BOX 17 India’s Economy Roars Ahead but Nutritional Improvement I
ndia allocated additional resources in 2011 to ongoing programs aimed at
reducing poverty and ending hunger and malnutrition. The country has high eco- nomic growth, bumper foodgrain produc- tion, and substantial food buffer stocks, which would usually indicate improve- ment in poverty and malnutrition num- bers. However, poverty in India remains pervasive, malnutrition is widespread, and the country’s nutritional status lags far behind Brazil or China. To address this, the Government of India initiated, and is now supplementing, an array of programs and policy measures for the welfare of the poor, especially women and children.1 Currently, more than 40 percent of
India’s population earns less than US$1.25 a day. Estimates show that one-third of all Indian women are underweight; almost half of Indian children are stunted and 40 percent are underweight; and rates of micronutrient deficiencies are also extremely high. The key reasons for India’s nutrition numbers lagging so far behind its economic numbers are (1) low agricultural productivity; (2) low incomes for a majority of the rural population; and (3) poor people’s limited access to educa- tion and food, health, and nutrition pro- grams.2 To boost incomes, among other concerns, the government’s budget outlay for the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme increased
from US$2.60 billion in 2006–07 to US$8.91 billion in 2010–11. This flag- ship program aims to enhance livelihood security of households in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a year and mandates 33 percent participation by women. The Scheme has generated employ-
ment opportunities in rural areas and has had a positive impact on consumption expenditure, intake of energy and pro- tein, and asset accumulation by the rural poor. The government intends to expand the scope of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme by providing employment that creates permanent assets for the country (such as water conservation structures) and builds infrastructure (such as rural roads). To improve access to food, the public distribution system provides highly subsidized food to the population below the poverty line. The public distribu- tion system is expected to be reoriented and implemented through the proposed Food Security Act. Implementation of the Act was expected in 2011 but is cur- rently awaiting parliament approval. Many observers see mixed results from these programs, driven mainly by the variable quality of program governance and lack of appropriate coordination by different departments. The challenge is to make these programs efficient and
Is Stalled P. K. Joshi and Suneetha Kadiyala, IFPRI; S. Mahendra Dev, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research
more accessible to the poor, or effective at scale. India has a long way to go to ensure
nutritional security. Some estimates suggest that with the current pace of actions, the target of achieving the first Millennium Development Goal to halve the number of undernourished people by 2015 will be achieved by India only in 2042—a 28-year lag.3 This is unacceptable given the country’s outstanding economic performance. Programs and resources require con- vergence, transparent institutions, and inclusive governance for greater impact. Continued poverty and undernourishment would undermine India's progress as a high-performing emerging economy. The pathways between agriculture
and nutrition are now well recognized (see Chapter 6), which is why existing programs need to dovetail with agricul- tural improvements. A disconnect exists between agricultural production and nutritional security when, as in India, the majority of farmers holding less than two hectares are net buyers of food. Production of high-value and nutritive commodities—such as milk, poultry, meat, and fish—by smallholders would augment their income and make them food and nutrition secure.
recent report states that “maternal and child undernutrition levels remain persistently and unacceptably high.”15 Te 2011 edition of the Human Development Report points out that body mass index, which is a good measure of an
individual’s nutritional status, has remained low for the past twenty-five years.16 But, how can this be so, when innovative programs designed to deliver nutrition, education, and healthcare in integrated ways (including the Integrated Child
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENTS 85
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126