The present dispensation at the Centre rushed to put the National Food Security Ordinance (NFSO) 2013 into effect on 5 July 2013. This move was perhaps spurred by the success of the MGNREGA, which was passed in the teeth of substantial opposition, and was hailed as an example of a positive social legislation that worked. The UPA reaped good electoral dividends at the 2009 hustings and whether the NFSO will prove an even bigger game-changer in the forthcoming 2014 elections is yet to be seen.
It is worth mentioning here that the National Food Security Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011and since then an elaborate debate on its merits and implications have ensued. However, despite the considerable time spent on these discussions, the parliament failed to arrive at a consensus. Media reports make it discerbible that the new food security bill, which will heavily subsidise basic food for about two-thirds of the population, is sparking nation-wide questions over the wisdom of such an expensive ordinance.
The NFSO is claimed to be a measure designed to benefit the people in general. It hopes to do so by legally entitling roughly 67 percent of the country’s population to five kilograms of food grains per month at a highly subsidized rate. The price of rice, wheat and coarse grains has been prescribed to be three rupees, two rupees and one rupee per kilogram respectively.
The NFSO, which appears set to become law nonetheless, has been variously criticised for low food entitlements, inadequate attention to nutrition, too much discretion to state governments in identifying beneficiaries, a poor grievance redressal mechanism and providing scope for substituting the Public Distribution system (PDs) with cash transfers. No one knows what impact it will have — economic, political, and social.
Cost of Implementation
Those associated with the framing of National Food Security Bill have little idea how much implementing the Right to Food will cost. In the current financial year, Union Finance Ministry has allocated only Rs 90,000 crore towards the food subsidy, of which Rs. 10,000 crore is the additional amount for implementing the Food Security Bill. The food ministry estimates that the subsidy bill in the current year is likely to cross Rs 1.3 lakh crore.
And even this is inadequate, according to a paper by the Commission on Agricultural Costs and Prices, which puts the cost at Rs 2.41 lakh crore in the first year of implementation. Over three years, it says, the outlay will be Rs 6.82 lakh crore, including the Rs 1.1 lakh crore required for upscaling food production. Whatever the figure, the fact is that the food subsidy bill has gone up more three times in the same period, from Rs 25,181 crore to Rs 85,000 crore. This is because handling and storage costs have gone up as well.
Malnutrition
The Food Security Bill (FSB) fails to address the problem of malnutrition, especially among the children. On the one hand, India’s economy has been growing at 6-9% for over decade now; on the other hand, under nutrition among children has dropped a mere 1% in the eight-year period 1998-99 to 2006. Should we accept a token 0.1% decline in childhood hunger per year? There is a need to understand that underfed people are unable to contribute, even if provided with opportunities, because of lack of capability. Therefore, there is need to build an environment of empowerment with nutritional security.
Prevalent levels of malnutrition result in a 2-3% decline in GDP. It causes delays in education, triggers learning disabilities, affects the overall physical and cognitive development of children at an early age. Every year, India loses 1.3 million children under the age of 5 due to undernutrition and non-availability/inaccessibility to basic healthcare.
All these factors are at the root of hunger. Professor Arjun Sengupta, in his report on the unorganised sector, mentions that 77% of India’s population survives on Rs 20 a day. On the other hand, NNMB (National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau) figures show that 76.8% of the population does not receive the prescribed amounts of nutrition!
The existing Integrated Child Development Services programme aims at spending Rs 80,000 crore in the next five years; the midday meal scheme is already in place. There is a 17 crore under-6 child population, 45% of which is undernourished. But barely Rs 1.62 is spent per child per day on their growth and nutrition.
India contributes 40% to the world’s overall maternal, neo-natal, infant and child deaths. It has half the world’s undernourished children. Fifty-four per cent of women in the country suffer from anaemia. There is need to end this ‘domestic variety of colonialism’ where corporations rule over our farmers and labourers and traders indulge in the business of education and health services and keep people deprived of the very basic services in the name of growth. The resources generated through growth should go towards the wellbeing of all people. Not to subsidise corporations.
Priority to Food Production
In order to effectively implement the sound and rational provisions of the Food Security Bill, it is essential to accord priority tp food production. It has become a nation-wide phenomenon that prime farmland is going out of agriculture for non-farm purposes such as real estate and biofuels. According to renowned agricultural scientist, Dr M.S. Swaminathan, globally, the impact of biofuels on food security has become an increasing concern. A High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE) of the World Commission on Food Security (CFS), chaired by Dr Swaminathan, will be submitting a report shortly on Biofuels and Food Security. In this report, it has been pointed out that if 10 per cent of all transport fuels were to be achieved through biofuels in the world, this would absorb 26 per cent of all crop production and 85 per cent of the world’s fresh water resources. Therefore, it will be prudent for all countries to accord food security the pride of place in the national land use policy.
In order to ensure sustainable food production, the Food Security Bill should address the problems of small farmers. If a small farmer could get foodgrain for as little as Rs.1 per kg, as proposed in the FSB, why should he bother to grow his own? And what would happen in a bad crop year, or successive bad years? Therefore, these and other related issues need to be addressed in the FSB adequately.
Need for Holistic Approach
The Food Security Bill (FSB) in its present form lays abundant emphasis on food grains sans need for equal emphasis on other edibles of daily consumption, especially pulses, poultry farming, vegetables. Concurrently, important issues like regional variations in food culture, changing food habits of burgeoning middle class, impact of climate change, need for inter-sectoral convergence, transparency, debt problems of small farmers etc find no mention in the FSB.
The global warming and climate change pose a big threat to food production in India. As pointed out by Dr Swaminathan, “It is now clear that the mean temperature may rise by at least 2 degrees centigrade during the next few decades. Adverse changes in temperature, precipitation and sea level are all causes for concern. Both anticipatory research to checkmate the adverse consequences of climate change, and participatory research with farming families for developing adaptation and mitigation measures will be important.”
Ensuring adequate food security ordains inter-sectoral convergence. There is an annual tug of war between the ministries of food and agriculture. The former, as the purchaser, does not want the MSP increased. The latter, representing farmers, insists that it must be. Synergy between various ministries at the Centre and between the Centre and the states is a sine qua non for effective implementation of the provisions of the FSB for sustainable food security.
As water and energy are essential for food production, hence water-energy-food nexus approach assumes tremendous significance in ensuring food security. This approach calls for coordination, cooperation and convergence between various ministries and the FSB in its present form does not emphasize on this aspect.
One is inclined to agree with Dr Swaminathan’s argument that a shift of emphasis from providing cash instead of grain to those needing protection against hunger, as prescribed in the FSB, may lead to a loss of interest in procurement and storage by public agencies like the Food Corporation of India.
He further cautions: “Most of our farm families have small holdings and have very little holding capacity. They want to sell as soon as their crop is harvested. If procurement goes down, there will be distress sales and production will go down. We should remember that the green revolution has been sustained only by assured and remunerative marketing opportunities. The Public Distribution System will suffer if procurement by public agencies goes down. National and global price volatility will increase, adding to the misery of the poor. The government, therefore, should always remain at the commanding height of the food security system.”
Role for SMEs
SMEs, as major drivers of growth engine, are destined to play pivotal role in ensuring food security. By providing adequate storage facilities in towns adjacent to agriculture-rich areas, opening retail distribution outlets for quality seeds and fertilizers for the farmers in cooperation with local banks and cooperatives and providing transportation facilties for the movement of foodgrains and other edibles, SMEs can contribute tremendously in ensuring food security. Besides, SMEs are also potent instrument for being a catalyst for water-energy-food nexus approach.
Conclusion
India is endowed with natural resource abundance, especially in terms of land and water. However, the onus for failure to turn these endowments into sustained wealth for the well-being of the people lies with the government and agencies assigned with the task to extract natural resources, to instigate change. Consequently, a new paradigm is required to focus on rational and judicious use of these resources with adequate emphasis on water-energy-food nexus approach, synergy between the major implementing agencies with a deep sense of commitment, transparency and accountability. Various loopeholes in the Food Security Bill in its present form should be plugged before it is turned into a law in the larger interest of the people.
By Dr Arvind Kumar, President, India Water Foundation
