Water needs-Food industry Vs Agriculture, opposing pressures!

Soda which is the international name given to sweetened fizz drinks like Coke and Pepsi is gain in troubled 'waters"; literally! These beverages are focus of attention from health critics as well as conservationists who blame the bottlers for over utilization of water and environmental pollution through the sludge they let out. Farmers are agitating wherever the soda plants are located because of their fear that such massive extraction of ground water causes water shortage affecting their livelihood. Interestingly the two soda giants are also courting controversy in their own country, USA because of the widely held perception that their products sweetened with sugar cause many health disorders including obesity. Because of their vice-like grip on the political class that rule the country, they are never restrained from hawking their "potion", especially to young kids. In India the Delhi Government has laid red carpet for foreign investors in the hope that their investments will generate significant employment in the country. Unfortunately the impact of this open arm policy on the common man is never kept in mind when such FDI proposals are cleared. The Coke bottling plant to be set up in Gujarat is in the news recently because of the reckless policy of the state government in allotting huge volume of water from Narmada river which is supposed to be meant for agriculture sector. Here are the details of the drama unfolding in that state and the common man is just a mute spectator on the sidelines unable to do any thing to stop this loot of public water resources.

"Soft drinks giant Coca-Cola is finding itself in troubled waters, again. After rows over water usage at its plants in Kerala and Uttar Pradesh, it is now the turn of its Gujarat factory.Congress leader Ahmed Patel has questioned the Gujarat government's decision to allot to a Coca-Cola plant over three million litres of water a day from the Sardar Sarovar Dam, even as many villages in Sanand go without water.In a letter to Chief Minister Anandiben Patel on October 10, Patel expressed concern over her government's September decision and noted that the dam had been built to provide water to drought-prone parts of North Gujarat, Saurashtra and Kutch. Patel highlighted concerns raised by non-government organisations and citizens' groups over the alleged daily effluent discharge of 450 kilolitres by the plant, which executives of the multinational beverage company said were baseless because the unit was located in a no-effluent industrial cluster. Coca-Cola India executives did not want to get drawn into the controversy. They said the company had taken all approvals for the plant and any response to Patel's letter should come from the Gujarat chief minister, to whom it was addressed. The plant, being set up by Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages, the largest bottling partner of Coca-Cola India, will be the company's second unit in Gujarat. Coca-Cola has a plant in Goblej in Kheda district, its second-largest in the country after the Dasna unit in Uttar Pradesh. The Gujarat government has allotted 185,000 square metres to the company to make sweetened aerated drinks like Coke, Sprite, Fanta and Thums Up".

Governments never seem to learn any lesson from past experiences as evidenced by the attitude of the Gujarat Government in allocating precious natural resources especially after the humiliating retreat of this soft rink giant from Kerala a few years ago because of the same problem. Politician-industry nexus is not new in India and diversion of water from dams built for irrigation to sugar mills and breweries in Maharashtra is another example of this nebulous practice. A moot question that the country faces is whether a health debilitating beverage industry can be given priority over food production when half the population in the country does not have adequate food to satisfy their hunger? No body is denying the fact that food industry is invariably water guzzlers because huge quantity of water is absolutely necessary to maintain safety and quality of the end products. But locating them in proximity to irrigated agricultural lands cannot be condoned. It is not understandable why these synthetic beverage manufacturers are forced to make nutritionally better products rather than easily salable junk foods like potato chips and sugar sweetened drinks. If this trend continues India may be following the foot steps of America where one in three citizens are obese with bloated bodies spending billions of dollars for treating their diseases!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE DROUGHT-WHO IS RESPONSIBLE, MAN OR GOD?

The water scarcity in Maharashtra seems to be getting worse with each passing day and the government there seems to have no clue as to what must be one to save some of the drought prone districts from ruination. India is not new to droughts and practically every state experiences water shortage periodically, especially when monsoon rains fail or the precipitation is lass than normal but the conditions are never allowed to get out of control with timely ameliorative action. However the present condition in the state of Maharashtra where more than one third of the people are affected by the drought is grave enough to focus the attention of the nation for bringing the much needed relief to the severely stressed people there. According to analysts the drought here is a man made one deliberately brought about by the greediness of sugar industry, wineries, distilleries and banana growing cooperatives blessed by powerful politicians who are at the helm of affairs there. How can the country forgive these powerful vested interests for depriving the agricultural community of the water stored in over 50 dams by diverting the same to the water guzzling industries and government in the state has no moral right to continue in power for allowing this day light robbery! Here is an account of what has caused drought in the state through the eyes of dispassionate observers, development specialists  and economic experts.            

The drought in a large part of Maharashtra, said to be the worst since 1972, may have been triggered by poor rainfall in the last monsoon season - but it has been compounded by mismanagement of the available water. Nearly one-third of the state's population living in the 15 drought-hit districts in and around the Marathwada region is facing a severe scarcity of drinking water, apart from water for salvaging its wilting crops. The paucity of fodder for livestock, the mainstay of livelihood for the small and marginal farmers and landless households, too, is acute. This, paradoxically, is the state of affairs in a state that has the country's largest network of dams. What this has meant is that financially and politically influential farmers and industrialists are managing to corner enough water to irrigate crops and run industrial units, while the poor are deprived of even drinking water. This is evident in various areas where water-guzzling sugarcane and banana farms are in fairly good shape, while the neighbouring fields of less water-requiring sorghum - which belong to resource-poor farmers - wither away. Remember, the Marathwada region, which lies in the rain-shadow zone, is drought-prone. It is, therefore, unfit for the cultivation of water-intensive crops such as sugarcane. It is also worth recalling that the state government had decided in February, when the signs of a water crisis became imminent, to give priority to meeting drinking-water needs before letting water to be used for other purposes. This well-intended resolve has, however, remained largely on paper. Since the bulk of the state's sugar industry is in the co-operative sector and is controlled by politicians, cane crushing, which requires substantial amounts of water, is still going on in water-stressed areas.

Every patriotic Indian has to hang his head in shame when such inequities and crimes are committed openly with no remorse by a group of people elected by them to protect their interests. This is also a reflection of the failure of the Central government to implement existing laws that are supposed to protect the farmers from such gross exploitation. Can any one justify encouragement of water intensive crops like Sugarcane and Banana in areas where there is  perpetual shortage of water? How could the state allow water guzzling industries like wineries, sugar mills and distilleries to be set up in the region without giving adequate consideration for ensuring water supply to the agricultural fields for which the largest net work of dams has been built? Is sugar more important than food grains when the whole world is shunning sugar because of its well established role in health disorders like diabetes, CVD and others? Are alcoholic products like wine, beer and spirits more important than staples like pulses? If God is invoked and blamed for the present drought, the same God will not spare the perpetrators of this crime on humanity by a few political overlords of this country!    

   .

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

A FLAWED AGRICULTURAL POLICY-DROUGHT AND CONSEQUENCES

Diversion of valuable food materials that can quench the hunger of millions of people for non-food purpose is nothing but a crime against humanity and this is what is going on in a supposed to be "civilized" country like the US. It is understandable that renewable energy is a priority for the whole world because fossil fuels cannot last for ever and world cannot sustain itself without energy with every human endeavor anchored to energy use. While energy from solar, wind, geothermal, wave and other sources is being tapped with increasing efficiency, there is one area where man is doing harm to himself by using food materials like corn soybean, sugarcane and Palm oil for converting into automobile fuels to extend the supply of fossil fuels. It is understandable if there is a vast surplus production of food that needs to be utilized without wasting them but the present situation indicates that world is short of foods unable to feed millions of people in Africa, Asia and South America. As the North American drought is spreading across the continent mercilessly, the corn and soybean production is plummeting causing world wide concerns regarding its impact on food prices. It is here that the US, a major producer of corn in the world  has to show its statesmanship and magnanimity by temporarily suspending its "corn for ethanol" policy at least for two years. Here is a commentary on this issue with which many dispassionate observers agree.  

"More than one-third of our corn crop is used to feed livestock. Another 13 percent is exported, much of it to feed livestock as well. Another 40 percent is used to produce ethanol. The remainder goes toward food and beverage production. Previous droughts in the Midwest (most recently in 1988) also resulted in higher food prices, but misguided energy policies are magnifying the effects of the current one. Federal renewable-fuel standards require the blending of 13.2 billion gallons of corn ethanol with gasoline this year. This will require 4.7 billion bushels of corn, 40 percent of this year's crop. Other countries seem to have a better grasp of market forces and common sense. Brazil, another large ethanol producer, uses sugar instead of corn to make ethanol. It has flexible policies that allow the market to determine whether sugar should be sold on the sugar market or be converted to fuel. Our government could learn from the Brazilian approach and direct the E.P.A. to waive a portion of the renewable-fuel standards, thereby directing corn back to the marketplace. Under the law, the E.P.A. would first have to determine that the program was causing economic harm. That's a no-brainer, given the effects of sharply higher grain prices that are already rippling through the economy. The price of corn is a critical variable in the world food equation, and food markets are on edge because American corn supplies are plummeting. The combination of the drought and American ethanol policy will lead in many parts of the world to widespread inflation, more hunger, less food security, slower economic growth and political instability, especially in poor countries".

Of course America is a sovereign country with full power to dictate its own policy, deemed to be appropriate to its population but under today's globalized environment can one country decide unilaterally what it will do without bothering to think about the consequences of its action?. If past history is taken into consideration, the US is the biggest food donor in the world and one can assume that same humane consideration will prevail over its response to the new situation emerging in the food front. As a super power with vast technological superiority, this country can always think of other feasible alternatives for fuel production and the non-food biomass conversion to ethanol or high fat algal production can be a feasible alternative if pursued vigorously on a priority basis. The US must provide leadership to the rest of the world in ensuring that every grain of food is conserved and no human being goes to bed with a hungry stomach!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD AID-IN KIND OR CASH?

Hunger is a phenomenon common to every living creature in this planet and as far as man is concerned daily intake of adequate calories, proteins and essential micro nutrients is a prerequisite for sustaining the life. As against this there are millions of people who have limited access to regular foods in adequate quantity & quality and according international agencies, Africa is the epicenter of acute malnutrition and starvation due to regular cycles of drought and famine. Countries like Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia bear the brunt of this tragedy. However they do get succor and solace from "generous" countries like America in the form of "Food Aid". Though the rich countries had promised aid to the extent of $22 billion for "licking" the food crisis through a sustained development program, actual economic aid is just trickling, grossly inadequate to tackle the crisis on hand. Without accusing the donors for basing their aid on self interest, it is a fact that the "strings attached" food assistance program is not effective as it ought to have been. An exhaustive expose of the real time ground reality in Africa has been recently brought out and it offers some valuable lessons to all the donors 

A common misconception is that hunger crises are about a lack of food. Yet there is food in Kenya and Ethiopia, and even in many parts of Somalia. The real issue is poverty. The people affected are poor to begin with; when things turned bad, they had no recourse. In April the World Bank reported that 44 million people worldwide were pushed over the edge by skyrocketing food prices. Such a perspective is largely missing in our food-aid program. It's like a health insurance system that waits until someone has a full-blown illness before he or she can get treatment. By the end of June, with the crisis in full swing, the United States had committed a total of about $64 million to Kenya, much of it in the form of food supplies (this doesn't include relief for the Somali refugees). But food aid loses at least half of its value, according to the Government Accountability Office, because we ship actual food instead of sending cash for local purchase, like most countries. And only $5 million was allocated to agriculture, nutrition, water and sanitation — about $1.33 per hungry person — things that would have helped people during lean times. Blame politics. Medium- and long-term planning is often the first thing to be cut from an aid budget. After the food price crisis of 2008, when hunger riots erupted around the globe, President Obama got the Group of 8 to promise $22 billion for agricultural development and food security. But many of those commitments have not been met. Meanwhile, this summer Congressional Republicans voted to cut the foreign food aid budget by a third, and more cuts are planned. And, of course, there is the matter of optics: donors want to see dead babies before they provide significant assistance, one frustrated aid worker told me. Blame also lies with the Kenyan and Ethiopian governments. In the northern district of Wajir, for instance, by July the central government provided only about half the food assistance that local governments requested, while Ethiopia, according to the BBC, misused aid for political purposes. It is an old story: sending emergency aid is clumsy, and often fraught with problems. As I was leaving a village that depended entirely on delivered water, I passed the water truck the villagers were waiting for, broken down by the side of the road. Aid officials say they realize that prevention is better than reaction. "We know how to do this," Rajiv Shah, the head of U.S.A.I.D., told me during a trip he made in July to Kenya's Dadaab refugee camp. "It is one-tenth the cost to provide effective agricultural support and help communities gain food security than it is to provide food aid at a time of famine."

It is no doubt laudable that the US government agencies have established significant presence in some of the vulnerable countries to monitor and predict drought and famine but the outside world comes to know about the seriousness of the crisis only after the worst is over. inordinate delay in responding to the call for help by these countries extinguish many lives due to starvation and diseases. The argument, that instead of outside food being delivered to the needy, a system of cash transfer enabling the affected population to buy local foods would be more effective, deserves consideration. It must be shocking to many to realize that hunger need not be due to insufficient food availability but on account of acute poverty with most poor ones having no money to buy food from local shops. Even in a country like India cash transfer system is being considered in place of Public Distribution System that will enable beneficiaries to buy the food from the open market. Unfortunately in almost all cases of food aid, the donors try to help their own cause by sending foods from their own country through their own vessels, transporting the same thousands of miles across oceans. This mindset must change and if aid is promised it must be provided the most efficient way with maximum benefit derived from it by the targeted population.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

GETTING MORE FROM LESS WATER-THE MIDDLE EAST INITIATIVE

Water is a critical input for food production and one of the major reasons for world-wide food shortage has been the progressive decline in usable water and erratic rain pattern experienced from time to time. Over exploitation of ground water and global warming affecting precipitation in the form of rains are twin problems facing to day's world. Over 80% of cultivation of world's farmland depends on rains and the productivity from these lands tends to be highly fluctuating year to year depending on timely rainfall. Water use in cultivation needs to be optimized and according to agricultural experts "supplemental irrigation" technique in rain fed areas with just one third of water used for full irrigation can increase land productivity significantly.

Gathering in Amman, Jordan, for a global conference on food security and climate change in dry areas, experts reported that improved irrigation techniques in rainfed cropping will allow farmers to more than double their wheat yields using only one-third the water they would use with full irrigation; the new methods have been shown to boost farmers' yields up to five-fold over those crops which relied on rainfall only. Such innovative strategies could provide a much-needed lift to livelihoods in dry areas in the developing world, home to almost 25 percent of the world's population. Regions most affected by drought and water scarcity are also disproportionately challenged by high population growth, climatic unreliability, frequent droughts, and widespread poverty, the experts said, citing figures from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations.

The figures mentioned are really impressive and yield of wheat at 2.5 kg per cubic meter water under supplemental irrigation is significantly higher than 0.5 for rain-fed and 1 kg for fully irrigated lands. If resources required for establishing such water saving technologies in Asian and African countries are forthcoming from the rich nations, there is no reason as to why there should be any food shortage at all in this planet.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com