indian

planners should remember that one-third of India is already with the Maoists. This area is

expanding day-by-day & not shrinking. This may spell the greatest danger to India’s

development and political stability.

So in this context, we can ask that:

IS THE INDIAN ECONOMY ‘ACTUALLY’ PROSPERING?

CAN WE LIVE UP TO THE PROMISE --- THE RIGHT TO FOOD FOR ALL --- TO A WORLD FREE FROM HUNGER?

13

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Anandabazar Patrika, August 24, 20102. Chatterjee, B. & Karmakar, A.K. – Food Security in India3. Economic and Political Weekly, July 18, 20094. Frontline, Volume 27, Issue 17, August 24, 20105. Ganashakti, September 15, 20106. Kurukshetra, May 2009, September 2009, March 2010 & July 20107. www.agri.iitkgp.ernet.in 8. www.indiaenvironmentalportal.org.in 9. www.hindubusinessline.com 10.www.azadindia.org

14

15

16