In analyzing the promises of food security, it is crucial to scrutinize the gap between rhetoric and tangible outcomes. Governments worldwide often make ambitious commitments to ensure food security for their citizens, pledging comprehensive strategies and policies. However, the implementation of these promises is where challenges arise. Factors such as bureaucratic inefficiencies, inadequate resource allocation, and unforeseen external shocks can impede the translation of commitments into real improvements in food access and nutrition. Moreover, the sustainability and inclusivity of these strategies must be assessed to determine their long-term impact. A critical examination of the actual measures taken to address food security, including investment in agricultural infrastructure, social safety nets, and research and development, is essential to ascertain the authenticity of these promises and their potential to create lasting change in the lives of vulnerable populations.
Tag: GS Paper-3: Growth & Development; Public Distribution System (PDS); Buffer Stocks & Food Security.
Exam view:
Anna Bhagya; OMSS; A key message to States.
Context:
The Karnataka government’s decision to convert the promised Anna Bhagya scheme to a direct benefit transfer temporarily has brought into focus the limits of a State government’s policy intervention on a crucial matter such as food security.
Decoding the editorial: Anna Bhagya
- Under this scheme, the government had envisaged the following provisions
- 5 kg of free rice per person per month to
- 4.42 crore beneficiaries, including 45 lakh Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) cardholders, 3.58 crore Priority Household (PHH) cardholders, and 39 lakh cardholders belonging to Karnataka’s own category of PHH.
- This was in addition to the regular entitlements to the beneficiaries under the National Food Security Act (NFSA).
- The State would have required around 2.3 lakh metric tonnes of rice every month to meet this commitment.
- Karnataka had planned to utilise Open Market Sale Scheme-Domestic (OMSS-D) to implement the scheme, which was one of the five pre-poll guarantees of the Congress party.
- The Food Corporation of India (FCI) had agreed to supply the quantity under the OMSS-D for July, but the Union Food Ministry discontinued the sale of rice and wheat under OMSS-D to all State governments, with exceptions.
- There is also one difference between the present and the immediate past.
- The Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana (PMGKAY), implemented in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, is no longer in force. This scheme had provided five kg of free food-grains per person per month from the central pool to AAY and PHH cardholders all over India.
OMSS
Sale of surplus stocks of wheat and rice
- It is done at predetermined prices through e-auctions in the open market, to improve the supply of food-grains and control the price line, States have generally been allowed to purchase the surplus stock without e-auctions.
- The OMSS is now limited to accommodate small and marginal buyers and traders.
- The quantity that a bidder can purchase in a single bid ranges from 10-100 metric tonnes at present.
The Centre’s decision
- It took several States, especially rice-deficit ones, by surprise, since OMSS is one of the routes that they use to supplement their allocation.
- The suddenness of the decision especially hit Karnataka, which had begun preparations to launch the scheme in anticipation of the FCI’s help.
- The Centre has its own compulsions in restricting the availability of food-grains under OMSS-D.
- The quarterly stock position of rice and wheat in the Central pool, as on April 1, 2023, was the lowest in the last three years, despite being much higher than the level prescribed in the food-grains stocking norms.
- Uncertainty regarding the south-west monsoon and the possible impact of an adverse monsoon on the production of food-grains are factors that the authorities must have considered before taking the decision to restrict supply.
- All this only justifies the need for more broad-based consultation.
A key message to States
Own mechanism in place before launching any scheme
- Even if there had been no row between the Central and Karnataka governments, the sustainability of Anna Bhagya was questionable as supply only through OMSS-D would not have been sufficient.
- On average, about 16 lakh tonnes were drawn in total by all the players in the country from 2018-19 to 2022-23.
- The highest quantity of about 24.6 lakh tonnes was drawn in 2020-21, the first year of COVID-19.
- But Karnataka would have needed about 27.5 lakh tonnes annually, about 1.5 lakh tonnes higher than the State’s allocation under the NFSA for 2023-24.
- The FCI had reportedly agreed to supply grains to Karnataka at ₹36.6 per kg. Assuming that the required quantity was obtained at this cost, the monthly outgo would have been about ₹840 crore.
- Thus, the States must consider the macro picture to ascertain the practicality of their new schemes.
Not an instrument of politics
- Political parties should stop viewing food-grains as an instrument of politics and begin to take an objective appraisal of programmes such as PMGKAY and Anna Bhagya.
Source: The Hindu
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
FAQ: What do food security promises from governments entail?
Answer: Food security promises typically involve a commitment from governments to ensure that all citizens have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food. This encompasses a range of measures, including agricultural policies, social safety nets, and initiatives to address issues such as poverty and malnutrition.
FAQ: How can we assess the effectiveness of food security promises?
Answer: The effectiveness of food security promises can be evaluated by examining the concrete actions taken by governments, such as investments in agricultural infrastructure, implementation of social programs, and support for research and development. Additionally, assessing the impact of these measures on reducing hunger, improving nutrition, and enhancing the resilience of food systems provides a comprehensive view.
FAQ: What challenges might hinder the fulfillment of food security promises?
Answer: Challenges include bureaucratic inefficiencies, resource constraints, and external factors like climate change and geopolitical events. Additionally, the sustainability and inclusivity of policies need to be considered to ensure that the promises lead to lasting improvements and benefit all segments of the population.
FAQ: Are food security promises a one-size-fits-all solution?
Answer: No, food security promises should be tailored to the specific needs and contexts of each region or country. Localized approaches that consider factors such as climate, culture, and economic conditions are essential for the success of these promises.
FAQ: How can citizens hold governments accountable for their food security promises?
Answer: Citizens can hold governments accountable by staying informed about the progress of promised initiatives, participating in advocacy and awareness campaigns, and engaging with policymakers through feedback mechanisms. Civil society, media, and grassroots organizations play crucial roles in monitoring and demanding transparency in the implementation of food security policies.
In case you still have your doubts, contact us on 9811333901.
For UPSC Prelims Resources, Click here
For Daily Updates and Study Material:
Join our Telegram Channel – Edukemy for IAS
- 1. Learn through Videos – here
- 2. Be Exam Ready by Practicing Daily MCQs – here
- 3. Daily Newsletter – Get all your Current Affairs Covered – here
- 4. Mains Answer Writing Practice – here
