From Hunger to Food Security: Civil Services Mentor Magazine May 2013

The Union Cabinet, headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, on 19 March 2013 approved the National Food Security Bill. The food security bill approved is directed towards giving the right to food to around 67 per cent of India’s 120-crore population. The amendments to the Bill will guarantee 5 kg of foodgrains per person per month, while families in the poorest of the poor will continue to get 35 kg of grains per month. As per the bill around 800 crore people will be entitled to get five kilos of subsidised grain per month. Rice will be made available at 3 Rupees per kilo; wheat will cost 2 rupees a kilo and cereal will be sold for 1 Rupees per kilo. The beneficiaries are supposed to be decided by state governments, while the criteria to exclude 33 per cent of population would be provided by the Planning Commission, Thomas said. The scheme will be linked to the Aadhar scheme which provides every citizen with a unique identification number that’s linked to a database that includes the biometrics of all card-holders. It is also evident from the present year budget, that 90000 crore Rupees is allocated for spending on food subsidies with the government setting aside an extra 10000 crore Rupees for the bill. In earlier versions, the Food Security Bill assigned subsidised grains on the basis of priority and general groups, which were demarcated on the basis of poverty levels. The Cabinet gave its nod to the 71 amendments proposed by the Food Ministry, including the one that said the 2.43 crore Antyodaya Anna Yojna beneficiary households will continue to get their quota of 35 kg grains a month under the public distribution system.

Using the census data of 1982, the population was divided into 16 groups defined by age, gender and activity, with recommended calorie intakes varying from 300 calories for children below 1 year, to 3,800 calories for a young man doing heavy work. The average norm was derived as a weighted average: 2,435 and 2,095 calories per person respectively for rural and urban areas, rounded down to 2,400 and up to 2,100. These nutrition norms have since been the accepted basis for poverty studies in India. This is a minimalist definition of poverty, however, since no spending norms are set for essential non-food items such as fuel (for cooking and lighting), clothing, shelter, transport, medical care or education. A household observed to be above the so-called poverty level expenditure satisfies only the nutritional norm and may not be able to access adequate amounts of other necessary goods and services from its non-food expenditure.

Highlights of the Bill

• The Bill proposes foodgrain entitlements for up to 75 percent of the rural and up to 50 percent of the urban population. Of these, at least 46 percent of the rural and 28 percent of the urban population will be designated
  as priority households. The rest will be designated as general households.

• Priority households will be entitled to 7 kg of subsidised foodgrains per person per month. General households will be entitled to at least 3 kg.
• The central government will determine the percentage of people in each state that will belong to the priority and general groups. State governments will identify households that belong to these groups.

• The Bill proposes meal entitlements to specific groups. These include: pregnant women and lactating mothers, children between the ages of six months and 14 years, malnourished children, disaster affected persons, and destitute, homeless and starving persons.

• Grievance redressal mechanisms will be set up at the district, state, and central levels of government.
• The Bill proposes reforms to the Targeted Public Distribution System.

Key Issues and Analysis

• The Bill classifies beneficiaries into three groups. The process of identifying beneficiaries and placing them into these groups may lead to large inclusion and exclusion errors.
• Several entitlements and the grievance redressal structure would require state legislatures to make adequate budgetary allocations. Implementation of the Bill may be affected if states do not pass requisite allocations in their budgets or do not possess adequate funds.
• The Bill does not provide a rationale for the cut-off numbers prescribed for entitlements to priority and general households.
• The grievance redressal framework may overlap with that provided in the Citizens’ Charter Bill that is pending in Parliament.
• Schedule III of the Bill specifies goals which may not be directly related to food security. It is unclear why these have been included in the Bill.
• The Bill provides similar definitions for starving and destitute persons. However, entitlements to the two groups differ.

The year 2013 marks the 70th anniversary of the Bengal Famine which resulted in the death of an estimated 1.5 to 3 million children, women and men during 1942-43. A constellation of factors led to this mega-tragedy, such as the Japanese occupation of Burma, the damage to the aman(kharif) rice crop both due to tidal waves and a disease epidemic caused by the fungus Helminthosporium oryzae , panic purchase and hoarding by the rich, failure of governance, particularly in relation to the equitable distribution of the available food grains, disruption of communication due to World War II, and the indifference of the then U.K. government to the plight of the starving people of undivided Bengal.