Government’s objection to the functioning of the Global Hunger Index is not based on facts
NS Global Hunger Report (GHR) India has once again made headlines for the country’s poor ranking in the Global Hunger Index (GHI). India has been ranked 101 out of 116 countries in the report, in which the country falls under the category of ‘severe’ hunger conditions. The ranks are not comparable over the years due to various methodological issues and hence it is wrong to say that India’s position has fallen from 94 (out of 107) in 2020. However, it is true that year after year, India is at the lower end. – Below many other countries which are poor in terms of per capita income. This in itself is a cause for concern.
Indicators
The Government of India, through a press release, has refuted the GHI, claiming that it is ‘devoid of ground reality’ and based on an ‘unscientific’ methodology. The GHI’ is based on four indicators – the percentage of the undernourished in the population (POUs); Percentage of children under the age of five who suffer from wasting (low weight-for-height); Percentage of children under five years of age who suffer from stunting (short for age), and percentage of children who die before the age of five (child mortality). The first and last indicators each carry one-third of the weight and the two child malnutrition indicators carry one-sixth weighting each in the final GHI, where each indicator is standardized based on thresholds set slightly above the highest country-level values. goes. Looking at each of these indicators separately, India shows a worsening in POUs and childhood wasting compared to 2012. This is 15.3% of the POU figure for the 2018-20 that the government is contesting.
from official data sources
The government’s objection to the methodology, that “they based their assessment on the results of a ‘four question’ opinion poll, which was conducted by Gallup over the telephone”, is not based on facts. The report is not based on a Gallup poll; Rather, it is on the POU data of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (as also clarified by the publishing agencies). The POU, according to the FAO, is ‘an estimate of the proportion of the population whose habitual food consumption is insufficient to provide the dietary energy level necessary to maintain a normal active and healthy life’. The POU has been estimated taking into account several factors like availability of food, pattern of food consumption, income level and distribution, population structure etc. All data used are from official data sources of the respective national governments. In the absence of food consumption data in most countries, this indicator is an estimate based on a modeling exercise using available data; Therefore, there is some margin of error. Much of the criticism of the FAO’s POU data has been about how it underestimates rather than eliminates hunger. Therefore, while there is scope for a valid discussion on the GHI method and its limitations, this objection by the government is not justified.
slow rate of progress
The main message that the GHR gives is to remind us once again that India has not been very successful in tackling the issue of hunger and the rate of progress is very slow. The report gives the comparative values of the index for four years, i.e. 2000, 2006, 2012 and 2021. The GHI improved from 37.4 to 28.8 during 2006-12, while it improved only from 28.8 to 27.5 between 2012-21. . The POU data shows that the proportion of the malnourished population showed a declining trend till 2016-18, when it reached a low of 13.8 per cent, followed by 14% for 2017-19 and 15.3 for 2018-20. % has increased. Other data also broadly confirm these findings. The partial results of the National Family Health Survey-5 (2019-20) also show that stunting and wasting indicators have stabilized or decreased for most of the states for which data is available. The leaked report of the Consumption Expenditure Survey (2017-18) also revealed that between 2012-18 there was a decline in rural consumption and a very modest increase in urban consumption.
pre-epidemic period
It should also be remembered that all the data is for the period before the COVID-19 pandemic. There were several indications based on nationally representative data – such as from various field surveys conducted by the Center for Monitoring Indian Economy and research organisations, academics and civil society groups – that the state of food insecurity at the end of 2020 was related, and The situation is likely to worsen after the second wave. Several of these surveys have found that over 60% of respondents say they are eating less in 2020 than before the national lockdown. Services like Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) and school mid-day meals are disrupted in most areas. , depriving crores of children of one nutritious meal a day to which they previously had access. Therefore, it would not be surprising if national surveys (hopefully conducted soon) show a further slowdown in the improvement in malnutrition.
The novel coronavirus pandemic has affected food security and nutrition around the world. In countries like India – where the situation was already bad – the effect is probably worse. The response cannot be denied; Rather, measures are needed to ensure a speedy recovery. It has been pointed out by many that the government’s relief measures, so far, have been inadequate in comparison to the scale of the problem.
deduction for plans
The provision of additional free food grains through the Public Distribution System (PDS) is the only adequate solution, and even that has been lacking. This leaves out about 40% of the population, many of whom are in need and consists only of grain. Also, as of now, it is expiring in November 2021. Also, inflation in other food items, especially edible oils, has also been very high, affecting people’s ability to eat healthy food. While we need additional investments and more priority for food, nutrition and social security schemes, Budget 2021 saw a realistic cut for schemes like ICDS and mid-day meals.
The argument that GHI is an indicator of malnutrition, not hunger, is only diverting attention from more important issues. Of course, malnutrition is influenced by many factors (such as health, hygiene, etc.) in addition to food consumption alone, but this does not mean that a healthy diet is not central. It cannot be denied that a varied nutritious diet for all Indians is still a distant dream.
Deepa Sinha is a Faculty at Ambedkar University Delhi. views expressed are personal
.