India continues to struggle with how to achieve inclusive growth. A basic problem is that a large portion of the population does not possess the capabilities to participate productively in a modern market economy. A natural policy response is for the government to intervene directly: provide food, jobs, education and credit. India?s problem is that the government?s interventions are often ineffective. It is natural for a developing country government to lack capacity?India?s governmental capacity is actually quite good for its level of development. Making good policy choices is often not about capacity, however, it is about clarity of thought and recognition of realities. The ?right to food? campaign needs both.
It is true that hunger is still a problem in India. Providing cheap food to the hungry is a natural policy response. It has not worked perfectly in the past, but no policy is perfect. Attention has focused on fixing one weakness, the fact that often the cheap food goes to those who are neither poor nor hungry. Another idea is that it is better to give the poor cash to buy food (conditional cash transfers, in economics jargon)?this gives them more flexibility and it reduces the costs of running the programme, the second major weakness. Smart cards are envisaged as a way to fix both weaknesses.
Hunger is important, but is it the problem that needs the most policy attention? Malnutrition in India is much more widespread, and perhaps much more pernicious in its long-term effects. Malnutrition has certainly been hitting the headlines. In February, the Prime Minister addressed a conference in Delhi on the role of farming in improved nutrition, and he noted the severity of the problem of malnutrition. But ultimately he talked about health and hygiene and food security as well. When problems get broadened, the solutions can escape policymakers. An emphasis on coordination and integration across a wide range of problems and policies often results in losing the ability to do what can actually be done. The unattainable best can be the enemy of the attainable good.
In the case of malnutrition, the important role of women is well-recognised. But often, the policy prescription becomes a whole range of measures for improving the status of women. This is good and important in its own right. But it loses focus. Improving the food supply chain will also help improve nutrition, but again, it is a huge task that does not focus on nutrition per se. India has created ambitious national missions and schemes for education, health, employment and food. But the National Nutrition Policy was formulated as long ago as 1993. Periodic conferences and documents from think-tanks or government agencies address the issues, but again, they often list all the things that need to be done, which amount to broad-based social change and development. This is a catch-22 situation, since malnutrition contributes to the lack of such inclusive development and social change.
I would suggest two things?a laser-like focus on problems and on delivery mechanisms. Malnutrition is pervasive and persistent. But maybe it is not as complex to solve as we think. Maybe just the thinking has been wrong. First, breastfeeding is important. I have previously suggested focusing on a relatively short, critical period?pregnancy plus the first year of the child. The pivotal point here is birth, of course, so building on schemes that leverage the private sector for institutional deliveries is a natural place to focus on the health and nutrition of pregnant women, and the health of newborns, including breastfeeding. The Integrated Child Development Services and other direct government programmes may be futile if pregnancy and postnatal care are not fixed.
The second point of intervention is even simpler, because it does not require behavioural changes. We know what people like to eat. We know the patterns of consumption at different income levels. We even know that they do not always go for calories, and they do not always optimise nutrition (think of the US, with rampant poor nutritional choices). We know that a relatively few micronutrients are the ones that really matter. Mostly, we know how to fortify different foods to deliver these micronutrients across the board, without requiring people to eat what they do not want to buy. We have been talking about this for years, but doing little. What would be needed again, however, is a partnership with the private sector, not just big corporations, but numerous smaller businesses in the food processing sector. Collaboration with them, and an accompanying system of tax breaks, could be implemented more easily and at lower cost than the planned improvements in the public distribution system. Fortified salt, sugar, milk, wheat and rice can all be used to deliver critical micronutrients. When a third of the richest 20% of India?s children are malnourished, targeting becomes less of a concern. Focus on the critical problems and right delivery channels, and malnutrition can be conquered.
The author is professor of economics, University of California, Santa Cruz