Presented at the Pulses for Sustainable Agriculture and Human Health” on 31 May-1 June 2016 at NASC, New Delhi, India. The conference was jointly organised by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS), TCi of Cornell University (TCi-CU) and Agriculture Today.

1. Consumption Pattern of Pulses
and Price Elasticity
Praduman kumar
Former Professor, IARI

2. The study:
• The pulses constitute an important
component of Indian diet and there is a big
demand for pulses across country.
• While studying pulses, researchers
normally treat pulses as a single
commodity group, but this study has
recognized pulses as a heterogeneous
commodity because demand for each
major pulses varies widely across different
regions of India based on tastes and
preferences and type of food preparation.

3. The study is focused on the estimation of
price and income elasticities of demand for
major pulses and dealt with:
• Consumption pattern of different pulses in
India
• Identify drivers of changes in consumption
pattern of pulses
• Expenditure and price elasticity of demand
for pulses (chickpea, pigenpea,
mungbean,urad and others (lentils+))
• Demand-Supply scenarios for pulses

4. The data
• Various rounds of NSSO’s Consumption
Expenditure Survey(CES) from 1983 to
2011
• Unit household data of rural and urban
pertain to NSS rounds 38, 43, 50, 55, 61,
68.
• Total households sample about 120K in
each round.

5. Classification of HH data
• Rural and urban
• Expenditure quartiles
• Food habit (vegetarian and non-vegetarian)
• Dietary diversification
• Social groups

6. Share of pulse nutrient in total nutrient intake
State Intake/cap/day
Pulses share in
total intake, %
1983 2011 1983 2011
Calories (kcl) 2223 2095 3.8 4.5
Protein (gram) 55.8 56.3 10.0 10.9

7. Annual consumption of pulses
(kg/person)
1988 1999 2004 2011 Change
%
1988-
2011
CGR,
%
India 11.6 10.5 8.93 9.90 -14.6 -0.69
Rural 11.2 10.0 8.62 9.54 -14.8 -0.69
Urban 12.5 14.5 9.54 10.48 -16.2 -0.76
Expenditure quartile
Poor 8.7 7.8 6.57 7.61 -12.53 -0.58
Rich 16.5 18.4 12.29 13.24
-19.8 -0.95

8. Annual consumption of pulses (kg/person)
2004 2011 Change,%
Food habits
Vegetarian 10.0 10.9 + 9.0
Non-
vegetarian
8.4 9.5 +13.1
% Change +16.0 +13.1
Ration card holder
Yes 8.9 9.9 +11.4
No 9.3 10.1 + 8.6
% change - 4.3 - 2.0
Dietary diversification index
Low (<33%) 7.8 8.2 +5.1
High ( >66%) 10.9 11.9 +9.2
% change +40.1 +44.8

9. Consumption pattern of different pulses, 2011
Chickpea Pigenpea Mungbean
Black
gram Lentil+ Pulses
Annual per capita consumption of different pulses (kg)
2004 1.62 2.48 1.16 0.99 2.68 8.93
2011 2.38 2.62 1.22 1.05 2.63 9.90
% change 46.9 5.6 5.2 6.1 -1.9 10.9
Per cent share of major pulses in total pulses
2004 16.6 30.3 13.4 10.7 29.0 100
2011 20.2 29.3 14.7 11.1 24.7 100

10. Share (%) of major pulses in total pulses
consumption, 2004 & 2011
Chickpea Pigeon
pea
Mung
bean
Black
gram
Lentil
Poor households
2004 13.4 35.2 11.9 9.1 30.4
2011 17.7 32.0 11.4 9.0 30.0
Rich households
2004 19.1 26.5 14.2 12.3 27.8
2011 22.0 26.7 16.9 13.5 20.9

11. Alternative Approaches: to
estimation of demand model
• Demand Analysis
– Single equation (Estimation of Engle
Function)
– Demand System
• Linear expenditure system (LES)
• Almost Ideal Demand System (AIDS)
• Food Characteristic Demand System (FCDS)
• 3 Stage Demand System (3SDS)

12. Total Expenditure
Non-food commodities Food
Vegetables
MilkCereals
MFEPulses
Types of pulses(gram, arhar, moong, urad, lentils+
Multi-Stage Budgeting Framework

13. Stage 1: Food expenditure for a household
can be expressed as:
)Z,Y,P,P(fM h
t
h
tnftft
h
t

Stage 2: Pulses expenditure can be
expressed as:
)Z,M,P(fF h
t
h
tt
h
t

Stage 3: Aids specification
)F,PF(fS h
tt
h
it

Proposed Analytical…

14. AIDS/LA restrictions
Adding up 


n
i
i
1
1a 

n
i
ij
0
0g 

n
i
i
0
0b
Homogeneity  
j
ij 0g
Symmetry jiij
gg 

15. Restrictions on stage 3
• The homogenty and symmetry restrictions
were imposed at sample mean. Adding up
restriction was imposed while computing
the parameters of the last equation of the
model, which was not included in set of
estimations

16. Expenditure and price elasticity for main
food in India
Food Income Price
2004 2011 2004 2011
Pulses 0.70 0.66 -0.71 -0.77
Cereal 0.27 0.19 -0.32 -0.21
Vegetables 0.59 0.54 -1.07 -1.08
Milk 0.58 0.50 -0.70 -0.76
Meat, Fish & Eggs 0.54 0.53 -1.43 -1.39

17. Cross price elasticity of pulses
India
Food Rural Urban
2004 2011 2004 2011
Cereals -1.13 -0.97 -0.58 -0.51
Vegetables 0.29 0.22 0.23 0.19
Milk 0.04 -0.12 0.02 0.00
Meat, Fish &
Eggs
-0.11 -0.13 0.04 0.03

18. Issues of cross price elasticities
• The positive sign of cross-price elasticities indicates
a substitute relationship while a negative sign
indicates a complementary relationship among the
pair of goods.
• Cross-price elasticities of pulses are positive with
vegetables, negative with cereals and highly
inelastic with milk & MFE implies:
• - Pulses and vegetables are substitutes
• - Pulses and cereals are complimentary
• - Pulses and livestock products (milk, mfe) are
independent.

19. Income elasticities of major pulses by
income quartiles in India

20. Own price elasticities for pulses, India
Pulses Rural Urban All India
2004 2011 2004 2011 2004 2011
Chick pea -0.89 -0.96 -0.76 -0.84 -0.85 -0.92
Pigeon pea -0.84 -0.85 -0.88 -0.89 -0.85 -0.96
Mung bean -1.05 -1.03 -1.09 -1.08 -1.06 -1.05
Black gram -1.03 -1.03 -0.98 -0.99 -1.02 -1.02
Lentil -1.12 -1.10 -1.14 -1.12 -1.12 -1.10
All pulses -0.80 -0.83 -0.67 -0.76 -0.71 -0.77

21. Cross price elasticities
Pulses Chickpea Pigeon
pea
Mung
bean
Black
gram
Lentil +
Chickpea +0.078 +0.022 +0.020 -0.192
Pigeon pea +0.062 +0.052 +0.041 -0.282
Mung bean -0.08 -0.097 -0.032 -0.040
Black gram -0.061 -0.080 -0.035 0.192
Lentil + +0.025 +0.050 +0.014 +0.017

22. Demand elasticities for pulses in India
Demographic
area
Income group of households
Poor Middle income Rich All
Income elasticity
Rural 0.499 0.285 0.111 0.248
Urban 0.501 0.260 0.090 0.176
All India 0.500 0.274 0.098 0.206
Own price elasticities
Rural -0.686 -0.507 -0.300 -0.448
Urban -0.723 -0.557 -0.381 -0.462
All India -0.699 -0.530 -0.349 -0.456
Summation of income and price elasticities (Pure price inflation)
Rural -0.187 -0.222 -0.189 -0.200
Urban -0.222 -0.297 -0.291 -0.286

23. Domestic demand and supply of pulses
India
(Million tonnes)
Year Demand Supply D-S Gap
Pulse grains Pulses Trade of
pulses
2010 18.0 16.2 14.6 -3.5
2015 19.9 18.3 16.4 -3.4
2020 21.9 20.7 18.6 -3.3
2025 24.1 23.3 21.0 -3.1
2030 26.6 26.4 23.7 -2.8

24. Observations:
• Although per-capita consumption of pulses
has declined over time, the total demand
for pulses is growing continuously in India
driven by rising population, growing
economy, expending urbanization.
• Low productivity of pulses, marginal nature
of pulse farming, and low response of the
pulse crop to input management put on
supply constraints and resulted to about
annual 3 to 4 million tons deficit of pulses.

25. Observations…..
• Cereals and pulses are complementary to each
other. Higher demand for pulses is expected to
come from low-income households and cereal
based diet and poor comprise bulk of the Indian
population.

26. Observations…..
• Each type of pulses are equally preferred
by the consumers. To provide nutritional
security and price stability, it is essential to
have equal emphasis on ensuring supply
for each pulse species.

27. Thank you