Food security of a nation is a subject that defies any logical solution because of the complex inter-acting factors that influence the outcome of any efforts towards achieving the goal. Basically any food security plan will have to take into consideration three issues which include quantitative, qualitative and accessibility aspects. While quantitatively on a global basis there could be adequate production of staple cereals to meet the needs of every human being, there may be qualitative inequity due to unbalanced diets depending predominantly on cereals. According to nutritional pundits there must be some minimum contents of calories, proteins, fat, minerals and vitamins, besides the mandatory level of dietary fiber and obviously over dependence on cereals can pose severe nutritional challenges to those who cannot afford expenditure on protective foods like pulses, milk, fruits and vegetables. Accessibility is an economics related issue and even if sufficient food is available there is a substantial segment of the population incapable of buying their minimum needs due to low purchasing power. Unless these three facets are integrated into a national policy there can never be real food security.
"Policies that focus on the availability of food, rather than on securing access to food can, and frequently do, create risks for access to food. Consider, for example, using import tariffs to protect domestic food production. This will certainly narrow the gap between production and demand—by increasing domestic production and reducing consumption. But this policy choice can easily put the access of the poor to food at risk. The poorest people spend three quarters of their income on staple food. While such policies are frequently justified as safeguarding the welfare of poor farmers, they may do exactly the opposite—survey data show that the poorest farmers typically produce less food than they consume, and depend on the market for the rest. Similarly, policies that restrict or tax the ability of small farmers to produce cash crops, or force them to grow food when cash crops would provide them a higher income, may actually reduce their food security by lowering their real incomes. By contrast, policies and projects that increase the incomes of poor people—75 percent of whom live in rural areas, and the majority of whom depend substantially on agriculture for their livelihoods—can do a great deal to improve food security".
Take the case of India where more than 60 million tons of food grains are under the custody of the government after procuring them at enormous cost and further investing on handling, transportation and storage but GOI is unable to deliver to the poor and needy people inviting the wrath of the Supreme Court. The much vaunted PDS has holes large enough to siphon off substantial portion of the grains by private vested interests, denying those in genuine need of the food at affordable cost for mere survival. It is time GOI comes up with an integrated national policy that is inclusive in nature, weaving into it all elements of a just and equitable food security guarantee to its citizens. In stead of talking about making India prosperous, the most important objective should be to aim at a healthy India. Capitalistic policies can make a few people prosperous but it has to be combined with socialistic ideals of providing minimum needs of every citizen.
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment