Key points

• As per the NSSO data Madhya Pradesh [9.72] is third lowest in terms of monthly per capita cereal consumption [kg.] preceding Kerala [9.37] and Punjab [9.63].
• In rural India, value of average monthly food consumption per person was between Rs.260 and Rs.275 in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Chhattisgarh, over Rs.500 in Punjab and Kerala, and in between these levels in the remaining major States. In urban India, corresponding State-level averages of monthly food consumption per person varied between Rs.400 and Rs.640 for the 17 major States.
• The average MPCE [Rs.] for Madhya Pradesh in the year 2006-07 is Rs. 515 for rural areas and Rs. 1002 for urban areas. The national figure for the same year stand at Rs. 695 for rural and Rs. 1312 for urban areas.
• Overall, the level of food consumption in Rural areas of India is on a downfall. In 2005-06, an average of 11.920 KGs food grains was consumed by a member in the family and they had spent Rs. 106.30 per month in acquiring this. But in 2006-07, the average food consumption came down to 11.685 KGs per person (1.97% decline) in the family, on the other hand their expenditure gone up to Rs. 114.80 at this consumption level.
• The changing consumption pattern in Madhya Pradesh in itself points towards a deep crisis of food security in the state. At an average, a person in Rural Madhya Pradesh was consuming 11.48 kgs food or grain per month in the year 2005-06 and was spending Rs. 86.46 to get this amount of food. But the per person food consumption has declined to the level of 9.718 kgs per month and sees a negative change of 15.34% and expenditure level is almost the same – Rs. 87.27. It clearly shows the impact of inflation in changing food consumption levels.

1. Background

Is society living with Hunger in Madhya Pradesh?

More reports now say the numbers of people living with Huger is increasing rapidly. Development process is moving so fast, that peoples are left behind like they have no existence. Development, Social Inclusion and ending empowrishment has become new targets in the political battle field now, but a perspective is still lacking in these jargons. In fact electoral politics has also got the flavor of Politics for development.  And in this context latest NSSO report on consumption patterns in India released by Government of India (which includes consumption on food and other essentials for life) shows a decline in level of food consumptions. And various analyses show that these findings are actually clearing the fog of poverty elimination programs and the concept of development without protecting agriculture. As per the NSSO data released in October 2008, Madhya Pradesh [9.72] is third lowest in terms of monthly per capita cereal consumption [kg.] preceding Kerala [9.37] and Punjab [9.63]. It is difficult to digest the fact that Progressive and Rich states like Kerala and Punjab are the worst performer then Madhya Pradesh. But it is true because Kerala, being a coastal state, has fish in their food plate. Punjab also consumes non-vegetarian stuff in large quantity but Madhya Pradesh is not a coastal state or a non-veg consumer. Also Kerala and Punjab are considered as richer and developed state, and studies show that Richness is also a cause of change in food behavior or change in food consumption patterns, Pizza and Chinese or Packaged food becoming main part of food plate in these states, especially in Punjab they hare more interested in market food, but Madhya Pradesh does not contain high purchasing capacity, so low food grain consumption is a serious matter.

Overall, the level of food consumption in Rural areas of India is on a downfall. In 200506, an average of 11.920 KGs food grains was consumed by a member in the family and they had spent Rs. 106.30 per month in acquiring this. But in 2006-07, the average food consumption came down to 11.685 KGs per person (1.97% decline) in the family, on the other hand their expenditure gone up to Rs. 114.80 at this consumption level.

The changing consumption pattern in Madhya Pradesh in itself points towards a deep crisis of food security in the state. At an average, a person in Rural Madhya Pradesh was consuming 11.48 kgs food or grain per month in the year 2005-06 and was spending Rs. 86.46 to get this amount of food. But the per person food consumption has declined to the level of 9.718 kgs per month and sees a negative change of 15.34% and expenditure level is almost the same – Rs. 87.27. It clearly shows the impact of inflation in changing food consumption levels.

While looking at various contexts, political visionaries need to emphasize the policies to enhance people’s capabilities to lead a life for which they have a reason to value or their entitlements for such! There has been half – heartened effort by the governments to ensure food supply through ensured food subsidies or proper functioning of PDS. In a larger framework, new politics talks about making agriculture a profitable business; it means they are talking about Agri-Business, not about Agri-Culture.

As far as policies are concerned, there seems only dark tunnel with assurance of no light even at the end of it! The state has failed in introducing any such policy to reduce the structural imbalances in agriculture and improve purchasing power of the people through sustained means of livelihood. This is nothing but a structural imbalance where you have more population (67%) contributing less (18%) in a gross domestic product. Where are the efforts to reduce this phenomenon? It‘s non-negotiable fact now that we need to re-examine the definition of poverty, which only prefers expenditure and consumption based indicators and leaves income with dignity aspects. It has a gross impact on poverty and food insecurity elevation programs, because in a society where large part of the daily needs in rural families come out from the forest, agriculture, self production or community management, but Government calculates these receiving in monetary terms and then says their spending is big and they are not poor.  It may be an appropriate analysis that in present development spheres, Human and Natural Resources are considered essential for development, but the concept of exclusion and capability deprivation has been put a side in policy spheres, and so why we find no change in the situation and the cycle of poverty goes on. We may expect some quality changes after the honest implementation of Forest Rights Act, which is meant to hand over the rights on the resources to the around 4 lac in-danger indigenous and other forest dwelling families.

1.1 Understanding Hunger and deprivation

Starvation is the characteristic of some people not having enough food to eat. It is not the characteristic of there being not enough food to eat. While the latter can be a cause of the former, it is but one of many possible causes. Whether and how starvation relates to food supply is a matter of factual investigation.

Hunger is not a new affliction. Recurrent famines as well as endemic undernourishment have been persistent features of history. Life has been short and hard in much of the world, most of the time. Deprivation of food and other necessities of living have consistently been among the causal antecedents of the brutishness and brevity of human life.

Hunger is, however, intolerable in the modern world in a way it could not have been in the past. This is not so much because it is more intense, but because widespread hunger is so unnecessary and unwarranted in the modern world. The enormous expansion of productive power that has taken place over the last few centuries has made it, perhaps for the first time, possible to guarantee adequate food for all, and it is in this context that the persistence of chronic hunger must be seen as being morally outrageous and politically unacceptable.

Against this backdrop, the recent findings of the Arjun Sengupta report on the Conditions of Work and Promotion of livelihood in the unorganized sector presents some gruesome facts about the persistent poverty and inequality in the country considered to be the next super power, i.e., India. As per the report, an overwhelming 836 million people in India live on a per capita consumption of less than Rs.20 a day. The report is based on government data for the period between 1993-94 and 2004-05.

Picking up threads from here, the following sections of this document will try to sneak into the household consumer expenditure and patterns of food consumption in India and particularly Madhya Pradesh, as based on the report on Household Consumer Expenditure in India, 2006-07 conducted by National Sample Survey Organization [NSSO] in its 63rd round, to explore the impact of macro policies at the micro level in the course of development.

1.2 Poverty Estimates in India

Since the 1970s Poverty studies in India have been based on the use of a ‘poverty line’ expenditure level. It is defined as that particular observed level of expenditure per capita per month on all goods and services, whose food expenditure component provided an energy intake of 2400 kcal per capita in rural areas and 2100 kcal per capita in urban areas. Rural energy norms were set higher owing to the hard physical labour that more rural workers perform compared to a higher proportion doing lighter work in urban areas. Actual observed average calorie intake in rural India was also higher than average intake in urban India from the 1950s until the 1990s, after which with rural intake decline and urban intake rise, the position has been reversed by 1999-00.

All persons spending below the poverty line expenditure are considered to be poor. While Dandekar and Rath (1971) had adopted a uniform nutrition norm of 2250 calories per head, the Task Force on Projections of Minimum Needs and Effective Consumption Demand, constituted by The Planning Commission in 1979, did not find a uniform calorie norm to be suitable and suggested different norms for rural and urban areas. Using the Census data projected to 1982, the population was divided into sixteen groups defined by age, sex and activity, with calorie intakes recommended varying from 300 calories for children below 1 year to 3600 for a young man doing heavy work. The average norm was derived as a weighted average, and was 2435 and 2095 calories per person, rural and urban, rounded down to 2400 and up to 2100. These nutrition norms have been the accepted basis for poverty studies in India.

This is a minimalist definition of poverty, since no norms are set for essential non-food items of spending such as on fuel for cooking and lighting, clothing, shelter, transport, medical care or education. A household which is observed to be above the poverty level expenditure so defined satisfies only the nutrition norm and may not be able to access adequate amounts of other goods and services from its observed non-food expenditure.

The data base for estimating poverty has been the National Sample Survey Rounds on Consumer Expenditure which take the household as the sampling unit and carry out large sample surveys every five years with smaller samples being canvassed in intervening years. The NSS Reports present the distribution of persons and average expenditure by monthly per capita expenditure groups, and they also present the calorie intake per capita per diem by expenditure groups, though the latter tabulations have been released after a considerable time lag in the past. In the NSS Rounds the quantities of food items actually purchased by sample households are noted (as are farm- produced food items retained for consumption by farmers). These are valued at prevailing prices, and added to expenditure on non-food items to give the total monthly per capita expenditure [“Poverty and Neo-liberalism in India” by Utsa Patnaik, http://www.macroscan.org/the/Poverty/jan07/pov060107Poverty_Neoliberalism.htm. Accessed on 9th December, 2008.].

As pet the poverty estimates for the year 2004-05, the Planning Commission as the nodal agency in the Government of India says that poverty in India is reducing. It says the URP-Consumption distribution data of the 61st Round yields a poverty ration of 28.3 percent in the rural areas, 25.7% in the urban areas and 27.5% for the country as a whole in 2004-05. The Poverty line (implicit) at all-India level is worked out from the expenditure class – wise distribution of persons (based on URP consumption, that is, consumption data collected from 30-days recall period for all items) and the poverty ratio at all-India level.

The Planning Commission estimates that in Madhya Pradesh, a family spending Rs 327.78 per person per month in rural settlement will be considered as poor. In Urban settlement, the expenditure level is Rs 570.15 per person per month. In other words, it means, a person spending anything more then Rs 9 every day in a village or Rs 19 in any kind of urban area, will not be identified as poor and will be out of Poverty elimination programs. At all-India level, the poverty line represents the expenditure level of Rs. 356.30 in rural areas and Rs. 538.60 in urban area per person per month.

2. Household Consumer Expenditure in India, 2006-07  [NSS 63rd Round]

A sample of 33146 rural households and 30583 urban households spread over the entire country was surveyed in the Consumer Expenditure Survey of the 63rd round of NSS, carried out in 2006-07. The major highlights and consumption patterns emerging are summarized in the following sections.

2.1 Level of Consumption in 2006-07

• The survey estimated that in 2006-07, around one-half (50.3%) of the Indian rural population belonged to households with monthly per capita consumption expenditure (MPCE) less than Rs.580at 2006-07 prices.
• In urban India, where expenditure levels were higher, only 17.4% of the population belonged to households with monthly per capita consumer expenditure less than Rs.580. About 50% belonged to households with monthly per capita consumer expenditure less than Rs.990.
• Average Monthly Per Capita Consumer Expenditure (average MPCE) in 2006-07 was Rs.695 in rural India and Rs.1312 in urban India at 2006-07 prices. This implies that on an average a person daily spends Rs. 23 and Rs. 44, in rural and urban area respectively. This includes every kind of expenditure be it food, education, health or any other need. However, the corresponding average MPCE in 2005-06 (NSS 62nd round) was Rs.625 in rural India and Rs.1171 in urban India at 2005-06 prices. The average MPCE has increased by 11.2% and 12% in rural and urban area respectively from 2005-06 to 2006

2.2 Broad Pattern of Consumption in 2005-06

• Out of every rupee spent in 2006-07 by the average ruralIndian on consumption, 52 paise was spent on food. Of this, 17 paise was spent on cereals and cereal substitutes, 8 paise on milk and milk products, 6 paise on vegetables, 4 paise on sugar, salt and spices, and 4 paise on beverages, refreshments, processed food and purchased meals.
• Out of every rupee spent in 2006-07 by the average urbanIndian on consumption, 39 paise was spent on food. Of this, 9 paise was spent on cereals and cereal substitutes, 7 paise on milk and milk products, 6 paise on beverages, refreshments and processed food, and 4 paise on vegetables.
• This analysis shows that people in rural areas are spending 33% more on food than their urban counterparts. This may be due to several reasons like changing cropping pattern where the major thrust is on producing cash crops than cereals and vegetables, crop failure, failing measures of food security ensured by the government [through PDS or any other such scheme.
• There was little difference between rural and urban households in the share of the budget allocated to fuel and light (10% for rural, 9% for urban) and clothing, including bedding and footwear (7% for rural, 6% for urban).
• There was considerable difference between rural and urban households in the share  of the budget allocated to cereals (17% for rural, 9% for urban), rent (less than 0.5% for rural, 5% for urban), education (3% for rural, 7% for urban), and miscellaneous consumer services including transport and telephone (8% for rural, 14% for urban). There was some difference between the rural and urban sectors in the share of medical expenditure (8% for rural, 6% for urban). People in urban area have spent significantly on rent, education and miscellaneous consumer services while the people in rural areas have spent higher on cereals.
• In rural India, value of average monthly food consumption per person was between Rs.260 and Rs.275 in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Chhattisgarh, over Rs.500 in Punjab and Kerala, and in between these levels in the remaining major States. In urban India, corresponding State-level averages of monthly food consumption per person varied between Rs.400 and Rs.640 for the 17 major States.

2.3 Cereal Consumption in 2006-07

• Average quantity of cereals consumed per person per month in 2006-07 was 11.7 kg in rural areas and 9.6 kg in urban areas.
• In rural India, the share of cereals other than rice and wheat was 6% or less in all major States except Gujarat (41%), Karnataka (37%), Maharashtra (33%), Rajasthan (28%), and Madhya Pradesh (20%). In urban India cereals other than rice and wheat accounted for 3% or less of total cereal consumption in all but 4 major States – Karnataka (24%), Maharashtra and Gujarat (10-11%), and Rajasthan (7%).
• At State level, the share of cereals in total expenditure in rural India varied from 8% in Punjab and 9% in Haryana and Kerala to 23-24% in West Bengal, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, 25% in Orissa, and 26% in Bihar. In urban India, the share varied less, from 6% for Punjab and 7% for Gujarat, Haryana, Kerala and Maharashtra to 18% for Bihar.

3. Household expenditure in MP

As per the latest Economic Survey the % of population below poverty line [2004-05] in MP was 38.3%. On the other hand the average MPCE for 2004-05 was Rs. 439.06 for rural areas and Rs. 903.68 for urban areas. 

Now as per the estimates of Planning Commission of India, 27.5% of the population in India was living below the poverty line in 2004–2005. The source for this was the 61st round of the National Sample Survey (NSS) and the criterion used was monthly per capita consumption expenditure below Rs. 356.35 for rural areas and Rs. 538.60 for urban areas. This is the latest definition and estimation of poverty by the government of India. The percentage of population living below poverty line in Madhya Pradesh was clearly much higher than the national average figure. 
In the absence of any recent estimate for poverty line after 2004-05 we base our analysis on the average monthly per capita expenditure as given by the latest 63rd round of NSS [2006-07]. It is important to note that the estimates of poverty are calculated by the consumption of set calorie limits in urban and rural areas. The amount spend on such consumption [known as monthly per capita consumption expenditure in economic terms] is set as the limit for deciding the cut off of poverty line.

3.1 Some facts about the consumption expenditure in MP are presented below:

The average MPCE [Rs.] for Madhya Pradesh in the year 2006-07 is Rs. 515 for rural areas and Rs. 1002 for urban areas. The national figure for the same year stand at Rs. 695 for rural and Rs. 1312 for urban areas. This implies that a rural person gets to spend Rs. 18 and urban person Rs. 33 for the basic needs like food, clothing, housing, education, health, etc. Out of the Rs. 18, Rs. 8-9 is spend on food in rural areas.

It is substantiated by the fact that out of the total 17 states surveyed by NSS, Madhya Pradesh stands at 16th position, i.e., the second last position [Orissa occupies the last position], in terms of average rural MPCE. The state’s position has deteriorated as it records a fall from 13th position in the year 2004-05 and 2005-06 to 16th position in the year 2006-07.

In case of average urban MPCE, Madhya Pradesh occupies 15th position that is third from the lowest. A slump in state’s performance is visible from the fact that it has fallen from 14th position in 2004-05 and 2005-06 to 15th position in the year 2006-07. Bihar (Rs.865) records the lowest average urban MPCE, second lowest is Uttar Pradesh and then Madhya Pradesh (about Rs.1000 each). However, the highest urban average MPCEs were those of Kerala (Rs.1681), Maharashtra (Rs.1673) and Punjab (Rs.1609).

In the year 2005-06, 33.6% rural population lived on less than Rs. 12 per day and 8.9% on less than Rs. 9 per day. In urban areas, 29.4% population lived on less than Rs. 19 per day while 8.4% lived on less than Rs.13 per day. However, it is striking to note that in the year 2006-07, 40.4% rural population in the rural area is living on less than Rs. 14 a day.

As per the mode of distribution of mpce, the majority of rural population lives on an average less than Rs. 13 per day.

As per the modal value of distribution of mpce in urban areas, the majority of population lives on less than Rs. 18 per day, 22.8% people in urban areas live on less than Rs. 19 per day.

A rough estimate for calculating population below poverty line can be done by using the planning commission’s estimate for poverty line as monthly per capita consumption expenditure below Rs. 356.35 for rural areas and Rs. 538.60 for urban areas. As per this cut off line 22.8% rural population and 28.2% urban population was living below poverty line in the year 2006-07. The state’s average comes at around 25.5%, which is still close to the national average figure.

Now we come to the patterns of consumption of the Households in Madhya Pradesh.

4. Patterns of Consumption

The patterns of consumption can be seen broadly in various categories like shares of various food and non-food groups in total expenditure, average consumer expenditure per person on selected food groups, variation in quantity of cereals consumed, etc.

The table given below compares the food and non-food components of total MPCE with the estimates for the previous (62nd) round, for which the reference period was 2005-06.

Table 1: Food and non-food components of MPCE, 2005-06 and 2006-07, all-India

For rural India, State-level food expenditure per person varied, generally, in the range Rs. 260-Rs.510 for the 17 major States against the national average of Rs.363. It was lowest in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Chhattisgarh [between Rs. 260 and Rs. 275]. This implies that the rural population in MP gets to spend approximately between Rs. 8 and Rs. 9 per day on food! Well a bottle of mineral water costs Rs. 10, even half kg of milk comes at around Rs. 9-10. In such a case it would be certainly amazing to investigate the calories pertinent from this expenditure to estimate the intensity of poverty across the state.

Among the expenditure on food components the monthly per capita expenditure on cereals was Rs.115 for India as a whole but it is even less than Rs.100 for Madhya Pradesh. In urban India, Madhya Pradesh is one among the 5 States where per capita expenditure on cereals was lowest (between Rs.95 and 105), the other states were Tamil Nadu, Haryana, Punjab and Gujarat.

Table 2: Average consumer expenditure per person on cereals and food and their percentage shares in total consumer expenditure in 2006-07: Madhya Pradesh and All India, rural and urban

There is a considerable difference in the share of cereals and food in the total expenditure in both urban and rural areas as rural population tends to spend more on food and cereals than the urban population.

Table 3: Average consumer expenditure per person on selected food groups in 2006-07: Madhya Pradesh and All India, rural and urban

The given table above shows that the per person expenditure on milk, egg, vegetables, fruits, etc is lower in the rural areas than the urban areas. However, table 2 shows that the share of food and cereals is more in rural population than the urban areas. This implies that the major chunk of income of rural population is been spend on cereals rather than other nutritious food like milk, egg, fruits or vegetables.

4.1 Variation in quantity of cereals consumed per person:

• Rice and wheat together accounted for as much as 96% of all cereal consumption in urban areas, and for 90% in rural areas. In rural India, the share of cereals other than rice and wheat was 6% or less in all major States except Gujarat (41%), Karnataka (37%), Maharashtra (33%), Rajasthan (28%), and Madhya Pradesh (20%). In urban India cereals other than rice and wheat accounted for 3% or less of total cereal consumption in all but 4 major States – Karnataka (24%), Maharashtra and Gujarat (10-11%), and Rajasthan (7%).
• Another persistent feature of the Indian cereal consumption scene is that the average person in a primarily rice-consuming State consumes a larger quantity of cereals per month than the average person in other States, including the primarily wheat-consuming States. Kerala and Tamil Nadu, however, are exceptions. wheat-consuming States. Kerala and Tamil Nadu, however, are exceptions.

Table 4: Quantity of cereals consumed per person per month and percentage shares of rice and wheat in cereal consumption in 2006-07, Madhya Pradesh and all India figure

As per the NSSO data Madhya Pradesh [9.72] is third lowest in terms of monthly per capita cereal consumption [kg.] preceding Kerala [9.37] and Punjab [9.63]. Out of the total cereals consumed there is high consumption for wheat in both the urban and rural areas. The monthly per capita quantity of cereals consumed in MP is considerably less than the national average figure as well.

Table 5: Average quantity of food consumption of different cereals per person per 30 days for RURAL areas (in Kilogram / 30 days)

As the above mentioned table shows the North-Eastern region, along with the states like Bihar and Orissa have made it to the foray of top 6-7 states with higher food consumption. However, the supposedly powerful states in socio-economic terms like Gujarat, Kerala, Haryana, and Karnataka to an extent have very little food to offer to their population as they came in the bottom five. Madhya Pradesh too joins the rank.

Overall, the level of food consumption in Rural areas of India is on a downfall. In 200506, an average of 11.920 KGs food grains was consumed by a member in the family and they had spent Rs. 106.30 per month in acquiring this. But in 2006-07, the average food consumption came down to 11.685 KGs per person (1.97% decline) in the family, on the other hand their expenditure gone up to Rs. 114.80 at this consumption level.

The changing consumption pattern in Madhya Pradesh in itself points towards a deep crisis of food security in the state. At an average, a person in Rural Madhya Pradesh was consuming 11.48 kgs food or grain per month in the year 2005-06 and was spending Rs. 86.46 to get this amount of food. But the per person food consumption has declined to the level of 9.718 kgs per month and sees a negative change of 15.34% and expenditure level is almost the same – Rs. 87.27. It clearly shows the impact of inflation in changing food consumption levels.

Table 6: Average quantity of food consumption of different cereals per person per 30 days for urban areas (in Kilogram / 30 days)

Figures speak for themselves and there is no considerable improvement in the situation of MP in terms of total cereals consumed since 2005-06. One of the striking features emerging from the above table is that the top seven states with highest food consumption are the ones where rice is more consumed than wheat, take for instance Assam, J&K, Manipur, Bihar, etc. Kerala and Karnataka are an exception here but that may be due to their thrust on producing cash crops rather than producing for meeting their subsistence level.

The worst performers [Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab and MP] are basically the wheat consuming states. This analysis in itself opens many questions for further probing, as in is there any genuine food crisis or a larger politics been played over certain grains and realms? We certainly can’t ignore the larger macroeconomic aspects related to food security [like trade liberalization, procurement prices, neo-liberal reforms, etc] while analyzing the imbalances created at the micro level. And it is saddening to see that the economic giants of past, Punjab, Haryana and Gujarat, are struggling to feed their population.

Table 7: Average expenditure (Rs.) per person per 30 days on groups of items of consumption for rural and urban areas: Madhya Pradesh and all-India

The above mentioned table depicts that the inequalities in expenditure and consumption do not exists only between the states but within the states as well. This analysis in the context of MP shows a clear marginalization of the rural population in terms of reaping the benefits of so-called ‘development’ or accelerating economic growth. The amount spend by the rural population on nutritious food like egg, meat, fruits, vegetables, milk products is not even half of what people in urban areas spend!  The definition of poverty line set by the government of India had placed more calories for rural people owing to their laborious work than the urban areas but where are the means to consume such food.

Even the expenditure on basic necessities like education and health is minimal in rural areas comparative to urban areas. This might be due to the provisions of free schooling and health schemes for urban areas but it is not to forget that only the schooling is provided free of cost by the government, what about higher education, Graduation, etc? Certainly, most of the rural population do not even reach such levels, take example from MP, the same NSSO data shows that 63.4% rural population and 35.3% urban population [both male and female] above 7 years of age has not even completed primary education! It shows that the low spending in education is not due to government assistance but is due to the fact that there is nobody out there to spend this amount upon?

The point is not to say that the urban population is completely better off but is it not a question on what kind of development process and whose development are we promoting when the vulnerable is being marginalized persistently throughout?

5. A concluding note

There are two – three important points to take into account while concluding this report. Firstly, the data and its analysis undertaken in this report is not an end itself. In fact, it’s a mean to explore and inter link the various issues of macroeconomics to what is happening in reality at the grassroots. It is therefore, a mean to look beyond the obvious and develop the critical understanding of the nexus between politics and economics, all in the name of development.

Secondly, as already mentioned in the beginning of this report, food crisis is not merely due to lack of availability of food or inflation. It is nothing but the failure of state as it has failed to enhance people’s capabilities to lead a life for which they have a reason to value or their entitlements for such! [By state I mean both the national and sub-national governments]. There has been half – heartened effort by the governments to ensure food supply through ensured food subsidies or proper functioning of PDS, we succumb to the nefarious food agreements like GATT and WTO and end up implementing the policies conferred upon by West on us.

As far as policies are concerned, there seems only dark tunnel with assurance of no light even at the end of it! The state has failed in introducing any such policy to reduce the structural imbalances in agriculture and improve purchasing power of the people through sustained means of livelihood. Coming to the first point of structural imbalances, as per the government’s definition of small and marginal farmers [i.e., those holding 5 acres or less are small and marginal farmers]. As per NSSO data, roughly around 86.7% land owning rural population comprises small or marginal farmer as they own less than 2 hectare or 5 acre land [NSSO data talks in hectare. So, 1 hectare = 2.471054 acres, 2 hectare will be 4.94 or approximately 5 acre.]. As per the NSSO data 2006-07, 70.2% population in rural areas is dependent directly or indirectly on agriculture, while their contribution to the state’s Net Domestic Product [NDP] is around 30% [http://www.mp.gov.in/spb/fiveyearplan/VolumeIsep07/Chapter-6%20agr%20final.pdf. Accessed on 11th December, 2008.]. This is nothing but a structural imbalance where you have more population contributing less in a sector. Where are the efforts to reduce this phenomenon?

Second point is about the sustained means of livelihood, though there have been some commendable efforts like introduction of right to work but does the road end there only? The same NSSO data shows how there have been a mockery of ‘sustenance’ and ‘livelihood’. In the year 2006-07 in Madhya Pradesh, 112 people on per 1000 population aged above 15 years got work in public works [“Public works” were defined as those activities which were sponsored by Government or local bodies and covered local area development works like construction of roads, dams, bunds, digging of ponds, etc., as relief measures, or as an outcome of employment generation schemes under the poverty alleviation programme such as Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS), Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY), National Food for Work Programme (NFFWP).], 104 didn’t get work while 784 didn’t seek [We wonder if it is due to lack of awareness or something else! I am sure there must be some budgetary allocation for publicity of such schemes, then why are not people demanding for work]. Even those who got the work were employed only for16 days and got Rs. 56 wages per day, while the minimum wages for unskilled labour in agriculture is fixed as Rs. 61.37 by the state government [http://www.paycheck.in/main/officialminimumwages/madhya-pradesh. Accessed on 9th December, 2008.].

Though NREGS provides for paying unemployment allowance to those who sought work but didn’t get it within a stipulated period but the same NSSO data shows that 226 persons out of per 1000 made complaints as they didn’t get work in PW but the average consumption received by them is Zero. This is nothing but a mockery of the legislation and the constitution of India.

On a concluding note it is imperative to understand that this analysis should be seen mainly as a provocative thought to learn, unlearn and relearn the processes taking place around us in the name of development. The main objective of this analysis was not just confined to throwing of numbers and figures but to build a critical understanding to question ourselves about whom we are standing with when we say that we are in a developmental process and what does it mean to them.

Chandni Tyagi and Sachin Kumar Jain