Key points

• As per the NSSO data 2006-07, 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, the 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 kg 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 kg per person (1.97% decline) in the family. At this consumption level their expenditure had gone up to Rs. 114.80.
• 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%. However, the expenditure level is almost the same, i.e., (-) Rs. 87.27. It clearly shows the aggravating food insecurity problem across the state.

1. Background

1.1 Is society living with Hunger in Madhya Pradesh?

Money is increasing but food plate is becoming empty!! At least latest trends of food consumption patterns are scathing new pictures of Chronic Hunger. Many reports are now unanimous that the number of people afflicted with hunger is increasing rapidly. Development process is moving so fast, that the common person is left behind as if they don't exist. Development, social inclusion and elimination of poverty has emerged as new targets in the political battle field now, but all these jargons still lack in perspective. And in this context latest NSSO report released by Government of India on consumption patterns in India (which includes consumption on food and other essentials for life) shows a decline in level of food consumptions. Various analyses have shown that these findings are actually revealing the actual face of poverty elimination programs and that of the concept of development without protecting agriculture.

Overall, the level of food consumption in rural areas of our country is declining. In 2005-06, an average of 11.920 KGs food grain was consumed per month by a member of the family and to acquire this, the family had to spend Rs. 106.30 per month. But in 2006-07, the average food consumption came down to 11.685 KGs per person (1.97% decline) in the family, and their cost to acquire it had risen 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. On an average, a person in rural Madhya Pradesh was consuming 11.48 kgs food or grain per month in 2005-06 and was spending Rs. 86.46 to acquire this amount of food, but 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 i.e. Rs.87.27. It clearly shows the impact of inflation on changing food consumption levels.

Moving to food and other consumption analyses, rural Kerala spends a total amount of Rs 505.52 and Punjab Rs. 511.25 on food group (cereal, milk, meat, dry fruit, vegetables etc.), whereas in Madhya Pradesh this expenditure is 263.86. It simply means that 80.5% of their total expenditure is being spent for food arrangements.

Data speak for themselves. Interestingly, Kerala people spend Rs. 83.69 on egg, fish and meat while Madhya Pradesh individual spends only Rs. 7.44 per month on these items. Punjab definitely spends less on food grain (Rs. 91.86.00) but the total expenditure on food group is Rs. 511.25 per person per month and they consume milk and milk products worth Rs 167.24 (32.71% of total food expenditure), while, an individual from Madhya Pradesh spends only Rs. 44.75 per month on these.

Haryana and Himachal Pradesh spend biggest part (41.46 percent and 27.17 percent respectively) of their total food expenditure on Milk or Milk products. The difference in overall per capita expenditure is worth mentioning. The per capita average expenditure in Madhya Pradesh is one of the lowest in the country at Rs. 514.93 per month, whereas it is Rs 1250.35 in Kerala, Rs. 1198.93 in Punjab and Rs. 111749 in Himachal Pradesh – more then double in any case.

It goes without saying that higher expenditure is directly linked with livelihood and subsistence security, and unfortunately, it is again lacking in Madhya Pradesh. Agriculture and natural resource based livelihood options have just become an accident, which are compensated time to time by the government.

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 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]. This does not mean that progressive and rich states like Kerala and Punjab are the worst performer then Madhya Pradesh. On the other hand Kerala, being a coastal state, has fish in their food plate and Punjab also consumes non-vegetarian stuff in large quantity, with the result that their cereal consumption is lower than Madhya Pradesh which is not a coastal state or a non-veg consumer.

Moreover, Kerala and Punjab are considered as affluent and developed states, and studies have shown that affluence also brings changes in food consumption pattern, packaged food becoming main chunck of food plates, especially in Punjab. Since Madhya Pradesh does not have such high purchasing capacity required for consumption of non-cereal food items, people have to depend mainly upon the cereals. With this backdrop, low food grain consumption in Madhya Pradesh is a serious matter.

1.2 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 [“The Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze Omnibus”, Chapter on Hunger and Public Action, OUP, New Delhi, 2004.].

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.

1.3 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.

1.4 Estimation of poverty or Preservative for Chronic Hunger

It can't be termed development if the largest section of the society is bound to spend 55 to 70 percent of their gross income just to arrange their daily requirement of food. The farce of poverty identification is a big challenge before the goal of elimination of chronic hunger. Actually, according to Planning Commission’s latest estimation, poverty in India is reducing. Looking to the ground level conditions, it seems that they have a mandate to make it possible and it is being achieved by putting people in statistical formulas.

It is said that 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. Actually during the poverty estimation, on the one hand, locally available items from forest or agriculture retained for consumption by farmers or Tribals are also valued at prevailing prices, and added to expenditure on non-food items to give the total monthly per capita expenditure. While, on the other hand, the cost of items and services (dwellings or Health or Education) are counted at the lowest price without considering the present state of inflation.

In fact, the people at large should have enough income or they should have rights over natural resources. Both these factors have been neglected by the government of Madhya Pradesh and what ever has been done, the performance is very poor. There have been no land reforms in Madhya Pradesh since long, while land reforms are vital for an agrarian society.

It is a known fact that land reforms in Kerala have changed the life of the people considerably. In fact southern states have been progressive in providing social security to the marginalized sections with their positive political will. One should know that olds age destitute can go to school and get mid day meal with dignity in Tamilnadu. These are the welfare schemes which are not just meant for getting election mileage.

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 considered 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. No person can survive at this level of expenditure at all. This is basically a Starvation Line, rather ten Poverty line. The recent NSS 63rd round survey clearly shows that the biggest part of the total expenditure goes for food arrangements and other aspects, like health, education and entertainment, have been given no value in poverty definition.

Now it may not be a coincidence that Madhya Pradesh has the lowest and continuously declining food consumption, with highest malnutrition, highest infant mortality and lowest life expectancy of 57.7 years, much lower then Kerala’s 73.9 Years. It is just not merely an issue relating to non-availability of institutional health services, these conditions shows the insecurity and invisibility of poverty within the State frame-work and it’s efforts too. It also reflects that avoidance of fundamental issues of exclusion, neglect of community knowledge, threat to agriculture, unlimited exploitation of natural resources for revenue generation and colonial style of addressing development, has pushed the larger society on margins and a fewer ones have become the center in the politics of development.

As far as policies are concerned, there seems only a dark tunnel with assurance of no light even at its tail end! 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 may be an appropriate analysis that in present development sphere, human and natural resources are considered essential for development, but the concept of exclusion and capability deprivation has been put aside in policy spheres. That is why no change is discerned in the situation and the cycle of poverty moves on. We may expect some qualitative changes after the genuine implementation of Forest Rights Act, meant to hand over the rights on the resources to around 4 lac  rural and other forest dwelling families.

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.580 at 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 2006-07.

2.2 Broad Pattern of consumption in 2005-06

• Out of every rupee spent in 2006-07 by the average rural Indian 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 urban Indian 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 foodconsumption 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

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 in MP 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 per day. As per the mode of distribution of mpce, the majority of rural population in the state clustered in the distribution of mpce between Rs. 365 and Rs. 410, which is averaged as less than Rs. 13 per day [Mode is the value that occurs the most frequently in a probability distribution.].

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.

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.

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.

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 (1011%), 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.

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.

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 socioeconomic 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 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.

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.

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 but due to the larger issues of ensuring people’s entitlements to the food. 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 without assessing our local needs and priority areas.

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],roughly around 86.7% land owning rural population comprises small or marginal farmer in MP as they own less than 2 hectare or 5 acre land [NSSO data talks in hectare. So, 1 hectare =2.471054acres, 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! Certainly, there must be some budgetary allocation for publicity of such schemes and creating awareness among people, 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 labor 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. 22]

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