Opinion Personal gain
Why food security should factor in the needs of individuals?
The debate on food security seemed almost over when both the Prime Ministers Economic Advisory Council (PMEAC) and the National Advisory Council (NAC) decided on a coverage of about two-thirds of the population. The EGoM was expected to take a decision on this,but has instead reportedly discussed the question of individual entitlement of PDS,in place of the present system where monthly entitlements are given to households. Does this mean that the debate on coverage and entitlements is open again? By itself,the decision may mean little,if as at present the poor families in sections in villages where Dalits live are excluded. But as part of a strategy to cover the hungry more effectively,it would be useful. Hunger is more in certain regions and in certain classes of families. Who goes hungry also depends on individual characteristics of families. Therefore,a woman or a girl child,or a landless labourer,belonging to a Dalit or an Adivasi family in the hunger belt of the eastern region is likely to be chronically undernourished compared to others.
Given the futile nature of the existing debate,high in theoretical coverage,low in effective reach,I had argued tongue-in-cheek for a cash-subsidy programme since it couldnt be less effective than the present programme. But the discussion on targeting is open again. Simultaneously,a paper by economists Himanshu and Abhijit Sen has outlined the arguments that I have been making in this column for universal coverage so that the really needy are not excluded. Since the concern all around is for an effective food security programme,it may be useful to look at the present proposals from this perspective.
While arguing for junking the official poverty line,many of us have said that this should be substituted by a multi-layered approach that captures the aam aadmi. Entitlements to subsidies in the food security plan would have to be strictly decided and family and individual characteristics have to be factored in. For example,a proposal is that a priority group identified on the basis of verifiable inclusion criteria will pay only Re 1 for a kg of millet,Rs 2 for a kg of wheat and Rs 3 for a kg of rice for an entitlement of 7 kg of grain. A second group using exclusion criteria will get half that amount of grain,3.5 kg. The remaining section will get grain at three-fourths the minimum support price.
For the priority group,this column has argued for coverage of the severely and chronically malnourished and has pointed out the correlates of this group for identification. The chronically and severely malnourished would be around 22 per cent of the population. According to Sen and Himanshu,it would be around 20 per cent. I have consistently suggested free food for the destitute and the handicapped,for households that are headed by women,for pregnant and lactating women in such families and the girl child in deprived sections of society. These are obviously individual characteristics. A similar group has also been correctly identified by the NAC.
The point is that the need to universalise entitlements is not just to entitle families to cheap grain. We must recognise that a large number of families,which may be entitled,will not be purchasing and consuming the grain they are entitled to. This approach,however,will solve the issue of access. Restricting numbers often results in reducing access and not quite the leakage ratio. It is important to allow wide access,monitor actual PDS participation and allocate accordingly.
A nuclear family with three or four members with some consumer durables or a job in the organised sector wouldnt get free or highly subsidised grain even if they want to participate in the PDS. But they cant be excluded because others who really need it may suffer. The need of the hour is wider access,but limited entitlements and more severely limited subsidies aimed at the really needy. The debate has been reopened and will hopefully lead to a more effective solution to what is Indias real problem. The smart card is only a number if the identity issue is avoided. The individual is at least as good as the household for this and,when intelligently used,could be better.
The writer,a former Union minister,is chairman,Institute of Rural Management,Anand,express@expressindia.com
Share
