Food subsidies in India-New suggestions to make them more rationale

The so called Food Security Act is an anachronism as it was based on a populist policy with the sole aim of collecting votes during election time from an electorate thought to be obliged to the political party that piloted the bill. The then government forgot that it was pledging future earnings of the country in perpetuating this dole out year after year working out to more than 1 lakh crore rupees an year! Revisiting this Act by the new government raised some hope that the senseless commitment of future generations to sustain the program might turn out to be a millstone around the neck of the nation. The Shantakumat committee set up to review the Act has submitted its recommendations recently wasting minimum time as is usually the case with government set up commissions. A perusal of the report gives hope that there would be drastic revision of the Act soon if government is serious about its intentions. A gist of the report is reproduced below which gives an insight into the thoughts of the experts who did a commendable job in record time. 

The government should reduce coverage under the National Food Security Act (NFSA) to 40% of the population from 67% and defer implementation of the scheme in states which have not complied with the rollout conditions, a panel appointed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has recommended. The panel headed by former food minister Shanta Kumar submitted the report to the PM on Wednesday. Reforming the subsidy regime is a key plan of Modi's economic reforms. It has recommended far reaching changes in the functioning of the state-run Food Corporation of India (FCI) and the minimum support price (MSP) regime. It has suggested that the food grain under NFSA for those under the below poverty line should be raised to 7kg per person from the current norm of 5 kg. It has also called for moving to a direct cast transfer regime for food subsidy and estimates that the savings on food subsidy could be as much as Rs 30,000 crore per year. "Move to cash transfer and start with 53 million-plus cities. The states which are deficit in grains should be given the option of either grain or cash," said a source. The panel has also suggested that fertilizer subsidy should be paid to farmers directly on per hectare basis which comes to around Rs 7,000 per hectare. "This will result in saving nearly Rs 10,000 to Rs 15,000 crore annually in fertilizer subsidy," the source said. There should be a liquidation policy which will kick in immediately when the stocks go beyond the buffer stock limit. At present, FCI sells in open market or exports after approval cabinet which some experts say raises its carrying cost. "FCI should get a free hand," the source said. The panel has recommended that the name of FCI be changed. "The new of FCI will be akin to an Agency for Innovations in Food Management System with a primary focus to create competition in every segment of food grain supply chain, some procurement to stocking to movement and finally distribution in public distribution system so that the overall costs of the system are substantially reduced, leakages plugged and it serves large no of consumers and farmers," the source said. The panel has said that FCI should move its procurement move to eastern states. "If any state is giving bonus, the payment for the extra procurement should be borne by that state and not FCI," the source said. It has also suggested that there should be an upper limit on taxes imposed by states for procurement. For example, Punjab has 14.5% tax while Gujarat has less than 2%. "The upper limit should be 4%," the source said. The FCI should revamp its grain handling and stocking operations, the committee has recommended. It should move to bulk handling and mechanize the operations to reduce its dependence on so called "labour gangs." Temporary storage should be done away with gradually with no grain stock remaining for more than three months. The agency should run "grain trains" for moving food grains. The stocking operations should be handed over to the Central Warehousing Corporation, state warehousing corporations. The private sector should also be encouraged to build silos. All existing silos of FCI should be revamped, the panel has recommended. The country needs 10 million tones capacity of storage."Government needs to revisit its MSP policy. Currently, MSPs are announced for 23 commodities, but effectively price support operates primarily in what and rice and that too in selected states," the source said.

Suggestions like reducing the coverage to include only deserving population, reforming Food Corporation of India, reducing taxes on grains, moving to cash transfer mode for delivery, increasing the quantum receivable by a person by 40%, revising the norms for distribution of fertilizer subsidy to farmers, changing the minimum support price system etc will have far reaching benefits if implemented sincerely. There is one area where the Panel did not seem to have bestowed its attention and that pertains to integrating food security with nutrition security. Instead of a cereal only policy under NFSA, probably pulses at least could have been included in the benefit basket. The Andhra Pradesh model implemented recently under a new scheme provides 9 commodities including pulses, oil, salt etc though the coverage is comparatively small targeting certain poor segments of the population. Probably as a socially responsible country India must aim to improve the nutritional status of the poor people through supply of such a balanced food basket. 

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

Universities getting into "hunger amelioration" programs? What can they do?

Universities are always considered as centers of higher learning where students can achieve academic excellence through hard work in a congenial environment. Some of them are specialized in application oriented research, results of which are used by the industry and the society for the betterment of humanity. Such research efforts are bought by the user industries by investing in the required infrastructure for mass production. But it is difficult to imagine these universities ever bothering about food scarcity and hunger prevalent mostly among poor people in many countries and this attitude often invites criticisms from some quarters regarding their elitist nature. Such a notion is sought to be removed by the latest move by a few universities in the US banding together under an initiative from the US government to work for food security around the globe. This new initiative is expected to help coordinate existing endeavors in some universities which are working on energy, health and other pressing problems to day's world is facing. Here is a take on this new development which if it is seriously pursued can make this world a better place to live.

"Penn State is one of  one of nearly 50 universities worldwide that have banded together to address the global issue of hunger  Leaders from these universities will sign The Presidents' Commitment to Food and Nutrition Security – a declaration acknowledging their commitment to make food insecurity a priority. There is a ceremonial signing set for Dec. 9 at the United Nations in New York. PUSH – Presidents United to Solve Hunger – was created by Auburn University in Alabama in February as the result of a first-time gathering among leaders of more than 30 universities in the U.S. (including Penn State), Canada and Central America. PUSH and the Presidents' Commitment to Food and Nutrition Security are both direct results of the February meeting. "As a land-grant institution with a major economic impact and research enterprise, Penn State is already playing a tremendous role in addressing extraordinary global challenges related to energy, disease, health care and clean water to name just a few," said Penn State President Eric J. Barron, acknowledging Penn State's College of Agricultural Sciences as the lead on this effort for the University. "I'm proud to say that the issue of world hunger also is being addressed in various ways at our University through research and student activism. Our hope is to elevate these activities in concert with other institutions. Together, we have a wealth of expertise and leadership that can lead to meaningful change." The public signing ceremony and other related events mark the first time universities around the world will share a collective focus on ending food insecurity. Tom Gill, assistant director of international programs in Penn State's College of Agricultural Sciences, noted, "Our faculty and students are committed to working across colleges at Penn State and with a range of diverse partners around the world to develop scalable solutions that can combat global hunger." PUSH member institutions include land-grants, liberal arts, faith-based, historically black and Hispanic-serving colleges and universities from five continents.'

One may ask what any university can do to enhance food security situation which is invariably related to the low purchasing power among people due to which they are not able to access food already available in the market. Universities do know this harsh reality but they can always contribute to knowledge regarding the nutrition and health aspects of food and also train people in income generating activities. Besides they can also train health workers and extension activists to provide succor to people. A note of caution is called for in this noble idea as these universities must understand their limitations in establishing outreach to their intended target beneficiaries.  Probably they can best fit into a global program of training the trainers who can disseminate their knowledge and skill by working among the intended beneficiaries. India should also consider joining such a movement which will expose the young university scholars to the reality of food insecurity that exists widely in many parts of the world including India. 

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

Beyond Green Revolution-New insight into greater food production

Doomsday sayers have been raising the specter of famine and starvation due to mismatch between population growth and food production since a long time. But there are eternal optimists who feel if human race has outlived such situations in the past it will also find some away to perpetuate itself with suitable ameliorating strategies. Whether one believes it or not the oft repeated claim by many pundits is that one in eight people, on an average remains hungry due to inability to get adequate food every day! This works out to more than 800 million of the global population who remain starved, one of the reasons being non-availability of food near their habitat. But this is disputed by some social activists who contend that access to food is denied to these unfortunate fellow denizens because of economic compulsions, viz inadequate buying power. What ever it be, fact still remains that there does exist a problem vis-a-vis food security. This is compounded by the wide prevalence of nutrition insecurity due to imbalanced food production profile that constitutes today's crop mix. It is sad that more priority is accorded to crops like sugarcane and cereals than pulses and oil seeds in may countries depriving the people of the vital nutrient dense food commodities so necessary for an active and healthy life. Added to this the critical shortage of land for expanding agriculture further, places roadblocks for increasing food production. This calls for new strategies and approaches to quantitatively and qualitatively increase food production in coming years. Success of a group of scientists in Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York State in the US on plant flowering and the possibility of gene manipulation to increase yield of crops like Tomato through Florigen-Antiflorigen system gives hope for achieving quantum jump in food production much faster than that which can be obtained through conventional plant breeding. Here is a take on this exciting development.

"Crop yields of tomato plants could be boosted by 100 percent and plant breeders will be able to combine different gene variants among the set to create an optimal plant architecture for particular varieties and growing conditions. The set of mutations will enable farmers to maximize yield in tomatoes and potentially many other flowering plants, including staple crops like soybeans. Natural variation in plant genes stopped being the best way to increase yield a while ago and yield gains are plateauing. That means a modern scientific approach is needed. Worldwide, more than 842 million people do not receive adequate nourishment, about 1 person in 8 alive today. The cost of food is expected to increase and hunger is likely to become more widespread as the global population expands to beyond 9 billion by 2050 unless improvements are made in the agriculture of developing nations. Ancient humans recognized that selecting plants with modified architectures could have a major impact on the amount of fruit they produce. In general scientific terms, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Associate Professor Zachary Lippman explains, "Plant architecture results from a delicate balance between vegetative growth – shoots and leaves – and flower production. To increase crop yields, we want plants to produce as many flowers and fruits as possible, but this requires energy – energy that is produced in leaves." A set of genetic variants can dramatically increase tomato production. On the far left is the average yield from a plant that grows standard canning tomatoes. The next three piles were produced by plants with mutations found in the toolkit. The combination of genetic mutations on the far right produces twice as many tomatoes as the standard variety. Credit: Zachary Lippman/ Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory In tomatoes and all other flowering plants, the balance between vegetative growth and flowers is controlled by a pair of opposing hormones, called florigen and anti-florigen. Prior work by Lippman and Israeli colleagues showed that a mutation in florigen can shift the balance between vegetative growth and flowering, modifying plant architecture in a way that increases yield. This suggested that the balance between florigen and anti-florigen might not yet be optimal in tomato plants, despite centuries of breeding with natural variants. In a study published today in Nature Genetics, Lippman and colleagues identified an array of new gene mutations that allow, for the first time, a way to fine-tune the balance of florigen to anti-florigen. This maximizes fruit production without compromising the energy from leaves needed to support those fruits. "We mixed and matched all of the mutations," explains Lippman. "And we were able to produce plants with a broad range of architectures. Together, our collection of mutations forms a powerful toolkit for breeders to pinpoint a new optimum in flowering and architecture that can achieve previously unattainable yield gains." With multiple genetic variants, breeders can combine different mutations to provide a new optimum for their particular variety (as shown above) and growing conditions. Credit: Zachary Lippman/ Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The breakthrough benefit of the toolkit, says Lippman, is that it allows farmers to customize genetic variations for particular varieties and growing conditions. "For example, we found that different combinations boost yields for cherry tomatoes and other fresh-market tomatoes compared to tomatoes that are processed for sauce, ketchup, and other canned products. We've tested this in multiple genetic backgrounds, in multiple years, and in multiple environments – and the toolkit always provides a new maximum yield." These results are likely to be broadly applicable to other flowering crops, Lippman says. Mutations that affect florigen and anti-florigen are already known to play a role in controlling plant architecture for the oil crops rapeseed and sunflower, and can be applied in those. But the team is anxious to move on to critical food crops, specifically soybeans, which share many growth similarities with tomato"

 If scientists have been able to increase tomato production by 100% through this new approach there is no reason why the same success cannot be ensured for other more critical crops like pulses and oil seeds. In India the agricultural production has no doubt increased after the success of Green Revolution heralded by late Norman Borlaug but the food production profile seems to be lopsided with heavy emphasis on crops like cereals, sugarcane and non-food crops, neglecting such vital crops like pulses and oil seeds which continue to be imported at great cost to the exchequer. Though light, temperature and environment do play a part in crop production, the new emerging technology involving florigen-antiflorigen manipulation through gene mutation to change the plant architecture favoring more flowering and fruiting, appears to be best suited to Indian conditions. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) must collaborate with the the institution that is pioneering the new technology to enable the country to achieve increased production of pulses and oilseed crops without losing much time.  

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

CEREAL-CENTRIC POLICIES IN INDIA-WARNING SIGNALS THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED!

During the last 4 years citizens in India were being led on a diet of promises most of them remaining on paper with very little impact on their day to day lives. One of the most hotly debated policies of the present government is the recently promulgated ordinance under its food security proposal to make available rice and wheat to more than two thirds of the population at Rs 1-2 per kg. Whether all the beneficiaries scheduled to be covered under the scheme really deserve this dole out is some thing the planners of this gross misuse of public funds did not bother to think! While poorest of the poor must be provided social support through such poverty alleviation programs why even well to do citizens who can afford to buy foods at the market price are being included as beneficiaries is beyond comprehension! Of course this is a controversial issue with no consensus among the experts. But common sense tells that public funds must be carefully deployed for maximum impact and in a country like India subsidies must be provided only to those below poverty line. One of the major flaws of the rice-wheat scheme is the government assumption that quantity is more important than quality when it comes to providing food security to its citizens. This distorted assumption is brought out recently by some experts who feel that the scheme needs a revisit in the light of latest statistics regarding the change in food consumption habits of the population. Here is a take on this vexatious issue.

"Even as the government is gearing up to bring in the cereal-centric National Food Security Bill (NFSB), Indian households are fast changing their consumption preferences from cereals to higher value food items. The share of monthly expenditure on cereals by families in total consumption spending has fallen drastically, prompting economists to suggest food security should have a larger basket than just cereals and should be reviewed periodically. Rural households spent 12 per cent of their total consumption outlay on food in 2011-12 against 18 per cent in 2004-05, while the share fell to 7.3 per cent from 10.1 per cent in urban parts over the period. The expenditure on pulses as a percentage share in total expenditure has remained constant in both urban and rural areas at 3.1 per cent and 2.1 per cent, respectively. Talking of milk products, it has risen to 9.1 per cent in 2011-12 from 8.5 per cent in 2004-05 in rural areas and has remained more or less the same in urban centres where it has declined marginally by 0.1 percentage points to 7.8 per cent in 2011-12. When it comes to egg, fish and meat, the percentage share has increased in both rural and urban sectors. In the rural population, it rose to 3.6 per cent in 2011-12 from 3.3 per cent in 2004-05 and in urban, the share grew marginally to 2.8 per cent from 2.7 per cent in the same period. While most economists said this is a sign of prosperity in the economy, some of them maintained that this could come as a blow to the highly-debated NFSB. "Complexion of system is changing. There is a gradual change towards higher value agriculture food items. We must recognise that and our food policy should be in tune with this emerging demand pattern,"  Ashok Gulati, chairman of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) told Business Standard".

It is a paradox that calorie rich foods are becoming cheaper day by day while protective foods like fruits, vegetables, pulses, oil seeds, milk, egg, fish and meat are tending to be dearer! Even if government makes available cereals like rice and wheat at low cost, where will the poor go to get the much needed protective foods like milk and pulses, prices of which are in the stratosphere with government not able to do any thing about it?. What will be the consequences of such a policy of supplying the cereals only at controlled prices? Will this nation become a place for people with stunted growth ravaged by diseases caused by essential nutrients deficiency? Of course government's thinking that it has primary responsibility to prevent starvation deaths through such basic food supply schemes has some validity and employment generating opportunities through schemes like MGNREGA are there to empower the people to earn the needed money for spending on quality improvement of life. Unfortunately people fed on such doles became more and more dependent on the government with very little initiative for developing self sufficiency!  

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