essay on food production in india

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Self-Archiving Policy
• About Food Quality and Safety
• About Zhejiang University Press
• Editorial Board
• Outstanding Reviewers
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, organic farming process, benefits of organic farming, organic agriculture and sustainable development, status of organic farming in india: production, popularity, and economic growth, future prospects of organic farming in india, conclusions, conflict of interest.

• < Previous

Organic farming in India: a vision towards a healthy nation

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Suryatapa Das, Annalakshmi Chatterjee, Tapan Kumar Pal, Organic farming in India: a vision towards a healthy nation, Food Quality and Safety , Volume 4, Issue 2, May 2020, Pages 69–76, https://doi.org/10.1093/fqsafe/fyaa018

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Food quality and safety are the two important factors that have gained ever-increasing attention in general consumers. Conventionally grown foods have immense adverse health effects due to the presence of higher pesticide residue, more nitrate, heavy metals, hormones, antibiotic residue, and also genetically modified organisms. Moreover, conventionally grown foods are less nutritious and contain lesser amounts of protective antioxidants. In the quest for safer food, the demand for organically grown foods has increased during the last decades due to their probable health benefits and food safety concerns. Organic food production is defined as cultivation without the application of chemical fertilizers and synthetic pesticides or genetically modified organisms, growth hormones, and antibiotics. The popularity of organically grown foods is increasing day by day owing to their nutritional and health benefits. Organic farming also protects the environment and has a greater socio-economic impact on a nation. India is a country that is bestowed with indigenous skills and potentiality for growth in organic agriculture. Although India was far behind in the adoption of organic farming due to several reasons, presently it has achieved rapid growth in organic agriculture and now becomes one of the largest organic producers in the world. Therefore, organic farming has a great impact on the health of a nation like India by ensuring sustainable development.

Food quality and safety are two vital factors that have attained constant attention in common people. Growing environmental awareness and several food hazards (e.g. dioxins, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, and bacterial contamination) have substantially decreased the consumer’s trust towards food quality in the last decades. Intensive conventional farming can add contamination to the food chain. For these reasons, consumers are quested for safer and better foods that are produced through more ecologically and authentically by local systems. Organically grown food and food products are believed to meet these demands ( Rembialkowska, 2007 ).

In recent years, organic farming as a cultivation process is gaining increasing popularity ( Dangour et al. , 2010 ). Organically grown foods have become one of the best choices for both consumers and farmers. Organically grown foods are part of go green lifestyle. But the question is that what is meant by organic farming? ( Chopra et al. , 2013 ).

The term ‘organic’ was first coined by Northbourne, in 1940, in his book entitled ‘Look to the Land’.

Northbourne stated that ‘the farm itself should have biological completeness; it must be a living entity; it must be a unit which has within itself a balanced organic life’( Nourthbourne, 2003 ). Northbourne also defined organic farming as ‘an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity’. According to Winter and Davis (2006) , ‘it is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony’.

They mentioned that organic produce is not grown with synthetic pesticides, antibiotics, growth hormones, application of genetic modification techniques (such as genetically modified crops), sewage sludge, or chemical fertilizers.

Whereas, conventional farming is the cultivation process where synthetic pesticide and chemical fertilizers are applied to gain higher crop yield and profit. In conventional farming, synthetic pesticides and chemicals are able to eliminate insects, weeds, and pests and growth factors such as synthetic hormones and fertilizers increase growth rate ( Worthington, 2001 ).

As synthetically produced pesticides and chemical fertilizers are utilized in conventional farming, consumption of conventionally grown foods is discouraged, and for these reasons, the popularity of organic farming is increasing gradually.

Organic farming and food processing practices are wide-ranging and necessitate the development of socially, ecologically, and economically sustainable food production system. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) has suggested the basic four principles of organic farming, i.e. the principle of health, ecology, fairness, and care ( Figure 1 ). The main principles and practices of organic food production are to inspire and enhance biological cycles in the farming system, keep and enhance deep-rooted soil fertility, reduce all types of pollution, evade the application of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, conserve genetic diversity in food, consider the vast socio-ecological impact of food production, and produce high-quality food in sufficient quantity ( IFOAM, 1998 ).

Principles of organic farming (adapted from IFOAM, 1998 ).

According to the National Organic Programme implemented by USDA Organic Food Production Act (OFPA, 1990), agriculture needs specific prerequisites for both crop cultivation and animal husbandry. To be acceptable as organic, crops should be cultivated in lands without any synthetic pesticides, chemical fertilizers, and herbicides for 3 years before harvesting with enough buffer zone to lower contamination from the adjacent farms. Genetically engineered products, sewage sludge, and ionizing radiation are strictly prohibited. Fertility and nutrient content of soil are managed primarily by farming practices, with crop rotation, and using cover crops that are boosted with animal and plant waste manures. Pests, diseases, and weeds are mainly controlled with the adaptation of physical and biological control systems without using herbicides and synthetic pesticides. Organic livestock should be reared devoid of scheduled application of growth hormones or antibiotics and they should be provided with enough access to the outdoor. Preventive health practices such as routine vaccination, vitamins and minerals supplementation are also needed (OFPA, 1990).

Nutritional benefits and health safety

Magnusson et al. (2003) and Brandt and MØlgaord (2001) mentioned that the growing demand for organically farmed fresh products has created an interest in both consumer and producer regarding the nutritional value of organically and conventionally grown foods. According to a study conducted by AFSSA (2003) , organically grown foods, especially leafy vegetables and tubers, have higher dry matter as compared to conventionally grown foods. Woëse et al. (1997) and Bourn and Prescott (2002) also found similar results. Although organic cereals and their products contain lesser protein than conventional cereals, they have higher quality proteins with better amino acid scores. Lysine content in organic wheat has been reported to be 25%–30% more than conventional wheat ( Woëse et al. , 1997 ; Brandt et al. , 2000 ).

Organically grazed cows and sheep contain less fat and more lean meat as compared to conventional counterparts ( Hansson et al. , 2000 ). In a study conducted by Nürnberg et al. (2002) , organically fed cow’s muscle contains fourfold more linolenic acid, which is a recommended cardio-protective ω-3 fatty acid, with accompanying decrease in oleic acid and linoleic acid. Pastushenko et al. (2000) found that meat from an organically grazed cow contains high amounts of polyunsaturated fatty acids. The milk produced from the organic farm contains higher polyunsaturated fatty acids and vitamin E ( Lund, 1991 ). Vitamin E and carotenoids are found in a nutritionally desirable amount in organic milk ( Nürnberg et al. , 2002 ). Higher oleic acid has been found in organic virgin olive oil ( Gutierrez et al. , 1999 ). Organic plants contain significantly more magnesium, iron, and phosphorous. They also contain more calcium, sodium, and potassium as major elements and manganese, iodine, chromium, molybdenum, selenium, boron, copper, vanadium, and zinc as trace elements ( Rembialkowska, 2007 ).

According to a review of Lairon (2010) which was based on the French Agency for food safety (AFSSA) report, organic products contain more dry matter, minerals, and antioxidants such as polyphenols and salicylic acid. Organic foods (94%–100%) contain no pesticide residues in comparison to conventionally grown foods.

Fruits and vegetables contain a wide variety of phytochemicals such as polyphenols, resveratrol, and pro-vitamin C and carotenoids which are generally secondary metabolites of plants. In a study of Lairon (2010) , organic fruits and vegetables contain 27% more vitamin C than conventional fruits and vegetables. These secondary metabolites have substantial regulatory effects at cellular levels and hence found to be protective against certain diseases such as cancers, chronic inflammations, and other diseases ( Lairon, 2010 ).

According to a Food Marketing Institute (2008) , some organic foods such as corn, strawberries, and marionberries have greater than 30% of cancer-fighting antioxidants. The phenols and polyphenolic antioxidants are in higher level in organic fruits and vegetables. It has been estimated that organic plants contain double the amount of phenolic compounds than conventional ones ( Rembialkowska, 2007 ). Organic wine has been reported to contain a higher level of resveratrol ( Levite et al. , 2000 ).

Rossi et al. (2008) stated that organically grown tomatoes contain more salicylic acid than conventional counterparts. Salicylic acid is a naturally occurring phytochemical having anti-inflammatory and anti-stress effects and prevents hardening of arteries and bowel cancer ( Rembialkowska, 2007 ; Butler et al. , 2008 ).

Total sugar content is more in organic fruits because of which they taste better to consumers. Bread made from organically grown grain was found to have better flavour and also had better crumb elasticity ( BjØrn and Fruekidle, 2003 ). Organically grown fruits and vegetables have been proved to taste better and smell good ( Rembialkowska, 2000 ).

Organic vegetables normally have far less nitrate content than conventional vegetables ( Woëse et al. , 1997 ). Nitrates are used in farming as soil fertilizer but they can be easily transformed into nitrites, a matter of public health concern. Nitrites are highly reactive nitrogen species that are capable of competing with oxygen in the blood to bind with haemoglobin, thus leading to methemoglobinemia. It also binds to the secondary amine to generate nitrosamine which is a potent carcinogen ( Lairon, 2010 ).

As organically grown foods are cultivated without the use of pesticides and sewage sludge, they are less contaminated with pesticide residue and pathogenic organisms such as Listeria monocytogenes or Salmonella sp. or Escherichia coli ( Van Renterghem et al. , 1991 ; Lung et al. , 2001 ; Warnick et al. , 2001 ).

Therefore, organic foods ensure better nutritional benefits and health safety.

Environmental impact

Organic farming has a protective role in environmental conservation. The effect of organic and conventional agriculture on the environment has been extensively studied. It is believed that organic farming is less harmful to the environment as it does not allow synthetic pesticides, most of which are potentially harmful to water, soil, and local terrestrial and aquatic wildlife ( Oquist et al. , 2007 ). In addition, organic farms are better than conventional farms at sustaining biodiversity, due to practices of crop rotation. Organic farming improves physico-biological properties of soil consisting of more organic matter, biomass, higher enzyme, better soil stability, enhanced water percolation, holding capacities, lesser water, and wind erosion compared to conventionally farming soil ( Fliessbach & Mäder, 2000 ; Edwards, 2007 ; Fileβbach et al. , 2007 ). Organic farming uses lesser energy and produces less waste per unit area or per unit yield ( Stolze et al. , 2000 ; Hansen et al. , 2001 ). In addition, organically managed soils are of greater quality and water retention capacity, resulting in higher yield in organic farms even during the drought years ( Pimentel et al. , 2005 ).

Socioeconomic impact

Organic cultivation requires a higher level of labour, hence produces more income-generating jobs per farm ( Halberg, 2008 ). According to Winter and Davis (2006), an organic product typically costs 10%–40% more than the similar conventionally crops and it depends on multiple factors both in the input and the output arms. On the input side, factors that enhance the price of organic foods include the high cost of obtaining the organic certification, the high cost of manpower in the field, lack of subsidies on organics in India, unlike chemical inputs. But consumers are willing to pay a high price as there is increasing health awareness. Some organic products also have short supply against high demand with a resultant increase in cost ( Mukherjee et al. , 2018 ).

Biofertilizers and pesticides can be produced locally, so yearly inputs invested by the farmers are also low ( Lobley et al. , 2005 ). As the labours working in organic farms are less likely to be exposed to agricultural chemicals, their occupational health is improved ( Thompson and Kidwell, 1998 ). Organic food has a longer shelf life than conventional foods due to lesser nitrates and greater antioxidants. Nitrates hasten food spoilage, whereas antioxidants help to enhance the shelf life of foods ( Shreck et al. , 2006 ). Organic farming is now an expanding economic sector as a result of the profit incurred by organic produce and thereby leading to a growing inclination towards organic agriculture by the farmers.

The concept of sustainable agriculture integrates three main goals—environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity. The concept of sustainability rests on the principle that we must meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

The very basic approach to organic farming for the sustainable environment includes the following ( Yadav, 2017 ):

Improvement and maintenance of the natural landscape and agro-ecosystem.

Avoidance of overexploitation and pollution of natural resources.

Minimization of the consumption of non-renewable energy resources.

Exploitation synergies that exist in a natural ecosystem.

Maintenance and improve soil health by stimulating activity or soil organic manures and avoid harming them with pesticides.

Optimum economic returns, with a safe, secure, and healthy working environment.

Acknowledgement of the virtues of indigenous know-how and traditional farming system.

Long-term economic viability can only be possible by organic farming and because of its premium price in the market, organic farming is more profitable. The increase in the cost of production by the use of pesticides and fertilizers in conventional farming and its negative impact on farmer’s health affect economic balance in a community and benefits only go to the manufacturer of these pesticides. Continuous degradation of soil fertility by chemical fertilizers leads to production loss and hence increases the cost of production which makes the farming economically unsustainable. Implementation of a strategy encompassing food security, generation of rural employment, poverty alleviation, conservation of the natural resource, adoption of an export-oriented production system, sound infrastructure, active participation of government, and private-public sector will be helpful to make revamp economic sustainability in agriculture ( Soumya, 2015 ).

Social sustainability

It is defined as a process or framework that promotes the wellbeing of members of an organization while supporting the ability of future generations to maintain a healthy community. Social sustainability can be improved by enabling rural poor to get benefit from agricultural development, giving respect to indigenous knowledge and practices along with modern technologies, promoting gender equality in labour, full participation of vibrant rural communities to enhance their confidence and mental health, and thus decreasing suicidal rates among the farmers. Organic farming appears to generate 30% more employment in rural areas and labour achieves higher returns per unit of labour input ( Pandey and Singh, 2012 ).

Organic food and farming have continued to grow across the world. Since 1985, the total area of farmland under organic production has been increased steadily over the last three decades ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ). By 2017, there was a total of 69.8 million hectares of organically managed land recorded globally which represents a 20% growth or 11.7 million hectares of land in comparison to the year 2016. This is the largest growth ever recorded in organic farming ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ). The countries with the largest areas of organic agricultural land recorded in the year 2017 are given in Figure 2 . Australia has the largest organic lands with an area of 35.65 million hectares and India acquired the eighth position with a total organic agriculture area of 1.78 million hectares ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ).

Country-wise areas of organic agriculture land, 2017 ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ).

In 2017, it was also reported that day to day the number of organic produces increases considerably all over the world. Asia contributes to the largest percentage (40%) of organic production in the world and India contributes to be largest number of organic producer (835 000) ( Figures 3 and 4 ).

Organic producers by region, 2017 ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ).

Largest organic producers in the world, 2017 ( Willer and Lernoud, 2017 ).

The growth of organic farming in India was quite dawdling with only 41 000 hectares of organic land comprising merely 0.03% of the total cultivated area. In India during 2002, the production of organic farming was about 14 000 tonnes of which 85% of it was exported ( Chopra et al. , 2013 ). The most important barrier considered in the progress of organic agriculture in India was the lacunae in the government policies of making a firm decision to promote organic agriculture. Moreover, there were several major drawbacks in the growth of organic farming in India which include lack of awareness, lack of good marketing policies, shortage of biomass, inadequate farming infrastructure, high input cost of farming, inappropriate marketing of organic input, inefficient agricultural policies, lack of financial support, incapability of meeting export demand, lack of quality manure, and low yield ( Figure 5 ; Bhardwaj and Dhiman, 2019 ).

Constraints of organic farming in India in the past ( Bhardwaj and Dhiman, 2019 ).

Recently, the Government of India has implemented a number of programs and schemes for boosting organic farming in the country. Among these the most important include (1) The Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana, (2) Organic Value Chain Development in North Eastern Region Scheme, (3) Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, (4) The mission for Integrated Development of Horticulture (a. National Horticulture Mission, b. Horticulture Mission for North East and Himalayan states, c. National Bamboo Mission, d. National Horticulture Board, e. Coconut Development Board, d. Central Institute for Horticulture, Nagaland), (5) National Programme for Organic Production, (6) National Project on Organic Farming, and (7) National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture ( Yadav, 2017 ).

Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF) is a method of farming where the cost of growing and harvesting plants is zero as it reduces costs through eliminating external inputs and using local resources to rejuvenate soils and restore ecosystem health through diverse, multi-layered cropping systems. It requires only 10% of water and 10% electricity less than chemical and organic farming. The micro-organisms of Cow dung (300–500 crores of beneficial micro-organisms per one gram cow dung) decompose the dried biomass on the soil and convert it into ready-to-use nutrients for plants. Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana since 2015–16 and Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana are the schemes taken by the Government of India under the ZBNF policy ( Sobhana et al. , 2019 ). According to Kumar (2020) , in the union budget 2020–21, Rs 687.5 crore has been allocated for the organic and natural farming sector which was Rs 461.36 crore in the previous year.

Indian Competence Centre for Organic Agriculture cited that the global market for organically grown foods is USD 26 billion which will be increased to the amount of USD 102 billion by 2020 ( Chopra et al. , 2013 ).

The major states involved in organic agriculture in India are Gujarat, Kerala, Karnataka, Uttarakhand, Sikkim, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, and Himachal Pradesh ( Chandrashekar, 2010 ).

India ranked 8th with respect to the land of organic agriculture and 88th in the ratio of organic crops to agricultural land as per Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority and report of Research Institute of Organic Agriculture ( Chopra et al. , 2013 ; Willer and Lernoud, 2017 ). But a significant growth in the organic sector in India has been observed ( Willer and Lernoud, 2017 ) in the last decades.

There have been about a threefold increase from 528 171 ha in 2007–08 to 1.2 million ha of cultivable land in 2014–15. As per the study conducted by Associated Chambers of Commerce & Industry in India, the organic food turnover is increasing at about 25% annually and thereby will be expected to reach USD 1.36 billion in 2020 from USD 0.36 billion in 2014 ( Willer and Lernoud, 2017 ).

The consumption and popularity of organic foods are increasing day by day throughout the world. In 2008, more than two-thirds of US consumers purchased organic food, and more than one fourth purchased them weekly. The consumption of organic crops has doubled in the USA since 1997. A consumer prefers organic foods in the concept that organic foods have more nutritional values, have lesser or no additive contaminants, and sustainably grown. The families with younger consumers, in general, prefer organic fruits and vegetables than consumers of any other age group ( Thompson et al. , 1998 ; Loureino et al. , 2001 ; Magnusson et al. , 2003 ). The popularity of organic foods is due to its nutritional and health benefits and positive impact on environmental and socioeconomic status ( Chopra et al. , 2013 ) and by a survey conducted by the UN Environment Programme, organic farming methods give small yields (on average 20% lower) as compared to conventional farming ( Gutierrez et al. , 1999 ). As the yields of organically grown foods are low, the costs of them are higher. The higher prices made a barrier for many consumers to buy organic foods ( Lairon, 2010 ). Organic farming needs far more lands to generate the same amount of organic food produce as conventional farming does, as chemical fertilizers are not used here, which conventionally produces higher yield. Organic agriculture hardly contributes to addressing the issue of global climate change. During the last decades, the consumption of organic foods has been increasing gradually, particularly in western countries ( Meiner-Ploeger, 2005 ).

Organic foods have become one of the rapidly growing food markets with revenue increasing by nearly 20% each year since 1990 ( Winter and Davis, 2006 ). The global organic food market has been reached USD 81.6 billion in 2015 from USD 17.9 billion during the year 2000 ( Figure 6 ) and most of which showed double-digit growth rates ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ).

Worldwide growth in organic food sales ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ).

India is an agriculture-based country with 67% of its population and 55% of manpower depending on farming and related activities. Agriculture fulfils the basic needs of India’s fastest-growing population accounted for 30% of total income. Organic farming has been found to be an indigenous practice of India that practised in countless rural and farming communities over the millennium. The arrival of modern techniques and increased burden of population led to a propensity towards conventional farming that involves the use of synthetic fertilizer, chemical pesticides, application of genetic modification techniques, etc.

Even in developing countries like India, the demand for organically grown produce is more as people are more aware now about the safety and quality of food, and the organic process has a massive influence on soil health, which devoid of chemical pesticides. Organic cultivation has an immense prospect of income generation too ( Bhardwaj and Dhiman, 2019 ). The soil in India is bestowed with various types of naturally available organic nutrient resources that aid in organic farming ( Adolph and Butterworth, 2002 ; Reddy, 2010 ; Deshmukh and Babar, 2015 ).

India is a country with a concrete traditional farming system, ingenious farmers, extensive drylands, and nominal use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Moreover, adequate rainfall in north-east hilly regions of the country where few negligible chemicals are employed for a long period of time, come to fruition as naturally organic lands ( Gour, 2016 ).

Indian traditional farmers possess a deep insight based on their knowledge, extensive observation, perseverance and practices for maintaining soil fertility, and pest management which are found effective in strengthening organic production and subsequent economic growth in India. The progress in organic agriculture is quite commendable. Currently, India has become the largest organic producer in the globe ( Willer and Lernoud, 2017 , 2019 ) and ranked eighth having 1.78 million ha of organic agriculture land in the world in 2017 ( Sharma and Goyal, 2000 ; Adolph and Butterworth, 2002 ; Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ).

Various newer technologies have been invented in the field of organic farming such as integration of mycorrhizal fungi and nano-biostimulants (to increase the agricultural productivity in an environmentally friendly manner), mapping cultivation areas more consciously through sensor technology and spatial geodata, 3D printers (to help the country’s smallholder), production from side streams and waste along with main commodities, promotion and improvement of sustainable agriculture through innovation in drip irrigation, precision agriculture, and agro-ecological practices. Another advancement in the development of organic farming is BeeScanning App, through which beekeepers can fight the Varroa destructor parasite mite and also forms a basis for population modelling and breeding programmes ( Nova-Institut GmbH, 2018 ).

Inhana Rational Farming Technology developed on the principle ‘Element Energy Activation’ is a comprehensive organic method for ensuring ecologically and economically sustainable crop production and it is based on ancient Indian philosophy and modern scientific knowledge.

The technology works towards (1) energization of soil system: reactivation of soil-plant-microflora dynamics by restoration of the population and efficiency of the native soil microflora and (2) energization of plant system: restoration of the two defence mechanisms of the plant kingdom that are nutrient use efficiency and superior plant immunity against pest/disease infection ( Barik and Sarkar, 2017 ).

Organic farming yields more nutritious and safe food. The popularity of organic food is growing dramatically as consumer seeks the organic foods that are thought to be healthier and safer. Thus, organic food perhaps ensures food safety from farm to plate. The organic farming process is more eco-friendly than conventional farming. Organic farming keeps soil healthy and maintains environment integrity thereby, promoting the health of consumers. Moreover, the organic produce market is now the fastest growing market all over the world including India. Organic agriculture promotes the health of consumers of a nation, the ecological health of a nation, and the economic growth of a nation by income generation holistically. India, at present, is the world’s largest organic producers ( Willer and Lernoud, 2019 ) and with this vision, we can conclude that encouraging organic farming in India can build a nutritionally, ecologically, and economically healthy nation in near future.

This review work was funded by the University Grants Commission, Government of India.

None declared.

Adolph , B. , Butterworth , J . ( 2002 ). Soil fertility management in semi-arid India: its role in agricultural systems and the livelihoods of poor people . Natural Resources Institute , UK .

Google Scholar

Google Preview

AFSSA. ( 2003 ). Report on Evaluation of the nutritional and sanitary quality of organic foods (Evaluation nutritionnelle et sanitaire des aliments issus de l’agriculturebiologique, in French), AFSSA, 164 . http://www.afssa.fr . Accessed 3 August 2018 .

Barik , A. , Sarkar , N . ( 2017 , November 8-11). Organic Farming in India: Present Status, Challenges and Technological Break Through . In: 3rd International Conference on Bio-resource and Stress Management, Jaipur, India.

Bhardwaj , M. , Dhiman , M . ( 2019 ). Growth and performance of organic farming in India: what could be the future prospects? Journal of Current Science , 20 : 1 – 8 .

BjØrn , G. , Fruekidle , A. M . ( 2003 ). Cepa onions ( Allium cepa L) grown conventionally . Green Viden , 153 : 1 – 6 .

Bourn , D. , Prescott , J . ( 2002 ). A comparison of the nutritional value, sensory qualities, and food safety of organically and conventionally produced foods . Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition , 42 : 1 – 34 .

Brandt , D.A. , Brand , T.S. , Cruywagen , C.W . ( 2000 ). The use of crude protein content to predict concentrations of lysine and methionine in grain harvested from selected cultivars of wheat, barley and triticale grown in Western Cape region of South Africa . South African Journal of Animal Science , 30 : 22 – 259 .

Brandt , K. , MØlgaord , J.P . ( 2001 ). Organic agriculture: does it enhance or reduce the nutritional value of plant foods? Journal of Science of Food Agriculture , 81 : 924 – 931 .

Butler , G. et al.  ( 2008 ). Fatty acid and fat-soluble antioxidant concentrations in milk from high- and low-input conventional and organic systems: seasonal variation . Journal Science of Food and Agriculture , 88 : 1431 – 1441 .

Chandrashekar , H.M . ( 2010 ). Changing Scenario of organic farming in India: an overview . International NGO Journal , 5 : 34 – 39 .

Chopra , A. , Rao , N.C. , Gupta , N. , Vashisth , S . ( 2013 ). Come sunshine or rain; organic foods always on tract: a futuristic perspective . International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology Neurological Diseases , 3 : 202 – 205 .

Dangour , A.D. , Allen , E. , Lock , K. , Uauy , R . ( 2010 ). Nutritional composition & health benefits of organic foods-using systematic reviews to question the available evidence . Indian Journal of Medical Research , 131 : 478 – 480 .

Deshmukh , M.S. , Babar , N . ( 2015 ). Present status and prospects of organic farming in India . European Academic Research , 3 : 4271 – 4287 .

Edwards , S . ( 2007 ). The impact of compost use on crop yields in Tigray, Ethiopia . In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Organic Agriculture and Food Security . 2–5 May 2007, FAO , Rome [cited on 2013 March 20], pp. 1 – 42 . http://www.ftp.fao.org/paia/organica/ofs/02-Edwards.pdf .

Fileβbach , A. , Oberholzer , H.R. , Gunst , L. , Mäder , P . ( 2007 ). Soil organic matter and biological soil quality indicators after 21 years of organic and conventional farming . Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment , 118 : 273 – 284 .

Fliessbach , A. , Mäder , P . ( 2000 ). Microbial biomass and size—density fractions differ between soils of organic and conventional agricultural system . Soil Biology and Biochemistry , 32 : 757 – 768 .

Food Marketing Institute (FMI) . ( 2008 ). Natural and organic foods . http://www.fmi.org/docs/media-backgrounder/natural_organicfoods.pdf?sfvrsn=2 . Accessed 10 March 2019 .

Gour , M . ( 2016 ). Organic farming in India: status, issues and prospects . SOPAAN-II , 1 : 26 – 36 .

Gutierrez , F. , Arnaud , T. , Albi , M.A . ( 1999 ). Influence of ecologic cultivation on virgin olive oil quality . Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society , 76 : 617 – 621 .

Halberg , N . ( 2008 ). Energy use and green house gas emission in organic agriculture. In: Proceedings of International Conference Organic Agriculture and Climate Change . 17–18 April 2008, ENITA of Clermont , France , pp. 1 – 6 .

Hansen , B. , Alroe , H.J. , Kristensen , E.S. ( 2001 ). Approaches to assess the environmental impact of organic farming with particular regard to Denmark . Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment , 83 : 11 – 26 .

Hansson , I. , Hamilton , C. , Ekman , T. , Forslund , K . ( 2000 ). Carcass quality in certified organic production compared with conventional livestock production . Journal of Veterinary Medicine. B, Infectious Diseases and Veterinary Public Health , 47 : 111 – 120 .

International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) . ( 1998 ). The IFOAM basic standards for organic production and processing . General Assembly , Argentina, November, IFOAM, Germany . Organic Food Production Act of 1990 (U.S.C) s. 2103.

Kumar , V. ( 2020 , February 03). Union Budget 2020– 21 : Big talk on natural farming but no support [Web log post] . https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/agriculture/union-budget-2020-21-big-talk-on-natural-farming-but-no-support-69131 . on 28.04.2020

Lairon , D. ( 2010 ). Nutritional quality and safety of organic food. A review . Agronomy for Sustainable Development , 30 : 33 – 41 .

Levite , D. , Adrian , M. , Tamm , L. ( 2000 ). Preliminary results of resveratrol in wine of organic and conventional vineyards, In: Proceedings of the 6th International Congress on Organic Viticulture , 25–26 August 2000, Basel, Switzerland , pp. 256 – 257 .

Lobley , M. , Reed , M. , Butler , A. , Courtney , P. , Warren , M . ( 2005 ). Impact of Organic Farming on the Rural Economy in England . Exeter: Centre for Rural Research, Laffrowda House, University of Exeter , Exeter, UK .

Loureino , L.L. , McCluskey , J.J. , Mittelhammer , R.C . ( 2001 ). Preferences for organic, eco-labeled, or regular apples . American Journal of Agricultural Economics , 26 : 404 – 416 .

Lund , P . ( 1991 ). Characterization of alternatively produced milk . Milchwissenschaft—Milk Science International , 46 : 166 – 169 .

Lung , A.J. , Lin , C.M. , Kim , J.M . ( 2001 ). Destruction of Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in cow manure composting . Journal of Food Protection , 64 : 1309 – 1314 .

Magnusson , M. K. , Arvola , A. , Hursti , U. K. , Aberg , L. , Sjödén , P. O . ( 2003 ). Choice of organic foods is related to perceived consequences for human health and to environmentally friendly behaviour . Appetite , 40 : 109 – 117 .

Meiner-Ploeger , K . ( 2005 ). Organic farming food quality and human health. In: NJF Seminar , 15 June 2005, Alnarp, Sweden .

Mukherjee , A. , Kapoor , A. , Dutta , S . ( 2018 ). Organic food business in India: a survey of companies . Research in Economics and Management , 3 : 72 . doi: 10.22158/rem.v3n2P72 .

Nourthbourne , C.J. , 5th Lord. ( 2003 ). Look to the Land , 2nd Rev Spec edn. Sophia Perennis , Hillsdale, NY ; First Ed. 1940. J.M. Dent & Sons.

Nova-Institut GmbH . ( 2018 , July 2). High-tech strategies for small farmers and organic farming [press release] . http://news.bio-based.eu/high-tech-strategies-for-small-farmers-and-organic-farming/ . Accessed 28 April 2020 .

Nürnberg , K. et al.  ( 2002 ). N-3 fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acids of longissimus muscle in beef cattle . European Journal of Lipid Science and Technology , 104 : 463 – 471 .

Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101–624, §§ 2101- 2123, 104 Stat. 3935 (codified at 7 U.S.C.6501–6522).

Oquist , K. A. , Strock , J. S. , Mulla , D. J . ( 2007 ). Influence of alternative and conventional farming practices on subsurface drainage and water quality . Journal of Environmental Quality , 36 : 1194 – 1204 .

Padiya , J. , Vala , N . ( 2012 ). Profiling of organic food buyers in Ahmadabad city: an empirical study . Pacific Business Review International , 5 : 19 – 26 .

Pandey , J. , Singh , A . ( 2012 ): Opportunities and constraints in organic farming: an Indian perspective . Journal of Scientific Research , 56 : 47 – 72 , ISSN: 0447-9483.

Pastushenko , V. , Matthes , H.D. , Hein , T. , Holzer , Z . ( 2000 ). Impact of cattle grazing on meat fatty acid composition in relation to human nutrition. In: Proceedings 13th IFOAM Scientific Conference . pp. 293 – 296 .

Pimentel , D. , Hepperly , P. , Hanson , J. , Douds , D. , Seidel , R . ( 2005 ). Environmental, energetic and economic comparisons of organic and conventional farming systems . Bioscience , 55 : 573 – 582 .

Reddy S.B . ( 2010 ). Organic farming: status, issues and prospects—a review . Agricultural Economics Research Review , 23 : 343 – 358 .

Rembialkowska , E . ( 2000 ). Wholesomeness and Sensory Quality of Potatoes and Selected Vegetables from the organic Farms . Fundacja Rozwoj SGGW , Warszawa .

Rembialkowska , E . ( 2007 ). Quality of plant products from organic agriculture . Journal Science of Food and Agriculture , 87 : 2757 – 2762 .

Rossi , F. , Godani , F. , Bertuzzi , T. , Trevisan , M. , Ferrari , F. , Gatti , S . ( 2008 ). Health-promoting substances and heavy metal content in tomatoes grown with different farming techniques . European Journal of Nutrition , 47 : 266 – 272 .

Sharma A. K , Goyal R. K. ( 2000 ). Addition in tradition on agroforestry in arid zone . LEISA-INDIA , 2 : 19 – 20 .

Shepherd , R. , Magnusson , M. , Sjödén , P. O . ( 2005 ). Determinants of consumer behavior related to organic foods . Ambio , 34 : 352 – 359 .

Shreck , A. , Getz , C. , Feenstra , G. ( 2006 ). Social sustainability, farm labor, and organic agriculture: findings from an exploratory analysis . Agriculture and Human Values , 23 : 439 – 449 .

Sobhana , E. , Chitraputhira Pillai , S. , Swaminathan , V. , Pandian , K. , Sankarapandian , S . ( 2019 ). Zero Budget Natural Farming. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.17084.46727.

Soumya , K. M . ( 2015 ). Organic farming: an effective way to promote sustainable agriculture development in India . IOSR Journal Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) , 20 : 31 – 36 , e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. www.iosrjournals.org .

Stolze , M. , Piorr , A. , Haring , A.M. , Dabbert , S. ( 2000 ). Environmental impacts of organic farming in Europe . Organic Farming in Europe: Economics and Policy . vol. 6 . University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany . Retrieved on 15 May 2011. http://orgprints.org/8400/1/Organic_Farming_in_Europe_Volume06_The_Environmental_Impacts_of_Organic_Farming_in_Europe.pdf .

Thompson , G.D. , Kidwell , J . ( 1998 ). Explaining the choice of organic procedure: cosmetic defects, prices, and consumer preferences . American Journal of Agricultural Economics , 80 : 277 – 287 .

Van Renterghem , B. , Huysman , F. , Rygole , R. , Verstraete , W . ( 1991 ). Detection and prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in the agricultural ecosystem . Journal of Applied Bacteriology , 71 : 211 – 217 .

Warnick , L. D. , Crofton , L. M. , Pelzer , K. D. , Hawkins , M. J . ( 2001 ). Risk factors for clinical salmonellosis in Virginia, USA cattle herd . Preventive Veterinary Medicine , 49 : 259 – 275 .

Willer , H. , Lernoud , J ., eds. ( 2017 ). The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends . FiBL & IFOAM—Organics International , Bonn.

Willer , H . Lernoud J , eds. ( 2019 ). The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends . Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick and IFOAM—Organics International , Bonn . https://www.organicworld.net/yearbook/yearbook-2019.html .

Winter , C.K. , Davis , S.F . ( 2006 ). Organic food . Journal of Food Science , 71 : 117 – 124 .

Woëse , K. , Lange , D. , Boess , C. , Bögl , K.W . ( 1997 ). A comparison of organically and conventionally grown foods—results of a review of the relevant literature . Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture , 74 : 281 – 293 .

Worthington , V . ( 2001 ). Nutritional quality of organic versus conventional fruits, vegetables, and grains . Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine , 7 : 161 – 173 .

Yadav , M . ( 2017 ). Towards a healthier nation: organic farming and government policies in India . International Journal of Advance Research and Development , 2 : 153 – 159 .

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Advertising and Corporate Services

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 2399-1402
• Print ISSN 2399-1399
• Copyright © 2024 Zhejiang University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Sustainable food security in India—Domestic production and macronutrient availability

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Contributed equally to this work with: David Reay, Peter Higgins

Roles Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Moray House School of Education, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

• Hannah Ritchie, 
• David Reay, 
• Peter Higgins

• Published: March 23, 2018
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766
• Reader Comments

India has been perceived as a development enigma: Recent rates of economic growth have not been matched by similar rates in health and nutritional improvements. To meet the second Sustainable Development Goal (SDG2) of achieving zero hunger by 2030, India faces a substantial challenge in meeting basic nutritional needs in addition to addressing population, environmental and dietary pressures. Here we have mapped—for the first time—the Indian food system from crop production to household-level availability across three key macronutrients categories of ‘calories’, ‘digestible protein’ and ‘fat’. To better understand the potential of reduced food chain losses and improved crop yields to close future food deficits, scenario analysis was conducted to 2030 and 2050. Under India’s current self-sufficiency model, our analysis indicates severe shortfalls in availability of all macronutrients across a large proportion (>60%) of the Indian population. The extent of projected shortfalls continues to grow such that, even in ambitious waste reduction and yield scenarios, enhanced domestic production alone will be inadequate in closing the nutrition supply gap. We suggest that to meet SDG2 India will need to take a combined approach of optimising domestic production and increasing its participation in global trade.

Citation: Ritchie H, Reay D, Higgins P (2018) Sustainable food security in India—Domestic production and macronutrient availability. PLoS ONE 13(3): e0193766. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766

Editor: David A. Lightfoot, College of Agricultural Sciences, UNITED STATES

Received: September 13, 2017; Accepted: February 17, 2018; Published: March 23, 2018

Copyright: © 2018 Ritchie et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files, or can be accessed at the UN FAO databases through the following URL: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home .

Funding: The authors received funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) as part of its E3 DTP programme.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

In 2015, the United Nations (UN) committed to achieving zero hunger by 2030 as the second of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). An important element of this goal is to end all forms of malnutrition, including agreed targets on childhood stunting and wasting. This represents an important progression beyond the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), where food security was defined and measured solely on the basis of basic energy requirements (caloric intake), and prevalence of underweight children [ 1 ]. This new commitment has significant implications for the focus of research and policy decisions; it requires a broadening of scope beyond the traditional analysis of energy intake, and inclusion of all nutrients necessary for adequate nourishment.

India offers a potentially unique example in the development of models and mechanisms by which nutritional needs can be addressed sustainably. In 2016, India ranked 97 out of 118 on the Global Hunger Index (GHI)—this rates nations’ nutritional status based on indicators of undernourishment, child wasting, stunting and mortality [ 2 ]. Despite ranking above some of the world’s poorest nations, India’s reduction in malnourishment has been slow relative to its recent strong economic growth and puts it behind poorer neighbouring countries [ 3 ]; India has fallen from 80 th to 97 th since 2000.

India’s nutritional problems are extensive. In 2016, 38.7% of children under five were defined as ‘stunted’ (of below average height) [ 2 ], a strong indicator of chronic malnourishment in children and pregnant women, and a largely irreversible condition leading to reduced physical and mental development [ 4 ]. Malnourishment within the adult population is also severe, with approximately 15% of the total population defined as malnourished. The issue of malnutrition in India is complex, and determined by a combination of dietary intake and diversity, disease burden (intensified by poor sanitation and hygiene standards), and female empowerment and education [ 5 ]. Improvements in dietary intake alone will therefore by insufficient to eliminate malnutrition, however it forms an integral component alongside progress in other social and health indicators—particularly sanitation. Quantification of India’s micronutrient and amino acid profiles, and recommendations for addressing these deficiencies have been completed as a follow-up paper (Ritchie et al. in submission) to provide a more holistic overview of its nutritional position.

India’s nutritional and health challenges are likely to be compounded in the coming decades through population growth and resource pressures. Its current population of 1.26 billion is projected to increase to 1.6 billion by 2050, overtaking China as the world’s most populous nation [ 6 ]. India has also been highlighted as one of the most risk-prone nations for climate change impacts, water scarcity, and declining soil fertility through land degradation [ 7 ].

A number of studies have focused specifically on Indian food intake and malnutrition issues from survey assessments at the household level [ 8 ]. The emphasis within India’s agricultural policy and assessment of its success has traditionally been on energy (caloric) intake [ 9 ]. Since the Green Revolution in the 1970s, agricultural policies have been oriented towards a rapid increase in the production of high-yielding cereal crops with a focus to meet the basic calorific needs of a growing population. India has attempted to reach self-sufficiency predominantly through political and investment orientation towards wheat and rice varieties [ 10 ]. While production of staple crops has increased significantly, India’s agricultural policy focus on cereal production raises a key challenge in simultaneously meeting nutritional needs in caloric, high-quality protein and fat intakes. Few studies have addressed the system-wide balance between supply and demand of the three key macronutrients—calories, protein and fat; nor have they assessed the importance of protein quality through digestibility and amino acid scoring. This assessment is particularly significant for India as a result of its extensive and complex malnutrition issues. Whether India is capable of meeting these macronutrient needs in the future through domestic production improvements alone is of prime importance for study, as a result of its growing population and policy orientation towards self-sufficiency.

Improving the availability and access to food at the consumer level requires an understanding of how food is created and lost through its various pathways across the full agricultural supply chain. Here, for the first time, we have attempted to capture this high-level outlook from crop harvesting to residual food availability across the three macronutrient categories.

Mapping the current Indian food system

The Indian food system was mapped from crop production through to per capita food supply using FAO Food Balance Sheets (FBS) from its FAOstats databases [ 11 ]. FBS provide quantitative data (by mass) on production of food items and primary commodities, and their utilisations throughout the food supply chain. Such data are available at national, regional and global levels. Food Balance Sheet data for 2011 have been used, these being from the latest full data-set available. Some aspects of FBS data are available for the years 2012 and 2013, however such data are not complete across all commodities and value chain stages at the time of writing.

Food Balance Sheets provide mass quantities across the following stages of the supply chain: crop production, exports, imports, stock variation, re-sown produce, animal feed, other non-food uses, and food supplied (as kg per capita per year). Data on all key food items and commodities across all food groups (cereals; roots and tubers; oilseeds and pulses; fruit and vegetables; fish and seafood; and meat and dairy) are included within these balances.

While there are uncertainties in FAO data (see Supplementary Information for further discussion on FAO data limitations), FBS provide the only complete dataset available for full commodity chain analysis. Therefore, while not perfect, they provide an invaluable high-level outlook of relative contribution of each stage in the food production and distribution system. As shown in this study (see Results section below), a top-down model using FAO FBS has a discrepancy of <10% with national nutrition survey results at the household level.

FBS do not provide food loss and waste figures by stage in the supply chain. To maintain consistency with FAO literature, food loss figures have therefore been calculated based on South Asian regional percentages within FAO publications [ 12 ]. These percentage figures break food losses down across seven commodity groups and five supply chain stages (agricultural production, postharvest handling and storage, processing and packaging, distribution and consumption). The applied percentage values by commodity type and supply chain stage are provided in S1 Table .

In order to calculate the total nutritional value at each supply chain stage, commodity mass quantities were multiplied by FAO macronutrient nutritional factors [ 11 ]. In this analysis, energy content (kilocalories), protein, and fat supply were analysed. Protein quality is a key concern for India in particular as a result of its largely grain-based diet, with grains tending to have poorer digestibility and amino acid (AA) profiles than animal-based products and plant-based legume alternatives [ 13 ]. To best quantify limitations in protein quality in the Indian diet, protein intakes have therefore been corrected for digestibility using FAO digestibility values [ 14 ].

For consistency, and to provide a better understanding of the food system down to the individual supply level, all metrics have been normalised to average per person per day (pppd) availability using UN population figures and prospects data [ 6 ]. Whilst this provides an average per capita availability value, it does not account for variability in actual macronutrient supply within the population. To help adjust for this, we have also estimated the assumed distribution of supply of each macronutrient using the FAO’s preferred log-normal distribution and India-specific coefficient variation (CV) factor of 0.26 [ 15 ]. Whilst we recognise that food requirements vary between demographics based on age, gender and activity levels, the normalisation of food units to average per capita supply levels is essential in providing relatable measures of food losses within the system, and its measure relative to demographically-weighted average nutritional requirements (as described below) is appropriate in providing an estimation of the risk of malnourishment.

Estimated macronutrient supply has then been compared to recommended intake values. The FAO defines the “Average Daily Energy Requirement” (ADER)—for India’s demographic specifically—as 2269kcal pppd; ADER is defined as the average caloric intake necessary to maintain a healthy weight based on the demographics, occupation, and activity levels of any given population [ 16 ]. Protein requirements can vary between similar individuals; recommended daily amounts (RDA) are therefore typically given as two standard deviations (SD) above the average requirement to provide a safety margin, which some individuals would be at risk of falling below. The World Health Organization (WHO) define a ‘safe’ (recommended) intake in adults of 0.83 grams per kilogram per day (g/kg/d) of body mass for proteins with a digestibility score of 1.0 [ 17 ]. The average vegetarian Indian diet contains lower intakes of animal-based complete proteins; the Indian Institute of Nutrition therefore recommends a higher intake of 1 g/kg/d of total protein for Indians to ensure requirements of high-quality protein are met [ 18 ]. This is equivalent to 55 and 60 grams of protein per day in average adult females and males, respectively based on mean body weight [ 19 ]. Since our analysis attempts to correct for protein digestibility, WHO’s lower safe intake of 0.83g/kg/d would reduce to an equivalent of 50 grams of high-quality protein per day for an average 60 kilogram individual. Consequently in this study we have adopted this RDA value of 50 gpppd.

Dietary fat intake plays a key dietary role in the absorption of essential micronutrients. Several vital vitamins, including vitamin A, D, E and K are fat-soluble—insufficient intake can therefore result in poor micronutrient absorption and utilisation [ 20 ]. Inadequate fat intake can therefore exacerbate the widespread ‘hidden hunger’ (micronutrient deficiency) challenge in India [ 21 ] through poor nutrient absorption. However, daily requirements for fatty acids are less straightforward to determine, relative to energy or protein—there is no widely-agreed figure for total fat requirements for adequate nutrition [ 22 ]. The resolution of food balance sheet data does not allow us to adequately quantity the availability to the level of specific fatty acids. As a result, although we have mapped pathways of total fat availability through the food system in a similar manner to energy and protein, we have not here attempted to quantity the prevalence of potential insufficiency at the household level.

Mapping potential near-term and long-term scenarios

Our initial analysis identified two mechanisms potentially crucial in increasing food availability at the household level: reduction of harvesting, postharvest and distribution losses; and improvements in crop yields. Medium-term (through to 2030) and long-term (2050) scenarios have therefore been mapped based on use of these mechanisms. It should be noted that these scenarios are focused on domestic supply-side measures to enhance food availability as opposed to demand drivers related to consumer preferences. A summary of assumptions used in each scenario in this analysis is provided in S2 Table .

A 2030 baseline scenario (assuming yields stagnate and population growth continues in line with UN projections) and three alternative scenarios to 2030 were analysed:

Scenario 1 (halving food supply chain losses): it was assumed that a significant shift in post-harvest management practices, appropriate refrigeration, and efficient distribution allowed for a halving of food loss percentages at the production, postharvest, processing and distribution stages of the supply chain. This would make its relative losses more in line with those of more developed nations [ 12 ]. In this scenario consumption (household) waste was assumed to remain constant.

Scenario 2 (achieving 50% of attainable yield (AY) across all key crops): the halving of food chain losses in scenario 1 was assumed. In addition, it was assumed that all key crops managed to achieve 50% AY through better agricultural management, irrigation and fertiliser practices. ‘Attainable yield’ is defined as the yield achieved with best management practices including pest, nutrient (i.e. nutrients are not limiting) and water management.

Scenario 3 (achieving 75% AY across all key crops): assumptions as in scenario 2 except an attainment of 75%, rather than 50% AY, has been assumed through crop yield improvements.

Long-term (through to 2050) scenarios were as follows:

Scenario 1 (halving food supply chain losses): the same assumption of halving food loss percentages at the production, postharvest, processing and distribution stages of the supply chain was applied in this scenario. This will require a significant shift in post-harvest management practices, appropriate refrigeration, and efficient distribution, hence 50% reduction represents a magnitude which is more likely to be achieved in this long-term scenario than in the near-term.

Scenario 2 (achieving 75% AY across all key crops): the same assumption of a closure of the yield gap to 75% AY across all crop types, as in the near-term scenario 3, was applied.

Scenario 3 (achieving 90% AY across all key crops): it was assumed that all crop types managed to achieve closure of the yield gap to 90% AY.

To correct for 2030 and 2050 population estimates, all metrics were re-normalised to ‘per person per day’ (pppd) based on a projected Indian population estimate from UN prospects medium fertility scenarios [ 6 ].

To best demonstrate the food production potential of current agricultural support mechanisms, such as governmental policy and subsidy (which largely determine crop choices), the relative allocation of crop production was assumed constant. It was also assumed that production increases were achieved through agricultural intensification alone; this assumption was based on FAOstats data which has shown no increase in agricultural land area over the past decade, indicating a stagnation in agricultural extensification ( http://faostat.fao.org/beta/en/#home ).

Crop yield increases were derived based on closure of current farm yields (FY) to reported attainable yields (AY). FY is defined as the average on-farm yield achieved by farmers within a given region, and AY is defined as the economically attainable (optimal) yield which could be achieved if best practices in water and pest management, fertiliser application and technologies are utilised in non-nutrient limiting conditions). Estimates of crop yield improvements were based on given percentage realisations of maximum attainable yields (AY) attained from published Indian crop-specific figures [ 23 ]. These data are available across all key crop types. Baseline and AY values are provided in S3 Table .

Significant improvements in yield would predominantly be achieved through improved nutrient and water management. In the present study, scenarios were mapped based on achievement of 50% and 75% AY in the near-term. Fifty percent AY should be technically feasible by 2030: many crops have already reached these values, and those which have yet to do so, typically fall short by 3–5% (see S3 Table for baseline, and AY values). Attainment of 75% AY would be highly ambitious in the near-term, representing an increase of >20% in yield. However, 75% AY and higher may be feasible in the long-term if significant investment in agricultural management and best practice were to be realised in this sector.

Our scenarios to 2050 are therefore modelled on the basis of closure of the yield gap to 75% and 90% AY. To assess whether these estimates were realistic, necessary growth rates were cross-checked based on historical yield growth rates in India. Discussion on this comparison and the suitability of attainable yield valuables utilised in this study are available in the Supplementary Discussion.

Climate change impacts on crop yields remain highly uncertain; the importance of temperature thresholds in overall crop tolerance makes yield impacts highly dependent on GHG emission scenarios. This makes it challenging to accurately quantify 2050 climate impacts. As such, we applied average percentage changes in yields of Indian staple crops based on literature review [ 24 ] of field-based observations and climate model results. The studies utilised presented results for a doubling of atmospheric CO 2 from pre-industrial levels. This approximates to a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario for 2050 [ 25 ]. The yield-climate factors applied in this analysis are provided in S4 Table .

It is projected that, through economic growth and shifts in dietary preferences, meat and dairy demand in India will continue to increase through to 2050. It has been assumed that per capita demand in 2050 is in line with FAO projections; this represents an increase in meat from 3.1kg per person per year (2007) to 18.3kg in 2050, and an increase in milk and dairy from 67kg to 110kg per person per year [ 26 ]. We here assume that this increase in livestock production has been met through increased production of crop-based animal feed rather than pasture. The change in macronutrient demand for animal feed was calculated based on energy and protein conversion efficiency factors for dominant livestock types (beef cattle, dairy cattle, ruminants and poultry) [ 27 ].

Our analysis assumes that the per person allocation of crops for resowing and non-food uses, and the relative allocation of land for respective crop selection, is the same as in the initial baseline (2011) analysis.

Current food system pathways

The pathways of macronutrients from crop production to residual food availability are shown for calories, digestible protein and fat in Fig 1A–1C . Across all macronutrients, the relative magnitude of exports, imports and stock variation is small, and approximately balance as inputs and outputs to the food system. This result is in line with India’s orientation towards meeting food demand through self-sufficiency agricultural policies [ 28 , 29 ]. This study’s scenarios are therefore designed to assess whether this same emphasis on self-sufficiency in food supply through to 2050 could be achieved through waste reduction and crop yield improvements alone.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

Food pathways in (a) calories; (b) digestible protein; and (c) fat from crop production to residual food availability, normalised to average per capita levels assuming equal distribution. Red bars (negative numbers) indicate food system losses; blue bars indicate system inputs; green bars indicate meat and dairy production; and grey bars indicate macronutrient availability at intermediate stages of the chain.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.g001

In 2011, India produced 3159kcal, 72g of digestible protein, and 86g of fat per person per day (pppd) ( Fig 1A–1C ). Across the system, this resulted in average food availability of 2039kcal, 48g digestible protein, and 49g fat pppd; this represents a loss across the food supply system of 35%, 33%, and 43% in calories, digestible protein, and fat respectively.

Our top-down supply model has been cross-checked against India’s National Sample Survey (NSS) data—this reports nutritional intakes bi-annually measured through national household surveys. In its 68 th Round (2011–12) report, the NSS reported average daily intakes of 2206kcal and 2233kcal in urban and rural areas, respectively; 60g of protein in both demographics; and 58g (urban) and 46g (rural) of fat [ 30 ]. Our top-down analysis therefore suggests slightly lower caloric availability than NSS intake figures (but with a discrepancy of <10%); and strong correlation regarding fat intake. Since NSS data reports total protein and take no account of quality or digestibility, our results of digestible protein are not directly comparable. However, with digestibility scores removed, our analysis suggests a total average protein availability of 57g pppd—within 5% of NSS intake results.

Despite the acknowledged uncertainties in FAO FBS datasets (see Supplementary discussion), the strong correlation (within 5–10%) between our top-down supply model and reported household intakes (bottom-up approach) gives confidence in the use of FBS data for high-level food chain analyses such as attempted here.

The largest sources of loss identified in the Indian food system for calories and protein lie in the agricultural production and post-harvest waste stages of the chain, with lower but significant losses in processing and distribution. Consumption-phase losses are comparatively small. Higher losses of fat occur predominantly due to the allocation of oilseed crops for non-food uses; this is in contrast to digestible protein where losses to competing non-food uses are negligible.

In contrast to the average global food supply system, the conversion of crop-based animal feed to meat and dairy produce in India appears comparatively efficient, with an input-output ratio close to one for calories and protein, and an apparent small production of fats [ 31 ]. It is one of the few agricultural systems in the world where the majority of livestock feed demand is met through crop residues, byproducts and pasture lands—its lactovegetarian preferences tend to favour pasture-fed dairy cattle over grain-fed livestock such as poultry (ibid).

Average per capita supply across all macronutrients falls below average per capita minimum requirements. The magnitude of this issue in India emerges via the population-intake distributions. With extension of average macronutrient availability to availability across the population distribution (using a log-normal distribution with CV of 0.26), 66% (826 million) and 56% (703 million) of the population are at risk of falling below recommended energy and protein requirements, respectively.

Potential future pathways

Scenario results for 2030..

Results from scenario analyses for potential food waste reduction and crop yield improvements are summarised in Table 1 . Note that we have assumed no change in income/dietary inequalities, hence the CV in distribution has remained constant.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.t001

Under all scenarios, waste or yield improvements fail to keep pace with population growth through to 2030; average per capita caloric, digestible protein and fat availability all fall below the 2011 baseline. Under current levels of dietary inequality, distribution of availability highlights even greater potential malnourishment. The majority (>75%) of the population are at risk of falling below requirements in energy and protein availability in all scenarios. This represents severe malnutrition across India in 2030, even in the case of significant and ambitious yield and efficiency improvements.

Under these scenarios, India would fall far short of reaching the SDG2 target of Zero Hunger by 2030.

Scenario results for 2050.

India’s anticipated population growth, in addition to potential impacts of climate change on crop yields, could have severe implications on household macronutrient supply by 2050. Our 2050 baseline scenario demonstrates these potential impacts, assuming gains in crop yields were to stagnate at current levels. The full supply chain pathways are shown in Fig 2A–2C . Even at the top level of the supply chain (crop production phase) mean provision per person would fall below average requirements in all macronutrients (2198kcal, 49g protein, and 60g fat per person). Although reducing food system losses plays an important role in improving availability at the household level, this result highlights the necessity of also achieving substantial crop yield improvements at the top of the supply chain.

Food pathways in (a) calories; (b) digestible protein; and (c) fat from crop production to residual food availability, normalised to average per capita levels assuming equal distribution under 2050 baseline conditions. Red bars (negative numbers) indicate food system losses; blue bars indicate system inputs; green bars indicate meat and dairy production; and grey bars indicate macronutrient availability at intermediate stages of the chain.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.g002

How these variables impact on availability at the household level in our 2050 baseline, and three scenarios is detailed in Table 2 , with baseline distributions provided in Supplementary Fig 1A–1C . As shown, even in the case of scenario 1 (halving of supply chain loss and waste), and scenario 2 (increase to 75% of AY), in 2050 greater than 80% of the population would potentially fall below average requirements in energy and protein. Only in the case of significant yield increases to 90% AY (scenario 3) would projected levels of malnourishment approach current levels. This would still leave 62% and 56% of the population at risk of falling below recommended caloric and protein requirements, respectively.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.t002

Our analysis utilised a framework for evaluation of the whole food system (from crop production through to residual food availability) by normalising to consistent and relatively simplistic metrics (per person per day). This holistic approach is critical for identifying levers within the food system which can be targeted for improvements in food security and efficiency of supply. The basic framework is replicable and could therefore be adapted for analysis of any dietary component (for example, micronutrients or amino acids and at a range of scales (global, regional, or national). This allows for similar analyses to be carried out for any nation, potentially allowing for improved understanding of hotspots in the food system and opportunities for improved efficiency. As such, it could then allow national food strategies to focus on components which are likely to maximise improvements.

Overall, our analyses indicate weaknesses in India’s current reliance on domestic food production. Further calculation, based on FAO FBS, make this explicit: in 2011 India’s population was 17.8% of the global total, yet produced only 10.8%, 9%, and 11.8% of the world’s total calories, digestible protein and fat respectively. Based on calculations using FAOstats global crop production data and nutritional composition factors, in 2011 world crop production totalled 1.34x10 16 kcal; 3.62x10 14 g digestible protein; and 3.33x10 14 g fat. 2011 Indian production amounted to 1.44x10 15 kcal; 3.27x10 13 g digestible protein; and 3.93x10 13 g fat. Even in a highly efficient food system, self-sufficiency is impossible to achieve based on such production levels and the need to provide sufficient nourishment for all. Likewise, even if Indian population figures were to plateau, it is unlikely that domestic production alone would be sufficient to close the current food gap.

Current malnutrition levels—defined here as insufficient macronutrient availability—in India are already high. Sufficient nutrition requires adequate availability and intake of all three macronutrients. Impacts of insufficient protein and energy intake can often be difficult to decouple, and are often termed protein-energy malnourishment (PEM)—PEM has a number of negative consequences including reduced physical and mental development [ 32 ]; increased susceptibility to disease and infection; poorer recovery and increased mortality from disease; and lower productivity [ 33 ]. Our results indicate that India’s self-sufficiency model—a reliance on domestic crop yield increases and waste reduction strategies—will be insufficient to meet requirements across all three macronutrients. Levels of undersupply and consequent malnutrition would show a significant increase in both 2030 and 2050 scenarios.

This has important implications for forward planning to effectively address malnutrition. Policy incentives in Indian agriculture since the Green Revolution have predominantly been focused on achieving caloric food security through increased production of cereals (wheat and rice) [ 9 ]. This has resulted in a heavily carbohydrate-based diet (> 65–70% total energy intake [ 34 ]) which may be significantly lacking in adequate diversity for provision of other important nutrients [ 35 ]. Widespread lactovegetarian preferences have further reduced the scope for dietary diversity [ 36 ].

If trying to address caloric inadequacy alone, efforts to increase output of energy-dense crops (i.e. cereals, roots and tubers) may seem appropriate, and has largely been India’s focus to date [ 8 ]. Our analysis, however, strongly suggests the need to shift dietary composition away from reliance on carbohydrates towards a more diversified intake of protein and fats (with diversification also contributing to a reduction in micronutrient deficiency) [ 37 ]. Forward planning therefore needs to simultaneously address caloric inadequacy and malnourishment through balanced, increased supply and intake of high-quality proteins and fats.

Our examination of macronutrient supply in India indicates large inequalities in availability across the population. This is likely to be closely coupled to the high levels of income inequality and poverty which remain in India today [ 8 ]. Large inequalities in food supply and dietary intake will make it increasingly difficult for India to address its malnutrition challenges; our assessment of potential improvement scenarios highlight that, even in cases where average macronutrient supplies meet requirements, the high CV in distribution still leaves a large proportion of the total population at risk of malnourishment. Whilst the RDA values used in this analysis account for distribution in nutritional requirements of individuals, they do not account for the distribution in intake. To meet SDG2 (whereby all individuals’ requirements are met) at current levels of inequality, the national mean intake would therefore have to increase to 3600kcal pppd; 82g pppd digestible protein; and 105g pppd fat. This is well above current national pppd supply values, even if crop production-phase level were to be at the top of the food system.

It should be emphasised that this work is a largely computational, supply-driven analysis exploring the domestic capacity of India’s food. Our results are not intended to imply actual future scenarios of Indian malnutrition. Projections of acute food shortage implied within this analysis would be likely to drive market and policy interventions including enhanced trade, in addition to changes in consumer and producer responses. The interaction between supply and demand-side measures, commodity prices, trade, and governmental policy creates an important feedback loop for food pricing, affordability and production [ 38 ]. For example, the estimated reduction in per capita food supply and domestic food shortage would be expected to drive an increase in food prices [ 39 , 40 ]. Rising food prices (as are expected across a number of countries where food demand continues to grow [ 41 ]) create a number of producer and consumer impacts, including per capita food expenditure, reduced purchasing power for expensive commodities such as meat and dairy products [ 42 ], farmer incentives and agricultural investment. Analysis of the drivers of historical food price volatility and inflation in India suggests that both supply and demand-side factors (and the interaction between) play an important role [ 40 ].

The impact of feedbacks such as reduced meat and dairy demand (thereby reducing demands for feed, with further feedbacks on food supply and commodity prices) are not reflected within these scenarios, but will play an important role in determining food system dynamics. The impact of domestic food shortages, agricultural prices and balance within international markets is particularly pronounced in India where the agricultural sector accounts for the employment and income of a large percentage of the population [ 43 ]. Literature on the interactions between poverty, agriculture and food prices is extensive; many studies indicate that, since a large share of the world’s poor are rural, high food prices have a positive long-term impact on poverty reduction. However they have negative impacts on poverty and malnutrition in the short-term [ 39 , 44 – 48 ]. The lack of domestic capacity in India to meet the full nutritional needs (balancing caloric, protein and micronutrient requirements) of its population is likely to increase the demand for commodity imports. This in turn creates further feedbacks on domestic prices, farmer income and inevitably poverty reduction [ 46 ]. Further work on the economic dimension to Indian food security—within the context of value chain potential and efficiency evaluations in this study—is therefore crucial to develop better understanding of their interactions and policy responses.

Overall, our results highlighted several key points:

• production quantities at the farm level are very low relative to global average production;
• low import and export values produce an approximately balanced trade model; this correlates with India’s self-sufficiency focused agricultural and food policies;
• harvesting, post-harvest and distribution losses in the supply chain form a large proportion of total food system inefficiencies;
• a moderate amount of energy and fat (but not protein) is allocated to non-food uses, although this is significantly less than global average non-food allocation;
• India’s caloric and protein losses in the conversion of edible crops to livestock are small due to the dominance of pasture-fed livestock such as dairy cattle. The large nutritional gains achieved through increased milk consumption in India suggest this may be a beneficial trade-off in agricultural land for provision of high-quality protein.

Our examination of the food supply chain in India identified harvesting, handling and storage losses, and top-level crop production to be the key intervention phases for improving food security. The approach not only adds value in the identification of ‘hotspots’ of wastage and inefficiency, but also allows for an understanding of the magnitude of change required to produce a certain food supply chain-wide result. Our analysis highlighted that, despite being an important mechanism for improving food security, even a 50% reduction in food loss/waste (a challenge that is achievable but would take significant economic, infrastructural and educational investment) alone would be largely insufficient in ensuring food security in India.

Increased production at the agricultural level must therefore be a focus for both near and long-term food security. The viability of achieving yields close to 75% AY in the near-term (to 2030), across the range of available crops, needs to be more closely considered. For several staple crops, a yield increase upwards of 30% and 50% would be required for attainment of 75% and 90% AY, respectively (see S2 Table ). The challenge in reaching close to 90% AY (i.e. almost maximum yield) is substantial; many developed countries have not yet reached such levels [ 23 ].

The potential resource limits and environmental implications needed to achieve such yields also need to be given consideration in order to optimise crop selection and mitigate negative impacts. The yield gap could predominantly be closed through improved water and nutrient management [ 23 ]. Depleting groundwater resources through agricultural irrigation in India raises key concerns over long-term water security [ 49 ][ 50 ], and whether water availability is likely to impose a resource limit on yield attainment. Improved yields through increased fertiliser application raise similar sustainability concerns; nitrous oxide (N 2 O) is a key source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a major source being microbially-mediated emissions as a result of nitrogen fertiliser application to agricultural soils [ 51 ]. There may therefore be a significant GHG penalty in closing the current yield gap.

It should be noted that this study has considered only yield improvements through traditional crop varieties. Genetic variation and modification of crop strains may offer further potential for yield increases, in addition to increased resilience to pests, disease and climatic impacts [ 52 ]. However, with the exception of Bt Cotton, genetically modified (GM) crop varieties are banned from commercial crop production [ 53 ]. Despite the introduction of GM field trials in recent years, they continue to face significant resistance across a range of stakeholder groups [ 54 ].

Our analyses for 2050 highlight severe food security challenges for India, even in scenarios which assume attainment of 90% AY for all crops. In addition to the hotspots identified for further focus to achieve near-term improvements, long-term strategies require increased consideration of the impact of potential climatic changes. India’s staple crops–wheat and rice—show particular vulnerability; in the near-term, CO 2 fertilisation may offer some positive yield impacts, however, simulated climate models suggest this effect is likely to be cancelled out if global mean temperature increase reaches a 3°C threshold in wheat (2°C for rice) [ 55 ]. This suggests negative climate impacts may only begin to arise from mid-century onwards. Failure to build capacity and agricultural resilience in the interim could result in severe food deficits should a 2°C or 3°C warming threshold be breached. Planning strategies should therefore not only aim to adapt to gradual near-term impacts of a changing climate, but importantly focus on capacity-building for a resilient food system in a warmer post-2050 world.

Our 2050 scenarios are based on assumptions which are sensitive to change; we have assumed BAU climatic-yield factors, and increased meat and dairy intakes in line with FAO projections. Both of these assumptions could change based on global GHG mitigation progress, and governmental or social interventions on meat consumption. In addition, it is recognised that some potential climatic impacts could be reduced through shifts in crop production regions and seasonal cropping patterns [ 24 ]. While such changes may marginally change the scale of the food supply and malnutrition challenge, the overall conclusions remain the same. Climatic and livestock impacts may serve to exacerbate the issue, however, India would continue to face a severe risk of domestic food shortages regardless of these additional pressures.

To deliver effective recommendations for addressing macronutrient undersupply and malnutrition, two key components need to be further explored. Firstly, there needs to be better understanding of optimal crop selections to maximise production and consumer supply of energy, digestible protein and fats alike. This has to be analysed with key resource and environmental constraints in mind to deliver a more optimal and sustainable domestic food system. This should include consideration of options outwith traditional domestic agricultural practice, such as genetic modification, industrial biotechnology and biofortification [ 56 , 57 ].

Secondly, India’s role within global food markets needs to be more closely assessed. To successfully address malnutrition, India will likely have to fill the gap between domestic production and food demand through increased imports. Food imports can have a significant impact on domestic prices, and the dominance of agriculture as a primary source of employment in India may be a negative influence on farmer livelihoods [ 9 ]; and further, a large increase in food imports could potentially reduce energy-protein intake for the poorest 30% of the population [ 46 ]. This means appropriate economic and social analysis must be carried out to try to optimise import quantities and products which will have minimal domestic impacts. The importance of reducing economic and dietary inequalities makes this even more crucial.

In order to ensure a resilient food system, such analyses and recommendations should be made alongside consideration of potential climatic impacts in the medium- and long-term. This would allow for appropriate choices to be made in the near-term that are also sustainable in a changing climate. The implications of our analysis for health, social, and environmental policy is discussed in detail in our Supplementary Discussion.

Closing its current food supply and nutrition gap while meeting increasing population demand will require a combination of domestic measures to improve agricultural practice and subsequent yields, in addition to a well-planned increase in food imports.

Supporting information

S1 file. supplementary discussion..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.s001

S1 Table. Loss and waste percentages by food chain stage and commodity group for South and Southeast Asia.

Due to poor data availability on India-specific food loss figures, regional average figures from the FAO were applied to derive estimates of macronutrient losses at each stage in the Indian commodity chain.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.s002

S2 Table. Assumptions and sources for figures used within all scenarios from 2011 baseline to 2050 scenarios.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.s003

S3 Table. Indian baseline and attainable yield (AY) values for key crop types.

Year 2000 and all attainable yield values have been derived from Mueller et al. (2012)[ 23 ][ 23 ][ 23 ][ 23 ][ 23 ](23)(23)(23)(23)(23)(23)(23)(23)(23)(23)(22)(21)(21)(21), and 2011 yield data derived from the FAOstats database ( http://faostat.fao.org/beta/en/#home ). The necessary percentage increase in yield from 2011 levels to reach each of the AY values has also been shown.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.s004

S4 Table. Average estimated climatic impacts on Indian crop yields in 2050.

Average values have been assumed based on the range of historic studies on yield sensitivities and climatic models within literature review [ 24 ]. These models are projected on the basis of a doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial (which is approximately equivalent to a business-as-usual scenario).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193766.s005

• 1. United Nations. Road map towards the implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration. New York: 2001.
• 2. Klaus von Grebmer, Jill Bernstein, Nilam Prasai, Shazia Amin YY. Global Hunger Index: Getting to Zero Hunger. Washington, DC: 2016.
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 6. United Nations. UN Population Prospects 2015. http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/ (accessed February 6, 2016).
• 11. FAO. Food Balance Sheets Handbook. Rome: 2001.
• 12. FAO. Global food losses and food waste–Extent, causes and prevention. Rome: 2011.
• 14. World Health Organization. Energy and protein requirements. Geneva: 1991.
• 15. FAO. Refinements To the FAO Methodology for Estimating the Prevalence of Undernourishment Indicator. Rome: 2014.
• 16. FAO, IFAD, WFP. The State of Food Insecurity in the World: Meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: taking stock of uneven progress. 2015. I4646E/1/05.15.
• 17. WHO/FAO/UNU Expert Consultation. Protein and amino acid requirements in human nutrition. Geneva: 2007. ISBN 92 4 120935 6.
• 18. National Institute of Nutrition. Nutrient Requirements and Recommended Dietary Allowances for Indians. 2009.
• 22. FAO/WHO. Fats and fatty acids in human nutrition, Report of an expert consultation. vol. 91. Rome: 2008. 978-92-5-106733-8.
• 25. IPCC. Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report Summary Chapter for Policymakers. IPCC Fifth Assess Rep 2014. 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.
• 29. Subramaniam GS, Subramaniam SR. Does India attain self sufficiency in food production? 2009.
• 30. National Sample Survey Office. Nutritional Intake in India, 2011–12. vol. 471. New Delhi: 2014.
• 38. Evans A. Rising Food Prices: Drivers and Implications for Development. London: 2008.
• 40. Sekhar CS., Roy D, Bhatt Y. Food Inflation and Food Price Volatility in India: Trends and Determinants. New Delhi: 2017.
• 43. World Bank. World Development Indicators 2017. https://data.worldbank.org/ (accessed June 6, 2017).
• 44. Polaski S. Rising Food Prices, Poverty, and the Doha Round. Washington D.C.: 2008.
• 45. Headey D. Food Prices and Poverty Reduction in the Long Run. Washington D.C.: 2014.
• 46. Panda M, Ganesh-Kumar A. Trade liberalization, poverty, and food security in India. New Delhi: 2009.

Advertisement

The Hungry Nation: Food Policy and Food Politics in India

• Research Article
• Published: 02 May 2016
• Volume 1 , pages 29–45, ( 2016 )

Cite this article

• Dan Banik 1  

26k Accesses

14 Citations

22 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

India has the largest number of hungry people in the world. Improvements in nutritional status have not kept pace with the country’s impressive success in spurring economic growth in the past few decades. This essay revisits India’s success in preventing famine and compares it to the country’s inability to improve the food security of hundreds of millions of its citizens. Why is the Indian performance on reducing hunger not any better? And why is India’s democracy able to prevent famines but not more effectively combat undernutrition? An important result of the right to food movement and the resulting judicial activism was the enactment of the National Food Security Act (NFSA) in 2013, which has attracted considerable attention regarding its potential to radically improve the food security of over 800 million Indians. I critically examine the historical development of the NFSA including its current provisions against the backdrop of heated debates over four broad sets of interrelated issues—availability of adequate funds, the specific roles and duties of various levels of government in India’s federal political set-up, the distinction between food security and nutritional security and the extent to which the country proposes to reform existing social protection programmes aimed at improving food security.

Similar content being viewed by others

How colonisation determines social justice and indigenous health—a review of the literature.

Food Security Challenges and Options in the Caribbean: Insights from a Scoping Review

The sustainability of “local” food: a review for policy-makers

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

There has been considerable interest in academic and policy circles regarding India’s impressive economic growth rates over the past couple of decades. And many analysts have predicted, as recently as in January 2016, that the Indian economy will continue to grow at a fast pace. Although China is often praised for successfully distributing the benefits of economic growth and lifting over a half a billion people out of poverty between 1981 and 2005, India too has had several developmental successes. Indeed, India’s achievements include a doubling of live expectancy at birth and a drastic reduction in child mortality rates. In addition to being the poster child of freedom and democracy for over six decades, India is now also firmly established as one of major economies in the world with a burgeoning middle class and corporate houses that have acquired control over iconic brand names on the global stage.

Despite all its achievements, however, India tops the list of countries in the world with the largest share of the global extreme poor. And with 37.2 % of the population (more than 400 million people) that is officially estimated to be living in absolute poverty, the country has the unenviable record of being home to a third of the world’s poor (Banik 2011 ). Although substantial improvements have taken place in the past six decades—e.g. the number of undernourished individuals decreased from 210 million in 1990–1992 to 194.6 million in 2014–2016 (FAO 2015 ), there is now widespread consensus among scholars, practitioners and policymakers that improvements in nutritional status have not kept pace with the country’s impressive success in spurring economic growth in the past few decades. With 15.2 % of the population categorised as undernourished—and a prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years at 38.8 %—India is ranked 80th among 104 countries in the current Global Hunger Index compiled by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI 2015 ). Indeed, as a recent FAO ( 2015 , p. 15) report noted, ‘Higher economic growth has not been fully translated into higher food consumption, let alone better diets overall, suggesting that the poor and hungry may have failed to benefit much from overall growth’. Over 3000 children die every day in India from poor diet-related illnesses and undernutrition accounts for 24 % of deaths of children under five years of age. Footnote 1 The brutal reality is disconcerting and poses a major moral dilemma. Despite being touted as a major economic power and a rising global power, India is also home to the largest number of hungry people in the world. The dilemma prompted the Indian Prime Minister to admit in January 2012 that the ‘the problem of malnutrition is a matter of national shame’. He went on to add that the country has simply not managed to reduce hunger ‘fast enough’. Footnote 2

Why is the Indian performance in reducing hunger not any better? And why is India’s democracy successfully able to prevent sensational famines on the one hand but unable to combat chronic undernutrition on the other? The essay, which is structured in two parts, discusses the potential impact of the recently enacted National Food Security Act (NFSA) on hunger and food security in the country. The discussion in the first part revolves around three dimensions of the problem: food policies pursued by the Indian government, the politics of food in India’s democracy, and the role and impact of civil society and the judicial system on attempts to improve food security. I begin by providing a brief overview of the nature of food security policies implemented in the country, with a particular focus on the impact and functioning of major social protection programmes aimed at improving food security. Thereafter, I examine India’s past successes in improving food security and preventing large-scale food crises from turning into famines, before highlighting the current extent and nature of acute and chronic hunger that continues to affect hundreds of millions of people in the country every day. In the concluding sections of Part I, I discuss the influence and impact of civil society organisations and the right to food movement on food and nutrition policies in the country, starting with a Public Interest Litigation in the Supreme Court by a group of civil society organisations that has resulted in some progressive court orders that have changed the food policy landscape in India.

In Part II of the essay, I discuss one of the most important outcomes of the India’s right to food movement—the enactment of the National Food Security Act (NFSA) in 2013, which has attracted considerable attention both at home and abroad regarding its potential to radically improve the food security of over 800 million Indians. I critically examine the historical development of the NFSA including its current provisions against the backdrop of heated debates over funding, division of responsibility between various levels of government, potential impact on food and nutritional security and the ability to overhaul the country’s expensive but largely ineffective social protection system.

PART I: Three Dimensions of Food Security

Food policy.

Social scientists have long compared the development performance of the two Asian giants—India and China—particularly in relation to the ability of the two countries to reduce poverty and hunger. The picture that emerges on India’s performance in combating chronic (regular) hunger is very different to that of China. Indeed, as Yu et al. ( 2015 ) argue, all available evidence indicates that ‘Food insecurity is a much more serious concern in India than China’. Nonetheless, India has witnessed some progress in that the incidence of severe undernutrition among children, and the incidence of certain nutritional-deficiency diseases like kwashiorkor, marasmus and pellagra have been greatly reduced. Chronic caloric and micronutrient deficiencies, however, remain widespread among children and adults. For example, between 1947 and 2000, mortality rates had been reduced by half, but the corresponding reduction in undernutrition was only 20 % (Planning Commission 2000 , p. 5). More recent estimates show that around 1.83 million children die before reaching 5 years of age, 50 out of 1000 infants die before their first birthday and 39 out of 1000 die during their very first month of life (Planning Commission 2010 , p. 7). Particularly alarming is the fact that the number of underweight children has not declined significantly since the early 1990s, despite the Indian economy growing at an average annual rate of over 6 %. Footnote 3 And a study of 112 districts throughout the country concluded that child malnutrition is widespread throughout the country and 42 % of children under five were underweight and 59 % were stunted in the survey areas (Hungama 2011 ).

The main explanatory factors behind chronic caloric deficiency affecting large groups in the population are inadequate food intake (e.g. low dietary intake), infections (e.g. poor sanitation and inadequate health care) and poor caring practices (e.g. poor infant feeding practices). According to available evidence from the rather dated National Sample Survey (NSS 2005–06) results, the poorest 20 % of India’s rural population consume on average 1900 cal or less per day against the average recommended daily allowance of 2400 cal. And the poorest 25 % of the urban population consume on average 1700 cal per day or less against the recommended 2100 cal. Hunger in India moreover has a regional dimension. For example, while the national average of moderately underweight children stands at 40.4 %, the corresponding figures for Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand are 57.9, 55 and 54.5 %, respectively. Smaller states such as Mizoram (14.3 %), Sikkim (17.3 %) and Manipur (19.5 %) enjoy the best record, while among larger states Kerala (21.2 %) and Punjab (23.6 %) exhibit impressive results (Banik 2011 ).

The nutritional status of the population is also considerably dependent on gender, age and ethnicity. For example, undernutrition is particularly high among children less than two years of age, rural women, and Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) groups (Measham and Chatterjee 1999 , p. 10). These findings are further confirmed by data that shows that the prevalence of undernutrition among ST children is 54 %, and far higher than the national average of 42.5 % (NFHS 2005–06; Planning Commission 2010 , p. 9). Other studies conclude that undernutrition is not only higher among those who identify as Scheduled Castes or Schedule Tribes, but also among Muslims (HunGama 2011 , p. 9). And the rates of underweight and stunted children are significantly higher among women with low levels of education (Ibid.).

The overall improvements in nutritional status that many groups in India have experienced in the past half a century are mainly due to an increase in foodgrain production, better diets, increased access to health care and the implementation of some of the largest and most expensive social protection programmes in the world. The Indian government’s two main pillars for ensuring food security include improving access to foodgrains and increasing their availability or production (Yu et al. 2015 ). While food production has increased manifold—largely due to the success of the Green Revolution—hundreds of millions of Indians are not food secure in that they do not have ‘physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life’ (FAO 2014 ).

Over the years, the Indian government has intervened in private food markets in order to control and stabilize prices and supplies, and to prevent food shortages. Unlike China, which has adopted a policy of direct transfers to support agricultural incentives that many studies find to be less distorting and more efficient, India typically uses price-based input subsidies to support agriculture. The main (and most expensive) components of the policy include input subsidies on fertilisers, electricity for irrigation and irrigation water (Ibid: 407–408). In terms of market price support for foodgrains, the government operates with a so-called Minimum Support Price (MSP) for 25 agricultural commodities. It thus provides various forms of price support to producers, and encourages export (Pacey and Payne 1985 ; Planning Commission 2010 ). The government moreover regulates the rationing of subsidised food stocks, imposes movement restrictions on agricultural produce, imports food from other countries, and controls market prices through the Public Distribution System (PDS).

India currently has several active social protection programmes specifically aimed at improving the nutritional status of the population. These include the provision of subsidised food (through the Public Distribution System, PDS), targeted food supplementation (through the Integrated Child Development Services, ICDS); provision of a cooked meal once a day through the National Mid-Day Meals Programme, emergency feeding to the destitute, micronutrient programmes (e.g. distribution of iron-folate and vitamin A; salt iodization) and food/cash for work programmes (through schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, MGNREGA). Typical problems associated with these programmes relate to identifying and reaching targeted groups in the population, weak purchasing power of food insecure households, corruption and leakage, lack of trained staff and equipment and inadequate storage facilities for foodgrains (Banik 2007 ).

An illustrative example of some of the challenges in implementing social protection programmes in India is the PDS—a (producer) price-support-cum-consumer subsidy programme—which aims to improve food security among poor households by subsidising rations of rice, sugar, kerosene oil, and other commodities that are distributed through Fair Price Shops by the Food Corporation of India (FCI). The PDS is the most expensive and far reaching of safety-net oriented programmes in India and the distributive leg of a chain of government interventions in the agricultural products markets. In the past couple of decades, the fiscal cost of the PDS has more than doubled due to a widening gap between procurement prices (i.e. the Minimum Support Prices) and the subsidized consumer prices through the PDS (Kishore et al. 2014 ; Yu et al. 2015 ). Although it plays an important role in promoting food security, the poor enjoy limited access to the PDS. And since the relative poverty levels across states have not played a major role in determining programme allocations, the programme has had an overall nation-wide urban bias with considerable inter-state variation. It has also continued to remain an expensive and largely untargeted intervention (Banik 2007 ; De Brauw and Suryanarayana 2015 ).

At the local level, there have been numerous difficulties with targeting the neediest groups despite an attempt to improve this very feature through a targeted PDS (TPDS), which was introduced in 1997. For example, methodological inadequacies in the compilation of so-called ‘Below Poverty Line’ (BPL) lists make it difficult, if not impossible, for many genuinely needy households to access food and non-food items as they do not have the required ration cards. Moreover, a large number of households cannot afford to purchase their allocated quota of subsidised products in one transaction, and given the considerable distance to the nearest Fair Price Shop, it is not always practical to make several trips to the store to pick up small quantities of rationed goods. The general lack of purchasing power also means that although certain items (e.g. kerosene and sugar) may be abundantly available at Fair Price Shops, there are few takers. Further, many districts in the country do not have the capacity to adequately store (given adverse weather conditions) agricultural products for long periods, which negatively affects the quality and durability of foodgrains that are procured, stored and transported for the PDS by the Food Corporation of India from other parts of the country. Moreover, newspaper reports frequently cite villagers and local NGOs throughout India who complain about PDS stocks that are routinely diverted to the free market by shop owners and wholesale dealers in charge of transporting the stocks. The incentive to divert is particularly strong as the sale of subsidised PDS supplies in the open market fetches a higher price and involves an extra profit for Fair Price Shop owners.

Another major social protection programme aimed at improving nutritional and health status of children below 6 years of age is the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS). The ICDS combines several services to women and children: supplementary feeding, monitoring of child growth, immunisation against preventable childhood diseases, regular health check-ups and referral, health and nutrition education to adult women, preschool education to 3–6-year olds. The targeted groups are reached through more than 300,000 trained community-based ‘Anganwadi’ workers (trained village women) and an equal number of helpers, supportive community structures/women groups, through the ‘Anganwadi centre’, the health system and the community. However, the ICDS faces a similar set of challenges to that of the PDS. In a previous study, I found that that urban areas, and administrative blocks close to urban centres, are far better covered by the ICDS than remote areas of the country where children are more likely to be severely undernourished (Banik 2007 ). Another shortcoming in rural areas is that there is generally little contact between Anganwadi centres and the district health system. Local level ICDS staff moreover complain of shortage of funds, which in turn results in many unfilled positions (low monthly salaries make it unattractive for qualified candidates) and generally low quality and uncoordinated service delivery. The programme has also been criticised for earmarking only a small portion of funds and staff time for children below 3 years of age (Planning Commission 2010 ). Some argue that the ICDS model should be redesigned to be much more ‘outreach-based’ rather than the current ‘centre-based’ practice whereby small children are often required to walk long distances to reach the ICDS centres (Saxena 2012 ). If staff were to visit the children at their homes, then in addition to mothers, perhaps also other members of the families could be made aware of crucial nutrition-related information (Ibid.).

Food Politics

In 1947, when the country achieved independence from Great Britain, India’s political leaders were confronted with numerous challenges. Among the most serious of challenges resulting from widespread poverty and chronic energy deficiency due to a combination of low-literacy and poor access to safe-drinking water, sanitation and health care. In the first couple of decades after independence, progress on basic development indicators was slow and large groups in the population were plagued by infections, ill health and low life expectancy (Planning Commission 2000 , p. 2). With the Great Bengal Famine (1942–44) fresh in memory, a related concern was the threat of new famines and mass starvation deaths resulting from low agricultural production. India’s administrators, moreover, were confronted with the challenge of establishing an improved food distribution system that would enable the state to make adequate amounts of food available at regular intervals to a large number of food insecure people. India managed to gradually reduce (if not entirely eliminate) the threat of famine. As the Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has famously claimed, unlike its fellow Asian giant China, India has successfully prevented famine since independence mainly due to the functioning of its democratic institutions. Sen argues that the role played by opposition parties, a free press, and an active civil society has ensured that the political authorities are held to account if they are unable to prevent a major loss of lives in times of crisis. Indeed, India’s achievement is all the more impressive when one considers that it averted famines despite producing less food per capita than the famine-hit countries of Africa in the 1970s and 1980s (Banik 2007 ). Although there have been several so-called near-famine conditions in 1965–67 1970–73, and during major droughts in ensuing decades, the last famine in India took place in Bengal in 1943–44—under British colonial rule.

The case of China, however, is very different. During its attempt to take the ‘Great Leap Forward’, China experienced a major famine in 1958–61, resulting in the deaths of tens of millions of people (Ashton et al. 1984 ; Drèze and Sen 1989 ). A major reason for this famine, according to Sen, was the absence of democracy in the country, which allowed Chairman Mao to pursue collectivisation policies that exacerbated initial food shortages. Thus, Sen ( 1984 ) claims that India’s success in preventing famines is not because it drastically increased food production; indeed, famines have been prevented despite lower food production than in many Sub-Saharan African countries. Rather, Sen argues, a democratically-elected Indian government simply cannot afford to not take prompt action when large-scale starvation threatens. An independent and extremely adversarial news media plays a crucial role in this aspect in providing early warning information of impending problems and thereafter following up these initial reports with critical coverage of government response directed at affected communities. Similarly, opposition parties are always on the lookout for critical stories that can undermine the credibility of the ruling party, and use any ammunition they can find to criticize government policy in regional and national legislatures and other forums—especially during major calamities and visible crises. Hence, a political system which allows criticism and debate of official policies can ‘spread the penalties of famine from the destitute to those in authority’ (Sen 1990 ). The Chinese political system exhibited neither of the two above features during the famine of 1958–61, and subsequent research by others largely substantiates Sen’s claim. Without a democratic system of checks and balances, Chairman Mao’s policy decisions on development and famine relief were never really questioned or held to account (Becker 1996 ).

India’s impressive achievement in preventing famine, however, go beyond a simplistic idea of a well-functioning democracy. Rather, famines have been prevented due to comprehensive ‘entitlement protection’ efforts helped by two complementary forces (Drèze and Sen 1989 ). First, the Indian public administrative system has been largely efficient at recreating lost entitlements caused by major crises such as floods, droughts, and economic slumps. Specific interventions include provision of subsidized or free food and other basic necessities to vulnerable households as well as employment generation schemes such as food-for-work or cash-for-work schemes. Second, the political system has been very successful in pushing the administrative system to work as and when required. The major point here is that simply relying on the bureaucracy, not matter how efficient, is inadequate if there is no ‘political trigger’ that can be applied at regular intervals to prod efficient and timely response aimed at preventing large-scale suffering. And by influencing government policy via public action in the form of political activism, criticism and opposition, many actors in Indian society contribute towards triggering government response towards the successful prevention of famine.

Sen accepts that although democracy successfully helps combat famines in India, it fails to address problems of acute poverty and chronic malnutrition. However, he does not explain why this is so. I have argued elsewhere (Banik 2007 ) that in addition to the role of political parties and a free press, it is necessary and important to understand the actual interactions and relations between a whole set of actors and institutions at various levels—including the courts, voluntary organisations, the bureaucracy, institutions of local self government and national and regional legislative organs. This is important in order to better understand why public action in India is effective against famines but ineffective in reducing chronic hunger, which also often results in several hundred alleged ‘starvation deaths’ that although serious, do not warrant the same attention as a large-scale famine.

Civil Society and Judicial Activism

Amartya Sen is, of course, correct in claiming that the media can play an important role in providing early warning information of impending crises and thereafter hold the authorities to account for their failure to mount an appropriate and timely response. Although India has a free press, it does not, however, appear that newspapers are necessarily always interested in covering the plight of those starving in an objective manner. Indeed, the influence of the press is also highly dependent on working conditions of journalists. The political ownership of newspapers in many Indian states moreover poses an additional challenge, and critical reports emanating in media outlets controlled by political parties and their leaders often lack credibility and risk being easily dismissed by the ruling party as being politically biased (Banik 2007 ). Despite the above shortcomings, the Indian media does in fact provide regular coverage of food security-related stories. And it was particularly active in the late 1990s and the first couple of years in the new Millennium.

Following news reports of starvation deaths in the state of Rajasthan in 2000–2001 despite an abundance of food available in government storage houses, the People’s Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL)—a coalition of 56 civil society organisations—decided to seek the help of the Indian judiciary, which has been widely acclaimed for developing innovative jurisprudence on economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights. Footnote 4 In particular, PUCL made use of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which has become an extremely popular avenue for civil society to scrutinise the actions of the government. An important function of courts in India relates to ‘judicial review’, according to which the Constitution empowers the judiciary to protect the fundamental human rights of citizens and intervene when legislative and executive actions are found to be unconstitutional. In the past couple of decades, the Indian judiciary has been increasingly willing to don an activist garb following the decision of the Supreme Court to accept litigation that addresses matters in which interest of the public at large is involved. Such PIL petitions can be moved by any individual or group of persons highlighting the question of public importance for invoking this jurisdiction.

With an explicit focus on human rights, the PUCL submitted a PIL to the Supreme Court in April 2001 questioning whether the right to life guaranteed under article 21 of the Indian Constitution also included the right to food. Footnote 5 Using the human rights language of duty-bearers who must act to respect, protect and fulfil the rights of the poor, PUCL identified central and state governments in India as the main duty bearers with the obligation to protect the right to food (Banik 2010 ). The petition argued that these duty bearers must be held to account for their failure to assist individuals and households facing acute hunger while large stocks of food remained in government storage houses. The petitioners further requested the Supreme Court to enquire government action aimed at addressing the implementation challenges associated with the country’s main social protection programmes. They also questioned whether vulnerable groups in the population (e.g. impoverished women, children and the aged) were adequately covered and targeted by public policy. While the PIL was initially brought against the government of Rajasthan, thanks to civil society activism and mobilisation, it now applies to all state governments in India.

In a landmark judgement in November 2001, the Court ordered full implementation of the Public Distribution System (PDS) that offers subsidised food to below poverty line households, converted a previously voluntary programme (Mid-Day Meal Scheme) to provide cooked meals at schools to an obligation on the part of all states, and ordered improved implementation of the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), which provides assistance to pregnant and nursing women and children, and other programmes aimed at helping impoverished families whose primary breadwinner has died. With this particular order, the Court converted the benefits of the eight programmes into legal entitlements, i.e. all programme beneficiaries now have the ability to claim benefits as a matter of right, and seek judicial redress if such rights are violated (Right to Food Campaign 2005 , p. 10). This particular order together with previous and subsequent interim orders has thus given rise to a set of ‘umbrella orders’ (applicable to all relevant social programmes) and more specific orders relating to the functioning of specific Although the Supreme Court is yet to award a final verdict in the case, it has held hearings at regular intervals since 2001 and issued over a hundred very detailed ‘interim orders’ that are considered applicable as law until the case is closed. These umbrella orders cover the identification of agent(s) or agency with responsibility for compliance (mainly Chief Secretaries in the various States), and village councils (or Gram Sabhas) that can monitor social protection programmes, investigate misuse of funds and hold the authorities to account by accessing all relevant information. The Court also established a new mechanism for ensuring compliance with, and the monitoring of, its own orders by appointing two commissioners to monitor and report on the implementation of a whole range of public welfare programmes. The commissioners were given powers to investigate potential violations of the interim orders and to demand redress from the political and administrative leadership, with the full backing of the Supreme Court. In addition to providing periodic reports to the Court, the commissioners were authorised to seek responses from state governments, investigate complaints from civil society organisations and set up relevant enquiry committees. A major impact of these initiatives has been the gradual increase in the amount of funds allocated by state governments for improving coverage of social protection programmes within their territories (Right to Food Campaign 2012 ).

Not surprisingly, there has been considerable debate over the nature, extent and validity of the Supreme Court’s activism in the right to food as well as similar cases where PILs have been invoked by various actors to focus attention on the plight of the poor, who typically do not use legal channels to solve problems. In particular, political leaders at the state level, have expressed dismay at the additional costs associated with enforcing court orders. Indeed, politicians resent being lectured to by ‘unelected’ judges who do not have the mandate of the people (Banik 2010 ). Others are more supportive of the courts, arguing that judicial activism is necessary not only for the protection of the powerless but also due to the presence of corruption and inefficiency in the legislative and executive branches (Sateh 2002 , p. 278–281, cited in Zwart 2009 , p. 6–7).

The actions of the Supreme Court and the ensuing interim orders have had considerable impact, with the media and the political-administrative system paying close attention to the regular judicial pronouncements. It has also encouraged a few regional (state) governments in India to enact legislation of their own in order to improve service delivery. One prominent example is Chhattisgarh, a state which ranks low among other Indian states in relation to human development, where the government successfully enacted the Chhattisgarh Food Security Act in December 2012 with the aim of ensuring ‘access to adequate quantity of food and other requirements of good nutrition to the people of the State, at affordable prices, at all times to live a life of dignity’. With several innovative features related to targeting of vulnerable food insecure households, availability and distribution of various types of food, and speedier mechanisms for service delivery, this piece of legislation has been hailed as a major success story amidst the general reluctance of state and national governments in India to abide by the directions of the central government and the Courts that are aimed at improving food security. It is particularly interesting to bear in mind at this stage that a state level legislation on food security came into force well before legislation at the national level.

PART II: The National Food Security Act (NFSA), 2013

One of the most important impacts of the right to food movement in India, was the enactment of national legislation on food security—the National Food Security Act (NFSA), which was passed by the Indian Parliament in September 2013. The NFSA converted many existing food security programmes such as the TPDS into legal entitlements for recipients. It entitles up to 75 % of the rural population and up to 50 % of the urban population (thus covering two-thirds of the currently estimated population of 1.25 billion) to 5 kilograms (kg) of rice, wheat, or coarse cereals per person per month at a subsidised price of 1–3 Rupees per kg.

The Act highlights the importance of breastfeeding of children below six months while for children between 6 months and 6 years, it provides for a free age-appropriate hot-cooked meal. And for children aged 6–14 years, the Act provides for one free mid-day meal every day (except on school holidays) in all government and government-aided schools up to the eighth grade. Similarly, pregnant women and nursing mothers are entitled to a free meal every day during pregnancy and six months after childbirth, and there are provisions for basic maternity benefits. With the aim of promoting empowerment of women, the NFSA provides that women of 18 years of age or above will be considered to be the household head when ‘ration cards’ (that serve as proof of identity and status as programme beneficiary) for subsidised food programmes are issued. The Act also introduced a conditional cash transfer model to India by providing that households were entitled to receive food security allowance (or cash transfers) in situations when ‘the entitled quantities of foodgrains or meals to entitled persons’ are not available (NFSA 2013, Sec. 13.). The main responsibility for the implementation of the NFSA is given to state governments, ‘in accordance with the guidelines, including cost sharing, between the Central Government and the State Governments in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government’ (Ibid., Sec. 7). In addition, state governments are expected to constitute a seven-member State Food Commission for monitoring and reviewing the implementation process, with at least two women members and one member each from traditionally disadvantaged communities (Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities). The NFSA also provides for the redress of complaints and grievances, including call centres and helplines.

From a human rights and ethics perspective, the most important step forward is the recognition in the NFSA of explicit duties or ‘obligations’ of various levels of government for the promotion of food security. Thus, the main obligation of the central government is to provide foodgrains (or adequate funds) to state governments at specified prices. State governments, however, have the main duty to implement the provisions of the Act together with local government institutions, and may extend the level of benefits with additional resources from their own coffers.

Despite the delays in enacting the legislation, and the innumerable compromises in the final draft, many societal and political actors hailed the NFSA as a watershed. Most parties and organisations agreed on the need for a NFSA and its main purpose—to redefine the basis for promoting food security in the country ensuring greater access to adequate quantity and quality food at affordable prices. There are some very obvious benefits of legislating the right to food and guaranteeing access to food to large sections of the population. Harsh Mander, an erstwhile civil servant and activist, and one of the architects of an earlier version of the food security bill, claimed that one the main advantages of the legislation is that it will ensure that foodgrains that are procured by the government are actually distributed to the needy rather than rotting in official storage houses (Mander 2012 ).

The enthusiastic—and often heated—public debate that took place following the introduction of the first draft of the Bill in Parliament in 2011 and subsequent enactment of the NFSA in September 2013 provide an interesting backdrop to understanding India’s struggle to address specific challenges related to poverty and deprivation. The debates reveal considerable disagreement between political parties, think-tanks, scholars, civil society organisations and media commentators on the nature, extent and cost of state intervention in improving food security. Opposition to the NFSA has mainly come from two groups of people. There are those who argue the case for maintaining a high pace of economic growth with increased employment opportunities, wealth and fiscal prudence. They claim that the enormous costs associated with implementing the NFSA will slow India’s economic growth rate. Others subscribe to the view that combating hunger should be the country’s top priority and that the government should actually spend even more resources in combating hunger than it is currently doing. In the following sections, I will highlight four broad sets of interrelated issues that have characterised the Indian social and political discourse on food security in recent years. These four categories relate to the availability of adequate funds, the specific roles and duties of various levels of government in India’s federal political set-up, the distinction between food security and nutritional security and the extent to which the country proposes to reform existing social protection programmes aimed at improving food security.

Can India Afford the High Cost of Food Security Programmes?

The foremost criticism levelled against the NFSA relates to the huge cost of implementation. It did not help matters that ever since the legislation was first introduced in Parliament in 2011, it has been riddled with confusion over the exact amount of extra costs it will entail. The Congress-party led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government—which put all its political might and prestige into getting the NFSA passed in Parliament—initially estimated that an additional cost of US$ 4 billion Footnote 6 per year would be incurred. The Minister of Food significantly played down the costs after introducing the Bill in Parliament, claiming that it would require an additional amount of approx. US$ 3 billion annually. However, it was later revealed that the figures provided by the Minister mainly concerned the food distribution arm of the NFSA. And costs related to improving the nutritional status of children and providing maternity benefits to women would make the NFSA even more expensive.

Recent estimates show that the annual cost of India’s food subsidy programme is rapidly rising, having increased from US$0.62 billion in 1992 to US$16.67 billion in 2012 (Kishore et al. 2014 , p. 31). And according to the Indian government’s own projections, it was supposed to have used an estimated US$21 billion in 2013–2014 to procure 61.2 million tonnes of cereals and deliver it to 820 million people at 1–3 rupees per kg through its existing retail network of 480,000 fair price shops (Ibid.). Moreover, the overall costs of the food subsidy component of the NFSA is projected to rapidly rise to US$ 23.5 billion, although this figure does not include costs related to establishing new, and strengthening existing institutions that are required for the implementation of the Act.

Supporters of the Act argue that the cost of implementing the NFSA does not appear to be very high when compared to the roughly US$ 62.5 billion that are annually written off by the Indian state in the form of exemptions and subsidies to the non-farm sector in addition to tax breaks for big businesses. Footnote 7 The economist Jean Drèze ( 2011 ), who has been an active campaigner for the right to food movement, has claimed that the critics of the NFSA mistakenly assume that all expenses will be borne by the government right away when in reality, it will take a considerable amount of time for the government to start implementing the programme all over the country. Besides, he points out, not all states will be doing everything at the same time. Thus, the issue at hand relates not so much to the immediate financial impact of the NFSA, but ‘the ability of the Indian economy and public finances to accommodate’ the Act, and Drèze argues that current trends point towards a ‘favourable environment for a food security initiative’. Perhaps the most powerful argument in favour of the high costs associated with the Act comes from Harsh Mander who observes: ‘It is about our priorities … what is worth spending and what is not. In a country where every second child is malnourished, what could be more important?’ Footnote 8

Centre-State Blame-Game

India’s federal political system has witnessed a long history of tension between the central government in New Delhi and regional (‘state’) governments. Financial assistance to states affected by widespread natural calamities has been governed through the awards of successive finance commissions appointed by the central government, which recommends the formula for the sharing of all resources between the centre and states for a period of five years at a time. Politicians and civil servants at the state level frequently complain about not having the resources to mount an adequate response during natural calamities, particularly in relation to the provision of drought relief. State governments therefore tend to blame the central government for either failing to provide adequate resources and/or not providing earmarked resources on time. The central government’s typical response is to accuse state governments of underutilising available funds at their disposal and not planning in advance. Indeed, federalism is often under severe strain when the two levels of government do not agree on the extent and nature of assistance required to ameliorate various types of suffering, including those that are food-related. Since competing political parties often hold power at the centre and state levels, there is a constant tug-of-war for all potential sources that can be tapped. And this means that allegations of favouritism are hurled at the centre whenever a particular state does not get the amount it believes it is entitled to (Banik 2007 , p. 130–140).

When the food security bill was first tabled in Parliament in late 2011, many state governments immediately went on to attack the provisions relating to coverage and costs. For example, Tamil Nadu claimed that the Bill was ‘replete with confusion and inaccuracy’. In a memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister, the government of Tamil Nadu argued that the classification of the target groups was ‘unscientific and unacceptable’. Footnote 9 As this particular state is well-known for running well-functioning food security schemes of its own—and since the Bill provided that states cannot provide subsidised food to anyone that the central government rules out of its beneficiaries list—Tamil Nadu expressed concern that it would either have to find a way to fund the entire burden of subsidy for additional beneficiaries or take the politically controversial step of excluding people from its programmes. Footnote 10

The government of India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, characterised the Bill as a ‘political stunt’ given the forthcoming legislative assembly elections in the state and alleged that it would place additional fiscal pressure on non-Congress Party ruled states. Footnote 11 It also claimed that the ambitious new measures provided in the legislation were not implementable as the central government had not taken into consideration the availability of the required amount of foodgrains. Moreover, Uttar Pradesh claimed that the central government did not have viable plans for funding new schemes that involved the new and innovative system of cash transfers. Similarly, other opposition party controlled states like Bihar demanded a radical revision of implementation criteria for food security programmes while Tamil Nadu requested to be exempted from implementing the legislation. Footnote 12

Echoing the arguments of Tamil Nadu, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh governments, the main opposition party of the time—the BJP—characterised the initiative as unscientific and confusing, and part of the central government’s political game. Several news reports in this period further claimed that many states were actually offering rice at Rs. 1 per kg, which was much lower than the Rs. 3 per kg proposed in the Bill. When confronted with such inconsistencies, India’s Food Minister, while proclaiming that this was ‘the world’s largest experiment in providing food security to the poor’, argued that all such details would be looked into later. Footnote 13

Food Security in the Absence of Nutritional Security?

Some critics have questioned whether the quota of 5 kg of cereals per person as provided for in the NFSA is adequate. They argue that the PDS is already notorious for distributing low quality foodgrains given the lack of storage facilities and difficulties of transporting food across large parts of the country. The influential group of NGOs that are a part of the Right to Food Campaign ( 2012 ) in India has forcefully argued that current food security initiatives, including the provisions of the NFSA do not adequately address issues of ‘nutritional security’. They point to the highly centralised and extremely narrow understanding of the needs of people living in poverty in the NFSA. Indeed, while beneficiaries can only receive rice, wheat and coarse cereals under the provisions of the Act, some argue that pulses rather than cereals should be provided for better nutritional outcomes (Kishore et al. 2014 ). Others like Saxena ( 2012 , p. 8) argue that ‘food alone does not solve the problem of underweight children, which needs a multidimensional thrust in health, hygiene, quality of water’ as well as cultural practices related to accessing adequate food that typically discriminate against women.

Like Saxena, many activists and administrators rue the fact that food security-related interventions in India often do not place adequate emphasis on identifying and linking existing strategies with ‘non-food’ items that are crucial to improving nutritional security—health, education, culture, infrastructure, storage, transportation, etc. In addition, de Brauw and Suryanarayana ( 2015 ) argue that the NFSA ‘is not based on an explicit concept of food security’ and that it grossly exaggerates the need for covering two-thirds of the population as it is based in outdated calorie norms. They further argue that the Act ‘provides for a monotonous energy dense diet’ that can ‘at best ensure energy security only’ rather than dietary diversity which is the need of the hour. Thus, some critics argue that this very feature—i.e. the neglect of nutritional security—is one of the major reasons that explain the failure of major programmes such as the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) to radically improve food security of vulnerable groups.

Reforming Defective Social Protection Systems and Ensuring Efficient Service Delivery

Many observers have criticised India’s continued interest in persisting with flawed social protection programmes such as the PDS rather than radically improving or replacing them. Even after the PDS was reformed in 1997 to targeted PDS (TPDS), in order to enable it to better target food insecure households, the main challenge for it as well as other anti-poverty programmes in India continues to be that of identifying and targeting intended beneficiaries (Tanksale and Jha 2015 ). The PDS not only remains expensive (accounting for 1 % of the country’s GDP in 2004–2005) but there is also little evidence of it having made a substantial contribution in reducing food insecurity (Svedberg 2012 ).

The PDS is also already under pressure to distribute the current amount of foodgrains amidst considerable leakage caused by greedy shop owners who divert subsidised food items to the open market. Moreover, the lack of refrigeration and adequate storage capacity frequently results in damaged foodgrains, unsuitable for human consumption. Related to this is the absence of provisions in the NFSA regarding agriculture and concrete measures to increase food production to feed India’s rapidly growing population that currently includes 1.2 billion people and over 1 billion cattle and other farm animals. For example, Hegde ( 2012 ) claims that the procurement policies of the central government, by which rice is purchased from northern states and distributed at cheap prices in other regions has actually forced many farmers in southern and eastern regions of the country to ‘quit farming as it has become financially uneconomical and unviable’. Panandiker ( 2012 ) estimates that the total production of cereals (rice and wheat) in India in 2010–11 was 180 million tonnes (MT), of which around 36 MT is typically retained by farmers for self-consumption, another 36 MT is procured by the government for distribution through the PDS, and 109 MT is available in the open market. The NFSA accordingly will necessitate at least an additional 35 MT for government procurement to PDS, which will in turn drastically reduce supply in the open market and consequently having a negative impact on farmers.

Still others question the wisdom of replacing food subsidies with the introduction in India of a system of conditional cash transfers—a model that has worked very well in Mexico and Brazil. Many state governments are, however, reluctant to bear the costs of these cash transfers from their already meagre resources. In addition to concerns over costs, there is widespread scepticism of providing income-based support without improving access to food in adequate quantity and quality. Moreover, given the existing challenges related to the implementation of social protection programmes, critics claim that it may be extremely difficult to monitor compliance to any conditions attached to these cash transfers. Some scholars have thus recently argued that direct but unconditional cash transfers that offer recipients more choice and create less risk of distortion may be more relevant in the Indian context as they are more cost effective (Kishore et al. 2014 ; Gangopadhyay et al. 2015 ). There are, in addition, numerous concerns whether cash will be used by recipient households for intended purposes (i.e. purchase of food) and how cash will be distributed in the absence of local bank branches and ATM machines. One solution envisaged by the UPA government that sponsored the passage of the NFSA in Parliament is the Unique Personal Identity (UID) number project, which advocates the use of smart cards to transfer benefits directly to the poor rather than through Fair Price Shops and middlemen. However, as Saxena ( 2012 , p. 10) observes, while the use of individual biometric markers may make a difference in removing duplicate and fake beneficiaries and allowing people to withdraw food rations from any part of the state, the UID cannot in practice help target Below Poverty Line (BPL) households, for which other and more relevant criteria (for measuring deprivation) must be adopted.

India has been very successful in preventing famines. Indeed, it’s food security record so far has been most impressive whenever ‘crisis’ has been clearly defined and when there is an unambiguous understanding and consensus among politicians and administrators on the seriousness of the situation. India has in the past witnessed, and will continue to experience in the future, numerous situations that can best be described as ‘famine threats’. It has thus far managed to prevent such famine threats from escalating into famine and there is reason to believe that India will continue to enjoy success on this issue.

A more mixed picture emerges on India’s ability to tackle undernutrition. Instead of sustained commitment to long-term policies that aim to reduce vulnerability to hunger, the political-administrative response in India is typically short-term, ad hoc, and populist in character. There is widespread attention to allegations of sensational and so-called ‘starvation deaths’, while the problem of chronic hunger or ‘undernutrition’ does not attract the same level of state response as it is not considered to be a ‘crisis’ such as a famine. Indeed, the political system fails to address fundamental issues related to daily susceptibility to hunger and the numerous flaws in the implementation of social programmes—including the need for correct diagnoses of the exact type of nutrition-related problem, early intervention, and meaningful interaction between policymakers and local-level bureaucrats. Thus, India’s abysmal record at promoting food and nutritional security, despite managing to increase food production, is not necessarily a product of a lack of resources but rather due to political and administrative disinterest compounded by a lack of appreciation of the dangers of chronic (or less visible forms of) hunger.

The large and expensive social protection programmes run by India have no doubt made significant contributions to improving food security in the past few decades. However, they are ready for a major overhaul as many of the existing programmes are unable to identify and target beneficiaries and use available resources effectively. The importance of the right to food movement lies in the critical public scrutiny that the PDS and other programmes have attracted from the media, the legislature, the judiciary and not least civil society organisations as a result on the on-going case in the Indian Supreme Court. The resulting NFSA appeared to signal a new era where the rights of the poor would finally be respected, protected and promoted.

While the Act does possess many innovative features with the potential of improving food security in the country, I have highlighted four broad sets of challenges that it currently faces. These issues and challenges—which include endless debates over costs and available funding, division of responsibility between various levels of government, lack of linkages to health and education and a comprehensive overhaul of the country’s expensive but largely ineffective social protection system—are by no means new to India; but rather have characterised the debate on poverty reduction and the implementation of public policies for decades. The UPA government, which was accused by opposition parties of pushing the NFSA though Parliament in the hope of winning votes, ended up losing heavily in the 2013 general elections. The current government, formed by the BJP party and its allies, has been lukewarm to the NFSA. While in opposition, it was vocal in its criticism of the Act’s provisions, the BJP now finds itself in government and bound by law to implement the legislation. Although the central government has been reluctant to put its weight behind the NFSA, several state governments are showing signs of willing to start implementing various measures in accordance with the Act. If this trend continues, the central government may feel pressured into devoting more attention and resources to successfully implementing the NFSA on a national scale. The challenge for India is to pursue policies that continue to increase food production in an environmentally sustainable manner while undertaking major steps to improve food storage facilities. In addition, the country must devise better methods to identify food insecure households and adopt a set of policy instruments—either subsidies or cash transfers or both—that take into account local realities. While India has achieved considerable success in reducing extreme poverty, it continues to top world hunger charts. This reality should indeed force politicians to place food security at the top of their policy agendas.

‘India Tops World Hunger List with 194 Million People’, The Hindu 29 May 2015.

‘Full text of PM’s speech at the release of the HUNGaMA Report,’ NDTV , 10 January 2012, http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/full-text-of-pm-s-speech-at-the-release-of-the-hungama-report-165450 (Accessed: 11 January 2015).

For example, while 54 % of Indian children were underweight in 1992–1993, the figure declined to 46 % in 1998–99 and remained constant in 2005–06. Children under age 5 whose weight for age is more than two standard deviations below the median for the international references population for ages 0–59 months are classified as underweight.

This section has benefited from personal communication with Kavita Srivastava, the National General Secretary of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL).

Writ Petition (civil) 196 of 2001, submitted in April 2001. 8 ‘PUCL petitions Supreme Court on starvation deaths,’ PUCL Bulletin, July 2001, http://www.pucl.org/reports/Rajasthan/2001/starvation_death.htm (Accessed: 10 September 2010).

All figures converted from INR to USD according to current exchange rates (1 USD = 66.7 INR).

‘Promise of Food Bill is enormous’, editorial, Deccan Chronicle , December 2011.

‘Food Security Bill will ensure that grains will not rot in warehouses: Harsh Mander’, The Times of India , 22 December 2011.

‘Food Security Bill Confusing’, Business Standard , 28 December 2011.

‘Food Security Act to curb states’ largesse’, The Times of India , 23 December 2011.

‘Food security bill not practical for poor people: Mayawati’, The Times of India , 22 December 2011.

‘Govt will allay Food Bill fears: Thomas’, The Hindu , 22 December 2011.

Ashton, B., K. Hill, A. Piazza, and R. Zeitz. 1984. Famine in China, 1958–61. Population and Development Review 10(4): 613–646.

Article   Google Scholar  

Banik, D. 2007. Starvation and India’s democracy . London: Routledge.

Google Scholar  

Banik, D. 2010. Governing a giant: The limits of judicial activism on hunger in India. Journal of Asian Public Policy 3(3): 263–280.

Banik, D. 2011. Growth and hunger in India. Journal of Democracy 22(3): 90–104.

Becker, J. 1996. Hungry ghosts: China’s secret famine . London: John Murray.

De Brauw, A., and M.H. Suryanarayana. 2015. Linkages between poverty, food security and undernutrition: Evidence from China and India. China Agricultural Economic Review 7(4): 655–667.

Drèze, J. 2011. Hunger must go. Hindustan Times 21 December 2011.

Drèze, J., and A. Sen. 1989. Hunger and public action . Oxford: Clarendon.

FAO. 2014. The state of food insecurity in the World 2014. Strengthening the enabling environment for food security and nutrition . Rome: FAO.

FAO. 2015. The state of food insecurity in the World . Rome: FAO. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4646e.pdf .

Gangopadhyay, S., R. Lensink, and B. Yadav. 2015. Cash or in-kind transfers? Evidence from a randomised controlled trial in Delhi, India. Journal of Development Studies 51(6): 660–673.

Hegde, P. 2012. Food bill doesn’t promote security. Deccan Herald , 24 September 2011.

HUNGaMA 2011. Fighting hunger & malnutrition: The HUNGaMA survey report—2011 . http://hungamaforchange.org/HungamaBKDec11LR.pdf .

IFPRI. 2015. Global hunger index 2015: Armed conflict and the challenge of hunger . Washington DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Kishore, A., P.K. Joshi, and J. Hoddinott. 2014. India’s right to food Act: A novel approach to food security, chapter 3. In 2013 Global food policy report , ed. A. Marble and H. Fritschel. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/128046 .

Mander, H. 2012. Food from the courts: The Indian experience. IDS Bulletin 43(S1): 15–24.

Measham, A.R., and M. Chatterjee. 1999. Wasting away: The crisis of malnutrition in India . Washington DC: World Bank.

Book   Google Scholar  

Pacey, A., and P. Payne (eds.). 1985. Agricultural development and nutrition . London: Hutchinson.

Panandiker, D.H.P. 2012. Food grains for food security, http://blogs.reuters.com/india-expertzone/2011/12/26/food-grains-for-food-security/ . Accessed 12 Jan 2016.

Planning Commission. 2000. Nutrition, chapter 6.3.2. In Annual plan 2000–2001 . New Delhi: Planning Commission, Government of India.

Planning Commission. 2010. Addressing India’s Nutritional Challenges. New Delhi: Planning Commission, Government of India. http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/genrep/multi_nutrition.pdf .

Right to Food Campaign 2005. Supreme court orders on the right to food: A tool for action, Available at: http://www.righttofoodindia.org/data/ . Accessed 12 Jan 2016.

Right to Food Campaign 2012. Right to food campaign’s critique of the National Food Security Bill 2011, March 2012, Available at: http://www.righttofoodindia.org/data/right_to_food_act_data/events/March_2012_general_note_final_18_february_2012.pdf Accessed: 16 Oct 2012.

Sateh, S.P. 2002. Judicial activism in India: Transgressing borders and enforcing limits . New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Saxena, N.C. 2012. Hunger and malnutrition in India. IDS Bulletin 43(S1): 8–14.

Sen, A. 1984. Food battles: Conflicts in the access to food. Food and Nutrition 10: 81–89.

Sen, A. 1990. Public action to remedy hunger. In The Arturo Tanco Memorial Lecture, August 1990 . London: The Hunger Project and CAB International in association with The Commonwealth Trust and The Royal Institute of International Affairs [ http://www.thp.org/reports/sen/sen890.htm ] .

Svedberg, P. 2012. Reforming or replacing the public distribution system with cash transfers? Economic and Political Weekly 47: 53–62.

Tanksale, A., and J.K. Jha. 2015. Implementing national food security act in India: Issues and challenges. British Food Journal 117(4): 1315–1335.

Yu, W., C. Elleby, and H. Zobbe. 2015. Food security policies in India and China: Implications for national and global food security. Food Security 7: 405–414.

Zwart, T. 2009. Good governance as a legal concept with a bite, Available at: http://chairemadp.sciences-po.fr/pdf/seminaires/2009/CONTRIBUTION-TOM_ZWART.pdf . Accessed 05 Oct.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Matthias Kaiser and Anne Algers for the invitation to contribute to this inaugural issue of Food Ethics and to two anonymous referees for very useful comments and suggestions. The usual disclaimer applies.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo, P. O. Box 1116, Blindern, 0317, Oslo, Norway

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Banik .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Banik, D. The Hungry Nation: Food Policy and Food Politics in India. Food ethics 1 , 29–45 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-016-0001-1

Download citation

Accepted : 08 April 2016

Published : 02 May 2016

Issue Date : June 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-016-0001-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Food security
• Food policy
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Agricultural Sciences
• Astronomy & Space Sciences
• Chemical Sciences
• Cognitive Sciences and Psychology
• Computer Sciences and IT
• COVID-19 Research
• Earth, Atmosphere & Environment Sciences
• Energy Sciences
• Engineering Sciences
• Life Sciences & Biotechnology
• Mathematical Sciences
• Material Sciences
• Medical Sciences
• Pharmaceutical Sciences
• Physical Sciences
• Traditional Knowledge
• Other Areas
• Institutional
• International
• Grants for Seminar and Conferences
• Startup Grants
• Ministries & Departments
• Centres of Excellence
• Thematic Centres
• Centres of Higher Learning
• National Academies
• Statewise S&T Organisations
• Industry Related Associations
• Laboratories
• International Organisations
• Civil Societies
• Science Centres & Planetaria
• All Programmes & Schemes
• Research and Development
• Human Resource and Development
• Women Schemes
• International Programmes
• Societal Development
• Academia Industry Partnerships
• School Students
• Graduate Students
• Post Graduate Students
• PhD Scholars
• Post Doctoral Fellowships
• Scholarships for Women
• Faculty and Scientists
• National Fellows
• Grassroot Innovations
• Industrial Innovations
• COVID-19 Technology
• Earth, Atmosphere & Env. Sciences
• Rural Technologies

Featured Science

Science leading india towards self-sufficiency in food.

The UNDP records India’s rapid strides in improving rates of under- and malnutrition. Their records show that between 2006 and 2016, stunting in children below five years declined from 48 to 38%. However, India’s efforts to improve its nutritional status continue through involving science and technology for attaining self sufficiency in food.

Following international recommendations, India has adopted sustainable development goals as a member state of United Nations calling for universal action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure peace and prosperity of all people by 2030. The Union Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare report claims that country has witnessed record food grains production of 277.49 million tons, oilseeds and sugarcane production of 29.88 and 353.23 million tons, respectively, in 2017-18. Furthermore, India has emerged as world’s largest milk producer and the second largest producer of fruits and vegetables

This huge increase in food production possibly will help India to eradicate the instances of stunting among children, under- and mal nutrition among women, children and lactating mothers, and guarantee every citizen’s access to adequate food round the year through sustainable food systems. India is also working hard to meet the target of doubling of small land holder’s productivity and income, and reduced the food losses. So far, the country has been dealing with food insecurity through the National Food Security Act (NFSA) passed in 2013. Several programmes and schemes are being implemented by government of India to ensure food availability and security.

System of Mega Food Parks : The Mega Food Park were set up with an aim to provide a mechanism to link agricultural production to the market by bringing together farmers, people involved in food processing and retailers so as to increase value addition, reduce wastage, improve farmers income and to create employment opportunities predominantly rural agricultural practices. So far government has established 17 Mega Food Parks which are functional ( Table 1 ). Such food parks are based on “Cluster” approach and it visualizes making of state of art support infrastructure in a well-defined agri- and horticultural zone for setting up of modern food processing units in the industrial plots. Schemes promotes expansion of agribusiness in mega food parks with well established supply chain infrastructure including collection centers, primary processing centers, central processing centers, cold chain and around the food processing units. Such setups ensure availability of right food choices at affordable rates in market.

Development of Food Processing Industry: The Ministry of Food Processing Industries have extended financial assistance to research & development work to benefit the food processing industry in terms of product and process development, efficient technologies- and packaging material development, value addition and standardization of additives, colouring agents, preservatives, pesticide residues, chemical- and microbial contaminants and naturally occurring toxic substances within permissible limits. It has been established that a vibrant food processing play a vital role in reducing the wastage of perishable food items and improving the shelf life of food products, ascertain the diversification, value addition and commercialization of agricultural products. Such financial assistance also targets employment generation, and increasing farmer’s income.

Food Processing Start-Ups : India has made huge strides in global startup community, and ranks amongst the top five countries in the world in terms of number of startups founded. India houses about 4200 start ups which have created creating more than 85,000 employment opportunities. Furthermore, it has been predicted that the number of start-ups will increase to over 11,500 by 2020 in India and the number of jobs may reach to 2.5-3.0 lakhs. Food processing start ups have emerged as a result increase in consumption of processed foods. Processed foods are considered as healthy, safe, hygienic and convenience driven foods. Food start-ups are offering healthy, value added, and safe food products. Broad functional areas and activities of food start ups are classified into the following eight categories (Fig. 1).

Development of Knowledge-based Food Products/Technologies: The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) is functioning with 11 dedicated research laboratories involved in R&D research related to food technologies and processes development. Over the years, CSIR has developed numerous novel food processing technologies/processes which have been successfully commercialized 1 . Some of the key developments made by CSIR in this direction include:

• Development of improved technologies for storage and preservation
• Development of traditional and health-, specialty-, and ready-to-serve foods, nutraceuticals, beverages, etc.
• Scaling-up and improvement of food processing technology.
• Food product value addition, food safety and byproducts/wastes utilization.
• Food processing machinery/equipment development.
• Development of eco-friendly packaging materials and environment-friendly processes.
• Biotechnological intervention for enhancing nutritional values.

Some of the major foods/drinks, food processing technologies and knowledge-based products developed by CSIR are enlisted below in Table 2.

Progress of Indian agricultural research : The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) is an apex research organization of India with a high standing amongst international agricultural research institutions. The council plans, coordinates- and promotes research and technology development for sustainable agriculture in the country. The ICAR has 101 research institutes and 71 agricultural universities spread across the country which has been at forefront in pioneering Green Revolution and subsequent developments in agriculture sciences. The R&D activities of these research institutes has made it possible for India to develop technology and knowledge that has enabled the country to increase the production of food grains by 5.4 times, horticultural crops by 10.1 times, fish by 15.2 times, milk 9.7 times and eggs 48.1 times till 2017. The research and development has evident impact on food and nutritional security of country 2 .

Government of India has introduced multiple schemes and programmes to ensure availability of food. Some of the important initiatives taken are National Rural Health Mission (NRHM), Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY), Mid Day Meals (MDM), Indra Gandhi Matritva Sahyog Yojana (IGMSY), Kishori Shakti Yojana (KSY), and National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) etc., to address food security and associated problems.

The POSHAN Abhiyaan : The POSHAN Abhiyaan or National Nutrition Mission is Government of India’s flagship programme aimed at improving nutritional requirements of children, pregnant women and lactating mothers. The programme intends to fulfill country commitment towards eliminating under- and mal-nutrition among children, pregnant women and lactating mothers in three years after its launch in 2018. The POSHAN Abhiyaan mission’s broad theme includes antenatal care, optimal breastfeeding, complementary feeding, anaemia, growth monitoring, education and marriage of girls, diet, hygiene and sanitation, and most specially importance of right choice foods and their impact on health. Total number of districts covered (to be covered) under three phases of POSHAN Abhiyaan mission from 38 States/Union Territories during 2017-20 are represented by figure 2.

The Government of India has undertaken multiple reforms to meet nutrition- and food availability targets. Some of the multiple multidimensional ambitious schemes aimed at addressing the inequalities related to food availability-, nutrition and food security are discussed as:

The Green Revolution, India: Green Revolution of 1965 helped India to attain surplus food production with introduction of high yielding variety of seeds, fertilizers and agro-chemicals, new cultivation methods, use of modern technology coupled with controlled and efficient irrigation system. India moved on from traditional farming towards commercial farming and attained the remarkable results in terms of agricultural production. Although India has progressed entirely on several health outcomes, however, more sustainable efforts are required to attain food security and to overcome the under- and malnutrition.

National Food Security Mission (NFSM): To ensure availability of food to every Indian, the National Development Council (NDC) launched NFSM in 2007 to increase the annual production of rice by 10 million tonnes, wheat by 8 million tonnes and pulses by 2 million tonnes by the end of the 11 th five year plan. The mission met with a huge success and achieved the targeted additional production and the mission continued during 12 th plan with new targets of additional production of 25 million tonnes of food grains comprising of 10 million tonnes rice, 8 million tonnes of wheat, 4 million tonnes of pulses and 3 million tonnes of coarse cereals.

Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS) : The Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) launched MDMS in 2001. Under the scheme, the every child studying in every government and government aided primary school gets a mid day meal containing a minimum content of 300 calories of energy and 8-12 grams of protein per day for a minimum of 200 days and in 2006, the nutritional norm were revised to 450 calories and 12 gram of protein. In 2002, the MDMS was extended to children studying in Education Guarantee Scheme (EGS) and Alternative & Innovative Education (AIE) centres. In 2004, scheme was revised to provide for central assistance for cooking cost of Re 1 per child per school day to cover cost of pulses, vegetables cooking oil, condiments, fuel and cook wages.

In 2004 transport subsidy was raised and a provision for serving mid day meal was made possible during summer vacation in drought affected areas. In 2006, kitchen-cum-store construction and procurement of kitchen devices, a central assistance of rupees 60,000 per unit and rupees 5,000 per school, respectively, was given in a phase manner. The scheme was further extended to cover children of upper primary classes (class VI-VIII) studying in 3,479 Educationally Backwards Blocks (EBBs). Thus, in 2007 the scheme was renamed as to ‘National Programme of Mid Day Meal in Schools’ and the nutritional norm for upper primary stage was fixed at 700 calories and 20 grams of protein. It was further introduced to unrecognized institutions like Madarsas/Maqtabs supported under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan.

Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana : In 2016, the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India implemented Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY), which was previously known as Indira Gandhi Matritva Sahyog Yojana (IGMSY). The maternity benefit program aims at providing cash incentive of rupees 5000 to pregnant women and lactating mothers for the first living child of the family for fulfilling the specific maternal and child health needs. It is part of rupees 6000 compensation given on an average to the woman and the remaining one thousand is provided under Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) after institutional delivery.

Public Distribution System (PDS) : The Department of Food and Public Distribution (DFPD) is responsible for ensuring food security through procurement, storage and distribution of food grains in India. The Food Corporation of India (FCI) also shoulders some of the responsibilities The PDS system was renamed as Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS) to remove the lope holes in the system. Under TPDS system, food grains were providing to people below the poverty line at highly subsidized rates. The National Food Security Act, 2013 mandates to cover 75% of the population from rural areas and 50% from urban areas, and currently covers 81 crore people. Government has shown consistent increase in allocation of food subsidies (in crore) to the DFPD 3 (Fig. 2).

Another flagship programme in direction of promotes healthy food choices launched by Government of India in 2018 was called as 'Swasth Bharat Yatra'. Under this programme, a pan-India cycle rally was organized to sensitize people about eating safe food and be healthy and the cyclathon was supported by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). The programme also encouraged combating food adulteration.

More to the point, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MNREGA), a social employment guarantee act is one of the most influential initiatives undertaken for transformation of economy of rural households in India. The MNREGA Act was enacted in 2005 to provide a minimum guaranteed wages for 100 days in financial year to every rural household with unemployed unskilled adult. As per reports the increment in incomes of rural households generated through MNREGA works has enabled them to purchase adequate foods and other consumables. Thus, MNREGA had improved the food security of some households and saved some households from worsening their food security.

The importance of the food security can be understood from the fact more than one third of the world’s malnourished children are in India and India ranks 102 th among 117 countries in Global Hunger Index, 2019 4 . However, introduction of several social benefitting programmes and schemes has enabling India to manage malnutrition among pregnant- and lactating women, and children.

References :

• https://www.csir.res.in/achivement/csir-pride/food-food-processing .
• https://icar.org.in/content/about-us .
• Demand for Grants 2018-19 Analysis: Food and Public Distribution ( https://www.prsindia.org/parliamenttrack/budgets/demand-grants-2018-19-a... ).
• Hunger, Nutritional Challenges and India’s Dismal Ranking on Global Hunger Index ( https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2019/10/hunger-pangs-nutritional-challenges-and-indias-dismal-ranking-on-global-hunger-index/ ).

Dr. Bilqeesa Bhat, Ph.D Project Scientist Vigyan Prasar, Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi, India [email protected]

Essay on Indian Food Industry | Business

Here is an essay on ‘Indian Food Industry’ for class 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Find paragraphs, long and short essays on ‘Indian Food Industry’ especially written for school and college students.

Essay on Indian Food Industry

Essay Contents:

• Essay on the Threats to Indian Food Industry

Essay # 1. Introduction to Indian Food Industry:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

India’s culinary tradition is constantly changing. With urbanization, rising incomes, more working women and a proliferation of fast food outlets, the acceptance of packaged and ready-to-eat food products is increasing, especially among the urban middle class. Demand for specialty and high-value processed or packaged and ready to serve/ready to cook or reconstitute food items has increased.

India is the world’s second largest producer of food next to China. India, with diverse agro-climatic conditions, has a production advantage in many agricultural goods, with the potential to cultivate a large range of agricultural raw materials required by the food-processing industry. India is a major producer of spices, spice oils, essential oils, condiments, and fruit pulps.

Significant variations in food habits and culinary traditions across the country translate into a competitive advantage for small and medium local players, who are familiar with local food habits and markets. Some Indian food-processing companies have increased market share by decreasing product prices. High import duties on processed food and food ingredients make imports relatively costlier.

The total food production in India is likely to double in the next ten years and there is an opportunity for large investments in food processing, especially in areas of canning, dairy processing, specialty processing, packaging, frozen food/refrigeration and thermal processing. The industry has witnessed fast growth in most of the segments. In India the food processing sector is one of the largest in terms of production, consumption, export and growth prospects.

The important sub sectors in food processing industries are fruit and vegetable processing, fish- processing, milk processing, meat and poultry processing, packaged/convenience foods, alcoholic beverages and soft drinks and grain processing etc. The government has also accorded it a high priority to encourage commercialization and value addition to agricultural produce for minimizing post-harvest wastage, generating employment and export growth.

Essay # 2. Status of Indian Food Industry:

Processed Food Sector:

The turnover of the total food market is approximately Rs.250,000 crores (US $ 69.4 billion) out of which value-added food products comprise Rs. 80,000 crores (US $ 22.2 billion). Primary food processing is a major industry with lakhs of rice-mills/hullers, flour mills, pulse mills and oil-seed mills.

There are several thousands of bakeries, traditional food units viz. fruit, vegetable and spice processing units in unorganised sector. The size of the semi-processed and ready to eat packaged food industry is over Rs. 4000 crores (US $ 1 billion) and is growing at over 20 per cent.

In the organised sector, there are over 820 flour mills, 418 fish processing units, 5198 fruits and vegetable processing units, 171 meat processing units and 668 dairy processing units. India is the world’s second largest producer of fruits and vegetables, but hardly 2 per cent of the produce is processed.

India is the land of spices producing all varieties worth over Rs. 3500 crores (US $ 900 million) amounting to 25-30 per cent of world production, which is processed for value-addition and export. It grows 22 million tonnes of oilseeds covering most of the varieties. Other important plantation products include tea, coffee, cocoa and cashew etc.

Dairy Processing:

It is a matter of pride that India is the number one milk producing country in the world, maintaining the top position since 1988, thanks to successful implementation of the Operation Flood Programmes. World milk production is estimated at 613 million tons growing at a CAGR of 1.3 per cent. Indian production stands at 100 million tons growing at a CAGR of 4-5 per cent.

Hence, India contributes 4 million tones to the world’s incremental production of 7.5 million tonnes. Despite a higher growth rate, the per capita availability of milk in India (229 grams per day) is lower than the world average (285 grams per day). Buffalo milk is now estimated to account for 57 per cent of the total milk production in India.

India has a unique pattern of production, processing and marketing/consumption of milk, which is unparallel. About 70 million rural households (primarily, small and marginal farmers and landless labourers) in the country are engaged in milk production to change the dairy sector into viable self-sustaining organized sector. About 35 per cent of milk production, over 11 million farmers are organized into about 0.1 million village dairy cooperative societies (DCS).

The cumulative milk handled by DCS across the country is about 18 million kg of milk per day. These cooperatives form part of a national milk grid which links the milk producers throughout India with consumers in more than 700 towns and cities bridging the gaps on account of seasonal and regional variations in the availability of milk.

In India current annual growth rate in milk production is pegged between 4 to 6 per cent. This is primarily due to the initiatives taken by the operation flood programmes in organizing milk producers into cooperatives to turn the dairy sector into viable self-sustaining organized sector. About 35 per cent of milk products in India is processed. The organized sector processes about 13 million tones annually, while the unorganized sector (halwaiis and vendors) processes about 22 million tones per annum.

In the organized sector, there are 676 dairy plants in the cooperative, private and government sectors registered. There is huge potential for processing and value addition, particularly in traditional milk products, which are largely sold in unbranded form in the market.

The key differences between the organized and the unorganized sector is with respect to investments in preserving the quality of milk, technology used for processing and compliance with food standards. The solution lies in promoting investment in quality control and developing scalable efficient technologies for the unorganized sector.

Health Food:

Health food and health food supplements are another rapidly rising segment of food industry which is gaining vast popularity amongst the health conscious. India is one of the world’s major food producers but accounts for less than 1.5 per cent of international food trade. This indicates vast scope for both investors and exporters.

Food exports in 1998 stood at US $5.8 billion whereas the world total was US $438 billion. The Indian food industries sales turnover is Rs 140,000 crore (1 crore = 10 million) annually as at the start of year 2000. The industry has the highest number of plants approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outside the USA.

Value Added Food Product:

Although India is a world leader in the production of milk, rice, wheat, fruits and vegetables, livestock, fish and seafood, and eggs, India’s current food processing capabilities are very small compared with its agricultural output. Only 8 per cent of total agricultural output is processed into value-added products. However, production of value-added products in India is forecast to grow by 27 per cent by 2025.

Fruits and Vegetable Processing:

The installed capacity of fruits and vegetables processing industry has increased from 11.08 lakh tons (1993) to 24.74 lakh tons (2007). The utilization of fruits and vegetables processing is estimated to be around 2.20 per cent of the total production. Over the last few years, there has been a positive growth in ready to serve beverages, fruit juices and pulps, dehydrated and frozen fruits and vegetable products, tomato products, pickles, convenience veg-spice pastes, processed mushrooms and curried vegetables.

The domestic consumption of value added fruits and vegetable products is also low compared to the primary processed food in general and fresh fruits and vegetables in particular. Hardly 2 percent of fruits and vegetables produced in India are processed.

Meat and Meat Processing:

India’s livestock population is largest in the world with 50 per cent of world’s buffaloes and 20 per cent of cattle, but only about 1 per cent of total meat production is converted to value added products. In meat and meat processing sector, poultry meat is the fastest growing animal protein in India. The estimated production is 1500 thousand tones growing at CAGR of 13 per cent through 1991-2005. Per capita consumption has grown from 870 grams in 2000 to about 1.68 kg in 2005.

This is expected to grow to 2Kg in 2009. Buffalo meat production has been growing relatively less rapidly at a CAGR of 5 per cent in the last 6 years. The current production levels are estimated at 1.9 million MT. Of this about 21 per cent is exported. Mutton and lamb is relatively small segment where demand is outstripping supply, which explains the high prices in domestic market. The production levels have been almost constant at 950,000 MT with annual exports of less than 10,000 MT.

This has restricted large processing companies from developing business interests in this sector. Indian consumer prefers to buy freshly cut meat from the wet market, rather than processed or frozen meat. A mere 6 per cent of production (about 100,000 MT) of poultry meat is sold in processed form. Of this, only about 1 per cent undergoes processing into value added products (Ready to- eat/Ready-to-cook). Processing of large animals is largely for the purpose of exports.

The total processing capacity in India is over 1 million MT per annum, of which 40-50 per cent is utilized. India exports more than 500,000 MT of meat of which major share is buffalo meat. Indian buffalo meat is witnessing strong demand in international markets due to its lean character and near organic nature. India is the 5 th largest exporter of bovine meat in the world. Indian buffalo meat exports have the potential to grow significantly.

Due to emerging health threats of the diseases communicable to human through meat, the meat consumers are more vigilant towards the wholesomeness of the meat and demanding meat and poultry products processed in clean and sanitary environment. In metros and urban areas there are upcoming demands for “convenience items” such as semi cooked, ready-to-eat, ready-to-cook meat food products. Processing of meat products is licensed under Meat Food Products Order (MFPO) 1973.

The main objectives of the MFPO, 1973 are to regulate production and sale of meat food products through licensing of manufacturers, enforce sanitary and hygienic conditions prescribed for production of wholesome meat food products, exercise strict quality control at all stages of production of meat food products, fish products including chilled poultry etc.

Fisheries Processing:

India has large marine product and processing potential with varied fish resources along the 8041 km. long coastline, 28000 km. of rivers and millions of hectares of reservoirs and brackish water. At present, there are over 369 freezing units with a daily processing capacity of 10266 tons out of which 150 units are approved for export to EU. 499 units are engaged in production of frozen fish with a total storage capacity of 134767 tons. Apart from the above there are 12 surimi units, 5 canning units and 473 units are engaged in pre-processing and dry fish storage.

However, in 2004-05, export of marine products achieved a record 12 per cent increase in volume and 11 per cent increase in US$. Frozen shrimps constitute 63.5 per cent of total value of exports. USA is the largest importer of Indian marine products contributing 13.21 per cent in quantity and 29.8 per cent in value of total exports importing mainly frozen shrimps – HL Black tiger shrimps.

Ethnic Food/Street Food:

The concept of traditional food street has now been given a new meaning in developed countries, with food streets emerging as new tourist attractions. Major tourist destinations invariably have food streets offering exotic local foods. Street food in India has always been popular because of its affordability and convenient availability.

This is an area with huge potential for increased income generation for vendors and for giving a boost to the tourism sector. This may also lead to popularity of local food traditions, offering fast food, which are very popular among Indians.

Essay # 3. Strength and Weakness of Indian Food Industry:

Although India’s enormous population size makes it an attractive market for food manufacturers and suppliers, the majority of people do not have the necessary purchasing power to accommodate a large percentage of foreign foodstuffs. However, the strengthening Indian economy shows promise for potential exporters. According to Lynch (2007) reported that 22 per cent of Indian households (44 million households) are expected to be capable of purchasing packaged foods. In addition, there is demand for high-cost processed foods by India’s ever-increasing consumer class.

Weakness Indian Food Industry:

In an effort to comply with World Trade Organization (WTO) standards, India removed all import licensing restrictions effective April 1, 2001. The small- scale farming system in India, marketing problems, lack of grading and standards, poor distribution channels, and onerous government policies continue to pose problems for the processing industry to source the right type of raw materials and to discourage more investment in the sector.

Essay # 4. Opportunities of Indian Food Industry:

Processed foods that have done well in market include cheese, butter, ice cream, bakery products, ready-to-make foods, biscuits, chocolate, tea and milk products. Other processed foods that have good market potential in India include condiments and sauces such as ketchup, jams, jellies and pickles, in addition to healthy foods and beverages, fruit juices, cereals, confectionary, snack foods and curry powders.

Opportunities also exist for the export of processing and packaging technologies and storage and transportation alternatives as the Indian food processing industry strives to capitalize on current food surpluses and to increase its food processing capabilities to become a more prominent player in the global food market. However, the processed food market is expected to grow with continued strengthening of India’s economy.

India’s significant economic growth of 8.2 per cent in 2003 and 6.0 per cent in 2004 is forecast to continue to rise another 6.5 per cent in 2007-8. Furthermore, increased urbanization, rising incomes and changing lifestyles in which time and convenience are valued will drive demand for packaged foods and easy-to-prepare meals. Expected with this increased demand is a corresponding demand for healthy ready-to-eat foods.

The market for semi processed/cooked ready-to-eat meals in India grew 20 per cent during the 2003-2004 fiscal year. Between 2000 and 2003, demand for snack foods increased each year by 10 per cent. India’s market for processed foods is expected to more than double its value by 2015, amounting to almost $340 billion.

Several multinational companies, including US-based companies like Pepsi, Coca Cola, ConAgra, Cargill, Heinz, Kellogg’s, IFF, and Mars (pet food only) have entered the Indian food-processing industry with significant investments. Indian food and beverage companies are expanding their operations to neighboring countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Commonwealth of Independent States countries, and the Middle East. Takeovers and mergers are beginning to occur in the Indian food-processing sector, leading to consolidation.

Essay # 5. Threats to Indian Food Industry:

Even with import restrictions removed, imports face regulation, taxation and bureaucratic barriers. Import tariffs on consumer food items range from 35 per cent to 56 per cent. Moreover, India’s retail sector is primarily unorganized, and its infrastructure (especially roads and refrigerated cold chains) is underdeveloped. Although imported products are affordable to only approximately 25 per cent of the Indian population, the number of mid- to high-income earners is growing, and they are developing a taste for imported products.

Since 2001, Agri-food imports have increased steadily, rising 14.2 per cent through to 2003, reaching a value of $5.4 billion. Imported processed food products that have had success in this market were typically altered to cater to local tastes-in some cases, regional spices were used to make products more attractive to the Indian market.

Furthermore, smaller packages are offered to accommodate Indian consumers’ limited purchasing power and storage abilities. Examples of processed food items currently imported into India include ketchup, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, chocolate syrup, cake mixes, canned soups, popcorn, potato chips, canned fish, ice cream and canned corn.

The food-processing industry in India has undergone sea changes over the last few years, in terms of types, variety, quality, and presentation of products, which is mainly a result of the liberalization that led to foreign direct investment (FDI) in the processed food sectors. The growth in the food-processing sector has generated increased interest in high quality food ingredients in order to produce high quality processed and packaged foods.

The ready-to-eat food sector is growing at a high rate due to the changing lifestyles of the middle-class consumers (both partners working, etc.). Thus increasing number of fast food chains. The recent trend toward a healthier lifestyle has generated a niche market for diet, healthy, low-calorie, and non-fat food products.

Related Articles:

• Essay on the Indian Consumer | Marketing
• Measures to Control Absenteeism in Indian industry
• Impacts of Changes in Government Policy on Business and Industry (10 Impacts)
• Difference Between Trade, Commerce and Industry

We use cookies

Privacy overview.

• Website Inauguration Function.
• Vocational Placement Cell Inauguration
• Media Coverage.
• Certificate & Recommendations
• Privacy Policy
• Science Project Metric
• Social Studies 8 Class
• Computer Fundamentals
• Introduction to C++
• Programming Methodology
• Programming in C++
• Data structures
• Boolean Algebra
• Object Oriented Concepts
• Database Management Systems
• Open Source Software
• Operating System
• PHP Tutorials
• Earth Science
• Physical Science
• Sets & Functions
• Coordinate Geometry
• Mathematical Reasoning
• Statics and Probability
• Accountancy
• Business Studies
• Political Science
• English (Sr. Secondary)

Hindi (Sr. Secondary)

• Punjab (Sr. Secondary)
• Accountancy and Auditing
• Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Technology
• Automobile Technology
• Electrical Technology
• Electronics Technology
• Hotel Management and Catering Technology
• IT Application
• Marketing and Salesmanship
• Office Secretaryship
• Stenography
• Hindi Essays
• English Essays

Letter Writing

• Shorthand Dictation

Essay on “Food Grain Production in India” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.

Food Grain Production in India

Synopsis: Freedom from hunger and malnutrition presupposes availability of food-grains at reasonable rates all over the country. The present availability of food gain in the country is 38 gms per person per day, which is very low.  India is an agricultural country and the monsoon plays a very vital role here. We had nine successive good monsoons and this year 1997 too it has been good and the target has been fixed to 193 MT for 1997-98.  In 1994-95 India had the highest food-grain production ever achieved but it went down in 1995-96 and food-grain had to be imported.  India is still a country of malnourished people and self-sufficiency in food-grains is still a far cry.  The rapid increase in population has outpaced our food-production growth and there is an urgent need of a new thrust of food production.  We need more and more technology and research in agriculture.  Besides food-production, there are other problems like distribution, storage, subsidies etc. to be tackled. 

Food is one of the basic human needs.  It is the chief means of subsistence.  Therefore, agricultural development is as important as industrial development.  They are interrelated and interdependent. Development means providing means of sustenance to the people.  Adequate availability of food-grains at reasonable prices ensures freedom from hunger and malnutrition.  Availability and entitlement of food both are important.  Food should be within the easy reach of the masses. India’s population is increasing at the rate of over 2 percent per annum. Therefore, the production of food-grains, procurement, storage, distribution and timely movement to the deficient regions are to be given top priority.  The per capita availability of food-grains in India is nearly 38 gms per day.

            India is basically an agricultural country and in this sector monsoon plays an important role.  The southwest monsoon starts in June and lasts till October and causes rains in various parts of the country in various degrees.   Rains play a vital role in agriculture.  The kharif crop depends chiefly on the south-west monsoon and the Rabi crop on north-east monsoon which blows from November to May.  It brings rain mainly to the peninsular India and here the main crop is paddy.

            India had good monsoon for successive nine years since 1989 and is now poised to have the tenth successive good monsoon. It is expected that this year’s food production will be around 190 million tones which had declined to 180 million tons in 1996.  In the expectation of good and normal monsoon, the target of food production has been fixed at 193 MT for 1997-98.  But in spite of good monsoon last year, food-grain production slumped to 185 Mt against the target monsoon and unfavorable weather conditions at the procurement time of Rabi crops.  But again the procurement of food-grains this year has been way behind that of the previous year and therefore, the experts are doubtful about the improvement over last year’s; target of 62.6 MT. 43 per cent of the total food production is that of rice and its production this year is estimated to the tune of 81 MT over 79.6 Mt for 1995-96.

            When in 1994-95 India’s food grain production went up to 191 MT from 181 MT for 1993-94, this was widely publicized and it was stressed that the country had not only achieved self-sufficiency but also gained export capability.  But the following year it came down to 185 MT.  The food-grain production in 1994-95 was the highest India ever achieved.  It meant 210 kg per person per year.  China produces 300-370kg. Per person per year and still they find insufficient and so import food-grains.  It shows how underfed are people in India.  As per the standard of nutrition norm, there should be 300 kg. Food-grain per person per year. 

            Obviously, our present food-grain production is much less than our needs and so the fact in India is a malnourished nation and about 30 crore Indians suffer from starvation and hunger.  The present rate of increase in food production is 4 MT per year but we need it to be 5.4 MT.  This increase is essential to achieve self-sufficiency in this sector. India population has been increasing at the rate 2 per cent per year.  India’s population by 2006-7 is likely to be nearly 1,100 million requiring 330 MT of food-grain but the Union Agriculture Minister has targeted the food-grain production at 285 MT by the year 2006.7, and it is still far short of the norm of 300 kg per capita per year.  Moreover, it is doubtful if even this target of 285 MT will be achieved.  Fortunately was have had good monsoons for the last ten years, but if the monsoon fails, it will be really disastrous because only 27 per cent of our cultivated land is irrigated.  As such, there is hardly any scope for complacency.  Unless there is new thrust to increase the productivity of food-grains, the gap between the requiremt5n and availability cannot be bridged. 

            The demand of food-grains in India is far less than the actual need because the people are poor and their purchasing power is absolutely low.  Therefore, the air of self-sufficiency is artificial and false in regard to food-grain production.  Actually we will need about 300 MT of food-grains by the turn of the vestry itself which is just 3 years away.  Unless we adopt a strategy of higher production and target 300 MT by the year 2000, we shall be left far behind and this is not an unrealistic target if we tighten our belt and take appropriate measures to improve the irrigation facilities, check the soil degradation, which is over a million hectares per year, and have definite programme and policy in the sphere of biological production. We need more and more technology in agriculture based on sound and fundamental research of our scientists.

            The growth rate of population in the country has declined and yet India will take over China’s position as the most populous country.  There is addiction of 45,000 new mouths to feed every day.  It means there is increase of 31 persons every minute in our population.  Thus, every year we will have 16 million more to feed, shelter, educate, clothe and find employment.  Consequently, population growth is bound to out space our food-production. Besides food production, there are other problems like distribution, marketing and storage.  The problem of subsidy is also there.  There are increased subsidies every year but then they don’t reach the poor for whom they are meant.  They are grabbed by the rich farmers, middlemen and bureaucrats who hardly need them. 

About evirtualguru_ajaygour

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quick Links

Popular Tags

Visitors question & answer.

• Md shoaib sarker on Short Story ” The Lion and The Mouse” Complete Story for Class 10, Class 12 and other classes.
• Bhavika on Essay on “A Model Village” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.
• slide on 10 Comprehension Passages Practice examples with Question and Answers for Class 9, 10, 12 and Bachelors Classes
• अभिषेक राय on Hindi Essay on “Yadi mein Shikshak Hota” , ”यदि मैं शिक्षक होता” Complete Hindi Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.

Download Our Educational Android Apps

Latest Desk

• Samkaleen Bhartiya Mahilaye  “समकालीन भारतीय महिलाएं” Hindi Essay, Nibandh 1000 Words for Class 10, 12 Students.
• Nijikarn – Gun evm Dosh  “निजीकरण: गुण एवं दोष” Hindi Essay, Nibandh 1200 Words for Class 10, 12 Students.
• Bharat mein Mahilaon ke Rajnitik Adhikar  “भारत में महिलाओं के राजनीतिक अधिकार” Hindi Essay, Nibandh 700 Words for Class 10, 12 Students.
• Bharat mein Jativad aur Chunavi Rajniti “भारत में जातिवाद और चुनावी राजनीति” Hindi Essay, Nibandh 1000 Words for Class 10, 12 Students.
• Example Letter regarding election victory.
• Example Letter regarding the award of a Ph.D.
• Example Letter regarding the birth of a child.
• Example Letter regarding going abroad.
• Letter regarding the publishing of a Novel.

Vocational Edu.

• English Shorthand Dictation “East and Dwellings” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Haryana General Sales Tax Act” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Deal with Export of Goods” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Interpreting a State Law” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.

Essay on Food Problems in India

In this essay we will discuss about the Food Problems in India. After reading this essay you will learn about: 1. Introduction to Food Problems in India 2. Food Problem and Food Policy in India since Independence 3 . Different Aspects 4. Factors Responsible 5. Policy Measures Adopted by the Government.

• Essay on the Policy Measures Adopted by the Government to Solve the Food Problem

Essay # 1. Introduction to Food Problems in India:

India has been facing food problems since long period. During Second World War India experienced a severe food crisis leading to a phenomenal increase in the prices of foodgrains. Again in 1943, Bengal faced a serious Agriculture and its Development in India famine where nearly 3.5 million people died out of starvation.

In order to meet the situations, the rationing system was introduced and about 45 million people were covered by this rationing system. But due to corrupt and inefficient administrative structure, the entire system failed leading to a widespread hoarding and speculation of foodgrains causing huge suffering of millions of people of the country.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The partition of India in 1947 again aggravated the food crisis as after partition the country received about 82 per cent of the population but had to manage with nearly 45 per cent of the total cultivated area under cereals and with 69 per cent of the irrigated area. The country had to forego the surplus area of West Punjab and Sind.

Thus, while the separation of Burma aggravated the situation and forced the country to import rice but the partition of the country again forced the country to import wheat from foreign countries.

Essay # 2. Food Problem and Food Policy in India since Independence:

India had to face a serious food crisis at the time of independence.

To meet the deficiency in the supply of foodgrains in the short run, the Government made the following provisions:

(a) Extension of the rationing system to cover both urban and rural areas;

(b) Import of foodgrains to make easy the situation and the amount of import reached the level of 2.7 million tonnes in 1947; and

(c) Introduction of subsidy for the distribution of imported food grains as it was expensive as compared to indigenously produced foodgrains. But the public distribution system which was mostly maintained in the urban areas primarily had been suffering from huge degree of inefficiency and corruption. .

To meet the situation, the First Five Year Plan accorded highest priority to agriculture. During the First Plan period, the country experienced a series of good harvests leading to an improvement in the food supply situation, curtailment of imports and a consequent fall in the prices of food grains by 23 per cent.

Considering the situation the planners became very much optimistic and an impression was created that the food problem was finally solved. But the situation was short-lived because whatever improvement in food situation was achieved that was mainly due to better climatic conditions and timely arrival of monsoons.

PL-480 Agreement, 1956:

Soon after, the Second Plan again experienced a serious food crisis especially in 1958-59, in various parts of the country due to drought, floods and cyclone. To meet the crisis the Government of India entered into an agreement in 1956 with U.S.A. to import 3.1 million tonnes of wheat and 0.19 million tonnes of rice for the next three years. This agreement was known as Public Law-480 (PL- 480) Agreement, 1956 which the government utilised to reduce and stabilise the prices of foodgrains in the country.

That marked the beginning of the present public distribution system (PDS) which was introduced to distribute cheap imported foodgrains through network of “fair price shops” at a price which was far below the prevailing market price.

Again the Third Plan set a target to raise the production of foodgrains by 100 million tonnes but the plan failed to achieve the target. Under such a situation the government had no other alternative but to import foodgrains heavily.

Thus, the volume of import of foodgrains which was a negligible 6 lakh tonnes in 1955-56 went up to 1.4 million tonnes in 1956-57 (the first year of PL-480 imports), 3.6 million tonnes in 1956-57, 6.3 million tonnes in 1963-64, 7.4 million tonnes in 1964-65 and then to 10.3 million tonnes in 1965-66.

Foodgrains Enquiry Committee, 1957:

This huge import of foodgrains was endorsed by the foodgrains Enquiry Committee appointed by the government in 1957. This committee categorically observed that, “Food problem was likely to remain with us for a long time to come, assurance of continued imports of certain quantities- of foodgrains will constitute the very basis of a successful food policy for some years to come.”

Thus, under such a situation a stable and long term food policy based on heavy imports of foodgrains emerged gradually. Accordingly, India signed an agreement with U.S.A. for importing 16 million tonnes of wheat and 1 million tonnes office for the next 4 years.

During this 10 years period (1956-66), the food policy of the Government of India was mostly based on imports (under PL-480) from U.S.A. and the country imported nearly 60 million tonnes of foodgrains or an annual average of 6 million tonnes.

About 75 to 80 per cent of foodgrains distributed through public distribution system was brought through imports which was really a humiliating dependence. Instead of all these steps, the prices of foodgrains started to rise continuously and thus the Government realised that its food policy based on imports failed to save the situation.

Integrated Food Policy, 1966:

In order to save the situation the Government set up another food-grain Policy Committee, 1966 to review the situation. This committee recommended to prepare and implement a National Food Budget involving a national plan of supply and distribution of foodgrains through (a) procurement of foodgrains (b) control of inter-state movement (c) a public distribution system and (d) building a buffer stock for difficult years.

This Policy was known as Integrated Food Policy 1966 which recommended partial procurement, partial public distribution and simultaneously permitted private trade of foodgrains with free market prices.

Impact of New Agricultural Strategy:

In the meantime, the Government adopted new agricultural strategy during the Fourth Plan and set a production target of 129 million tonnes of foodgrains at the last year (1973-74) of the Plan. But at the end of Plan,’ the production of foodgrains could be started to increase. After 1968 the government gradually reduced the volume of imports of foodgrains from nearly 8.7 million tonnes in 1967 to 0.5 million tonnes in 1972.

But the Government raised its procurement of foodgrains since 1972 and put the public distribution system on a permanent basis. Inspite of that when prices of foodgrains rose considerably; the Government took a major decision to take over the wholesale trade in wheat from April 1, 1973.

But there was considerable opposition from the wholesale traders and rich farmers leading to a huge chaos and confusion in the wheat growing states. Due to a mounting pressure from within and outside the party, the Government ultimately forced to scrap the takeover of wholesale trade in wheat.

The new agricultural strategy, popularly known as green revolution was also continued during the Fifth and Sixth Plan. At the end of Fifth Plan total production of food grains rose to about 132 million tonnes and then the same figure rose to 145.5 million tonnes at the end of Sixth Plan (1984-85).

After two years acute drought, the production of foodgrain in 1988-89 reached a record level of 169.9 million tonnes and then it further rose gradually to 146.4 million tonnes in 1990-91. But due to bad weather, the total production of foodgrains again declined to 167.1 million tonnes in 1991-92 and in 1996-97 it is likely to reach the level of 192.0 million tonnes.

In spite of this positive trend in the production of foodgrains of the country, the Government had to continue its dependence on import of foodgrains for building buffer stock in different years excepting those favourable years viz., 1972, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1990, 1991.

India imported 4.1 million tonnes of cereals in 1982-83, 2.4 million tonnes in 1983-84 and also in 1987-88. In 1993, the Government has taken a decision to import 1 million tonnes of wheat for direct sale in the market and not for replenishing its buffer stocks.

Another aspect of the food problem is that prices of foodgrains have been rising continuously causing serious difficulties to the rural poor. The index of foodgrains price (base 1970-71 = 100) rose from 103 in 1971-72 to 1985 in 1979-80 and then to 390 in 1988-89.

Under such a situation income disparities have widened and the proportion of population lying below the poverty line has also increased considerably. Demand for foodgrains of those people lying below the poverty line gradually declined because they do not have sufficient purchasing power.

Essay # 3. Different Aspects of Food Problem:

Food problem in India bas the following three different aspects:

(i) Quantitative Aspect:

Supply of foodgrains in India is totally inadequate as the per capita calorie intake in India is very low in comparison to other developing countries. The report of the Food Advisory Committee (1958) states that in India a normal working adult person requires 2300 calories and 62 grams of protein daily. But unfortunately only 35 per cent of the Indian population is provided with this minimum consumption standard.

(ii) Qualitative Aspects:

There is a deficiency in the nutrient content of the diet of average Indian and this deficiency is mostly marked in respect of sugar, fish and milk.

(iii) High Prices of Foodgrains:

In India, the prices of foodgrains have been increasing rapidly and prices were double in 1970-71 as compared to that of 1960-61. The index of food grains prices (1970-71 = 100) has increased from 108 in 1971-72 to 390 in 1988-89. Again the new index of prices of foodgrains (1981-82 = 100) again increased from 118 to 179 in 1990-91.

This continuous rise in the prices of foodgrains has eroded the purchasing capacity of the Indian people and thus aggravated the food problem severely.

Essay # 4. Factors Responsible for Food Problem in India:

Food problem in India was very much acute during 1950s and 1960s. With the adoption of new agricultural strategy, the intensity of food problem in India has declined. But as Indian agriculture is continuing its dependence upon weather conditions thus the production of foodgrains is fluctuating abruptly with the variation of weather conditions, as experienced recently in 1991-92.

Thus, even in recent years, the country had to import foodgrains from foreign countries although at a lesser quantity. Thus, India has not yet reached the level of self-sufficiency in foodgrains.

The following are some of the important factors which are responsible for this persisting food problem in the country:

(i) High Rate of Population Growth:

The population of India is increasing at a very high rate. The annual average growth rate of population in India has declined slightly from -2.5 per cent during the decade 1961-71 and 1971-81 to 2.1 percent in 1981-91 and then to 1.9 per cent in 1991-2001.

The size of population has become more than double during the post-independence period which has raised the aggregate demand for foodgrains significantly. Thus, this ever increasing size of population is responsible for the persisting food problem in the country.

(ii) High Marginal Propensity to Consume:

Due to acute poverty the marginal propensity to consume of the people of India is very high. This is mainly due to high income elasticity of demand for food articles. With the increase in money income, the demand for food articles of average Indian is increasing rapidly leading to a huge pressure in the food market.

(iii) Inadequate Increase in the Production of Foodgrains:

In the pre-green revolution period, the production of foodgrains in India was totally inadequate. It is only due to adoption of new agricultural strategy the production of foodgrains has reached the level of 233.9 million tonnes in 2008-09. But considering the high rate of growth of population to (2.5 per cent per annum) this rate of increase in foodgrains production is totally inadequate.

Thus, the per capita net availability of foodgrains has failed to increase substantially as it has increased marginally from 494.4 grams per day in 1965 to 509.9 grams per day in 1991.

(iv) Hoarding of Foodgrains:

There is a continuous tendency on the part of traders in India to hoard foodgrains and to accentuate the shortage of foodgrains in order to push up the prices for reaping extra­ordinary profit. Thus, this speculation and hoarding has created artificial crisis of foodgrains in the country.

(v) Increase in Farm Consumption:

In India the farm consumption of foodgrains is increasing with the increase in agricultural output. Thus, due to this increasing home consumption the marketable surplus of foodgrains could not increase substantially.

(vi) Corrupt Administrative Practices:

To improve the food situation in the country, the Government has imposed various measures like price controls, rationing, zoning, surprise checks etc. But as the administrative machinery in India is totally corrupt, these measures failed to provide any benefit to the general masses of the country.

Essay # 5. Policy Measures Adopted by the Government to Solve the Food Problem:

During the planning period, the Government of India adopted various measures to tackle the food situation of the country at different times. Neither the free market mechanism nor the full control was adopted by the Government rather a compromise solution consisting of partial control, food procurement, public distribution system, import of foodgrains etc. has been followed to tackle the food problem of the country.

The policy measures adopted by tile Government during the planning period can be broadly classified into following four headings:

(i) Measures to increase output,

(ii) Measures to improve the distribution system,

(iii) Import of foodgrains, and

(iv) Price incentive to agricultural producers.

(i) Measures to Increase Agricultural Output:

In order to tackle the food crisis the Government had taken following measures to increase the agricultural output:

(a) Technological measure:

In order to face the serious food crisis faced by the country; the Government adopted’ technological measures to boost the agricultural production of the country. Since 1966, the Government adopted New Agricultural strategy through the application of HYV seeds, fertilizers, pesticides etc. and adopted farm mechanisation technique through the use of tractors, oil engines, pumpsets, tubewells, threshers, harvester combines etc.

All these technological measures have helped the farmers to raise the agricultural output considerably. But this technological change was very much restricted to some particular states like Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh.

(b) Land reforms:

In order to raise agricultural productivity through the removal of intermediary tenure, the Government introduced various land reform measures and also adopted legislation to bring ceiling on land holding, regulation of rent, conferment of ownership to tenants etc.

But due to half hearted approach of state governments the land reforms in India could not yield much result in raising the agricultural production and productivity in the country.

(ii) Measures to Improve the Distribution System:

In order to regulate and control the distribution of foodgrains in the country the Government adopted various measures as follows:

(a) Food Zones:

In order to stabilise the prices of foodgrains and to rationalise its distribution, the government adopted zoning system where the country was divided into food deficit zones and food surplus zones. This system restricted the private movement of food from one zone to another zone and facilitated procurement of food grains for public distribution system (PDS). But due to its various evils this system was later on abolished.

(b) Buffer stock and state trading:

In order to ensure regularity and certainty in food supply throughout the country the Government advocated for building up of buffer stock of 5 million tonnes of food grains by 1973-74. In January 1965, the Food Corporation of India (FCI) was set up to undertake purchase, handling, transport, storage and distribution of foodgrains on behalf of the government. As on 1st October, 1997 total buffer stocks of foodgrains with public agencies were 15.34 million tonnes as against 19.88 million tonnes in October 1996.

(c) Procurement and Public Distribution System:

In order to supply foodgrains ‘through public distribution system FCI is allowed to undertake procurement operations in different states on a large scale. Accordingly, the volume of procurement has increased substantially from 1.4 million tonnes in 1964 to 24.8 million tonnes in 1990-91 and then it declined to 18 million tonnes in 1991-92.

Moreover, the network of Public Distribution System (PDS) was introduced to supply essential commodities at subsidised price which was an essential element of Government’s safety net to the poor. The system started to operate with fair price shops and ration shops. As on 31st March, 1992 there were over 4 lakh such outlets in the country.

At present the PDS roughly distributes about 10 to 12 per cent of the annual grain production or it meet only 12 to 15 per cent of the individual foodgrains requirement. In 1991-92, 21.72 million tonnes of foodgrains were allocated to the states for the PDS against which 18.77 million tonnes were lifted for distribution. From January 1992, a scheme to revamp the PDS has been launched in about 1700 blocks falling in drought prone desert, integrated tribal development project areas and certain designated hill areas.

In these areas, additional commodities like tea, soap, pulses and iodised salts are also envisaged to be distributed through PDS.

But the PDS in India suffers from some serious defects:

(a) the distribution system is very much restricted to wheat and rice,

(b) the system remained restricted to urban areas for a considerable period,

(c) the coverage of PDS is still inadequate as it fails to cover all those persons living below the poverty line, and

(d) the PDS has now turned into Frankenstein’s monster for the Government.

The system has become very much expensive and a burden on the public exchequer as no efforts have been made for targeting, i.e., limiting the system to the vulnerable sections of the population. Due to its wide coverage, the PDS quota of ration per household is very poor.

C.H. Hanumantha Rao, Sushanta K. Roy and K. Subbarao made an estimate that PDS in some states accounts for nearly 10 per cent of the annual plan outlay. The high cost of maintaining PDS is “threatening its long run sustainability” and the small impact of the system on the poor is reducing its effectiveness.

(d) Other Measures:

As per the recommendations of foodgrains Policy Committee made in 1957, the government took over the wholesale trade in wheat and rice in 1972-73. But as this measure was vehemently opposed by the wholesale traders and large farmers thus the government scrapped the system in March, 1974. Again the another measure to produce 50 per cent of the stocks from wholesalers also flopped miserably.

(iii) Import of Foodgrains:

In order to face severe food crisis in the economy, it is quite essential to enforce stability in the prices of foodgrains. As there was deficiency in the supply of foodgrains, thus the Government of India entered into the first PL-480 agreement with U.S.A. in 1956 to import 3.1 million tonnes in wheat and 0.19 million tonnes of rice for the next three years.

Thereafter the government resorted to continuous import of foodgrains for meeting the deficiency in the food supply as the country failed to maintain a buffer stock of foodgrains. Accordingly, the volume of import of foodgrains gradually increased from a negligible 6 lakh tonnes in 1955-56 to 1.4 million tonnes in 1956-57, 3.9 million tonnes in 1959-60, 6.3 million tonnes in 1963-64, 7.4 million tonnes in 1964-65 and then finally to 10.3 million tonnes in 1965-66.

Again inspite of significant increase in the production of foodgrains in recent years, the country had to continue its dependence on import of foodgrains for building buffer stock excepting nine years (1972, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1990, 1991).

Accordingly, India imported 4.1 million tonnes of food-grains in 1982-83, 2.4 million tonnes in 1983-84 and in 1987-88. In 1993, the Government took a decision to import 1 million tonnes of wheat for direct rate in the market and not for replenishing its buffer stock.

A recent study conducted by World Food Programme (WFP) the U.N. in consultation with the Government of India observed that India still needs external food assistance to help large sections of its population for achieving food security and self-reliance despite the country’s achievements in agricultural development and its ability to meet the market demand for foodgrains.

There is a continuing role for food assistance to India as an estimated 200 million—almost a quarter of the country’s population are undernourished and live on conditions of extreme poverty.

This import of foodgrains although had a favourable impact in the food situation in the short run but it had a bad impact on the production front in the long run. Economists like S. Chakraborty and Rosenstein Rodan also argued in the similar line. Decline in the prices of foodgrains due to import discourages farmers to increase agricultural production.

If food aid is continued in the long run then agricultural sector cannot develop itself at a sufficiently fast rate so as to attain self sufficiency in foodgrains. Similarly, B.M. Bhatia argued that Import of foodgrains under PL-480 from USA did not allow the farmers to secure remunerative prices of foodgrains.

(iv) Price Incentives to Agricultural Producers:

Price incentives are very much important to induce the farmers for further agricultural development. American experts argued that high price incentives can be considered a key to any scheme for intensive development in agriculture. Various Indian economists like Raj Krishna, V.S. Patwardhan, A.M. Khusro also argued that Indian farmers do respond to price changes in determining their marketable surplus. The Government is also of the view that there exists a close positive relation between price incentives and agricultural production both in traditional and commercial farming.

Accordingly, the Government set up an Agricultural Prices Commission (later on renamed as Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices), which is making important decisions in connection with determining and announcing minimum support prices of agricultural produce regularly.

This commission has been recommending incentive prices policy for various agricultural crops since last 28 years. Thus, care should be taken that the pricing and procurement policy of the Government should not generate any disincentive to the expansion of agricultural production.

(v) Market Intervention Scheme (MIS):

The Market Intervention Scheme is an important ad-hoc scheme which includes horticultural commodities and other agricultural commodities, which are again perishable in nature and which are not covered under the minimum price support scheme.

In order to protect the growers of these horticultural and agricultural commodities from making distress sale in the event of bumper crop during the peak arrival period when prices fall to a very low level, Government implements the M.I.S. for a particular commodity on the request of a State Government concerned.

Losses so suffered are shared on 50: 50 basis between Central Government and the State itself. The market intervention scheme has already been implemented in various states of our country.

Thus, from the foregoing analysis we can come to conclusion that the food problem in India cannot be tackled on food front alone. Instead efforts should be undertaken to control the growth of population in order to solve the food problem of the country permanently.

Related Articles:

• Supply of Food Grains: 3 Conditions
• Essay on the Food Problems in India
• Food Problem in India (With Measures)
• 8 Major Problems of Petroleum Industry in India

India Aims To Promote Artificial Intelligence In Food Processing Sector: Report

The government officials emphasized the need for a proper roadmap to deploy ai solutions in india's food processing sector..

The innitiative aims to enhance the food idustry in India (Representative Image)

Technology is possibly not the first thing that we consider while discussing issues in the food industry. But today, with the advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), automation has become an aspect that you just can't ignore while considering food production and distribution. And India is gearing up to boost the integration of AI in the food processing industry, reads a report in PTI. According to a Government announcement, this initiative aims to enhance the efficiency of the farmers, further improving their incomes and minimizing environmental impact. The announcement was made at a recent conference, organized by the National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management (NIFTEM), on using frontier technologies in the food and agriculture sector.

Also Read:   How Food Technology Helps With Food Wastage - Expert Reveals

As per the PTI report, the senior bureaucrats and Government advisors, present at the conference, emphasized the need for a proper roadmap and strategy to deploy AI solutions, which are still at a very early stage when compared to the country's massive food processing industry.

Anita Praveen, the Food Processing Secretary, stated, "As an industry, we need to create a roadmap. The MEITY secretary has come on board. I am sure he is going to be a big support in this endeavour," referring to the secretary of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY).

MEITY Secretary S Krishnan further explained that while some technological progression has been made in the agriculture sector, the food processing industry is in a nascent stage when it comes to using such technologies.

The officials added that AI tools could also help improve overall sector efficiency as India aims to reach net zero emissions by 2070.

Promoted Listen to the latest songs, only on JioSaavn.com

Also Read:  Is Automation A Viable Solution For Food Industry? 5 Factors Restaurants Can Explore

What Is Artificial Intelligence In The Food Industry? How Is AI Used In The Sector?

Artificial Intelligence in the food sector involves the use of technologies , data analytics and machine learning to enhance food production, precision agriculture, quality control, personalized nutrition, supply chain management, and customer experience. According to experts, such applications help ensure the quality and standards of the food items, while maintaining an efficient production process.

Track Budget 2023 and get Latest News Live on NDTV.com.

Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world .

India Elections | Read Latest News on Lok Sabha Elections 2024 Live on NDTV.com . Get Election Schedule , information on candidates, in-depth ground reports and more - #ElectionsWithNDTV

Watch Live News:

Essay on Indian Food

Students are often asked to write an essay on Indian Food in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Indian Food

Introduction to indian food.

Indian food is a rich blend of various regional cuisines from India. It’s known for its bold, complex flavours and diverse ingredients.

Flavours and Ingredients

Indian cuisine uses a variety of spices like turmeric, cumin, and coriander. Ingredients like rice, wheat, and lentils are common, along with vegetables and fruits.

Regional Variations

India’s diverse regions each have unique food. Northern India enjoys creamy curries and tandoori, while Southern India is known for spicy dishes and rice-based meals.

Significance

Indian food is not just about taste, but also culture and tradition. It’s a crucial part of festivals and celebrations.

Also check:

• 10 Lines on Indian Food

250 Words Essay on Indian Food

Introduction.

Indian cuisine, a rich tapestry of flavors, is a testament to the country’s diverse culture and history. It is characterized by its sophisticated and subtle use of a multitude of spices and herbs, which vary by region due to differences in climate and soil.

The Diversity of Indian Cuisine

Indian food is not a monolith but a plethora of regional cuisines. Northern Indian dishes, like butter chicken and naan, are heavily influenced by Persian and Mughal cuisines. In contrast, Southern Indian cuisine, known for dosas and sambar, relies heavily on rice and lentils. Coastal areas, such as Goa and Bengal, offer a rich array of seafood dishes.

Spices: The Heart of Indian Cuisine

Spices are the lifeblood of Indian cuisine. Turmeric, cumin, coriander, and cardamom are just a few examples. These spices not only add flavor but also have medicinal properties, reflecting the ancient Indian practice of Ayurveda.

The Role of Vegetarianism

India has the highest percentage of vegetarians globally, influenced by religious beliefs and philosophies. This has led to a vast array of vegetarian dishes, including paneer tikka, aloo gobi, and chole bhature.

Indian food, with its rich flavors, diverse regional variations, and emphasis on spices and vegetarianism, offers a unique culinary experience. It is not just about feeding the body, but also about nourishing the soul, reflecting India’s cultural richness and spiritual depth.

500 Words Essay on Indian Food

Indian cuisine, a rich tapestry of flavors, is a testament to the country’s complex cultural heritage and geographical diversity. With its myriad regional dishes and culinary techniques, it offers a gastronomic journey that is as diverse as its people and traditions.

Historical and Geographical Influence

The evolution of Indian food is deeply intertwined with the country’s history and geography. The early Harappan civilization laid the foundation with its farming practices, later enriched by the Aryans’ dairy-based diet. Subsequent invasions, trade relations, and colonial rule introduced new ingredients and cooking methods, shaping the cuisine we know today.

India’s geography has also played a significant role. Coastal regions, with their abundant seafood, have developed distinct dishes like Goan fish curry. In contrast, the arid regions of Rajasthan and Gujarat have unique vegetarian cuisines, given the scarcity of water and fresh produce.

Ingredients and Flavors

Indian cuisine is characterized by its bold use of spices, which are typically toasted and ground into a blend known as masala. These spice blends vary regionally, with garam masala in the north and sambar powder in the south. Herbs, such as coriander, mint, and fenugreek, also play a significant role, adding depth and complexity to dishes.

Rice and wheat are staple grains, forming the base for dishes like biryani and roti. Lentils and pulses are also integral, providing protein in a predominantly vegetarian diet. Dairy, in the form of milk, yogurt, and ghee, is used extensively, especially in northern India.

Diversity of Indian Cuisine

India’s culinary diversity is striking. Northern Indian cuisine, influenced by Persian and Mughal cooking, features rich, creamy dishes like butter chicken and naan bread. Southern Indian cuisine, on the other hand, is characterized by its spicy, tangy flavors, with dishes like dosa and rasam. Western India offers a blend of sweet and savory dishes, while eastern India is known for its sweets like rasgulla and sandesh.

Indian Food Beyond Borders

Indian food has gained global recognition, with adaptations like chicken tikka masala becoming beloved dishes worldwide. This international popularity has led to fusion cuisines, blending Indian flavors with foreign culinary traditions. However, it’s important to note that these adaptations often represent only a fraction of India’s culinary diversity.

In essence, Indian food is a symphony of flavors, a reflection of the country’s cultural diversity and historical journey. It’s a cuisine that tells stories, celebrates regional diversity, and offers an array of flavors that continue to enthrall food lovers around the globe. As Indian food continues to evolve and influence global cuisines, it stands as a testament to India’s rich culinary heritage.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on India The Superpower in Sports
• Essay on India In 21st Century
• Essay on Importance of English Language in India

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• FDI in Make in India: Transforming the Manufacturing Landscape

• Team India Blogs

As India strives to become a $35 Tn economy, the role of the manufacturing sector is pivotal in driving the nation forward. A robust manufacturing industry is essential for boosting economic growth by contributing to the GDP, strengthening infrastructure, increasing imports, and creating job opportunities.  

From fiscal year 2006 to 2012, India's manufacturing sector GDP grew by an average of 9.5% per year. However, over the following six years, growth slowed to 7.4% because of challenges like project delays due to cumbersome regulations and red tape, ill-targeted subsidies, low manufacturing base, low-value addition in manufacturing, and the presence of a large informal sector.

To revitalise the manufacturing sector, the Make in India initiative was launched in September 2014 to fostering foster innovation, and position India as a global manufacturing hub by attracting domestic and foreign investment, building best-in-class manufacturing infrastructure, enhancing skill development, protecting intellectual property, and streamlining regulatory processes to create a conducive environment for businesses to thrive.

Foreign Direct Investment Over the Years 

Due to the sustained efforts of the government, during 2014-2023, Foreign Direct Investment equity inflow in the manufacturing sector increased by 55% to reach $148.97 Bn compared to $96 Bn in the previous nine years (2005-2014).

This achievement is due to the various policy initiatives taken by the government over the years. Under the  existing FDI policy, nearly all sectors allow for 100% FDI, except for certain prohibited sectors. The defence industry allows 74% FDI under automatic route and 100% under the government route. For the broadcasting sector, FDI limits vary, differing between print and digital media.  While the automatic route requires no approval from the Government of India for either non-resident or Indian companies, the government route necessitates prior approval from the Government of India before investment can proceed.

The government introduced several other measures, such as the Goods and Services Tax (GST) , to streamline indirect taxation. Before GST, manufacturers faced challenges with multiple tax filings and assessments by different tax authorities. The introduction of GST streamlined indirect taxation and automated tax compliances, easing the burden for businesses. Additionally, reductions in corporate taxes, along with simplified construction permits and and the abolition of archaic laws were implemented to improve the ease of doing business. Coupled with FDI policy reforms aimed at attracting foreign capital, these measures collectively aimed to bolster the business environment and stimulate economic growth.

At the global level as well, India also collaborated with other countries. To further propel innovation in manufacturing sectors, in 2015, India and Japan announced a $12 Bn ' Japan-India Make-in-India Special Finance Facility ’ fund managed by the Nippon Export and Investment Insurance (NEXI) and Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC). The fund “aims to promote direct investment of Japanese companies and trade from Japan to India, to support their business activities with counterparts in India, including the development of necessary infrastructure, and to help materialise Make-in-India policy of the Government of India.” Between 2000 and June 2023, Japan invested about $39.94 Bn in India, ranking fifth in FDI sources. Japanese investments mainly went into sectors like automobiles, electrical equipment, telecommunications, chemicals, finance (insurance), and pharmaceuticals.

Similarly, ‘ Make in India Mittelstand (MIIM) ,’ a collaboration between India and Germany, focuses on driving innovation and enhancing economic cooperation by encouraging small and medium-sized German companies to invest and manufacture in India. Since its inception in September 2015, as of August 2021, the MIIM program has supported more than 151 German Mittelstand companies, resulting in a total declared investment exceeding €1.4 Bn. A majority of these investments came in the automotive, renewables, construction, consumer goods, electronics and electricals, chemical, waste/ water management sectors.

These liberalised policies, coupled with efforts to improve the ease of doing business, have positioned India as an attractive destination for foreign investors.  

India's progress has been recognised internationally, with the World Bank's 2019 Ease of Doing Business report acknowledging a significant jump to a rank of 63 among 190 countries.

Current Landscape 

The Government has also introduced the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) Scheme, which has significantly boosted production, employment, economic growth, and exports in India. Under this scheme, companies are incentivise to promote domestic production, thereby enhancing India’s manufacturing competitiveness.  PLI scheme covers 14 key sectors with an incentive outlay of about $26 Bn. Sectors like Drugs and Pharmaceuticals (+46%), Food Processing Industries (+26%), and Medical Appliances (+91%) witnessed increased FDI inflows. The PLI scheme has prompted major smartphone companies like Foxconn, Wistron and Pegatron to shift suppliers to India, resulting in the manufacture of top-end phones in the country.

In line with the Make in India initiative, several Indian states have also launched their localised initiatives like Tamil Nadu Global Investors Meet, Make in Odisha, Vibrant Gujarat, Happening Haryana, and Magnetic Maharashtra.  

According to the parliamentary data, from October 2019 to December 2023, the total foreign investments in the manufacturing sector, as reported by the States through FDI equity inflow, were $20.8 Bn. The top five states receiving the maximum investment are Maharashtra (29.6%), Karnataka (22.6%), Gujarat (16.3%), Delhi (13.5%), and Tamil Nadu (4.7%).

The Make in India initiative has been instrumental in transforming India's manufacturing landscape and attracting significant investments to the country through a series of reforms geared towards improving the ease of doing business, liberalising FDI policy and promoting domestic manufacturing, The COVID-19 pandemic also presented an opportunity for India to transform its economic landscape by leveraging the disruption caused by the crisis into a growth opportunity. As of 2023, the manufacturing sector accounted for 17% of the GDP and provided employment to more than 27.3 Mn individuals in India. The government plans to increase manufacturing's share to 25% of the economy by 2025.

India has emerged as an attractive destination for foreign investors. The success of the Make in India policy is evident from the substantial increase in FDI equity inflows in the manufacturing sector and increased production of high-value goods.

India's continued focus on innovation, technology adoption, and skill development will be crucial for sustaining the momentum in the manufacturing sector. Initiatives like the Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme and ongoing reforms to improve infrastructure and regulatory environment will play a key role in enhancing India's competitiveness on the global stage.   

• https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/industrials-and-electronics/our-insights/a-new-growth-formula-for-manufacturing-in-india
• https://dea.gov.in/sites/default/files/The%20Indian%20Economy-A%20Review_Jan%202024.pdf
• https://sansad.in/getFile/loksabhaquestions/annex/1714/AS258.pdf?source=pqals#:~:text=Foreign%20Direct%20Investment%20(FDI)%20equity,financial%20years%20i.e.%202005%2D14.
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2004475#:~:text=Foreign%20Direct%20Investment%20(FDI)%20limit,in%20access%20to%20modern%20technology.
• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/FDI-PolicyCircular-2020-29October2020_0.pdf
• https://www.makeinindia.com/policy/foreign-direct-investment#:~:text=FDI%20under%20sectors%20is%20permitted,is%20required%20prior%20to%20investment
• https://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/26176/Joint_Statement_on_India_and_Japan_Vision_2025_Special_Strategic_and_Global_Partnership_Working_Together_for_Peace_and_Prosperity_of_theIndoPacific
• https://www.mea.gov.in/Portal/ForeignRelation/Japan_-_Bilateral_Brief_MEA_Website_Oct_2023.pdf
• https://indianembassyberlin.gov.in/pdf/menu/miim/MIIM-Programme-Highlights-August-2021.pdf
• https://archive.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/pdf/db2020/Doing-Business-2020_rankings.pdf
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1932051
• https://sansad.in/getFile/loksabhaquestions/annex/1714/AS258.pdf?source=pqals
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1962138

We are India's national investment facilitation agency.

For further queries on this subject, please get in touch with us @Invest India. Raise your query