Grain is rotting in India while the poor go hungry |
By Vikas Bajaj, The New York Times, June 7, 2012
In this connection it would be useful to read Post 814 that is the executive summary of the recent report by the Royal Society on the question of population and the planet-dealing with environmental impact of the exponentially rising human population (mostly in the capitalist hinterland--India being a case in point). There is a link to the full report there as well.
* * *
The article below reports on a massive "surplus" of grain rotting in storage in India while millions are in danger of dying from hunger. Hunger is the number one cause of death in India (see here). One third of the world chronically hungry people live in India, currently at 212 million, only slightly lower than 250 million in 1990. More than 7000 Indians die every day because of hunger.
This jarring reality is not new. World food production is for profit and much of it is concentrated in the hands of few multinational corporations. While lean years drive the price of food higher, years of plenty do not drive it below a certain threshold. Capitalist interests would not distribute excess supply to the hungry even in India where millions are in danger of dying.
With the rise of capitalism when peasants were driven off their land, people have become dependent on the market for their food and other life necessities as these have become commodities available only to those who can pay. While in the government in the affluent Western countries, either because of public pressure or to appease the working people and ensure the proper functioning of the capitalist economy, have programs to alleviate food scarcity for the poor, this is not the case in the capitalist hinterland, including "emerging" economies like India, where the poor are highly vulnerable. There is ample reasons to believe that this situation will get worse in the years ahead as the crisis of the world economy deepens and climate change and limits to growth undermine food production and increase food prices.
In this connection it would be useful to read Post 814 that is the executive summary of the recent report by the Royal Society on the question of population and the planet-dealing with environmental impact of the exponentially rising human population (mostly in the capitalist hinterland--India being a case in point). There is a link to the full report there as well.
The sensible and ethical option is an ecological socialist society based on participatory democratic institutions that will ensure the economy will serve the people on an egalitarian basis and that the human population gradually declines--through empowerment of women and grassroots family planning-- to a sustainable level to protect the ecological basis of life in general and human life in particular.
--KN
* * *
RANWAN, India — In
this north Indian village, workers recently dismantled stacks of burned and
mildewed rice while flies swarmed nearby over spoiled wheat. Local residents
said the rice crop had been sitting along the side of a highway for several
years and was now being sent to a distillery to be turned into liquor.
Just 180 miles to the south, in a slum on the outskirts of New Delhi,
Leela Devi struggled to feed her family of four on meager portions of flatbread
and potatoes, which she said were all she could afford on her disability
pension and the irregular wages of her day-laborer husband. Her family is among
the estimated 250 million Indians who do not get enough to eat.
Such is the paradox of plenty in India’s food system. Spurred by
agricultural innovation and generous farm subsidies, India now grows so much
food that it has a bigger grain stockpile than any country except China, and it
exports some of it to countries like Saudi Arabia and Australia. Yet one-fifth
of its people are malnourished — double the rate of other developing countries
like Vietnam and China — because of pervasive corruption, mismanagement and
waste in the programs that are supposed to distribute food to the poor.
“The reason we are facing this problem is our refusal to distribute
the grain that we buy from farmers to the people who need it,” said Biraj
Patniak, a lawyer who advises India’s Supreme Court on food issues. “The only
place that this grain deserves to be is in the stomachs of the people who are
hungry.”
After years of neglect, the nation’s failed food policies have now
become a subject of intense debate in New Delhi, with lawmakers, advocates for
the poor, economists and the news media increasingly calling for an overhaul.
The populist national government is considering legislation that would pour
billions of additional dollars into the system and double the number of people
served to two-thirds of the population. The proposed law would also allow the
poor to buy more rice and wheat at lower prices.
Proponents say the new law, if written and executed well, could help
ensure that nobody goes hungry in India, the world’s second-most populous
country behind China. But critics say that without fundamental system reforms,
the extra money will only deepen the nation’s budget deficit and further enrich
the officials who routinely steal food from various levels of the distribution
chain.
India’s food policy has two central goals: to provide farmers with
higher and more consistent prices for their crops than they would get from the
open market, and to sell food grains to the poor at lower prices than they
would pay at private stores.
The federal government buys grain and stores it. Each state can take a
certain amount of grain from these stocks based on how many of its residents
are poor. The states deliver the grain to subsidized shops and decide which
families get the ration cards that allow them to buy cheap wheat and rice
there.
The sprawling system costs the government 750 billion rupees ($13.6
billion) a year, almost 1 percent of India’s gross domestic product. Yet 21
percent of the country’s 1.2 billion people remain undernourished, a proportion
that has changed little in the last two decades despite an almost 50 percent
increase in food production, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute,
a research group in Washington.
The new food security law could more than double the government’s
outlays to 2 trillion rupees a year, according to some estimates.
Much of the extra money would go to buy more grain, even though the
government already has a tremendous stockpile of wheat and rice — 71 million
tons as of early May, up 20 percent from a year earlier.
“India is paying the price of an unexpected success — our production
of rice and wheat has surged and procurement has been better than ever,” said Kaushik Basu,
the chief economic adviser to India’s Finance Ministry and a professor at
Cornell University. “This success is showing up some of the gaps in our
policy.”
The biggest gap is the inefficient, corrupt system used to get the
food to those who need it. Just 41.4 percent of the grain picked up by the
states from federal warehouses reaches Indian homes, according to a recent
World Bank study.
Critics say officials all along the chain, from warehouse managers to
shopkeepers, steal food and sell it to traders, pocketing tidy, illicit
profits.
Poor Indians who have ration cards often complain about both the
quality and quantity of grain available at government stores, called fair price
shops.
Other families do
not even have ration cards because of the procedures — and often, bribes —
required to get them. Some are denied because they cannot document their
residence or income. And critics say more people would qualify if the income
cutoff were raised; in New Delhi, it is 2,000 rupees ($36) a month, regardless
of family size, a sum that many poor families spend on rent alone.
Ms. Devi, who lives in the Jagdamba Camp slum in south Delhi, said she
was denied a ration card four years ago. She said her family’s steadiest income
is a disability pension of 1,000 rupees a month she gets because of burns
suffered in an accident a few years ago. While her husband sometimes earns up
to 3,000 rupees a month as a laborer, she says she should be entitled to
subsidized grain since they must often get by on 2,000 rupees or less.
“Sometimes, we just have to sit and wait,” she said. “My mother-in-law
gets subsidized food and she gives me some when she can.”
Indian officials say they are addressing the system’s problems. Some
states, like Tamil Nadu and Chhattisgarh, have made big improvements by using
technology to track food and have made it easier for almost all households to
get ration cards. Other states, like Bihar, have experimented with food stamps.
Reformers argue that India should move toward giving the poor cash or
food stamps as the United States, Mexico and other countries have done. That
would reduce corruption and mismanagement because the government would buy and
store only enough grain to insure against bad harvests. And the poor would get
more choices, said Ashok Gulati, chairman of the government’s
Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices.
“Why only wheat and rice? If he wants to have eggs, or fruits, or some
vegetables, he should be given that option,” Mr. Gulati said. “You need to
augment his income. Then, the distribution, you leave it to the private
sector.”
But most officials say they are worried that if India switched to food
stamps, men would trade them for liquor or tobacco, depriving their families of
enough to eat.
“It has to improve, I have no doubt about it,” said K. V. Thomas,
India’s minister for food, consumer affairs and public distribution. “But this
is the only system that can work in our country.”
Officials say Parliament is likely to vote on a new food policy at the
end of the year. In the meantime, the government is working on temporary
solutions to its grain storage problems, putting up new silos and exporting
more rice.
Still, much of it is likely to keep sitting on the side of the road
here in Punjab.
“It’s painful to watch,” said Gurdeep Singh, a farmer from near Ranwan
who recently sold his wheat harvest to the government. “The government is big
and powerful. It should be able to put up a shed to store this crop.
No comments:
Post a Comment