Report on the State of Food Insecurity in Urban India, 2010 - M. S. ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

88 REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INSECURITY IN URBAN INDIA Table 3.19 Comparison of States in terms of Composite Index, All Variants, 1998-2000 and 2004-06 V6 04/06 V6 98/2000 V5 04/06 V5 98/2000 V4 04/06 V4 98/2000 V3 04/06 V3 98/2000 V2 04/06 V2 98/2000 V1 04/06 V1 98/2000 States AP 0.554 0.579 0.495 0.512 0.500 0.522 0.548 0.568 0.492 0.498 0.485 0.486 AS 0.405 0.386 0.353 0.379 0.392 0.389 0.361 0.374 0.424 0.362 0.379 0.350 BI 0.790 0.667 0.747 0.608 0.730 0.618 0.810 0.655 0.714 0.626 0.734 0.614 GU 0.594 0.533 0.532 0.450 0.536 0.482 0.590 0.497 0.536 0.452 0.532 0.415 HA 0.532 0.511 0.437 0.474 0.474 0.456 0.491 0.531 0.408 0.396 0.366 0.416 KA 0.510 0.552 0.489 0.515 0.460 0.520 0.542 0.545 0.456 0.460 0.489 0.454 KE 0.341 0.289 0.429 0.368 0.414 0.368 0.357 0.289 0.466 0.414 0.482 0.414 MP 0.734 0.671 0.684 0.624 0.669 0.614 0.751 0.682 0.668 0.593 0.685 0.604 MA 0.470 0.498 0.463 0.397 0.423 0.445 0.515 0.444 0.394 0.446 0.439 0.392 OR 0.671 0.610 0.662 0.574 0.631 0.587 0.705 0.595 0.643 0.616 0.677 0.601 PU 0.347 0.278 0.266 0.223 0.308 0.247 0.299 0.251 0.252 0.158 0.203 0.130 RJ 0.637 0.598 0.579 0.562 0.574 0.536 0.643 0.627 0.537 0.491 0.543 0.521 TN 0.504 0.491 0.493 0.469 0.469 0.461 0.531 0.500 0.467 0.427 0.493 0.435 UP 0.666 0.455 0.577 0.406 0.595 0.408 0.645 0.453 0.584 0.370 0.563 0.368 WB 0.457 0.414 0.442 0.394 0.420 0.375 0.481 0.435 0.418 0.400 0.443 0.421 IND 0.542 0.538 0.504 0.476 0.495 0.494 0.552 0.518 0.482 0.472 0.492 0.452
under all the variants, just as Kerala, the Punjab and all the “weaker” States did. The performance of Karnataka may come as a surprise to those impressed with the economic growth of the State between 1993- 94 and 2004-05, a growth that was more-over urban-centered, with Bangalore being a key site. Perhaps the results reviewed here should cause less complaceny about the growth process “taking care” of food security even in urban settings. The improvement of the more backward States is no doubt in part because they were so backward to begin with, but may also reflect a pattern of urbanisation over the period under consideration involving rapid growth in one or two major urban centres accompanied by investments in urban civic infrastructure. This issue is worth pursuing in future research. Uttar Pradesh in particular needs to be closely studied in this regard. Having reviewed and recognised the general improvement in the state of urban food insecurity in terms of the chosen index in all its variants, it must nevertheless be pointed out that the improvement is far from commensurate with the rate of economic growth that has occurred over the URBAN FOOD INSECURITY ACROSS STATES 89 period under consideration. Moreover, the values of many of the indicators – especially the nutritional outcome indicators – are scandalously high in the case of most States. The nature of urban growth, involving growth of employment mostly in the unorganised sector and of informal employment even in the organised sector, implies considerable insecurity of earnings for the workforce. Inadequate investments in urban civic infrastructure has lead to poor environmental hygiene. The growth of very poorly served urban slums, both recognised and otherwise, has also been a key factor in the tardy improvement in the urban food security situation. It needs also to be emphasised that some variants of the index may have overstated the improvement in urban food security in so far as they rely on certain input indicators such as access to safe drinking water and access to toilets where the numbers thrown up by offical data may not reflect the actual situation on the ground in terms of the functioning of the facilities assumed present. Therefore, the problem of urban food insecurity continues to remain a massive challenge.
Page 1 and 2:
REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INSECUR
Page 3 and 4:
REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INSECUR
Page 5:
Contents List of Acronyms i List of
Page 8 and 9:
ICDS Integrated Child Development S
Page 10 and 11:
List of Tables 1.1 Growth Rates of
Page 12 and 13:
3.4 Percentage of Urban Households
Page 14 and 15:
Box 1 Koozh in Chennai List of Boxe
Page 17 and 18:
Foreword In early 2000, the M. S. S
Page 19 and 20:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary
Page 21 and 22:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The first three i
Page 23 and 24:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2009-10 and 2010-
Page 25:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY macroeconomic pol
Page 28 and 29:
2 REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INSEC
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
10 REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INSE
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 79 and 80:
CHAPTER 3 Urban Food Insecurity Acr
Page 81 and 82:
FIAUI also worked out an overall ur
Page 83 and 84:
Data on percentage of households wi
Page 85 and 86:
The presence of stunting in childre
Page 87 and 88:
3.4.1 Proportion of Urban Populatio
Page 90 and 91:
Percentage of Population Consuming
Page 93 and 94:
and 2004-05. At the all-India level
Page 96 and 97:
Number per 1000 Urban Male Workers
Page 99 and 100:
3.4.4 Percentage of Urban Household
Page 102 and 103:
Number per 1000 Urban Female Worker
Page 104 and 105:
Percentage of Urban Households with
Page 107 and 108:
Table 3.5a and Maps 3.5a and 3.5b i
Page 110 and 111:
Percentage of Urban Households with
Page 112 and 113:
Percentage of Ever-married Urban Wo
Page 115 and 116:
3.4.7 Percentage of Urban Women wit
Page 120 and 121: Percentage of Urban Children (6-35
Page 123 and 124: 2005-06 were West Bengal, Maharasht
Page 126 and 127: Percentage of Stunted Children (6-3
Page 129 and 130: etween 1998-99 and 2005-06. At the
Page 132 and 133: Percentage of Children Underweight
Page 134 and 135: Percentage of Urban Children Wastin
Page 137 and 138: Sl. No. The picture emerging from a
Page 139 and 140: • Percentage of urban children (6
Page 141 and 142: There has generally been not much c
Page 144 and 145: Composite Index of Urban Food Insec
Page 149 and 150: URBAN FOOD INSECURITY ACROSS STATES
Page 151 and 152: URBAN FOOD INSECURITY ACROSS STATES
Page 159 and 160: Most States have remained in the sa
Page 167: Period Composite Index Variant 1 wi
Page 172 and 173: 92 REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INSE
Page 180 and 181: 100 REPORT ON THE STATE OF FOOD INS
Page 193 and 194: 5.1 Brief Review CHAPTER 5 Conclusi
Page 195 and 196: measured by the composite index in
Page 197 and 198: cent of GDP, and given the importan
Page 199 and 200: CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATI
Page 201 and 202: service area of primary health cent
Page 203 and 204: ANNEXURE 1 Recommendations: Towards
Page 205 and 206: Agarwal, Arti Bhanot and Kirti Sang
Page 207 and 208: Mathur, M. P., Rajesh Chandra, Satp
Page 209 and 210: Reforms, 1993-94 to 2004-05. Unpubl
Page 211 and 212: Participants at the Consultation on
Page 213: Acknowledgements The Report
show all

Report on the State of Food Insecurity in Urban India, 2010 - M. S. ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?