Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Biraj  Patnaik
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Biraj Patnaik

2,719

Published on

Day 2 …

Day 2

Professor P. S Ramakrishnan, Professor, School of Environmental Sciences
Ecology for Economy; Case of traditional cultivation practices

Biraj Patnaik Advisor, Food Commissioner's Office
Right to Food Campaign; The Case of Right to Food in India

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,719
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
136
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. The Right to Food in India Presentation for CSE April 2007 Office of the Commissioners to the Supreme Court (Writ 196/ 2001)
  • 2. India’s Annual Growth Rate Year GDP Per capita income 1951-79 3.6 1.3 1980-91 5.6 3.5 1992-06 6.5 4.7
  • 3.  
  • 4. Worrying issues <ul><li>News of starvation deaths & farmers’ suicides from many states </li></ul><ul><li>Stagnant agricultural production, and falling food availability </li></ul><ul><li>Unemployment has increased from 4 to 8% in ten years </li></ul><ul><li>Regional disparities are increasing </li></ul><ul><li>IMR stagnating around 60 per 1000, it is 46 in Bangladesh </li></ul><ul><li>Immunisation coverage fell from 60 to 40% in 5 yrs </li></ul><ul><li>50% women are anemic </li></ul><ul><li>47% children are malnourished </li></ul><ul><li>Declining child sex ratio during 1991-2001 </li></ul><ul><li>There is no will to improve administration in poor states </li></ul>
  • 5.  
  • 6. Index number of Agricultural Production <ul><li>Index annual rate of growth </li></ul><ul><li>1981-82 100 </li></ul><ul><li>4.4% </li></ul><ul><li>1990-91 148 </li></ul><ul><li>2.8% </li></ul><ul><li>1996-97 176 </li></ul><ul><li>0.2% </li></ul><ul><li>2004-05 179 </li></ul>
  • 7. % of W ork F orce dependent on A griculture
  • 8. <ul><li>Percentage below poverty line </li></ul><ul><li>1973 56 </li></ul><ul><li>39 </li></ul><ul><li>1994 35 </li></ul><ul><li>1999 26 ? </li></ul><ul><li>2004 28 </li></ul>Poverty
  • 9.  
  • 10. 28.9 100.0 34.2 100.0 All households 23.2 69.1 28.3 68.1 Others 38.4 20.4 45.7 21.1 Scheduled castes 48.0 10.5 48.8 10.8 Scheduled tribes BPL Total Rural Population BPL Total Rural Population   Percentage Share in Percentage Share in   1999-2000 1993-94 Social groups
  • 11.  
  • 12. There should be no food insecurity in India <ul><li>Both GDP and foodgrain production have risen faster than the growth in population over the last 50 years </li></ul><ul><li>And yet significant number of people hungry every day. A recent survey by PAC showed that 10 to 14% people are without meals for many days at a stretch in Jharkhand. </li></ul>
  • 13.  
  • 14.  
  • 15.  
  • 16. Offtake of foodgrains (in mT)   1 10.31 12.46 4.7 0 Subsidised exports   0.25 9.66 5.66 5.6 0.06 Open market sale 7.4 10.6 13.5 11.38 8.86 2.08 Other welfare schemes 31.4 29.4 24.2 20.09 13.84 16.98 TPDS & AAY 23,500 29,000 27000 24000 17612 7900 Food Subsidy in crore Rs 2005-06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 2001-02 1997-98  
  • 17. Planning Commission’s evaluation of TPDS <ul><li>58 per cent of subsidized food grains does not reach the BPL families, 22% reaches APL and 36% sold in black </li></ul><ul><li>High cost of handling, for one rupee transfer to the poor, the Gol spends Rs.3.65 </li></ul><ul><li>Targeting errors, ghost cards and non-BPL households </li></ul><ul><li>Only 57% of the BPL households have ration cards </li></ul><ul><li>FPSs are not viable, they remain in business through leakages </li></ul><ul><li>Homeless often do not have ration cards </li></ul>
  • 18.  
  • 19.  
  • 20. <ul><li>Source: Report of Committee on Long Term Grain Policy, 2002 </li></ul>
  • 21. Brimming Granaries and Rotting Grain…
  • 22. ICDS – Supreme Court Orders <ul><li>Have a disbursement centre in every settlement. </li></ul><ul><li>We direct the State Govts./ UTs to implement the ICDS in full and to ensure that every ICDS disbursing centre in the country shall provide as under - Each child up to 6 years of age to get 300 calories and 8-10 grams of protein; Each adolescent girl to get 500 calories and 20-25 grams of protein; Each pregnant woman and each nursing mother to get 500 calories & 20-25 grams of protein; Each malnourished child to get 600 calories and 16-20 grams of protein. </li></ul>
  • 23. Reality <ul><li>At present for around 14 lakh habitations, there are only 7lakh reporting Anganwadi centers. </li></ul><ul><li>Against a population of over 15 crore children in the age group 6 months to 6 years (of which roughly 7 crores are malnourished), only 3.4 crore children are registered for supplementary nutrition. </li></ul><ul><li>The number actually getting the benefit of feeding may be far less. </li></ul><ul><li>Adolescent girls are nowhere in the picture </li></ul><ul><li>Jharkhand surrendered 30 crores in March 2004 </li></ul>
  • 24.  
  • 25.  
  • 26. Other issues <ul><li>Two-thirds of all centres are running in rented buildings, which are invariably in upper caste locality, thus favouring their children, to the neglect of lower caste children </li></ul><ul><li>40% vacancies at the supervisor level, though budget is from GOI </li></ul><ul><li>Little attention to 6 months to 3 years, which is the most crucial period </li></ul>
  • 27. Increasing the number of ICDS centres <ul><li>Supreme Court Order for increase in numbers is dated 29/4/2004 </li></ul><ul><li>Part of Common Minimum Programme June 2004 </li></ul><ul><li>GOI Cabinet decided to increase the AWCs by 1.88 lakh on 29/12/04 </li></ul><ul><li>Supreme Court gave a judgement on ICDS on Dec 13 th , 2007 ordering 14 lakh centres to be operational by December 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Two years have passed, and yet very few centres have come up! </li></ul>
  • 28. % of children receiving SNP
  • 29. National Social Assistance Programmes <ul><li>NOAPS and NFBS transferred to the states </li></ul><ul><li>Funds cut down to less than 50% of requirement </li></ul><ul><li>State finance deptts do not release funds to districts </li></ul><ul><li>Little monitoring by the states or GOI </li></ul><ul><li>Payment is adhoc, uncertain, and subject to bribes </li></ul><ul><li>NMBS fund utilisation is not even 1/3 rd of requirement </li></ul><ul><li>Scale of pension (Rs 75 pm) revised to Rs 200, but no releases so far </li></ul><ul><li>Numerical ceiling not revised sine 1996 </li></ul><ul><li>Annapurna has been wound up in some states </li></ul><ul><li>Schemes have suffered as there are no contractors! </li></ul>
  • 30. Annapurna (lakh tonnes) 1.39 1.67 2005-06 1.32 1.67 2004-05 1.09 1.23 2003-04 1.15 0.78 2002-03  0.93 1.62 2001-02 Offtake Allocation Year
  • 31. Mid day meal scheme <ul><li>Fully Implemented – Gujarat, AP, Kerala, Pondicherry, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Lakhshdeep, Rajasthan, Chattisgarh </li></ul><ul><li>Partially Implemented –, Delhi, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Goa, MP, Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, UP, Haryana </li></ul><ul><li>Not Implemented – Assam, Manipur </li></ul><ul><li>Only 3 out of 51 schools surveyed in Bihar were running the scheme </li></ul>
  • 32.  
  • 33.  
  • 34. A donor study of a poor state showed that sharing of bribe money is through a well defined percentage structure
  • 35. Leakages – SGRY Orissa
  • 36. The Right to Food Case <ul><li>PUCL petition on hunger in Rajasthan in the Supreme Court in 2001 </li></ul><ul><li>Emergence of the Right to Food Campaign </li></ul><ul><li>Key Issues: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Making the Right to Food a Fundamental Right </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Converting all existing schemes into entitlements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tackling large scale malnutrition and chronic hunger </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Securing employment as a fundamental right linked to the Right to Food </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Longest mandamus on the Right to Food in the World </li></ul><ul><ul><li>47 Interim Orders so far; more than 300 affidavits; nearly 50 Interim Applications </li></ul></ul>
  • 37. Office of the Commissioners to the Supreme Court (Writ 196/ 2001) <ul><li>Appointed by the Supreme Court to monitor all food schemes in the Country </li></ul><ul><li>Mandate extends to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Feeding Entitlement Programmes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>MDMS, ICDS </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Employment Programmes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>NREGS, SGRY I & II, NFFWP, RSVY </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Food Subsidy Programme </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>TPDS, Antodaya Anna Yojana (AAY), Annapurna Yojana </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social Security Programmes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Pensions (NOAPS, NMBS, NFBS) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  • 38. How does the Office of the Commissioners function? <ul><li>Honorary positions; work supported by funds mandated by the Supreme Court </li></ul><ul><li>Works through a secretariat (Delhi) and a network of Advisers across India </li></ul><ul><li>Make policy recommendations through: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Rigorous participatory research </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Articulating alternative demands of State policy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Participating in policy bodies such as Planning Commission Steering Groups </li></ul></ul>
  • 39. How does the Office of the Commissioners function? (cont’d.) <ul><li>Monitors programmes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Through analysis of macro-data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Addressing complaints at the micro-level </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Holds the State accountable by: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Regular engagement with the GoI and State Governments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Joint Commission of Enquiries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Regular reports on non-compliance to the Supreme Court </li></ul></ul>
  • 40. Impact so far <ul><li>Universalisation of MDMS (12 crore children get school meals) and ICDS (GoI to increase at least 7 lakh ICDS Centres) </li></ul><ul><li>Managed to restrict the lowering of BPL quotas by GoI from 36% to 26% </li></ul><ul><li>Increase in off-take of food-grains through TPDS for BPL and Antodaya families </li></ul><ul><li>Increased budgetary allocation for ICDS, NOAPS </li></ul><ul><li>Sector Reforms in some States (PDS – Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra) </li></ul>
  • 41. Impact so far (cont’d.) <ul><li>Provided Civil Society an anchor to engage/ confront the State and created spaces for civil society to engage in food/ employment programmes </li></ul><ul><li>Brought the discourse on food rights to the centre-stage of governance in the States and GoI </li></ul><ul><li>Has been largely effective in provision of gratuitous relief (WB tea gardens, Assam SGRY misappropriation of funds, Chhattisgarh - MDMS) </li></ul><ul><li>Created the environment for the passage of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act </li></ul>

×