Words: 909
Through India was successful in achieving self- efficiency by increasing its food production and also improved its capacity to cope with year to year fluctuations in food productions chronic household food security the limitation is not food supply ,but the food distribution careful consideration of food security requires moving beyond food availability and reorganization the low incomes of the poor. India being such big country, the product ion is very high; India is exporting the food gratins. But is India totally food secured? Is there food security in India or not ?
Are every people getting Food to eat after 61 years of independence? NEED FOR THE STUDY Need for this study is • Why India is not totally food secured? Even if it has lots of food production and it is exporting food grains. • This paper is to meet the fulfillment of the requirement of Economic (Hons) +3 3rd year seminar assignment. REVIEW OF LITERATURE • According to Rao, the decline in pre capita intake of cereals has been sharper in rural areas where improvements in rural infrastructure made of the food and non food items available in the rural household. According to Mathura Swaminathan, Targeted public Distribution system has failed in the regional task that was performed by the relier PDS, namely transferring cereals from surplus to deficit region of the country”. HYPOTHESIS:- PDS system is not properly working in India. PDS is not doing in proper manner. OBJECTIVES:- This study is based on achievement of food security in India. This study has the following objectives • To study the actual benefit of PDS system. • To study the net availability of cereals. MEGODOLOGY: This assignment is done by taking the secondary data from books and magazines.
ANALYSIS: The main purpose of public distribution system (PDS) in India was to act as a price support programme for the consumer during periods of food shortage of 1960s. The basic aim was to provide essential goods. The PDS in its present form a producer price support-cum-a consumer subsidy programme. It is main study matter whether PDS is functioning properly achieved its main goal or not. There are some point of non-achievement of the goal of PDS properly. ? Regional disparity in PDS benefits ? The question of urban bias. PDS remained limited mostly in urban areas. PDS is highly subsidized in India and put a severe fiscal burden on government. ? PDS results in price increase in the open market. Due to PDS open market price increase casual laboures on daily wages, migrant workers and those without proper residential address are double disadvantaged because they are not covered under PDS but they have to pay a higher price to buy goods in the open market. ? PDS is corrupted The actual poor are not getting benefit from PDs. The other people are getting the benefit and for that people are not satisfied in PDS.
Many empirical studies have shown severe biased in the inter-regional distribution of the PDS supplies states with the high incidence of poverty such as Bihar, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh received a lower share. |YEAR |POPULATION |NET PRODUCTION |NET IMPORT |NET AVAILABILITY |PULSES NET | | | | | | |AVAILABILIT | |1950-51 |363 |40. 1 |4. |44. 3 |8. 0 | |1960-61 |442 |60. 9 |3. 5 |64. 6 |11. 1 | |1970-71 |551 |84. 5 |2. 0 |84. 0 |10. 3 | |1980-81 |689 |104. 1 |0. 5 |104. 8 |9. 4 | |1990-91 |852 |141. |-0. 6 |145. 7 |12. 9 | |2000-01 |1,033 |162. 5 |-4. 5 |145. 6 |11. 3 | |2002-03 |1,068 |143. 2 |-7. 1 |159. 3 |11. 3 | While India’s population is rising, production of food grains cereasl and pulses, specially cereals-rose equally. Imports are negligible. After 1995-96 India became a exporter of cereal.
The people are not getting food to live. That means there is bad distribution system . The food are not properly available for everyone if moderate and malnutrition problem is taken into consideration (together) the percentage of children suffering from malnutrition is 47. 7% in 2000-01. Nearly half of the rural children are suffering from malnutrition. CRITCISMS:- There is a critical analysis of the article. Some are discussed below. 1. Food are available, but not properly distributed. 2. The cultivation lands are very low. 3. PDS has failed to serve all BPL families 4. Bias for urban areas. 5.
Negligible coverage in poor status with large population of rural poor. CONCLUSIONS:- While India achieved success in competing food insecurity caused by droughts or floods, it merely failed to make much dent in chronic food insecurity as reflected in the low energy intake high incidences of malnutrition. The current growth rate would significant reduce income poverty by 2010, the chronic food insecurity is likely to persist. Several types of programmes need to targeted exclusively to the poor aimed to i. Elimination transient food insecurity on account of insecurity on account of inadequate access to food in periods of crises. i. Reducing malnutrition among pre-school children and women. iii. Reducing chronic food insecurity by enhancing their capacities ot participate in the growth process. iv. Improving basic services (safe drinking water, health care etc) to the poor. v. Adoption of food stamp/food credit card programme. vi. Linking PDS with public works programmes like Sampoorna Garmmin Pozagar Yojana, Jawaharlal Pozgar Yojana and other employment policy. The current crisis in food security will strengthen that hard of those who believe that biotechnology is the way forward. Another “Green Revolution” may bring food security.